Are you allowed to create a small mound on the tee box to hit from?

[Sparty4202]

You’re not hitting the ground first! You still make contact with the ball first..for me I just make better contact and drive the ball on the flight I want to see!

It just works for me.

[Mr. Bean]

> @dpb5031 said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @tbccgolfer said:

> > > Fred Couple does this on a lot of the par 3s. I do it all the time with a fairway wood or hybrid.

> >

> > Why? Hitting the ground with a club does not produce a reproducible outcome unlike using a tee. So why make it more difficult?

> >

> > Rational response, if I may.

>

> You're not making much sense. How does using a tee, in and of itself, lead to reproducible outcomes v. forgoing a tee? To my knowledge a player's swing and ball striking skills lead to reproducible outcomes, not the tee...lol!

>

> I'd also like to know why you deem it "childish" for a player to forego a tee in certain circumstances? I'm further curious as to why this issue apparently sticks in your craw?

>

> You're claiming it's just habit Do you not think that the world class players who choose to forego a tee under certain circumstances don't have ample enough experience using both methods to know which produces the results they're looking for out of a particular shot?

>

>

>

>

 

You seem to have some difficulties in understanding written text. I have not written anything of reproducible outcomes.

 

Pushing a tee into the ground to produce a specific distance between the surface of the ground and the top of the tee is not that difficult. Hitting the ground trying to match that precision is lottery, IMHO. Thus it is far more reproducible to use a tee. Nothing to do with the outcome of a shot. Got it?

 

I renew my question as you may have missed it: If that procedure is so much better than using a tee or placing a ball onto the ground without hitting it first to create an undulation, why only very few top players use it?

[Mr. Bean]

> @Newby said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

>

> So why make it more difficult?

> >

> 1) More difficult for whom?

> 2) I have had better results since using an 'earth' tee rather than a plastic one or no tee, when using an iron. Others may or may not find it difficult.

>

1) To anybody, of course.

2) Good for you. Is that a proof to convince me that it is a superior way of teeing a ball? I have said all along that it is a habit and whatever makes you feel you are more comfortable and feel you are gaining something just go for it. Yet there is no real reason IMHO why that would be in any way beneficial from the physics point of view.

 

I am done with this, thank you for all the responses.

 

[Newby]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> Is that a proof to convince me that it is a superior way of teeing a ball? I

>

 

No. Simply that I find it superior and it would seem that others do also. It also seems that you do not. Each to his own.

[dpb5031]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @dpb5031 said:

> > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > @tbccgolfer said:

> > > > Fred Couple does this on a lot of the par 3s. I do it all the time with a fairway wood or hybrid.

> > >

> > > Why? Hitting the ground with a club does not produce a reproducible outcome unlike using a tee. So why make it more difficult?

> > >

> > > Rational response, if I may.

> >

> > You're not making much sense. How does using a tee, in and of itself, lead to reproducible outcomes v. forgoing a tee? To my knowledge a player's swing and ball striking skills lead to reproducible outcomes, not the tee...lol!

> >

> > I'd also like to know why you deem it "childish" for a player to forego a tee in certain circumstances? I'm further curious as to why this issue apparently sticks in your craw?

> >

> > You're claiming it's just habit Do you not think that the world class players who choose to forego a tee under certain circumstances don't have ample enough experience using both methods to know which produces the results they're looking for out of a particular shot?

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> You seem to have some difficulties in understanding written text. I have not written anything of reproducible outcomes.

>

> Pushing a tee into the ground to produce a specific distance between the surface of the ground and the top of the tee is not that difficult. Hitting the ground trying to match that precision is lottery, IMHO. Thus it is far more reproducible to use a tee. Nothing to do with the outcome of a shot. Got it?

>

> I renew my question as you may have missed it: If that procedure is so much better than using a tee or placing a ball onto the ground without hitting it first to create an undulation, why only very few top players use it?

 

It's quoted above... "reproducible outcomes" was YOUR term, not mine. Read your own content. Perhaps you're the one with syntax difficulties?

 

...and YOU still haven't explained why you feel it's "childish" for a player to forego using an actual tee. Again, your words, not mine. That's a very condascending comment.

