USGA Proposes to Modernize Rules of Golf

[rogolf]

No.

 

Proposed Rule: Under new Rule 11.1, for all accidental deflections, including when the ball hits the player or opponent or their equipment or caddies:

• There would be no penalty and the ball would be played as it lies (with limited exceptions).
  
• To address any concern that a player might deliberately position equipment to act as a backstop and potentially deflect his or her ball, there would be a penalty if the ball hits equipment that was positioned for that purpose (new Rule 11.2a).
  

 

 

Not sure what you are responding to here? It's my understanding that there is currently no proposed change to the penalty for hitting the ball more than once during a stroke. However, it is still under review.

[TheCityGame]

Here's a question. . .does this mean there's no penalty for a double hit?

 

Is there a "penalty" for a double hit now ?

yes.

 

It's a stroke plus a penalty. 14-4.

 

Not two strokes, although effectively the same thing.

[North Butte]

A few weeks ago I double-hit a chip that went into the hole. Funny thing was, the initial contact was so bad I barely popped it straight up out of the rough. If I had not caught it again on the followthrough I'd have had a 20-foot downhill breaking putt for par.

 

So it was well worth the penalty in that one case!

[Newby]

Erroneous answer removed

 

 

Not sure what you are responding to here? It's my understanding that there is currently no proposed change to the penalty for hitting the ball more than once during a stroke. However, it is still under review.

 

Oops. Senior moment. I posted the correct answer a couple of days ago would you believe.

 

10.1 b. Striking the Ball More Than Once

If a player’s club strikes the ball more than once in making a stroke, the player must add one penalty stroke.

[BillyZ2]

Here's a question. . .does this mean there's no penalty for a double hit?

 

Is there a "penalty" for a double hit now ?

Only if someone catches you!

[LCP]

My $0.02 or so...

 

1" drop. Seemed weird at first, but when dropping on a steep slope makes a lot of sense, the way those bounce away (esp. if near the water). Plus, if you're taking a penalty stroke, why shouldn't you just be allowed to place it instead of drop it? So 1" drop seem fine.

 

3-minute looking rule. Seems too short -- you can be 10 yards to the side of the fairway and hit a tree with a 300-yard tee shot and have no idea where it went after that because you can't see that far, but you know that if you look in the long grass or even worse, leaves, over a 40-50 yard area, you'll find it. Unless your whole group is spread out in a search pattern, there's a good chance it's going to take the fourth or fifth minute to find it. But then again, spending 5 minutes multiple times during the round takes too long.

 

Opposite drop on a lateral hazard. Seems ok for when the lateral hazard is a lake. Not as good when it's a narrow little creek with trees on it -- sometimes that little creek is right below the flight of your tee shot nearly the whole way it's in the air; you might even cross back and forth over it a few times during flight if the creek meanders and is along the line to the hole from the tee box that is offset to the creek-side of the fairway, so picking which side to drop on if you can only pick one may be a dubious guess there. So long as you can get to the other side quickly, that might be where the shot is from. Maybe require it to be within two club lengths on the opposite side like it has to be on the near side, or limit it to narrow lateral hazards like creeks instead of wide lateral hazards like lakes.

 

And of course, the omissions: ball in a divot, especially if filled with sand, and OB/stroke&distance changing to lateral hazard drop, especially if it's on-the-course-OB, like a driving range or maintenance area. Hit it in someone's pool, window, patio table, parked car in the driveway, open garage, or barbecue grill, and you get stroke and distance. I've done them all and will gladly accept stroke and distance there.

[Roadking2003]

The lost ball is one of the rules that I struggle the most with currently. There have been multiple occasions in which the entire group says it's right here and nobody can find it, on a shot that should be on the fairway or the edge. When the majority of a group agrees a ball should be here does that player really deserve the current penalty. IMO if cameras and, or spectators were present the ball is found. The practical issue is how do you write this into a rule, what is a majority, etc. However, with all of the brain power being dedicated to this topic I have to believe somebody much smarter than I can come up with something.

 

If the rule was changed to be distance only, the problem would be solved.

 

You will have to explain this to me. What is the problem and how will "distance only" solve it? Is it the penalty stroke that is the problem?

 

A lost ball is at least a two-stroke penalty. That's pretty severe. Especially since finding the ball is not a golf skill, but many times it's just luck. You find it, no penalty. You don't find it, you have at least two strokes added.

