Lowlights from the Masters

There are a few tournaments that I watch fairly religiously, and the Masters is definitely one of them. I know I’m not alone. There’s something spectacular about being able to recognize every tee, fairway, bunker and green of a golf course where a major tournament is played each and every year. For those of us lucky enough to walk the course, Augusta National is as close to heaven as we can get while still on earth. With that familiarity comes an awareness of the history that goes along with the Masters, and can trigger memories of tournament boo-boos. This year was no different. Ernie Els faced an 8-ft putt for bogey on his first hole last week, the fairly innocent-looking par-4 1st. That putt was the first of five more, and Ernie now has the ignominious record for the largest score ever recorded on the first hole, a whopping 10. One wonders if he thought of turning around and walking back to the clubhouse after finally completing that hole. Mercifully, his week was over at the close of Friday. Unfortunately for this blog, none of Ernie’s strokes was the subject of possible penalty which is also pretty remarkable for setting the record – usually there’s a lost ball or an out-of-bounds, an unplayable lie, a water hazard or some other rule infraction that inflates the scoring. Not so for the tragic week of Jordan Spieth. I’m sure we’ve all heard about his losing battle with the shortest hole on the course, the par-3 12th. I thought I’d take some time to work through some of Jordan’s options as he played that hole on Sunday. I think the hole was playing about 150 yards from the tee box, flagstick on the right half, which is its typical Sunday position. Steep bank down to Rae’s Creek in front of the green, azaleas forced to bloom back behind the green for TV. I think Jordan was up by 3 strokes going into the hole and felt pretty good about his club selection, heard some of his conversation with his caddy that it was a stock iron (probably a nine). In what I’d call a typical strike by a hacker of my caliber, Jordan hit the ground behind the ball prior to striking the ball itself and as we all know from first-hand experience, the result is a ball that doesn’t travel as far as we’d like it to. In this case, striking the bank on the far side of Rae’s Creek (yet NOT crossing the hazard line on the bank), and rolling gently to a watery grave. So, what are Jordan’s options under the rules of golf? The hazard is a normal “yellow” water hazard, so there are three options under the rules of golf and one additional option under local Masters-tournament rules. Let’s address the Masters-tournament rule first. The Masters tournament has a drop zone for the 12th hole. Typically it’s on the left-hand side of the hole near the Hogan bridge. If a player has hit his ball into the water hazard, he has the option (with the addition of one penalty stroke) of playing his next stroke from the drop zone. (There’s also a drop area for the 15th hole near the Sarazen bridge.) If Jordan had elected to use the drop zone, accessing the right-half of the hole would have been a tough shot with all three green-side bunkers and the water hazard in play. Jordan thought he had better options than that under Rule 26 which governs water hazards. He had three options available. 1) (and I think this is probably the option he should have used), he could have replayed from the teeing ground (the stroke-and-distance option) with a one-stroke penalty. Think about it – he was playing a normal 9-iron shot, could tee up the ball and get a perfect lie, and he’s just made a swing mistake that every touring pro can rectify easily. 2) Jordan could have taken off his shoes and rolled up his pants and played from Rae’s Creek with no penalty. Not a good option at all in this case, I think the creek is at least 2 feet deep. Never seen anyone do that. 3) (the option Jordan did pursue) draw an imaginary line between the flagstick and the point at which the ball last crossed the hazard line, and he could drop as far back along that line as he wished with a one-stroke penalty. This line for Jordan basically travelled from the flag stick on the right-hand side of the 12th green up through the 13th fairway toward the tributary of Rae’s Creek that runs down the left edge of the 13th fairway. That is the lowest part of Augusta National Golf Club, and was wetter than any other area on the course. Dropping a ball in it was a virtual guarantee of a plug lie. Jordan also decided on a distance to the hole of 80 yards, which was probably like a ¾ swing with a lob wedge at most. Maybe on hard ground with a decent lie that would have been a prudent play. In this case, a fat swing that almost didn’t reach the water hazard. So, here’s the thing. Jordan