USGA Proposes to Modernize Rules of Golf

[wadesworld]

However, wade, what I see is it's even easier to measure one club-length or two club-lengths. No guessing or estimates needed. :)

 

Well, except that you have the problem of which club to measure with, and different people have different length clubs. Think of all the consternation that goes into what club you use when determining NPR and then what club you're allowed to use to measure. This eliminates all that. Find your NPR with the club you'd use if the interference weren't there, measure 20 inches and drop.

 

It should be noted there's probably not enough variation in club lengths for it to matter a lot. I would have been fine if had been "1 or 2 club lengths, always measured with the driver or longest non-putter in the bag" but I understand why they're proposing a fixed measurement.

[sui generis]

However, wade, what I see is it's even easier to measure one club-length or two club-lengths. No guessing or estimates needed. :)

 

Well, except that you have the problem of which club to measure with, and different people have different length clubs. Think of all the consternation that goes into what club you use when determining NPR and then what club you're allowed to use to measure. This eliminates all that. Find your NPR with the club you'd use if the interference weren't there, measure 20 inches and drop.

 

It should be noted there's probably not enough variation in club lengths for it to matter a lot. I would have been fine if had been "1 or 2 club lengths, always measured with the driver or longest non-putter in the bag" but I understand why they're proposing a fixed measurement.

 

You've refereed enough to realize that the problem often encountered is, "Is it one or two?"

 

My fond hope is that the RBs will settle on one club-length for every drop. Combine that with dropping from a very low altitude and we will have an easy to remember procedure.

[Sawgrass]

I would quit the game and take up Pickleball before I put measuring marks on a club to use for taking drops.

 

 

 

Extreme hyperpole? I hope so.

 

I'm imagining the USGA sitting around a table watching a video of a focus group guy saying that. An executive is asked to react. "Maybe golf isn't for everyone."

 

After our round, while having a few beers, my buddies and I discussed the benefits of watching women engage in extreme hyperpole.

 

Ha! (What a difference a "b" makes.)

[LeoLeo99]

I heard on PGA Tour radio that the executive committee of the USGA, with the exception of Mike Davis, is made up of people who do not receive any compensation and pay their own expenses. I would submit that these folks are not your average muni golfer and have no clue what the average golfer needs and wants.

 

For example, the groove rule. Most golfers have trouble spinning the ball around the green as it is. What does the USGA do in its infinite wisdom? And, the rule affected the professionals not one iota (not to mention all the retooling the OEMs had to do).

• 0
  

 

They may or may not be "your average muni golfer" but that does not infer that they do not know what is best for the game of golf. I'd submit that they are focused on the needs of the game, not the wants of any particular group of golfers.

 

They may or may not know what's best for the game. I think they act with a pure heart for what they think is the best for the game but they are not infallible. Far from it.

[Augster]

I do like the empirical number, but I agree with Sui. Just make it one club length for every drop. Doesn't matter what club, use whatever you'd like. Start measuring with one, change to another, who cares. Simple.

 

Now that the ball can't roll out of the club length, and you get to drop close to the ground, this would only speed up the process and clear up any confusion.

 

Sprinkler head? NPR, drop within a club length. Penalty Area? PLC, drop within a club length. Embedded ball? Nearest point, drop within a club length. What club? Any club you'd like.

 

THAT is the simplification of the Rules.

 

Or if they wanted to differentiate between free and penalty drops (and I don't understand why they did in the first place, just call it a "drop") make free drops your shortest club and penalty drops your longest club for club lengths. But then again, it's not simple and someone will measure a free drop with their driver and play from a wrong place.

 

One club length for all drops using any club. I'm hopeful they come to their senses and simplify it to that.

[aliikane]

There was a lot of surprises and some very good changes. Definitely improves the game to simplify the rules.

 

 

However, I still think the lost ball and OB rule should be played as a hazard. One stroke penalty with no loss of distance. So many times I have hit a ball down the fairway only to not find it because it was lost due to a gopher hole, random hole, or long rough. Or, my ball looked in bounds and just got a weird bounce or bounced off something only to find it a few feet out of bounds. Then it makes no logical sense to clog up the course for 15-20 mins while I walk back to the tee to re-hit.