 

It would be more appropriate to just replay the stroke with no penalty stroke. That would make a lost ball the same as a whiff.

[Roadking2003]

And, a ball which hits a tree in the woods and ricochets back into the fairway should be carted back into the woods and dropped in a pile leaves. :swoon:

 

Meh. I have never seen a player take a swing in the woods and a tree suddenly grow where they took the swing. I get the argument of 'such a rule might be hard to define' but these arguments of 'well then a bad shot with a good result should be turned back into a bad result' are nonsense to me.

 

You'll have to respect that the idea of providing free relief from divot holes is nonsense to many posters/readers here, including me.

 

Yep. One man's nonsense is another man's sense.

[Vindog]

And, a ball which hits a tree in the woods and ricochets back into the fairway should be carted back into the woods and dropped in a pile leaves. :swoon:

 

Meh. I have never seen a player take a swing in the woods and a tree suddenly grow where they took the swing. I get the argument of 'such a rule might be hard to define' but these arguments of 'well then a bad shot with a good result should be turned back into a bad result' are nonsense to me.

 

Well it's the same argument that is used for arguing for free relief from divots. Just opposite :dntknw:

[Hawkeye77]

I hate stroke and distance for OB and I need free relief from divots sure seem to go together and will not be changed - some people don't need to wish they were an Oscar Mayer wiener.

 

On topic, the leaving the flagstick in while putting seems to have lost the only justification I can think of when USGA said I can't post rounds played by myself. I see all sorts of situations where some want it in, then out, then maybe back in - among players and even the same player on one green. I don't see it being a timesaver overall and think it's one of those ill thought through ideas. Used to be the rule, I assume it was changed for a reason.

[Deceptively Short]

There seems definitely to be a split between UK and US thinking on the OB issue. I haven't heard of anyone ever criticising stroke and distance as the penalty for a shot OB, it is just accepted that it is part of golf. The divot issue is raised but isn't a burning one and as for a maximum score, well most social games, if not match play, are based on Stableford so there would be no issue there.

By the way, for the poster who couldn't recall anyone taking stroke and distance when they've gone OB, over here I can't ever remember playing with someone who didn't either go back to the tee (if they were foolish enough not to have hit a provisional) or accept loss of hole in match play or a 'blob' aka 0 points in Stableford or an NR (no score) in a medal competition. Just dropping another somewhere and adding a stroke would be totally unacceptable and I can't remember ever witnessing this unless in a pure practice round when there was no score involved anyway.

[Hawkeye77]

There seems definitely to be a split between UK and US thinking on the OB issue. I haven't heard of anyone ever criticising stroke and distance as the penalty for a shot OB, it is just accepted that it is part of golf. The divot issue is raised but isn't a burning one and as for a maximum score, well most social games, if not match play, are based on Stableford so there would be no issue there.

By the way, for the poster who couldn't recall anyone taking stroke and distance when they've gone OB, over here I can't ever remember playing with someone who didn't either go back to the tee (if they were foolish enough not to have hit a provisional) or accept loss of hole in match play or a 'blob' aka 0 points in Stableford or an NR (no score) in a medal competition. Just dropping another somewhere and adding a stroke would be totally unacceptable and I can't remember ever witnessing this unless in a pure practice round when there was no score involved anyway.

 

Too bad we don't have more of this philosophy. The split might be the greater % there play golf, the greater % here play something else on the golf course.

[nsxguy]

Here's a question. . .does this mean there's no penalty for a double hit?

 

Is there a "penalty" for a double hit now ?

yes.

 

It's a stroke plus a penalty. 14-4.

 

Not two strokes, although effectively the same thing.

 

The reason I put the word penalty in quotes is because there really one.

 

Simply count the number of times you actually hit the ball. You hit it twice (double-hit) ? OK, that's 2 "strokes", not just one. :dntknw:

 

You hit to the rough off the tee on a par 3. You lie 1. You double hit your chip and you now lie 3. Easy peasy. :)

[Newby]

My $0.02 or so...

 

3-minute looking rule. Seems too short --

 

Having refereed for umpteen years, my experience is that most players underestimate just how long 5 minutes is. Very few search for that long. Most give up in about 3 minutes.

