Rules Question

Wombatman

A right handed golfers ball is on the edge of the water in nasty rough. They can't take their normal stance without great difficulty and so elect to play left handed. However taking their stance to hit left handed, with the back of the club, they are in casual water, so they get a free drop.

1. After the drop can they go back to hitting right handed?
2. Could you, in theory, elect to play opposite handed at any time, to avail of such like favourable drops (casual water, obstruction etc)?

JIdontknow

I am assuming they are not across the hazard line? Either way they do not get any free relief.

If they are in the hazard, then they have to play it as it is, or take a drop under penalty of one shot, and then follow the red / yellow hazard rules for drop, etc.

If they are not in a hazard, they still cannot get any free relief. They can take an unplayable drop, but this then means a one shot penalty, and they can then get relief.

But if I am understanding the situatuon correctly, then no, they cannot take any relief without a penalty, unless a local rule is in place.

For example, there was a player recently (Billy Horschel??) Who played across a fairway and the ball held up very close to the hazard edge, he couldnt take a proper stance to hit it right handed,so claimed he was going to play it left handed (But there was a sprinkler head impeding his stance), therefore he was allowed free relief, and took it and then played the shot right handed after taking free relief. However this was a sprinkler head or some other immoveable object, so he was perfected entitled to, whereas your situation sounds different, water (presumably a hazard??) means no free relief unless a local rule in place.

mike12

If horshel got relief from a sprinkler head then yes you could get relief from casual water. One where u use the rules to your advantage.

mike12

Sorry rd reading the original post, you would have to have a reason to not be able to take your normal stance. If u were against a fence and could only hit the ball left handed and a staked tree was in your swing path then yes you could take relief. If u are in the middle of the field and thereis a tree in front of u you can't decide to suddenly play left handed.

Wombatman

mike12 wrote: »

Sorry rd reading the original post, you would have to have a reason to not be able to take your normal stance. If u were against a fence and could only hit the ball left handed and a staked tree was in your swing path then yes you could take relief. If u are in the middle of the field and thereis a tree in front of u you can't decide to suddenly play left handed.

Not trying to be funny but do you know the rule that covers this?

PARlance

Wombatman wrote: »

A right handed golfers ball is on the edge of the water in nasty rough. They can't take their normal stance without great difficulty and so elect to play left handed. However taking their stance to hit left handed, with the back of the club, they are in casual water, so they get a free drop.

1. After the drop can they go back to hitting right handed?
2. Could you, in theory, elect to play opposite handed at any time, to avail of such like favourable drops (casual water, obstruction etc)?

A few things would just need to be clarified
- The large body water is a hazard
- Assuming it is, is the ball lying within the hazard lines or not

Assuming it is a hazard then
1. If the ball lies within the staked area (in the hazard) then it cannot be moved. Dry land close to water is often within the hazard.
2. If the ball lies outside the hazard and there is casual water interfering with your stance then relief may be taken.... Edit Assuming it is reasonable to do so as per Highlines post

HighLine

To answer the OP's questions.... (assuming we are talking about the ball not lying in a water hazard)

1) Yes, you can go back to playing right handed after availing of free relief as a result of his left handed stance being impeded.
2) No, you can not just elect to play opposite handed to get favourable relief. The exception to Rule 25 (abnormal ground condition ... i.e. casual water) and Rule 24 (obstructions) provides for this...

Exception: A player may not take relief under this Rule if (a) interference by anything other than an abnormal ground condition makes the stroke clearly impracticable or (b) interference by an abnormal ground condition would occur only through use of a clearly unreasonable stroke or an unnecessarily abnormal stance, swing or direction of play.

The following decision also covers it...

24-2b/18 Obstruction Interferes with Abnormal Stroke; Abnormal Stroke Not Reasonable in Circumstances
Q.A right-handed player's ball is in a poor lie. A nearby immovable obstruction would not interfere with a normal right-handed swing but it would interfere with a left-handed swing. The player says he wishes to make his next stroke left-handed and, since the obstruction would interfere with such a stroke, he is entitled to proceed under Rule 24-2b. May the player invoke Rule 24-2b?

