From: sercely@convex.com (Ron Sercely)
Subject: Re: Rules question
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1992 14:47:19 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

>I thought the same way until a few weeks ago.  I made a posting and as part of
>a response, Charlie Shub pointed out that there is no such thing as "declaring
>a ball to be lost".  We all seem to play it, and most of the time it makes no
>difference.  
>
>This is because we "declare" the ball lost, then put another into play (e.g. by
>hitting our provisional from a point farther on than where the original was
>likely to have gone).  However, it is not the declaration which makes the
>original lost -- it is the putting of the other ball into play.
>
>So what, you may say.  Charlie pointed out a rules decision where it DOES make
>a difference :  You've stuffed a tee shot into the trees, then hit your
>provisional to the lip of the hole.  You prefer to be there for 3 than in the
>trees for 1.  Declaring the first to be lost so that you get the second ball is
>NOT allowed.  The race is on between you trying to put the second ball into
>play and your opponent trying to find your original before you do so.
>
>On reading rule 27a, though, 
>
>[ A ball is lost if : 
>   a. It is not found or identified as his by the player within five minutes
>   after the player's side or his or their caddies have begun to search for
>   it... ]
>   
>it seems that an opponent finding a ball may not prevent the player from
>rendering it lost through any of 27a, b, or c.  27a is not a terrific
>piece of text : does the 'found' relate to 'by the player' in the same way as
>'identified as his' does ?  what if they don't begin a search for it ?  It seems
>like the rule never takes into account that you might NOT want to search and
>find a ball.  Any Rules marshalls out there ?  Charlie, anyone else ? Help !
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Ian Watson, HP Pinewood Information Systems Division, England.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Charlie is correct.  The answer in decision 27/16 states "A player cannot
render a ball lost by a declaration."  I also believe you are correct in
stating that there can be a race between your playing the second ball which
DOES render the ball lost, and your opponent finding the ball.

The most interesting aspect of this discussion to me is that I believe a player
should be able to declare a ball lost.  For one thing this would eliminate the
following (probably unethical) situation.  Your oppenent finds "a" ball, and
asks you to identify it.  You look it over for 2 seconds and say, "I cannot
identify that ball as "the" ball that I first struck", at which point your
original ball is still not found.

Relative to your last paragraph.  I believe that the "found" relates to any
agency, i.e., player, opponent, caddy, fellow competitor, spectator, etc.  The
"identified" clearly can ONLY be done by "the" player, i.e., the one who struck
the ball. 


Ron Sercely