[Newby]

There seems definitely to be a split between UK and US thinking on the OB issue. I haven't heard of anyone ever criticising stroke and distance as the penalty for a shot OB, it is just accepted that it is part of golf. The divot issue is raised but isn't a burning one and as for a maximum score, well most social games, if not match play, are based on Stableford so there would be no issue there.

By the way, for the poster who couldn't recall anyone taking stroke and distance when they've gone OB, over here I can't ever remember playing with someone who didn't either go back to the tee (if they were foolish enough not to have hit a provisional) or accept loss of hole in match play or a 'blob' aka 0 points in Stableford or an NR (no score) in a medal competition. Just dropping another somewhere and adding a stroke would be totally unacceptable and I can't remember ever witnessing this unless in a pure practice round when there was no score involved anyway.

 

Ditto

[Stuart_G]

Simply count the number of times you actually hit the ball. You hit it twice (double-hit) ? OK, that's 2 "strokes", not just one. :dntknw:

 

Actually, although it works out that way for a double hit, it's not really that simple, a 'triple hit' would not add two strokes. Still just 1 stroke and 1 penalty for multiple hits during the stroke.

[North Butte]

There seems definitely to be a split between UK and US thinking on the OB issue. I haven't heard of anyone ever criticising stroke and distance as the penalty for a shot OB, it is just accepted that it is part of golf. The divot issue is raised but isn't a burning one and as for a maximum score, well most social games, if not match play, are based on Stableford so there would be no issue there.

By the way, for the poster who couldn't recall anyone taking stroke and distance when they've gone OB, over here I can't ever remember playing with someone who didn't either go back to the tee (if they were foolish enough not to have hit a provisional) or accept loss of hole in match play or a 'blob' aka 0 points in Stableford or an NR (no score) in a medal competition. Just dropping another somewhere and adding a stroke would be totally unacceptable and I can't remember ever witnessing this unless in a pure practice round when there was no score involved anyway.

 

My limited experience with UK golf is the same.

 

If you've never lived in USA you won't be able to believe the extent to which *everything* here is a stroke play mindset. If it's a 4BBB match game, all four guys are keeping their own pseudo-stroke-play scorecard. If they are playing Stableford, they keep the points and their stroke-play score side by side on the card.

 

Now mind, it isn't really a medal score they are keeping. It will have conceded putts counted as made, various made-up numbers if they pck up, ESC adjustments for the handicap system, etc. But almost any round that is not a scramble they think in terms f something they can treat as though it were a medal score...even if it's ridiculously compromised in term of playing down and putting out and following the stroe play rules.

[bladehunter]

There seems definitely to be a split between UK and US thinking on the OB issue. I haven't heard of anyone ever criticising stroke and distance as the penalty for a shot OB, it is just accepted that it is part of golf. The divot issue is raised but isn't a burning one and as for a maximum score, well most social games, if not match play, are based on Stableford so there would be no issue there.

By the way, for the poster who couldn't recall anyone taking stroke and distance when they've gone OB, over here I can't ever remember playing with someone who didn't either go back to the tee (if they were foolish enough not to have hit a provisional) or accept loss of hole in match play or a 'blob' aka 0 points in Stableford or an NR (no score) in a medal competition. Just dropping another somewhere and adding a stroke would be totally unacceptable and I can't remember ever witnessing this unless in a pure practice round when there was no score involved anyway.

 

My limited experience with UK golf is the same.

 

If you've never lived in USA you won't be able to believe the extent to which *everything* here is a stroke play mindset. If it's a 4BBB match game, all four guys are keeping their own pseudo-stroke-play scorecard. If they are playing Stableford, they keep the points and their stroke-play score side by side on the card.

 

Now mind, it isn't really a medal score they are keeping. It will have conceded putts counted as made, various made-up numbers if they pck up, ESC adjustments for the handicap system, etc. But almost any round that is not a scramble they think in terms f something they can treat as though it were a medal score...even if it's ridiculously compromised in term of playing down and putting out and following the stroe play rules.

 

 

very true.... but brings up the question for me of how can one post a match play score? everyone will have a conceded putt somewhere in the round ....how do golfers in the UK ever get a handicap if they arent playing stroke play ?

[North Butte]

There seems definitely to be a split between UK and US thinking on the OB issue. I haven't heard of anyone ever criticising stroke and distance as the penalty for a shot OB, it is just accepted that it is part of golf. The divot issue is raised but isn't a burning one and as for a maximum score, well most social games, if not match play, are based on Stableford so there would be no issue there.