 

Last, I've already answered your question (twice) as to why some players have stated they choose to forego a tee under certain conditions. You have no reasonable or logical retort other than your own personal opinion as a (_____ handicap?) recreational player.

 

A number of world class players choose to forego a tee in certain circumstances and I've explained quite clearly WHY they choose this method in previous posts. You may disagree that it'seffective, but again that's nothing more than YOUR opinion as a hacker. Sorry, but I'll take the Tour player's view on this one at face value and trust that they've tried both options and chosen what works best for them based on outcomes in tournamentplay and in practice.

 

You may not agree, but it doesn't make their choice to do so invalid or less effective.

 

So, please reply about your initial condescending comment. Why is it "childish" to not use a tee, and why does it bother you so much?

[Mr. Bean]

> @dpb5031 said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @dpb5031 said:

> > > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > > @tbccgolfer said:

> > > > > Fred Couple does this on a lot of the par 3s. I do it all the time with a fairway wood or hybrid.

> > > >

> > > > Why? Hitting the ground with a club does not produce a reproducible outcome unlike using a tee. So why make it more difficult?

> > > >

> > > > Rational response, if I may.

> > >

> > > You're not making much sense. How does using a tee, in and of itself, lead to reproducible outcomes v. forgoing a tee? To my knowledge a player's swing and ball striking skills lead to reproducible outcomes, not the tee...lol!

> > >

> > > I'd also like to know why you deem it "childish" for a player to forego a tee in certain circumstances? I'm further curious as to why this issue apparently sticks in your craw?

> > >

> > > You're claiming it's just habit Do you not think that the world class players who choose to forego a tee under certain circumstances don't have ample enough experience using both methods to know which produces the results they're looking for out of a particular shot?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > You seem to have some difficulties in understanding written text. I have not written anything of reproducible outcomes.

> >

> > Pushing a tee into the ground to produce a specific distance between the surface of the ground and the top of the tee is not that difficult. Hitting the ground trying to match that precision is lottery, IMHO. Thus it is far more reproducible to use a tee. Nothing to do with the outcome of a shot. Got it?

> >

> > I renew my question as you may have missed it: If that procedure is so much better than using a tee or placing a ball onto the ground without hitting it first to create an undulation, why only very few top players use it?

>

> It's quoted above... "reproducible outcomes" was YOUR term, not mine. Read your own content. Perhaps you're the one with syntax difficulties?

>

> ...and YOU still haven't explained why you feel it's "childish" for a player to forego using an actual tee. Again, your words, not mine. That's a very condascending comment.

>

> Last, I've already answered your question (twice) as to why some players have stated they choose to forego a tee under certain conditions. You have no reasonable or logical retort other than your own personal opinion as a (_____ handicap?) recreational player.

>

> A number of world class players choose to forego a tee in certain circumstances and I've explained quite clearly WHY they choose this method in previous posts. You may disagree that it'seffective, but again that's nothing more than YOUR opinion as a hacker. Sorry, but I'll take the Tour player's view on this one at face value and trust that they've tried both options and chosen what works best for them based on outcomes in tournamentplay and in practice.

>

> You may not agree, but it doesn't make their choice to do so invalid or less effective.

>

> So, please reply about your initial condescending comment. Why is it "childish" to not use a tee, and why does it bother you so much?

 

I did not write it is childish to not use a tee but to create this undulation on the ground by hitting the ground with a club. Obviously you read that wrong as well.

 

As I wrote earlier, for a common player (as all of us on this forum are including OP) this method is simply imitating something they have seen pros do (on tv) without knowing why they do it. That makes it childish in my eyes. This is my personal view on this and you cannot change it no matter how hard you try.

[dpb5031]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @dpb5031 said:

> > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > @dpb5031 said:

> > > > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > > > @tbccgolfer said:

> > > > > > Fred Couple does this on a lot of the par 3s. I do it all the time with a fairway wood or hybrid.

> > > > >

> > > > > Why? Hitting the ground with a club does not produce a reproducible outcome unlike using a tee. So why make it more difficult?

> > > > >

> > > > > Rational response, if I may.

> > > >

> > > > You're not making much sense. How does using a tee, in and of itself, lead to reproducible outcomes v. forgoing a tee? To my knowledge a player's swing and ball striking skills lead to reproducible outcomes, not the tee...lol!