A.No. If the only reason for the player to use a left-handed stroke is to escape a poor lie, use of an abnormal (left-handed) stroke is clearly unreasonable and the player is not entitled to invoke Rule 24-2b - see Exception under Rule 24-2b.

The player last week who took a left handed stance and availed of free relief was James Hahn. The following photo shows how it would clearly be impractical to play the shot right handed, so he took his stance playing left handed, and as a result, got free relief from a drain. He could then drop it within 1 club of the NPR and proceed to play the next shot right handed. As I said at the time, the rules are not always there to hinder you.

PARlance

Is there a limit on the amount times relief can be taken Highlines?

In Hahn's case he was taking relief under a left handed stance, if he dropped and found that upon going back right handed, that the sprinkler was now obstructing that stance, could he get relief again?

HighLine

PARlance wrote: »

Is there a limit on the amount times relief can be taken Highlines?

In Hahn's case he was taking relief under a left handed stance, if he dropped and found that upon going back right handed, that the sprinkler was now obstructing that stance, could he get relief again?

Yeah PAR good question and to be honest, I didn't know. I would have guessed that he would not have been able to because he would have had to take full relief the first time but the following decision suggests otherwise...

24-2b/17 Obstruction Interferes with Abnormal Stroke; Abnormal Stroke Reasonable in Circumstances
Q.A right-handed player's ball is so close to a boundary fence on the left of a hole that the player, in order to play towards the hole, must play left-handed. In making a left-handed stroke, the player's backswing would be interfered with by an immovable obstruction. Is the player entitled to relief from the obstruction?

A.The player is entitled to relief since use of an abnormal (left-handed) stroke is reasonable in the circumstances - see Exception under Rule 24-2b.

The proper procedure is for the player to take relief for a left-handed stroke in accordance with Rule 24-2b(i).

The player may then use a normal right-handed swing for his next stroke. If the obstruction interferes with the swing or stance for the right-handed stroke, the player may take relief for the right-handed stroke in accordance with Rule 24-2b(i).

mike12

Sorry rd reading the original post, you would have to have a reason to not be able to take your normal stance. If u were against a fence and could only hit the ball left handed and a staked tree was in your swing path then yes you could take relief. If u are in the middle of the field and thereis a tree in front of u you can't decide to suddenly play left handed.

hrigsby2

As a wrench in logic, what if someone was ambidextrous and liked to carry clubs of different hands (right handed irons, left handed wedges, etc.)? Not likely, but I assume it's possible. If the rules don't allow you to take relief from a left-handed stance if you're right handed (barring extenuating circumstances), then does this person get exemption from that?

It seems to me like you should be able to take relief from anything within a proper stances range. There's also no rule that states that you have to play towards the hole (is there?). A left-handed stance for a right-hander would become a right handed stance if they decided to play back towards the tee...just some food for thought!

Pacly

hrigsby2 wrote: »

As a wrench in logic, what if someone was ambidextrous and liked to carry clubs of different hands (right handed irons, left handed wedges, etc.)? Not likely, but I assume it's possible. If the rules don't allow you to take relief from a left-handed stance if you're right handed (barring extenuating circumstances), then does this person get exemption from that?

It seems to me like you should be able to take relief from anything within a proper stances range. There's also no rule that states that you have to play towards the hole (is there?). A left-handed stance for a right-hander would become a right handed stance if they decided to play back towards the tee...just some food for thought!

I have a friend who plays right handed but carries a left handed wedge for chipping (he has the yips right handed). Surely he can decide to play left or right handed at any time? I think everyone should?

Playing backwards is also an excellent thought! Would this be breaking the rule?

A.No. If the only reason for the player to use a left-handed stroke is to escape a poor lie, use of an abnormal (left-handed) stroke is clearly unreasonable and the player is not entitled to invoke Rule 24-2b - see Exception under Rule 24-2b.

I suppose anyone could bend this rule, claiming their reasoning for playing left handed is not to escape a poor lie?

kiers47

I know of a guy who plays. Driver - 6i right handed and 7i - wedge left handed.

No joke. He's playing off single figures to.

Also know 3 or 4 that putt left handed and play everything else right handed.