By the way, for the poster who couldn't recall anyone taking stroke and distance when they've gone OB, over here I can't ever remember playing with someone who didn't either go back to the tee (if they were foolish enough not to have hit a provisional) or accept loss of hole in match play or a 'blob' aka 0 points in Stableford or an NR (no score) in a medal competition. Just dropping another somewhere and adding a stroke would be totally unacceptable and I can't remember ever witnessing this unless in a pure practice round when there was no score involved anyway.

 

My limited experience with UK golf is the same.

 

If you've never lived in USA you won't be able to believe the extent to which *everything* here is a stroke play mindset. If it's a 4BBB match game, all four guys are keeping their own pseudo-stroke-play scorecard. If they are playing Stableford, they keep the points and their stroke-play score side by side on the card.

 

Now mind, it isn't really a medal score they are keeping. It will have conceded putts counted as made, various made-up numbers if they pck up, ESC adjustments for the handicap system, etc. But almost any round that is not a scramble they think in terms f something they can treat as though it were a medal score...even if it's ridiculously compromised in term of playing down and putting out and following the stroe play rules.

 

 

very true.... but brings up the question for me of how can one post a match play score? everyone will have a conceded putt somewhere in the round ....how do golfers in the UK ever get a handicap if they arent playing stroke play ?

 

They only use competition scores to compute their handicaps. Most clubs in UK have a monthly medal competition that almost everyone plays in. These are the majority of rounds in a typical handicap although additional competition scores are used as well.

 

I am not 100% sure but I think in some circumstances there can be Stableford scores counting toward UK handicaps. But normally a UK handicap is based off playing in competitions from the back tees under formal tournament-like conditions.

[KevCarter]

very true.... but brings up the question for me of how can one post a match play score? everyone will have a conceded putt somewhere in the round ....how do golfers in the UK ever get a handicap if they arent playing stroke play ?

 

4-1. Unfinished Holes and Conceded Strokes

 

A player who starts, but does not complete a hole or is conceded a stroke must record for handicap purposes the most likely score. The most likely score may not exceed the player's Equitable Stroke Control limit, defined in Section 4-3. This most likely score should be preceded by an "X." (See Decision 4-1/1.)

 

There is no limit to the number of unfinished holes a player may have in a round, provided that failure to finish is not for the purpose of handicap manipulation.

 

Example 1: A and B are partners in a four-ball stroke play competition. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A lies two, 18 feet from the hole. B lies two, 25 feet from the hole. B holes a putt for a 3. A picks up on the hole, because A cannot better B's score. A records X-4 on the scorecard because 4 is A's most likely score.

 

Example 2: A and B are playing a match. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A has holed out in 4; B has a 30-foot putt for a 5. B has lost the hole, and picks up. B records X-6 on the scorecard because 6 is B's most likely score.

 

Example 3: A and B are playing a match. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A is one foot from the hole, lying 4. B is 10 feet from the hole, lying 3. B putts and misses. They both concede a half. Both players record X-5 because that is their most likely score.

[weston14]

Liked the majority of the changes, hopefully they are able to implement timely after feeedback period!

 

*Keep it 5 minutes, but 5 minutes sharp, not 5 that is actually 10

*I think doing away with OB and yellow hazards is a good discussion to have. Yes it changes the scoring history of the game, but it simplifies our rules regarding hazards in such an intuitive way = faster play, ease of drops, eliminates many provisional situations, simplification of rules.

[Vindog]

Liked the majority of the changes, hopefully they are able to implement timely after feeedback period!

 

*Keep it 5 minutes, but 5 minutes sharp, not 5 that is actually 10

*I think doing away with OB and yellow hazards is a good discussion to have. Yes it changes the scoring history of the game, but it simplifies our rules regarding hazards in such an intuitive way = faster play, ease of drops, eliminates many provisional situations, simplification of rules.

 

Wanna drop for OB? Fine, but make it for +2 strokes. Simplifies the procedure and preserves the scoring history.

 

There is a drawback though: Much of the time the boundary is in a not so nice dropping area, so hitting 4 from the drop might be worse than hitting 4 from where your provisional lies. Food for thought.