did not think out his options, or if he did so, he did not do so carefully. I’ve already brought up my preference – that he should have rehit from the tee. Instead, he proceeded to drop in the swampland in front of the 13th fairway. The fat shot from there cost him his second green jacket. Now, Jordan’s hit his second approach into the water – what options does he have? Well, the same as before except that he can no longer go back to the tee box. Since he’s played a shot taking relief from the hazard, he could drop another ball as close as possible to the previous spot, he could have dropped it in the drop zone, played from the hazard, or again drawn that imaginary line between where his ball last crossed the hazard on his second approach and the flagstick and dropped along that line, as far back as he wanted. As far as I know, Jordan did not adjust and try to find a more suitable spot along that line – I think he pretty much dropped from the same spot, and (of course) made sure he got the ball over the hazard and put the ball in the back bunker. A chip and a putt for seven. Hindsight is 20/20, but does provide us with opportunities to think about how we would proceed in Jordan’s shoes. Ruggles doesn’t have a hole like #12, but there are quite a few out there that you’re required to pay a shot over a stream with a high bank. As with every water hazard, think about the options that are open to you and take some time to think about the best option. In some cases, re-teeing may be the way to go. And then there was Billy Horschel on the 15th on Saturday – on in two at even par for the tournament, he marks his ball and then puts it back down in front of his coin, removes the coin and goes to look at his line again when a gust of wind comes up and blows his ball into the pond in front of the green. This event triggered a number of questions in my brain, not the least of which was “What about Rule 18-2b?” For those of you who don’t know, Rule 18 deals with a ball moving when it had previously been at rest. Around 2010 there were a number of high-profile examples where a player had addressed the ball prior to striking it on the putting green, and a gust of wind caused the ball to move prior to the stroke. Until 2012, that meant a one-stroke penalty and the ball had to be replaced. In 2012, however, Rule 18-2b was added – basically saying that if a ball moved at address and the player was virtually certain that he did not play a role in causing the ball to move, he could replace the ball with no penalty. HOWEVER, in the 2016 release of the Rules of Golf, Rule 18-2b is GONE – with a comment in the introduction dealing with the rule changes. Here is the comment (verbatim). “Rule 18-2b (Ball moving after address) has been withdrawn. This means that when a ball moves after a player has addressed it, the application of Rule 18-2 will be based purely on whether the player caused the ball to move.” So, Billy Horschel didn’t cause his ball to move, so couldn’t he replace it? One key item to remember here is that Billy hadn’t addressed the ball yet, so even if Rule 18-2b was still on the books, he couldn’t use those provisions. A ball in play can move due to gravity or wind or rain or hail. Those are not “outside agencies” but naturally occurring phenomena, and until you make a stroke, all of those can affect the position of the golf ball and YOU HAVE TO ACCEPT THE CONSEQUENCES OF NATURALLY OCCURRING PHENOMENON. In Billy’s case, the cause of the ball’s movement was pretty obviously wind. There are provisions for a ball at rest being moved by an outside agency (18-1), a player, their caddy, their equipment (18-2, 3 and 4), by another ball (18-5), or moving while measuring (18-6). Nothing in there on wind. What could Billy have done to help minimize the impact of a wind gust? He could have marked the ball with his coin, picked it up and put it in his pocket prior to putting. Instead he kept the ball on the green to line up his putt and the wind blew at the wrong time. Use the Rules of Golf to your advantage. So, this discussion inevitably led me to thinking about all of those high-profile incidents with wind in previous years. A player lines up a short putt, addresses his ball and the ball moves, blowing forward toward the hole. The player is virtually certain that he hasn’t made the ball move, so he no longer has to take a penalty stroke and he plays a shorter shot into the hole! Keep in mind that the ball can also blow away from the hole.... (and in Horschel’s case, into a water hazard) Clearly, the removal of Rule 18-2b is going to make for some interesting future drama – probably not in our league play, but almost certainly in major championship golf where the greens are running at 13 and greater on the Stimpmeter.