> > > >

> > > > I'd also like to know why you deem it "childish" for a player to forego a tee in certain circumstances? I'm further curious as to why this issue apparently sticks in your craw?

> > > >

> > > > You're claiming it's just habit Do you not think that the world class players who choose to forego a tee under certain circumstances don't have ample enough experience using both methods to know which produces the results they're looking for out of a particular shot?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > You seem to have some difficulties in understanding written text. I have not written anything of reproducible outcomes.

> > >

> > > Pushing a tee into the ground to produce a specific distance between the surface of the ground and the top of the tee is not that difficult. Hitting the ground trying to match that precision is lottery, IMHO. Thus it is far more reproducible to use a tee. Nothing to do with the outcome of a shot. Got it?

> > >

> > > I renew my question as you may have missed it: If that procedure is so much better than using a tee or placing a ball onto the ground without hitting it first to create an undulation, why only very few top players use it?

> >

> > It's quoted above... "reproducible outcomes" was YOUR term, not mine. Read your own content. Perhaps you're the one with syntax difficulties?

> >

> > ...and YOU still haven't explained why you feel it's "childish" for a player to forego using an actual tee. Again, your words, not mine. That's a very condascending comment.

> >

> > Last, I've already answered your question (twice) as to why some players have stated they choose to forego a tee under certain conditions. You have no reasonable or logical retort other than your own personal opinion as a (_____ handicap?) recreational player.

> >

> > A number of world class players choose to forego a tee in certain circumstances and I've explained quite clearly WHY they choose this method in previous posts. You may disagree that it'seffective, but again that's nothing more than YOUR opinion as a hacker. Sorry, but I'll take the Tour player's view on this one at face value and trust that they've tried both options and chosen what works best for them based on outcomes in tournamentplay and in practice.

> >

> > You may not agree, but it doesn't make their choice to do so invalid or less effective.

> >

> > So, please reply about your initial condescending comment. Why is it "childish" to not use a tee, and why does it bother you so much?

>

> I did not write it is childish to not use a tee but to create this undulation on the ground by hitting the ground with a club. Obviously you read that wrong as well.

>

> As I wrote earlier, for a common player (as all of us on this forum are including OP) this method is simply imitating something they have seen pros do (on tv) without knowing why they do it. That makes it childish in my eyes. This is my personal view on this and you cannot change it no matter how hard you try.

 

I have not read anything wrong; modifying the ground was a given seeing as that's the topic being discussed.

 

I have zero interest in changing your mind, I simply provided several reasons why some players choose to tee the ball this way. Those "reasons" are perfectly legitimate and your personal view is immaterial.

[tungstenplug]

Most golfers simply will not be skilled enough to do this effectively and that's perfectly OK. You can still enjoy the weather, the light walk, the time spent with your playing partners, your Game Improvement irons, and just have fun out there

[Mr. Bean]

> @dpb5031 said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @dpb5031 said:

> > > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > > @dpb5031 said:

> > > > > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > > > > @tbccgolfer said:

> > > > > > > Fred Couple does this on a lot of the par 3s. I do it all the time with a fairway wood or hybrid.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Why? Hitting the ground with a club does not produce a reproducible outcome unlike using a tee. So why make it more difficult?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Rational response, if I may.

> > > > >

> > > > > You're not making much sense. How does using a tee, in and of itself, lead to reproducible outcomes v. forgoing a tee? To my knowledge a player's swing and ball striking skills lead to reproducible outcomes, not the tee...lol!

> > > > >

> > > > > I'd also like to know why you deem it "childish" for a player to forego a tee in certain circumstances? I'm further curious as to why this issue apparently sticks in your craw?

> > > > >

> > > > > You're claiming it's just habit Do you not think that the world class players who choose to forego a tee under certain circumstances don't have ample enough experience using both methods to know which produces the results they're looking for out of a particular shot?

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > You seem to have some difficulties in understanding written text. I have not written anything of reproducible outcomes.

> > > >

> > > > Pushing a tee into the ground to produce a specific distance between the surface of the ground and the top of the tee is not that difficult. Hitting the ground trying to match that precision is lottery, IMHO. Thus it is far more reproducible to use a tee. Nothing to do with the outcome of a shot. Got it?