 

Also, you should get free relief from a divot in the fairway because it is very similar instance to abnormal ground condition (ground under repair).

[Sawgrass]

However, wade, what I see is it's even easier to measure one club-length or two club-lengths. No guessing or estimates needed. :)

 

Well, except that you have the problem of which club to measure with, and different people have different length clubs. Think of all the consternation that goes into what club you use when determining NPR and then what club you're allowed to use to measure. This eliminates all that. Find your NPR with the club you'd use if the interference weren't there, measure 20 inches and drop.

 

It should be noted there's probably not enough variation in club lengths for it to matter a lot. I would have been fine if had been "1 or 2 club lengths, always measured with the driver or longest non-putter in the bag" but I understand why they're proposing a fixed measurement.

 

You've refereed enough to realize that the problem often encountered is, "Is it one or two?"

 

My fond hope is that the RBs will settle on one club-length for every drop. Combine that with dropping from a very low altitude and we will have an easy to remember procedure.

 

As a player who spends much of his time off the fairway, I would very much miss the two club-length (or 80") option on an unplayable ball.

[sui generis]

However, wade, what I see is it's even easier to measure one club-length or two club-lengths. No guessing or estimates needed. :)

 

Well, except that you have the problem of which club to measure with, and different people have different length clubs. Think of all the consternation that goes into what club you use when determining NPR and then what club you're allowed to use to measure. This eliminates all that. Find your NPR with the club you'd use if the interference weren't there, measure 20 inches and drop.

 

It should be noted there's probably not enough variation in club lengths for it to matter a lot. I would have been fine if had been "1 or 2 club lengths, always measured with the driver or longest non-putter in the bag" but I understand why they're proposing a fixed measurement.

 

You've refereed enough to realize that the problem often encountered is, "Is it one or two?"

 

My fond hope is that the RBs will settle on one club-length for every drop. Combine that with dropping from a very low altitude and we will have an easy to remember procedure.

 

As a player who spends much of his time off the fairway, I would very much miss the two club-length (or 80") option on an unplayable ball.

 

Egad, now you're asking the man to count to two! Surely, counting to one is all that can be expected of anyone bright enough to swing a golf club.

[smeech8000]

IMO, the RB's are (unnecessarily) attempting to quantify a couple things, and it will ultimately complicate matters even more:

 

1) Assigning the 95% value to KVC - this is not significantly different than before IMO (statistical discussion in the other thread set aside); true, most won't concern themselves with it, but this change is pointless.

 

2) The 20"/80" drop provisions - Players complained in the past about not having a uniform directive on which club to use, or possible advantage gained by someone owning a long putter (which is minimized now thanks to the anchoring ban at least, not to mention the notion is preposterous in the first place). Now they will complain because you're asking the player to make an estimate of a stated measurement. If the underlying motive behind these "simplifications" is to speed up pace of play, I can't help but think that these are a step in the wrong direction.

 

It's a club length. Use any club. I don't see how simpler this could be made.

 

 

 

You've refereed enough to realize that the problem often encountered is, "Is it one or two?"

 

My fond hope is that the RBs will settle on one club-length for every drop. Combine that with dropping from a very low altitude and we will have an easy to remember procedure.

Regarding 1 vs. 2 CL - keep in mind that the terrain surrounding many penalty areas is sloped, so 1 CL is often not sufficient to gain full relief as it will result in an awkward lie. IMO the player should not be further penalized in taking relief besides the penalty stroke.

 

It should be easy enough to communicate to players** that when taking free relief, you get 1 CL, but when adding a penalty stroke you get another CL. "The first one is free, you have to pay for the second..."

 

 

 

** I have never refereed, so please accept my $0.02 with a brick of salt.

[jslane57]

IMO, the RB's are (unnecessarily) attempting to quantify a couple things, and it will ultimately complicate matters even more:

 

1) Assigning the 95% value to KVC - this is not significantly different than before IMO (statistical discussion in the other thread set aside); true, most won't concern themselves with it, but this change is pointless.

