10 replies to this topic

[leaningtiger]

I was playing with an older friend today, and he told me about a time when he was young that his playing partner hit a ball and it split in half. Under the rules of golf, how does one proceed? Do you play it from the half that went farther, replay the shot, or what?

[kevcarter]

5-3. Ball Unfit For Play

A ball is unfit for play if it is visibly cut, cracked or out of shape. A ball is not unfit for play solely because mud or other materials adhere to it, its surface is scratched or scraped or its paint is damaged or discolored.

If a player has reason to believe his ball has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played, he may lift the ball, without penalty, to determine whether it is unfit.

Before lifting the ball, the player must announce his intention to his opponentin match play or his marker or a fellow-competitor in stroke play and mark the position of the ball. He may then lift and examine it, provided that he gives hisopponent, marker or fellow-competitor an opportunity to examine the ball and observe the lifting and replacement. The ball must not be cleaned when lifted under Rule 5-3.

If the player fails to comply with all or any part of this procedure, or if he lifts the ball without having reason to believe that it has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played, he incurs a penalty of one stroke.

If it is determined that the ball has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played, the player may substitute another ball, placing it on the spot where the original ball lay. Otherwise, the original ball must be replaced. If a player substitutes a ball when not permitted and makes a stroke at the wrongly substituted ball, he incurs the general penalty for a breach of Rule5-3, but there is no additional penalty under this Rule or Rule 15-2.

If a ball breaks into pieces as a result of a stroke, the stroke is canceled and the player must play a ball, without penalty, as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was played (see Rule 20-5).

[leaningtiger]

Thanks for the prompt reply, Kevin. You ARE the rules guru!

[turtleback]

kevcarter, on 09 February 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

5-3. Ball Unfit For Play

A ball is unfit for play if it is visibly cut, cracked or out of shape. A ball is not unfit for play solely because mud or other materials adhere to it, its surface is scratched or scraped or its paint is damaged or discolored.

If a player has reason to believe his ball has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played, he may lift the ball, without penalty, to determine whether it is unfit.

Before lifting the ball, the player must announce his intention to his opponentin match play or his marker or a fellow-competitor in stroke play and mark the position of the ball. He may then lift and examine it, provided that he gives hisopponent, marker or fellow-competitor an opportunity to examine the ball and observe the lifting and replacement. The ball must not be cleaned when lifted under Rule 5-3.

If the player fails to comply with all or any part of this procedure, or if he lifts the ball without having reason to believe that it has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played, he incurs a penalty of one stroke.

If it is determined that the ball has become unfit for play during play of the hole being played, the player may substitute another ball, placing it on the spot where the original ball lay. Otherwise, the original ball must be replaced. If a player substitutes a ball when not permitted and makes a stroke at the wrongly substituted ball, he incurs the general penalty for a breach of Rule5-3, but there is no additional penalty under this Rule or Rule 15-2.

If a ball breaks into pieces as a result of a stroke, the stroke is canceled and the player must play a ball, without penalty, as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was played (see Rule 20-5).

Did this rule change in, say, the last 30-40 years?  The reason I ask is that for soe reason it was in my head that you had to play from the point at which the largest piece came to rest but that obviously is not the case.  So I wonder if that WAS the rule at some point but it was changed.  I checked an historical rules site and it didn't have anything so I may have just imagined it.

The price of getting old - although getting old beats the alternative.

[kevcarter]

turtleback, on 10 February 2013 - 03:58 AM, said:

Did this rule change in, say, the last 30-40 years?  The reason I ask is that for soe reason it was in my head that you had to play from the point at which the largest piece came to rest but that obviously is not the case.  So I wonder if that WAS the rule at some point but it was changed.  I checked an historical rules site and it didn't have anything so I may have just imagined it.

The price of getting old - although getting old beats the alternative.

TurtleBack,

We are both getting old! :-)

I can't document it, but I absolutely think you are correct. I think it changed around the time that an apple with a bite taken out of it was no longer deemed an obstruction.  35 years may be about right...

Cheers,
Kevin

[kevcarter]

leaningtiger, on 09 February 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

Thanks for the prompt reply, Kevin. You ARE the rules guru!

Tiger, sorry I missed your reply yesterday. I'm far from a guru, I've just mastered copy/paste :-), but you are very welcome.

Kevin

[TJCDAS]

You must play both halves out and add up the total.

[Newby]

35 years was a pretty good estimate  

R&A records show that the average score of the Open Champion fell by 3 strokes with the introduction of the guttie balls.  One drawback of these balls was that they had a tendency to break, leading to a rule covering the eventuality.  The R&A allowed a ball to be substituted but in rather uncertain terms, in the 1850s.  In 1875 a player could put down a new ball where the largest piece lay, amended slightly in 1891 to being where either piece lay if they were of approximately equal size, and finally to wherever any piece lay in 1908.

The better durability (of the rubber cored ball) was perhaps the reason that in 1933, rule 24 did not mention a ball breaking into pieces separately, but was reworded as being 'so damaged as to be unfit for play'.  The rule reappeared in 1976, specifying the player was to replay the stroke.

[sui generis]

TJCDAS, on 26 February 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

You must play both halves out and add up the total.

... then divide by 2.

[turtleback]

Newby, on 26 February 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

35 years was a pretty good estimate  

R&A records show that the average score of the Open Champion fell by 3 strokes with the introduction of the guttie balls.  One drawback of these balls was that they had a tendency to break, leading to a rule covering the eventuality.  The R&A allowed a ball to be substituted but in rather uncertain terms, in the 1850s.  In 1875 a player could put down a new ball where the largest piece lay, amended slightly in 1891 to being where either piece lay if they were of approximately equal size, and finally to wherever any piece lay in 1908.

The better durability (of the rubber cored ball) was perhaps the reason that in 1933, rule 24 did not mention a ball breaking into pieces separately, but was reworded as being 'so damaged as to be unfit for play'.  The rule reappeared in 1976, specifying the player was to replay the stroke.

Thank you for clearing that up so comprehensively!!

[teejaywhy]

sui generis, on 26 February 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

TJCDAS, on 26 February 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

You must play both halves out and add up the total.

... then divide by 2.

What if it breaks into three pieces?