> > > >

> > > > I renew my question as you may have missed it: If that procedure is so much better than using a tee or placing a ball onto the ground without hitting it first to create an undulation, why only very few top players use it?

> > >

> > > It's quoted above... "reproducible outcomes" was YOUR term, not mine. Read your own content. Perhaps you're the one with syntax difficulties?

> > >

> > > ...and YOU still haven't explained why you feel it's "childish" for a player to forego using an actual tee. Again, your words, not mine. That's a very condascending comment.

> > >

> > > Last, I've already answered your question (twice) as to why some players have stated they choose to forego a tee under certain conditions. You have no reasonable or logical retort other than your own personal opinion as a (_____ handicap?) recreational player.

> > >

> > > A number of world class players choose to forego a tee in certain circumstances and I've explained quite clearly WHY they choose this method in previous posts. You may disagree that it'seffective, but again that's nothing more than YOUR opinion as a hacker. Sorry, but I'll take the Tour player's view on this one at face value and trust that they've tried both options and chosen what works best for them based on outcomes in tournamentplay and in practice.

> > >

> > > You may not agree, but it doesn't make their choice to do so invalid or less effective.

> > >

> > > So, please reply about your initial condescending comment. Why is it "childish" to not use a tee, and why does it bother you so much?

> >

> > I did not write it is childish to not use a tee but to create this undulation on the ground by hitting the ground with a club. Obviously you read that wrong as well.

> >

> > As I wrote earlier, for a common player (as all of us on this forum are including OP) this method is simply imitating something they have seen pros do (on tv) without knowing why they do it. That makes it childish in my eyes. This is my personal view on this and you cannot change it no matter how hard you try.

>

> I have not read anything wrong; modifying the ground was a given seeing as that's the topic being discussed.

>

> I have zero interest in changing your mind, I simply provided several reasons why some players choose to tee the ball this way. Those "reasons" are perfectly legitimate and your personal view is immaterial.

 

Your quest is childish. Let it go.

[raynorfan1]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> As I wrote earlier, for a common player (as all of us on this forum are including OP) this method is simply imitating something they have seen pros do (on tv) without knowing why they do it. That makes it childish in my eyes. This is my personal view on this and you cannot change it no matter how hard you try.

 

I'm obviously late to this party...but I go tee-less and pound the ground with a club on anything other than driver, and it's not because I'm trying to copy some pro.

 

The reason I do it? I never practice hitting an iron or hybrid off a tee. I hit a couple hundred balls a week at the range, and never tee it up. I practice hitting off the turf hundreds of times a week. From my perspective, I'd rather play the shot that I've practiced than play something that I'd only do maybe four times a round.

 

So why manipulate the turf? Because I believe (and this could be mental) that it creates a better lie. I want to create the best lie that I can on the turf. You might (and probably will) argue that I could be more consistent with a tee, but I actually find it quite difficult to be consistent when teeing the ball very close to the ground. In my personal experience (YMMV) I can most closely replicate a perfect driving range shot by hitting off the turf with a little manipulation of the ground.

[dpb5031]

> @raynorfan1 said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > As I wrote earlier, for a common player (as all of us on this forum are including OP) this method is simply imitating something they have seen pros do (on tv) without knowing why they do it. That makes it childish in my eyes. This is my personal view on this and you cannot change it no matter how hard you try.

>

> I'm obviously late to this party...but I go tee-less and pound the ground with a club on anything other than driver, and it's not because I'm trying to copy some pro.

>

> The reason I do it? I never practice hitting an iron or hybrid off a tee. I hit a couple hundred balls a week at the range, and never tee it up. I practice hitting off the turf hundreds of times a week. From my perspective, I'd rather play the shot that I've practiced than play something that I'd only do maybe four times a round.

>

> So why manipulate the turf? Because I believe (and this could be mental) that it creates a better lie. I want to create the best lie that I can on the turf. You might (and probably will) argue that I could be more consistent with a tee, but I actually find it quite difficult to be consistent when teeing the ball very close to the ground. In my personal experience (YMMV) I can most closely replicate a perfect driving range shot by hitting off the turf with a little manipulation of the ground.

