I hate the "Leaving the flag in" rule

[Shilgy]

> @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > @HitEmTrue said:

> > > @dwboston said:

> > > Read closer....

> > > "It was impractical to hit shots from the fringe, fairway, or rough because no human (not even Perfy, my putting/chipping robot) could hit the flagstick often enough or accurately enough to run the test in a reasonable amount of time. **However, by precisely rolling balls on a green from a short distance**, I could measure how the flagstick affected the results. To guarantee measurable, reliable results, **I used a putting machine called the “TruRoller,” which I invented to roll balls precisely controlled directions at carefully controlled speeds**.

> >

> > It doesn't matter how close the ball was to the hole when it began its journey. It is the speed of the ball when it hits the hole/stick that matters. They were using faster speeds in the test, to mimic a chip.

> >

>

> Each test was run at three different speeds: On a perfectly flat green, the speeds were fast enough to send the ball three feet past the hole, six feet past, and nine feet past. Each test also included putts that approached the target at different parts of the hole: dead center; left- and right-center of the pin; left and right edge of the pin. Finally, the tests were run, first on level greens, then on ones that sloped sharply uphill and downhill. (The speeds remained consistent, but because the slope changed, the balls, if they missed, would finish considerably farther away on downhill putts and closer on uphillers. But it is the speed, not the final distance from the hole, that matters.)

> Is this faster speeds?

 

How many players do you know that run putts six and nine feet past the hole? Those extreme speeds are why the test was considered a test for chipping with the pin in. A test for putting would typically test for putts that were going much slower-say 1 foot/2 foot/ 3 foot

[HitEmTrue]

> @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> Is this faster speeds?

 

Yes...I'd guess proper speed for putting is around 12-18" beyond the hole.

 

 

[I_HATE_SNOW]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > > @HitEmTrue said:

> > > > @dwboston said:

> > > > Read closer....

> > > > "It was impractical to hit shots from the fringe, fairway, or rough because no human (not even Perfy, my putting/chipping robot) could hit the flagstick often enough or accurately enough to run the test in a reasonable amount of time. **However, by precisely rolling balls on a green from a short distance**, I could measure how the flagstick affected the results. To guarantee measurable, reliable results, **I used a putting machine called the “TruRoller,” which I invented to roll balls precisely controlled directions at carefully controlled speeds**.

> > >

> > > It doesn't matter how close the ball was to the hole when it began its journey. It is the speed of the ball when it hits the hole/stick that matters. They were using faster speeds in the test, to mimic a chip.

> > >

> >

> > Each test was run at three different speeds: On a perfectly flat green, the speeds were fast enough to send the ball three feet past the hole, six feet past, and nine feet past. Each test also included putts that approached the target at different parts of the hole: dead center; left- and right-center of the pin; left and right edge of the pin. Finally, the tests were run, first on level greens, then on ones that sloped sharply uphill and downhill. (The speeds remained consistent, but because the slope changed, the balls, if they missed, would finish considerably farther away on downhill putts and closer on uphillers. But it is the speed, not the final distance from the hole, that matters.)

> > Is this faster speeds?

>

> How many players do you know that run putts six and nine feet past the hole? Those extreme speeds are why the test was considered a test for chipping with the pin in. A test for putting would typically test for putts that were going much slower-say 1 foot/2 foot/ 3 foot

 

3 feet was included.

[HitEmTrue]

> @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> 3 feet was included.

 

Their conclusions are based on the entire range of balls rolling 3 feet to 9 feet past the hole. It isn't a valid test for putting speeds. Well, it is for those who hit the ball too hard.

 

"Even if you don’t hit the flagstick dead center, it still will aid you. It proved especially advantageous when chipping downhill and **at faster speeds.**"

 

 

[dpb5031]

> @HitEmTrue said:

> > @dwboston said:

> > Read closer....

> > "It was impractical to hit shots from the fringe, fairway, or rough because no human (not even Perfy, my putting/chipping robot) could hit the flagstick often enough or accurately enough to run the test in a reasonable amount of time. **However, by precisely rolling balls on a green from a short distance**, I could measure how the flagstick affected the results. To guarantee measurable, reliable results, **I used a putting machine called the “TruRoller,” which I invented to roll balls precisely controlled directions at carefully controlled speeds**.

>

> It doesn't matter how close the ball was to the hole when it began its journey. It is the speed of the ball when it hits the hole/stick that matters. They were using faster speeds in the test, to mimic a chip.

>

 

Why would a good chip be rolling any faster than a good putt? It may be more difficult to hit a chip at perfect pace v. a putt, but that could be slower OR faster than optimal. In any event, the ultimate objective is the same...

[HitEmTrue]

> @dpb5031 said:

> > @HitEmTrue said:

> > > @dwboston said:

> > > Read closer....

> > > "It was impractical to hit shots from the fringe, fairway, or rough because no human (not even Perfy, my putting/chipping robot) could hit the flagstick often enough or accurately enough to run the test in a reasonable amount of time. **However, by precisely rolling balls on a green from a short distance**, I could measure how the flagstick affected the results. To guarantee measurable, reliable results, **I used a putting machine called the “TruRoller,” which I invented to roll balls precisely controlled directions at carefully controlled speeds**.