[Newby]

There seems definitely to be a split between UK and US thinking on the OB issue. I haven't heard of anyone ever criticising stroke and distance as the penalty for a shot OB, it is just accepted that it is part of golf. The divot issue is raised but isn't a burning one and as for a maximum score, well most social games, if not match play, are based on Stableford so there would be no issue there.

By the way, for the poster who couldn't recall anyone taking stroke and distance when they've gone OB, over here I can't ever remember playing with someone who didn't either go back to the tee (if they were foolish enough not to have hit a provisional) or accept loss of hole in match play or a 'blob' aka 0 points in Stableford or an NR (no score) in a medal competition. Just dropping another somewhere and adding a stroke would be totally unacceptable and I can't remember ever witnessing this unless in a pure practice round when there was no score involved anyway.

 

My limited experience with UK golf is the same.

 

If you've never lived in USA you won't be able to believe the extent to which *everything* here is a stroke play mindset. If it's a 4BBB match game, all four guys are keeping their own pseudo-stroke-play scorecard. If they are playing Stableford, they keep the points and their stroke-play score side by side on the card.

 

Now mind, it isn't really a medal score they are keeping. It will have conceded putts counted as made, various made-up numbers if they pck up, ESC adjustments for the handicap system, etc. But almost any round that is not a scramble they think in terms f something they can treat as though it were a medal score...even if it's ridiculously compromised in term of playing down and putting out and following the stroe play rules.

 

 

very true.... but brings up the question for me of how can one post a match play score? everyone will have a conceded putt somewhere in the round ....how do golfers in the UK ever get a handicap if they arent playing stroke play ?

 

They only use competition scores to compute their handicaps. Most clubs in UK have a monthly medal competition that almost everyone plays in. These are the majority of rounds in a typical handicap although additional competition scores are used as well.

 

I am not 100% sure but I think in some circumstances there can be Stableford scores counting toward UK handicaps. But normally a UK handicap is based off playing in competitions from the back tees under formal tournament-like conditions.

 

Any strokeplay round (which includes stableford) played in qualifying conditions (certified measured tees, no more than 2 temporary (winter) greens, preferred lies in season), is used for handicap purposes.

Generally, they will be in a formal competition but can be outside competition providing the round has been registered before play. These are called Supplementary Scores.

 

Qualifying Competitions are played more frequently than monthly. Usually at least one a week in season and during the winter if ground conditions are not too 'squidgy'.

 

Incidentally, the term medal goes back to the days when a 'medal' was awarded to the winner of a particular competition. These were usually played for once a month as the prestigious comp of the month. There would often be an club Annual Medal where a gold medal was awarded by the national body.

[weston14]

Liked the majority of the changes, hopefully they are able to implement timely after feeedback period!

 

*Keep it 5 minutes, but 5 minutes sharp, not 5 that is actually 10

*I think doing away with OB and yellow hazards is a good discussion to have. Yes it changes the scoring history of the game, but it simplifies our rules regarding hazards in such an intuitive way = faster play, ease of drops, eliminates many provisional situations, simplification of rules.

 

Wanna drop for OB? Fine, but make it for +2 strokes. Simplifies the procedure and preserves the scoring history.

 

There is a drawback though: Much of the time the boundary is in a not so nice dropping area, so hitting 4 from the drop might be worse than hitting 4 from where your provisional lies. Food for thought.

All good points. Could be worse or better, probably more times worse, or even another provisional that goes OB. To me the discussion would have to turn into, is simplifying the hazards of our game worth affecting the scoring history. I'm a traditionalist in many ways and love the history of professional tours, but also proponent of changes that improve the game, so I'm actually torn on this one, just wanted to put it out there.

[QEight]

very true.... but brings up the question for me of how can one post a match play score? everyone will have a conceded putt somewhere in the round ....how do golfers in the UK ever get a handicap if they arent playing stroke play ?

 

4-1. Unfinished Holes and Conceded Strokes

 

A player who starts, but does not complete a hole or is conceded a stroke must record for handicap purposes the most likely score. The most likely score may not exceed the player's Equitable Stroke Control limit, defined in Section 4-3. This most likely score should be preceded by an "X." (See Decision 4-1/1.)

 

There is no limit to the number of unfinished holes a player may have in a round, provided that failure to finish is not for the purpose of handicap manipulation.