 

Agreed. Slight improvement of the lie, but on the turf with no tee. Had a pro show me how to hit a hybrid into the wind using this technique to knock spin off the shot and flight it down a hair.

[WarEagleGolf]

I find if I tee up an iron it goes a bit higher and farther, than when I use a grass "tee". I also feel I get more spin hitting off the grass than the tee - so. The tee, off the grass or off a slight and I mean slight "grass tee" gives me three real options off the tee to shave a yard here and there, deal with wind, or hit a specific type of shot.

 

Real or not. Right or wrong. I've done it for years. MOST of my par three shots come from a grass tee and I take hella divots either way. I only tee it up when I want to squeeze a few more yards out.

[Mr. Bean]

> @WarEagleGolf said:

> I find if I tee up an iron it goes a bit higher and farther, than when I use a grass "tee". I also feel I get more spin hitting off the grass than the tee - so. The tee, off the grass or off a slight and I mean slight "grass tee" gives me three real options off the tee to shave a yard here and there, deal with wind, or hit a specific type of shot.

>

 

Those first two are the same I have noticed and those can easily be defended, but only for a hacker (like me). Teeing a ball gives more latitude and there is no need to push the club head down in order to get a good contact with the ball. Hitting off the grass means the margin of error is substantially smaller and us more insecure players tend to change the path of the club head to make sure we do not hit the ground first. Top players do not have this mental problem as they are so skilled that they can replicate a shot much better.

 

The third thing is what I am extremely dubious about. Hitting the ground to create an undulation does not seem very reproducible, unlike using a tee. That is why I do not believe in it, nor do the vast majority of professional players, from what I have seen.

 

To conclude this from my part, everyone is entitled to use any method allowed by the Rules one wishes. We all have routines we believe benefit us.

 

 

[WarEagleGolf]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @WarEagleGolf said:

> > I find if I tee up an iron it goes a bit higher and farther, than when I use a grass "tee". I also feel I get more spin hitting off the grass than the tee - so. The tee, off the grass or off a slight and I mean slight "grass tee" gives me three real options off the tee to shave a yard here and there, deal with wind, or hit a specific type of shot.

> >

>

> Those first two are the same I have noticed and those can easily be defended, but only for a hacker (like me). Teeing a ball gives more latitude and there is no need to push the club head down in order to get a good contact with the ball. Hitting off the grass means the margin of error is substantially smaller and us more insecure players tend to change the path of the club head to make sure we do not hit the ground first. Top players do not have this mental problem as they are so skilled that they can replicate a shot much better.

>

> The third thing is what I am extremely dubious about. Hitting the ground to create an undulation does not seem very reproducible, unlike using a tee. That is why I do not believe in it, nor do the vast majority of professional players, from what I have seen.

>

> To conclude this from my part, everyone is entitled to use any method allowed by the Rules one wishes. We all have routines we believe benefit us.

>

>

I could just be a cheap b@stsrd and don't want to snap tees with irons. I'd also note I tee higher than the grass mound. It's pretty slight off the grass. Almost like the ball.resting on the top of the blades. And yes. I know I can tee it that low.

 

But I don't. Sue me. :D

 

[Noles]

> @Emerich said:

> This came up in my foursome.

>

> Guy walks up to the tee on a par 3, hits his iron into the ground (not crazy hard, just a small thump) creating a little raised bump, sets his ball on that and then plays a shot (which lands about 3 feet from the hole).

>

> Another guy in the group claims this is against the rules and making that little bump on the tee is "changing the golf course". I always thought this was legal and I think I've seen Laura Davies do it on tour.

>

> Anyone know the actual rule? And if you cite the rule # that would help.

>

> Thx

 

The USGA needs to add a rule that if one attempts to call a penalty on someone but is incorrect, then the person who attempted to call the penalty incurs a penalty. People would either learn the rules or be quiet unless they are certain they are correct.

[antip]

> @Noles said:

> > @Emerich said:

> > This came up in my foursome.

> >

> > Guy walks up to the tee on a par 3, hits his iron into the ground (not crazy hard, just a small thump) creating a little raised bump, sets his ball on that and then plays a shot (which lands about 3 feet from the hole).

