From: "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: Golf Etiquette Part 1/5
Organization: Semper Excelsior
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 03:16:44 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink (3.2)

>  Ron Sercely <sercely@convex.com>
>
>In article <2934738421.3.p00168@psilink.com> "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com> writes:
>>>DATE:   29 Dec 92 14:53:25 GMT
>>>FROM:   Mark Bisgeier <mdb@netcom.com>
>>>
>>>I'd be interested in your analysis of etiquette vis-a-vis the Rules of Golf...
>>>is there an instance where etiquette is inconsistent with the Rules (e.g.,
>>>the common practice of a player off the green putting or chipping first
>>>even though someone on the green may be further away from the hole and the
>>>away player has not really given his consent to let the off-green player
>>>play)?
>>>-- 
>>>
>>>Mark Bisgeier              mdb@netcom.com
>>>       ...Let your mind wander... 
>>
>>Order of play, R. 29-2, 29-3 provide for loss of hole and a 2 shot penalty
>>respectively.  Playing off the following tee disqualifies.  In settings
>>less formal than tournament play, the rule is very rarely invoked (I 
>>would guess seldom stands, as well 8^) ).  The etiquette comes into play 
>>in a friendly foursome, despite the fact that no penalty 
>>would ensue, where one should always ask first.  The fact that one can play 
>>and the other player is not ready actually places the first breach on 
>>the other player who should have stated that other players should play 
>>while he prepares to play.  (What a terrible sentence!)  
>>
>>The rules allow for change of order by consent, even in honor off the tee.
>>Breaking the rules of order without consent is bad etiquette.  In general,
>>where rules apply, breaking the rules in a setting where they are not 
>>enforced is poor etiquette.
>>
>>Whether one plays out of order without permission depends on whether the 
>>other player will be inconvenienced, and especially  on whether 
>>one can mark the ball afterward without slowing down everybody.
>>
>>Good etiquette also implies the observance of unenforced rules, but I 
>>can think of nowhere that the rules and golf etiquette collide.

[embarrassed face deleted...]
>
>Sorry Jim, but I think you managed to read one small part of the rules,
>but missed most of the important one.  Rule 29 (and 30 and 31) are rules
>that are for "Other Forms of Play".  This includes foursomes, but virtually
>noone plays foursomes as defined in the Rules of Golf!  Four people going off
>of a tee together do NOT constitute a foursome!
>
>Considering the most common forms of play, order of play is covered by
>Rule 10.

You are correct.  That will teach me to hurry.  (Then again, probably not.)
I grabbed the rulebook, took a quick glance and fired away, and missed.

>
>The are summarized quite simply.
>
>In match play, the play who is away MUST play first, otherwise the opponent
>_MAY_ require the player to replay the stroke!  In other words, if you sink
>a 50 foot put, but your opponent is 51 feet from the pin, he can force you
>to replay the shot (no penalty). If you hit it OB, the opponent will probably
>NOT require you to replay :-)

True.  No argument at all.  

>
>In stroke play, there is no penalty for playing out of turn, with one minor
>exception.  If you play out of turn to aid another player (show a partner
>the line of a put for example) you, and the aided plaer are disqualified!

Except in 4-ball and best-ball matches, where "Balls belonging to one side 
may be played in the order the side considers best."  

>
>The net effect is, unless you are playing a match, "ready golf" is completely
>legal! 
>
>Ron

Playing out of turn can begin to transcend "order of play rules" in 
certain situations, and one begins to turn to the copious addenda
constituting the "rulings and decisions".  I turn to yesteryear, when
Sam Snead and ( L. Little, C. Wood, Hogan...???) had short putts on the
72nd hole of the US Open.  Snead needed his to win.  They measured, then
whoever was away made his putt, and then Snead missed.  What would have
happened had Snead just walked up and putted while everybody complained?
I don't know.  I think unsportsmanlike behavior might have disqualified him.

What would they do if two players tied for the lead in the US amateur,
approaching their shots to the 72nd hole, suddenly had one step briskly
ahead of the other, arrive at his ball which is several yards closer to the 
hole than his opponent's, grab a club and stone it 3 feet from the flag?  
I don't know.  Does the player who should have played first (by etiquette 
alone according to your summary), have a grievance?  I don't know.  Sure 
as hell is rude, though;  almost rude enough to be construed abuse of the 
opponent. 8^)

If playing out of turn makes anybody wait, it's generally wrong.  If it 
bothers anyone, it's always wrong.  If no one can even see you do it or be
at all inconvenienced, play away, I'd say.  

  ,...,.,,
 /666;    ',    jim tims
////;    _~ -   p00168@psilink.com
(/@/----0-~-0
 ;'  . `` ~ \'
  , `    ' , >
;;|\..((   -C---->> You guys are TOUGH. BTW, why weren't you helping that
;;| >-  `.__),;;    guy find his ball?  Might speed things more than hitting.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.golf