 

Example 1: A and B are partners in a four-ball stroke play competition. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A lies two, 18 feet from the hole. B lies two, 25 feet from the hole. B holes a putt for a 3. A picks up on the hole, because A cannot better B's score. A records X-4 on the scorecard because 4 is A's most likely score.

 

Example 2: A and B are playing a match. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A has holed out in 4; B has a 30-foot putt for a 5. B has lost the hole, and picks up. B records X-6 on the scorecard because 6 is B's most likely score.

 

Example 3: A and B are playing a match. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A is one foot from the hole, lying 4. B is 10 feet from the hole, lying 3. B putts and misses. They both concede a half. Both players record X-5 because that is their most likely score.

 

 

Not in UK though.

[KevCarter]

very true.... but brings up the question for me of how can one post a match play score? everyone will have a conceded putt somewhere in the round ....how do golfers in the UK ever get a handicap if they arent playing stroke play ?

 

4-1. Unfinished Holes and Conceded Strokes

 

A player who starts, but does not complete a hole or is conceded a stroke must record for handicap purposes the most likely score. The most likely score may not exceed the player's Equitable Stroke Control limit, defined in Section 4-3. This most likely score should be preceded by an "X." (See Decision 4-1/1.)

 

There is no limit to the number of unfinished holes a player may have in a round, provided that failure to finish is not for the purpose of handicap manipulation.

 

Example 1: A and B are partners in a four-ball stroke play competition. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A lies two, 18 feet from the hole. B lies two, 25 feet from the hole. B holes a putt for a 3. A picks up on the hole, because A cannot better B's score. A records X-4 on the scorecard because 4 is A's most likely score.

 

Example 2: A and B are playing a match. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A has holed out in 4; B has a 30-foot putt for a 5. B has lost the hole, and picks up. B records X-6 on the scorecard because 6 is B's most likely score.

 

Example 3: A and B are playing a match. On a hole on which neither player receives a handicap stroke, A is one foot from the hole, lying 4. B is 10 feet from the hole, lying 3. B putts and misses. They both concede a half. Both players record X-5 because that is their most likely score.

 

 

Not in UK though.

 

Very true. My apologies.

[jjj912]

...

On topic, the leaving the flagstick in while putting seems to have lost the only justification I can think of when USGA said I can't post rounds played by myself. I see all sorts of situations where some want it in, then out, then maybe back in - among players and even the same player on one green. I don't see it being a timesaver overall and think it's one of those ill thought through ideas. Used to be the rule, I assume it was changed for a reason.

 

The proposed flagstick rule is one that I am ambivalent about. The flagstick tends to act as a backboard and helps hole putts that were otherwise not go in. Thus, it decreases the required skill level. The time savings is minimal for a group since one player can pull the flag while the other(s) prepares to putt. If you are playing as a single, the only situation where it really saves a bit of time is when you have a long first putt and you enter the green where you ball is located.

[North Butte]

To be precise, the flagstick has been shown in tests to help a too-fast putt stay in VERY SLIGHTLY more often than it gets in the way of a putt that would have gone in without the flagstick.

 

In the real world the size of that effect is minuscule and only measurable over a large number of trials.

 

You do not have to worry about anyone's handicap going down if they start leaving the stick in constantly.

[Newby]

To be precise, the flagstick has been shown in tests to help a too-fast putt stay in VERY SLIGHTLY more often than it gets in the way of a putt that would have gone in without the flagstick.

 

In the real world the size of that effect is minuscule and only measurable over a large number of trials.

 

You do not have to worry about anyone's handicap going down if they start leaving the stick in constantly.

 

What research are you referencing ?

 

http://www.golf.com/...ion/flag-or-out

 

and

Short game guru Dave Pelz published his research on this in Golf Magazine (1990’s). After he had a machine and a golfer hit a total of ten thousand putts off the green, his researched found that:

• Machine made 33% more putts
  
• Man made 18% more putts
  

With the flagstick left ‘IN’ the hole.

 

DavePelz, the mad scientist of golf, researched the effects of the flagstick on balls approaching the hole. He finally set the record straight, "Leave the flagstick in whenever the Rules allow, unless it is leaning so far toward you that the ball can't fit."

unless it is leaning so far toward you that the ball can't fit."

However, a ball hitting the flagstick will always finish nearer than it would had it missed. No stats needed, laws of physics apply.

[Newby]

Just a thought. If it didn't help, why would the current rules require you to remove it?