> >

> > Another guy in the group claims this is against the rules and making that little bump on the tee is "changing the golf course". I always thought this was legal and I think I've seen Laura Davies do it on tour.

> >

> > Anyone know the actual rule? And if you cite the rule # that would help.

> >

> > Thx

>

> The USGA needs to add a rule that if one attempts to call a penalty on someone but is incorrect, then the person who attempted to call the penalty incurs a penalty. People would either learn the rules or be quiet unless they are certain they are correct.

 

I disagree. This would be an environment that protects the cheaters much more than now. And there are many more people fiddling their own card than the number attempting to impose an incorrect penalty on someone else. Anything that reduces the motivation to raise and find out the correct answer to a Rules issue when the incident occurs is not in the interests of the game, IMO.

[Noles]

> @antip said:

> > @Noles said:

> > > @Emerich said:

> > > This came up in my foursome.

> > >

> > > Guy walks up to the tee on a par 3, hits his iron into the ground (not crazy hard, just a small thump) creating a little raised bump, sets his ball on that and then plays a shot (which lands about 3 feet from the hole).

> > >

> > > Another guy in the group claims this is against the rules and making that little bump on the tee is "changing the golf course". I always thought this was legal and I think I've seen Laura Davies do it on tour.

> > >

> > > Anyone know the actual rule? And if you cite the rule # that would help.

> > >

> > > Thx

> >

> > The USGA needs to add a rule that if one attempts to call a penalty on someone but is incorrect, then the person who attempted to call the penalty incurs a penalty. People would either learn the rules or be quiet unless they are certain they are correct.

>

> I disagree. This would be an environment that protects the cheaters much more than now. And there are many more people fiddling their own card than the number attempting to impose an incorrect penalty on someone else. Anything that reduces the motivation to raise and find out the correct answer to a Rules issue when the incident occurs is not in the interests of the game, IMO.

 

What does "fiddling your own card" mean? Also, I use the word "cheater"only when someone knowingly does the wrong thing. People that break a rule without realizing it are not cheaters. I can't remember the last time I played with someone who cheats. The only time I can even remember is someone who has trouble counting when they make a big number, but that has nothing to do with rules. I have had several occurrences over the last few years during men's league, inter-club matches and club tournaments when someone tries to make a claim about a rule that is completely incorrect.

[Sawgrass]

> @Noles said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @Noles said:

> > > > @Emerich said:

> > > > This came up in my foursome.

> > > >

> > > > Guy walks up to the tee on a par 3, hits his iron into the ground (not crazy hard, just a small thump) creating a little raised bump, sets his ball on that and then plays a shot (which lands about 3 feet from the hole).

> > > >

> > > > Another guy in the group claims this is against the rules and making that little bump on the tee is "changing the golf course". I always thought this was legal and I think I've seen Laura Davies do it on tour.

> > > >

> > > > Anyone know the actual rule? And if you cite the rule # that would help.

> > > >

> > > > Thx

> > >

> > > The USGA needs to add a rule that if one attempts to call a penalty on someone but is incorrect, then the person who attempted to call the penalty incurs a penalty. People would either learn the rules or be quiet unless they are certain they are correct.

> >

> > I disagree. This would be an environment that protects the cheaters much more than now. And there are many more people fiddling their own card than the number attempting to impose an incorrect penalty on someone else. Anything that reduces the motivation to raise and find out the correct answer to a Rules issue when the incident occurs is not in the interests of the game, IMO.

>

> What does "fiddling your own card" mean? Also, I use the word "cheater"only when someone knowingly does the wrong thing. People that break a rule without realizing it are not cheaters. I can't remember the last time I played with someone who cheats. The only time I can even remember is someone who has trouble counting when they make a big number, but that has nothing to do with rules. I have had several occurrences over the last few years during men's league, inter-club matches and club tournaments when someone tries to make a claim about a rule that is completely incorrect.

 

You defend good willed people who make mistakes about their own play, and you rightfully point out that they are not cheaters. It's also true that good willed people who mistakenly pursue a rule violation against another person are not cheaters, so you might as well defend them too instead of trying to establish new rules against them.