 

2) The 20"/80" drop provisions - Players complained in the past about not having a uniform directive on which club to use, or possible advantage gained by someone owning a long putter (which is minimized now thanks to the anchoring ban at least, not to mention the notion is preposterous in the first place). Now they will complain because you're asking the player to make an estimate of a stated measurement. If the underlying motive behind these "simplifications" is to speed up pace of play, I can't help but think that these are a step in the wrong direction.

 

It's a club length. Use any club. I don't see how simpler this could be made.

 

 

 

You've refereed enough to realize that the problem often encountered is, "Is it one or two?"

 

My fond hope is that the RBs will settle on one club-length for every drop. Combine that with dropping from a very low altitude and we will have an easy to remember procedure.

Regarding 1 vs. 2 CL - keep in mind that the terrain surrounding many penalty areas is sloped, so 1 CL is often not sufficient to gain full relief as it will result in an awkward lie. IMO the player should not be further penalized in taking relief besides the penalty stroke.

 

It should be easy enough to communicate to players** that when taking free relief, you get 1 CL, but when adding a penalty stroke you get another CL. "The first one is free, you have to pay for the second..."

 

 

 

** I have never refereed, so please accept my $0.02 with a brick of salt.

Yes, one club when it's free. Two clubs when it costs. But in regards to the terrain comment, it's always been relief plus a club. It is the two club penalty situation that is from the spot. Many times the free relief plus a club covers more ground than any two clubs every will...

[rogolf]

They are focused on furthering one particular vision of "the game" shared by the sort of people who are interested in working for USGA. It is a perfectly cromulent vision but hardly the only one.

 

What a PGA Tour player thinks is the essence of "the game" overlaps with but is not identical to USGA's. And my own ideal of "the game" likewise is not identical to either of those.

 

Then you have a chance to get involved and provide your input - I'm sure they are looking for volunteers! That's how the system works. The existing Committee members have volunteered their time and efforts, probably many, many hours over many years.

[Golf Monkey]

These rule changes are dumbing down the game. Golf is a hard game where rub of the green has to be accepted. Changing a rule for the likes of Dustin Johnson (who disappeared from the game for 6 months for reasons we are yet to find out) is unacceptable. It seems that the rule makers in governing bodies have already bent over backwards for that particular 'athlete'.

[Seamus_McDuff]

With the move away from club-lengths, what will happen to the following?

 

 

"In addition, if a ball lies through the green and an immovable obstruction on or within two club-lengths of the putting green and within two club-lengths of the ball intervenes on the line of play between the ball and the hole, the player may take relief as follows:"

 

 

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!appendix-i

 

 

[Sean2]

These rule changes are dumbing down the game. Golf is a hard game where rub of the green has to be accepted. Changing a rule for the likes of Dustin Johnson (who disappeared from the game for 6 months for reasons we are yet to find out) is unacceptable. It seems that the rule makers in governing bodies have already bent over backwards for that particular 'athlete'.

 

No...perhaps injecting a wee bit of common sense...but dumbing down? Don't think so.

 

Lee Trevino once said that the rules of golf should fit on a matchbook cover. He had a point.

[LeoLeo99]

These rule changes are dumbing down the game. Golf is a hard game where rub of the green has to be accepted. Changing a rule for the likes of Dustin Johnson (who disappeared from the game for 6 months for reasons we are yet to find out) is unacceptable. It seems that the rule makers in governing bodies have already bent over backwards for that particular 'athlete'.

 

So, the rule change would be ok with you if was another golfer than DJ whose penalty shot/ruling brought this a head? And they're actually proposed changing two rules for DJ. The ball moving on the green and touching the sand when it's not testing.

 

Which proposed rule change affects rub of the green?

[LCP]

Regarding leaving the stick in, I've never ever seen a putt with anywhere near the correct amount of speed hit the pin and bounce off it for a miss. I putt all the time by myself with the stick in, and all of the practice green cups have the stick in. The only ones that have bounced off would have gone many feet past the hole, and all of those stopped at literally gimme, back-handed tap in distance from the hole.

