2013 Master's Contest

Rupert Pupkin · #1 04-13-2013, 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GPK

He technically can be DQd. The option he chose was one of the 3 options he had available to him, he just didn't execute the drop properly

If you watch the replay, it looked like he dropped it within about a club length. You could see where his previous divot was and it looked like the drop was about 3-4 feet behind that. That is within a club length. Isn't that a legal drop?

GPK · #2 04-13-2013, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

If you watch the replay, it looked like he dropped it within about a club length. You could see where his previous divot was and it looked like the drop was about 3-4 feet behind that. That is within a club length. Isn't that a legal drop?

The rule states as near as posssible to the spot last played from. He def could have dropped it closer than what he did.

Danzig · #3 04-13-2013, 08:57 AM

no dq. two stroke penalty. that's according to an update to my husbands phone...

Payson Dave · #4 04-13-2013, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GPK

The rule states as near as posssible to the spot last played from. He def could have dropped it closer than what he did.

Ray Paulick has a couple of great tweets on this subject...

GPK · #5 04-13-2013, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

Ray Paulick has a couple of great tweets on this subject...

Yeah...and I didn't realize he used to be in the program.

Rupert Pupkin · #6 04-13-2013, 02:16 PM

It was Tiger's statement that got him the penalty. His drop was close enough to where he hit the original shot from, that he was not going to get any penalty. But when Tiger made the statement that he intentionally dropped the ball a yard or two further back, that was what got him the penalty. It was the "intent" that got him the penalty.

There are situations (like when a ball goes directly in the water) where a player is allowed to drop as far back as he wants. But in this case where the ball was on dry land on the other side of the water, before it went in the water, then the player does not have the choice to go back as far as he wants.

GPK · #7 04-13-2013, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

It was Tiger's statement that got him the penalty. His drop was close enough to where he hit the original shot from, that he was not going to get any penalty. But when Tiger made the statement that he intentionally dropped the ball a yard or two further back, that was what got him the penalty. It was the "intent" that got him the penalty.

There are situations (like when a ball goes directly in the water) where a player is allowed to drop as far back as he wants. But in this case where the ball was on dry land on the other side of the water, before it went in the water, then the player does not have the choice to go back as far as he wants.

Yes he does.

Rupert Pupkin · #8 04-13-2013, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GPK

Yes he does.

I understand now. He could have gone back as far as he wanted from the point of entry. But he did not choose that option. He chose the option to hit it from the same spot. If he's going to hit it from the same spot, then he can't go as far back as he wants. He has to try to drop it in the same spot.