 

There is already 1.2 if someone is being egregious about deliberately making up rules to fool someone. Absent that, the more rules-awareness there is out there, the better off we all are. And if tracking down the fact that someone was wrong about the application of a rule helps educate all involved, that's a good thing.

 

The defense against your stated issue is to learn the rules yourself. Problem solved.

[Noles]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Noles said:

> > > @antip said:

> > > > @Noles said:

> > > > > @Emerich said:

> > > > > This came up in my foursome.

> > > > >

> > > > > Guy walks up to the tee on a par 3, hits his iron into the ground (not crazy hard, just a small thump) creating a little raised bump, sets his ball on that and then plays a shot (which lands about 3 feet from the hole).

> > > > >

> > > > > Another guy in the group claims this is against the rules and making that little bump on the tee is "changing the golf course". I always thought this was legal and I think I've seen Laura Davies do it on tour.

> > > > >

> > > > > Anyone know the actual rule? And if you cite the rule # that would help.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thx

> > > >

> > > > The USGA needs to add a rule that if one attempts to call a penalty on someone but is incorrect, then the person who attempted to call the penalty incurs a penalty. People would either learn the rules or be quiet unless they are certain they are correct.

> > >

> > > I disagree. This would be an environment that protects the cheaters much more than now. And there are many more people fiddling their own card than the number attempting to impose an incorrect penalty on someone else. Anything that reduces the motivation to raise and find out the correct answer to a Rules issue when the incident occurs is not in the interests of the game, IMO.

> >

> > What does "fiddling your own card" mean? Also, I use the word "cheater"only when someone knowingly does the wrong thing. People that break a rule without realizing it are not cheaters. I can't remember the last time I played with someone who cheats. The only time I can even remember is someone who has trouble counting when they make a big number, but that has nothing to do with rules. I have had several occurrences over the last few years during men's league, inter-club matches and club tournaments when someone tries to make a claim about a rule that is completely incorrect.

>

>

>

>The defense against your stated issue is to learn the rules yourself. Problem solved.

 

I disagree. My knowledge of the rules has no bearing on their opening their mouths when they are incorrect. That is the problem I have.

[Sawgrass]

> @Noles said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @Noles said:

> > > > @antip said:

> > > > > @Noles said:

> > > > > > @Emerich said:

> > > > > > This came up in my foursome.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Guy walks up to the tee on a par 3, hits his iron into the ground (not crazy hard, just a small thump) creating a little raised bump, sets his ball on that and then plays a shot (which lands about 3 feet from the hole).

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Another guy in the group claims this is against the rules and making that little bump on the tee is "changing the golf course". I always thought this was legal and I think I've seen Laura Davies do it on tour.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Anyone know the actual rule? And if you cite the rule # that would help.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thx

> > > > >

> > > > > The USGA needs to add a rule that if one attempts to call a penalty on someone but is incorrect, then the person who attempted to call the penalty incurs a penalty. People would either learn the rules or be quiet unless they are certain they are correct.

> > > >

> > > > I disagree. This would be an environment that protects the cheaters much more than now. And there are many more people fiddling their own card than the number attempting to impose an incorrect penalty on someone else. Anything that reduces the motivation to raise and find out the correct answer to a Rules issue when the incident occurs is not in the interests of the game, IMO.

> > >

> > > What does "fiddling your own card" mean? Also, I use the word "cheater"only when someone knowingly does the wrong thing. People that break a rule without realizing it are not cheaters. I can't remember the last time I played with someone who cheats. The only time I can even remember is someone who has trouble counting when they make a big number, but that has nothing to do with rules. I have had several occurrences over the last few years during men's league, inter-club matches and club tournaments when someone tries to make a claim about a rule that is completely incorrect.

> >

> >

> >

> >The defense against your stated issue is to learn the rules yourself. Problem solved.

>

> I disagree. My knowledge of the rules has no bearing on their opening their mouths when they are incorrect. That is the problem I have.

 

Ahh, I see, but if you expect stated rules perfection from most people, your problem is a very serious one. You must be knowledgeable, or you wouldn't be aware of and frustrated by other's misunderstandings. Too bad you can't simply enjoy educating them, because the Ruling Bodies are unlikely to come to your aid on this.