 

That said, I have seen putts that were going a bit too fast bounce off of the pin when my gut tells me that without the pin that putt had a good chance of dropping into the cup had it gone all the way to the back of the cup before it impacted anything. It happened to me tonight playing a few holes into darkness after hitting balls. Our greens had been damaged by fungus and they're pretty long and slow now while they're trying to rehabilitate. Thank goodness for a warm and wet winter/spring, so that will go quickly. But after leaving a 15 foot birdie putt short of the hole on my next to last hole of the night, despite thinking I really banged it when I made the putt, I had a chance on my last hole for 15 foot birdie putt as well. This time I really banged it hard to be sure I got it there. It hit the stick dead center and bounced off of it, stopping about 5 inches from the hole. Looking at my putt as it went to the hole and seeing the carom action, I realized with the stick out, and that direct center of the cup line I had, had the ball had 2 more inches to go to the back of the cup before it hit anything it probably would have made a hard bounce into the hole (sort of like when someone almost misses a slam dunk because they don't quite get to the rim and they throw it through the hoop and bangs around and goes in). However, if I'd missed the center of the back of that cup, no way it would have gone in with as much extra speed as it had, and it might have lipped or bounced a few feet away, introducing the slight possibility of a 3-putt instead of a gimme. So, there is a sweet spot on speed where the pin in hurts in my opinion, but it requires a dead center roll into the cup/pin, and enough speed to go about 4-8 feet past the hole (i.e., too long of a putt past but not grotesquely long).

[Augster]

With the move away from club-lengths, what will happen to the following?

 

 

"In addition, if a ball lies through the green and an immovable obstruction on or within two club-lengths of the putting green and within two club-lengths of the ball intervenes on the line of play between the ball and the hole, the player may take relief as follows:"

 

 

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!appendix-i

 

Anytime you read "two club lengths" it'll be amended to 80". It's basically 2 driver lengths, not including the grip.

[Sawgrass]

 

Lee Trevino once said that the rules of golf should fit on a matchbook cover. He had a point.

 

What he really had was a very large book of matches.

[rogolf]

Lee Trevino once said that the rules of golf should fit on a matchbook cover. He had a point.

 

What he really had was a very large book of matches.

 

Maybe what he meant was - "Play the ball as it lies. Play the course as you find it. Play hard." That would fit on a matchbook cover.

 

Or, as happens sometimes in our group when a player is looking for relief of some sort, his fellow-competitors just use "Play hard" and walk away.

[LCP]

Lee Trevino once said that the rules of golf should fit on a matchbook cover. He had a point.

 

What he really had was a very large book of matches.

 

Maybe what he meant was - "Play the ball as it lies. Play the course as you find it. Play hard." That would fit on a matchbook cover.

 

So would play it as you find it, unless it's due to manmade things not designed to be an integral part of the challenge of the course (where you can take free relief), or extraordinary conditions (playing in mud/standing water, etc.). Take a penalty and a drop if you hit in any kind of hazard, from where your ball last was at. Don't intentionally cheat by using the help of anyone or anything. Don't worry or do anything about random s*** that happens because s*** happens. Anything else is legal. That would also fit on a matchbook cover and would keep the game fun and fair.

[rogolf]

Lee Trevino once said that the rules of golf should fit on a matchbook cover. He had a point.

 

What he really had was a very large book of matches.

 

Maybe what he meant was - "Play the ball as it lies. Play the course as you find it. Play hard." That would fit on a matchbook cover.

 

So would play it as you find it, unless it's due to manmade things not designed to be an integral part of the challenge of the course (where you can take free relief), or extraordinary conditions (playing in mud/standing water, etc.). Take a penalty and a drop if you hit in any kind of hazard, from where your ball last was at. Don't intentionally cheat by using the help of anyone or anything. Don't worry or do anything about random s*** that happens because s*** happens. Anything else is legal. That would also fit on a matchbook cover and would keep the game fun and fair.

 

Play hard in every situation, and match play is much simpler.

 

ps: what is it with the signatures that take up the space of three posts?

[ruca]

So yesterday our 4ball agreed to putt with flag in.

I was surprised how much time this saved. The first couple players (whose balls were nearest front of green, or who got there first) , could put bags down at front of green and could putt while the other 2 took their bags to other edge of green. Then vice versa. Also someone could putt whist others were reading their putts. ( we already play ready golf, so putting out of turn is normal for us) We took flag out when someone had putted near hole and had nothing to do other than take flag out ( so we didn't test out shorter putts)

 

So purely from a time saving standpoint, it really works!

