Internal OB

Seve OB

Opinions please.

An established course introduces some new boundaries over half a dozen around the course. Mixed between internal OB & some boundaries just brought in much closer from the edge of the actual course boundary.

No emails have been sent to members advising of the new boundaries.

No changes have been made to the card identifying out of bounds areas.

No visible notices in the clubhouse/noticeboards/website regarding the new boundaries.

Is there not a requirement to identify these new boundaries on the card/clubhouse in order for them to actually qualify as boundaries?

I'm not bothered, OB is OB, but when you play it for the first time and think your ball is OK but then discover a new boundary it is frustrating! (thankfully didn't happen to me, but it did to others).

PS I do think some of them are fair, others are silly, I mean they have just put some rough areas now in the OB, areas where there is no danger & have plenty of room. I've no idea of the logic behind that.

slave1

New Forest did that a few years back, new OB, what was water hazard now in play in a few places which turned a tough track even harder, made no sense.
AFAIK internal OOB which results in OOB left and right off the tee is a no no and frowned upon by the GUI (or so I'm let to believe)...

Seve OB

Oh yea

another one, happened my dad other day.

White stake defining an internal OB, but not on the hole he is playing. Hole he is playing he is in a hazard, but only just and can ge his club on the ball so elects to play. There is a red stake in his way, but the internal OB from previous hole is along the same line, with a white stake right next to the red one.

I told him that it was fine to remove the white stake based on the fact the OB was for the previous hole.

Was I right or wrong?

slave1

Seve OB wrote: »

Oh yea

another one, happened my dad other day.

White stake defining an internal OB, but not on the hole he is playing. Hole he is playing he is in a hazard, but only just and can ge his club on the ball so elects to play. There is a red stake in his way, but the internal OB from previous hole is along the same line, with a white stake right next to the red one.

I told him that it was fine to remove the white stake based on the fact the OB was for the previous hole.

Was I right or wrong?

24/5
Boundary Stakes Having No Significance in Play of Hole Being Played

Q. White stakes installed between the 7th and 8th holes define out of bounds during play of the 7th hole, but they have no significance during play of the 8th hole. Are such stakes obstructions during play of the 8th hole?

A. No, the Definition of "Out of Bounds" states that such stakes are not obstructions. However, in this case it is recommended that, by Local Rule, the stakes be deemed immovable obstructions during play of the 8th hole.

HighLine

Never ok to remove/move a white OB stake. If the recommended local rule quoted above is implemented, you treat it as an immovable obstruction and take appropriate relief.

paulos53

slave1 wrote: »

New Forest did that a few years back, new OB, what was water hazard now in play in a few places which turned a tough track even harder, made no sense.
AFAIK internal OOB which results in OOB left and right off the tee is a no no and frowned upon by the GUI (or so I'm let to believe)...

The 4th in Castlemarty has the course boundary on the right and internal OOB on the left. It has ruined many a card in the monthly medal

Edit: The par 5 15th is the same for the 2nd shot

RoadRunner

Would it be an attempt to speed up play. Rather then have people looking for a ball in rough, just call it oob?

eoghan104

Seve OB wrote: »

Opinions please.

An established course introduces some new boundaries over half a dozen around the course. Mixed between internal OB & some boundaries just brought in much closer from the edge of the actual course boundary.

No emails have been sent to members advising of the new boundaries.

No changes have been made to the card identifying out of bounds areas.

No visible notices in the clubhouse/noticeboards/website regarding the new boundaries.

Is there not a requirement to identify these new boundaries on the card/clubhouse in order for them to actually qualify as boundaries?

I'm not bothered, OB is OB, but when you play it for the first time and think your ball is OK but then discover a new boundary it is frustrating! (thankfully didn't happen to me, but it did to others).

PS I do think some of them are fair, others are silly, I mean they have just put some rough areas now in the OB, areas where there is no danger & have plenty of room. I've no idea of the logic behind that.

I agree there should have been an email.

I don't agree that any of the decisions were bad. They were all advised by the GUI anyway.

Putting green is no-brainer and should have always been OB.
Right of the 12th is fine as it protects the area where the machine sheds are.
Right of 15 I assume is to stop slow play and people spending ages in there looking.

Was a lot of changes all at once but defo should have been communicated to us.

Seve OB

eoghan104 wrote: »

I agree there should have been an email.

I don't agree that any of the decisions were bad. They were all advised by the GUI anyway.

Putting green is no-brainer and should have always been OB.
Right of the 12th is fine as it protects the area where the machine sheds are.
Right of 15 I assume is to stop slow play and people spending ages in there looking.

Was a lot of changes all at once but defo should have been communicated to us.

I've no issues with any of them, except maybe left of fourth. I'm not to sure about right of 15, it could have been balls going into gardens, but there can't have been many as it be quite a way off. unfair to make OOB just because people are looking for balls... just cut the rough. and anyway, never really any hold ups there

few people have said it to me about the lack of communication.

but I still wonder if it is not advertised on the scorecard, can it be OOB. Otherwise why have any OOB marked on any card?

prawnsambo

Seve OB wrote: »

I've no issues with any of them, except maybe left of fourth. I'm not to sure about right of 15, it could have been balls going into gardens, but there can't have been many as it be quite a way off. unfair to make OOB just because people are looking for balls... just cut the rough. and anyway, never really any hold ups there

few people have said it to me about the lack of communication.

but I still wonder if it is not advertised on the scorecard, can it be OOB. Otherwise why have any OOB marked on any card?

It's possible that it's intended to put it on the scorecard at the next printing. Often times there's a gap between a technical change and it being published. This year my club had a change to SSS which didn't hit the scorecard until the next printing. There was a short period when we were out of scorecards and had to use copies.

Seve OB

slave1 wrote: »

24/5
Boundary Stakes Having No Significance in Play of Hole Being Played

Q. White stakes installed between the 7th and 8th holes define out of bounds during play of the 7th hole, but they have no significance during play of the 8th hole. Are such stakes obstructions during play of the 8th hole?

A. No, the Definition of "Out of Bounds" states that such stakes are not obstructions. However, in this case it is recommended that, by Local Rule, the stakes be deemed immovable obstructions during play of the 8th hole.

help me out here
I don't see a rule 24/5 in my book

eoghan104

Not sure it has to be on the card to count as OOB. Sure all water and other hazards are not on a card. Everyone should know what white stakes are.

I didn't know there was left of the 4th. Seems harsh, tough enough as it is.

prawnsambo

Seve OB wrote: »

help me out here
I don't see a rule 24/5 in my book

I think he found it on GolfWRX. It's described as a decision there, not a rule.