[Noles]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Noles said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @Noles said:

> > > > > @antip said:

> > > > > > @Noles said:

> > > > > > > @Emerich said:

> > > > > > > This came up in my foursome.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Guy walks up to the tee on a par 3, hits his iron into the ground (not crazy hard, just a small thump) creating a little raised bump, sets his ball on that and then plays a shot (which lands about 3 feet from the hole).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Another guy in the group claims this is against the rules and making that little bump on the tee is "changing the golf course". I always thought this was legal and I think I've seen Laura Davies do it on tour.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Anyone know the actual rule? And if you cite the rule # that would help.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Thx

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The USGA needs to add a rule that if one attempts to call a penalty on someone but is incorrect, then the person who attempted to call the penalty incurs a penalty. People would either learn the rules or be quiet unless they are certain they are correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > I disagree. This would be an environment that protects the cheaters much more than now. And there are many more people fiddling their own card than the number attempting to impose an incorrect penalty on someone else. Anything that reduces the motivation to raise and find out the correct answer to a Rules issue when the incident occurs is not in the interests of the game, IMO.

> > > >

> > > > What does "fiddling your own card" mean? Also, I use the word "cheater"only when someone knowingly does the wrong thing. People that break a rule without realizing it are not cheaters. I can't remember the last time I played with someone who cheats. The only time I can even remember is someone who has trouble counting when they make a big number, but that has nothing to do with rules. I have had several occurrences over the last few years during men's league, inter-club matches and club tournaments when someone tries to make a claim about a rule that is completely incorrect.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >The defense against your stated issue is to learn the rules yourself. Problem solved.

> >

> > I disagree. My knowledge of the rules has no bearing on their opening their mouths when they are incorrect. That is the problem I have.

>

> Ahh, I see, but if you expect stated rules perfection from most people, your problem is a very serious one. You must be knowledgeable, or you wouldn't be aware of and frustrated by other's misunderstandings. Too bad you can't simply enjoy educating them, because **the Ruling Bodies are unlikely to come to your aid on this.**

 

We have definitely found common ground here.

[rogolf]

The Ruling Bodies have provided a lot of education material and opportunities for golfers to learn. However, it is all the supporting bodies - national, state, provincial, regional association and member clubs - that are expected to use these education resources and provide Rules education to golfers. Then of course, the golfers need to take some initiative to learn the Rules of the game they play.

[Sawgrass]

> @rogolf said:

> The Ruling Bodies have provided a lot of education material and opportunities for golfers to learn. However, it is all the supporting bodies - national, state, provincial, regional association and member clubs - that are expected to use these education resources and provide Rules education to golfers. Then of course, the golfers need to take some initiative to learn the Rules of the game they play.

 

To be clear, when I said "the Ruling Bodies are unlikely come to [Noles'] aid on this" I meant that they are unlikely to create a rule to punish errant expressions of the rules. I didn't mean they are unlikely to educate people!

[rogolf]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @rogolf said:

> > The Ruling Bodies have provided a lot of education material and opportunities for golfers to learn. However, it is all the supporting bodies - national, state, provincial, regional association and member clubs - that are expected to use these education resources and provide Rules education to golfers. Then of course, the golfers need to take some initiative to learn the Rules of the game they play.

>

> To be clear, when I said "the Ruling Bodies are unlikely come to [Noles'] aid on this" I meant that they are unlikely to create a rule to punish errant expressions of the rules. I didn't mean they are unlikely to educate people!

 

Understood, and agree.

[Noles]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @rogolf said:

> > The Ruling Bodies have provided a lot of education material and opportunities for golfers to learn. However, it is all the supporting bodies - national, state, provincial, regional association and member clubs - that are expected to use these education resources and provide Rules education to golfers. Then of course, the golfers need to take some initiative to learn the Rules of the game they play.

>

> To be clear, when I said "the Ruling Bodies are unlikely come to [Noles'] aid on this" I meant that they are unlikely to create a rule to punish errant expressions of the rules. I didn't mean they are unlikely to educate people!

 

And I'm sure you realize that I am really being sarcastic when I say that. I know they will never make a rule like that. Although when I become king of the world, I will make that change. And all banked in 3 point shots in basketball will only count as 2, since no one intentionally banks in a 3.