[Colin L]

What could be simpler or more equitable than having a precise length within which to drop? What could be simpler than a once-off measuring and marking of 20" from the top of one club; it's the work of a moment. Once that is done, what is the difference between laying a club on the ground to measure a club length and laying a club on the ground to measure from its top to the mark you made?

[Vindog]

What could be simpler or more equitable than having a precise length within which to drop? What could be simpler than a once-off measuring and marking of 20" from the top of one club; it's the work of a moment. Once that is done, what is the difference between laying a club on the ground to measure a club length and laying a club on the ground to measure from its top to the mark you made?

 

At first I was unsure of the 20" - 80" progression, thinking that 40"-80" might have been a bit more in line. But then I read a post in this thread where the RBs were thinking they wanted to get the relief point closer to the NPR once it's found.

 

This rule wouldn't kill me either way, but initially I had not really seen what the appreciable gain was.

[Roadking2003]

adds 15 minutes to the round. Hitting provisionals also slows the pace of play.

 

How many balls do you manage to hit OOB for goodness sake?

 

Me personally? Maybe one every 100 rounds. The courses I play don't have OB close in.

 

So where do you get 15 minutes from?

 

I was referring to the time it takes to go back to the tee and replay if you didn't hit a provisional.

[Roadking2003]

The reason Pelz's article was popular was that it was counterintuitive. An article in a popular magazine can hardly be held up as settled science (a oxymoron if I ever heard one). Intuition can be unreliable. I don't particularly care whether you believe it or not. Is you intuition born out by tour professional's preferences? I would think that given the stakes and the value of one stroke, it would be universal. Then again, they can be just as silly as any one else.

 

Yes, I'm sure all the tour players are equally aware of this data and its conclusions as we are and yet....they often take the flag out.

 

There is a huge difference between a tour player's shot from just off the green and an average amateur. The tour player doesn't need the flag because he almost never hits it so hard that the flag would help him. Amateurs hit it way too hard quite often and should always leave the flag in.

[Roadking2003]

It's just the scientific method.

 

Well my earlier statement "it will certainly leave the ball nearer the hole than if it doesn't hit it". is 'scientifically' true. Something to do with a man named Newton I believe.

 

Well you are going to make that statement "scientifically true" you'd have to preface it with some sort of modifier because a well struck full shot with a bunch of spin on it will not universally end up closer to the hole after hitting the pin.

This is true. Quite often, a full shot hitting the pin will end up farther from the hole because spin would have stopped the ball if it had not hit the flag.

 

A good example is when Tiger hit the flagstick on #15 at Augusta and the ball ricocheted into the water.

[QEight]

adds 15 minutes to the round. Hitting provisionals also slows the pace of play.

 

How many balls do you manage to hit OOB for goodness sake?

 

Me personally? Maybe one every 100 rounds. The courses I play don't have OB close in.

 

So where do you get 15 minutes from?

 

I was referring to the time it takes to go back to the tee and replay if you didn't hit a provisional.

 

If someone takes 15 minutes to walk back to tee, hit a shot, walk back and hit again and walk ahead they should take a cart. If I need to S&D, I either walk brisk or even jog if needed. It will take me 5 minutes and you can hit your drive.

[Roadking2003]

 

You've refereed enough to realize that the problem often encountered is, "Is it one or two?"

 

My fond hope is that the RBs will settle on one club-length for every drop. Combine that with dropping from a very low altitude and we will have an easy to remember procedure.

 

It's really a simple answer so there is no reason to have a problem with "is it one or two". If it's free, it's one. If it's a penalty drop, it's two. And yes, it would be better if they were the same.

[Roadking2003]

With the move away from club-lengths, what will happen to the following?

 

 

"In addition, if a ball lies through the green and an immovable obstruction on or within two club-lengths of the putting green and within two club-lengths of the ball intervenes on the line of play between the ball and the hole, the player may take relief as follows:"

 

 

http://www.usga.org/...tml#!appendix-i

 

Anytime you read "two club lengths" it'll be amended to 80". It's basically 2 driver lengths, not including the grip.

 

So that does NOT simplify the rule or speed up play.