> >

> > It doesn't matter how close the ball was to the hole when it began its journey. It is the speed of the ball when it hits the hole/stick that matters. They were using faster speeds in the test, to mimic a chip.

> >

>

> Why would a good chip be rolling any faster than a good putt? It may be more difficult to hit a chip at perfect pace v. a putt, but that could be slower OR faster than optimal. In any event, the ultimate objective is the same...

 

I agree with you, so you'd have to ask Pelz that question. :)

 

They probably did it because there will be more variance in speed on shots taken from off the green. And any shots that end up short of the hole can't go in so they are left out of the testing.

 

 

[bladehunter]

> @Edward_Majorwin said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > and don’t like that cheaters can just pick up their ball unsupervised to “ identify “ it and tee up their lies.

> I didn't even know this was a common thing until it happened right in front of me a few weeks ago. Dude saw me looking at him so he offered up "yep, that's mine" and put it down all fluffy from a previous tough lie. I looked away and tried to find the 10 other golfers in our group who had just tee'd off...you know, thereby making such an action slightly justifiable, but alas there were only four of us in the group - we had somehow managed to find our balls using just our eyes.

>

> Back on topic I now proceed...thought I'd be putting with pin in all year but have now reverted to removing it for anything inside 15 feet. Nobody I play with can putt worth a darn anyway so everyone agrees with leave it for lags and yank for the deuce attempt.

 

I’m telling you they use it. Especially in a hazard. Ball burried in a nest of twigs. “ ah shoot. I need to make sure that’s me ... “ picks it up then clears out all the brush then places it back. Whala clean lie.

[ThinkingPlus]

> @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > > > @HitEmTrue said:

> > > > > @dwboston said:

> > > > > Read closer....

> > > > > "It was impractical to hit shots from the fringe, fairway, or rough because no human (not even Perfy, my putting/chipping robot) could hit the flagstick often enough or accurately enough to run the test in a reasonable amount of time. **However, by precisely rolling balls on a green from a short distance**, I could measure how the flagstick affected the results. To guarantee measurable, reliable results, **I used a putting machine called the “TruRoller,” which I invented to roll balls precisely controlled directions at carefully controlled speeds**.

> > > >

> > > > It doesn't matter how close the ball was to the hole when it began its journey. It is the speed of the ball when it hits the hole/stick that matters. They were using faster speeds in the test, to mimic a chip.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Each test was run at three different speeds: On a perfectly flat green, the speeds were fast enough to send the ball three feet past the hole, six feet past, and nine feet past. Each test also included putts that approached the target at different parts of the hole: dead center; left- and right-center of the pin; left and right edge of the pin. Finally, the tests were run, first on level greens, then on ones that sloped sharply uphill and downhill. (The speeds remained consistent, but because the slope changed, the balls, if they missed, would finish considerably farther away on downhill putts and closer on uphillers. But it is the speed, not the final distance from the hole, that matters.)

> > > Is this faster speeds?

> >

> > How many players do you know that run putts six and nine feet past the hole? Those extreme speeds are why the test was considered a test for chipping with the pin in. A test for putting would typically test for putts that were going much slower-say 1 foot/2 foot/ 3 foot

>

> 3 feet was included.

 

Results for the 3 feet speed showed there was no advantage to having the pin in. Only the higher speeds showed any advantage. This is straight from one of Pelz books. All the data is broken down in the book.

[Edward_Majorwin]

> @bladehunter said:

> I’m telling you they use it. Especially in a hazard. Ball burried in a nest of twigs. “ ah shoot. I need to make sure that’s me ... “ picks it up then clears out all the brush then places it back. Whala clean lie.

 

And dudes probably already have the ball marked in a way that can be seen, at least partially, with a good focused scan of the ball...while resting on the playing surface!!

Hope I don't have to see it again soon but I fear it won't be the last time

 

 

 

[Shilgy]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Edward_Majorwin said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > and don’t like that cheaters can just pick up their ball unsupervised to “ identify “ it and tee up their lies.

> > I didn't even know this was a common thing until it happened right in front of me a few weeks ago. Dude saw me looking at him so he offered up "yep, that's mine" and put it down all fluffy from a previous tough lie. I looked away and tried to find the 10 other golfers in our group who had just tee'd off...you know, thereby making such an action slightly justifiable, but alas there were only four of us in the group - we had somehow managed to find our balls using just our eyes.

> >

> > Back on topic I now proceed...thought I'd be putting with pin in all year but have now reverted to removing it for anything inside 15 feet. Nobody I play with can putt worth a darn anyway so everyone agrees with leave it for lags and yank for the deuce attempt.

>

> I’m telling you they use it. Especially in a hazard. Ball burried in a nest of twigs. “ ah shoot. I need to make sure that’s me ... “ picks it up then clears out all the brush then places it back. Whala clean lie.

 

Exactly, one of my pet peeves as well. But a few guys in our Saturday group don't even do it the way you mention. They do it to other people's ball as well. Usually you can figure out what the brand and number are WITHOUT TOUCHING THE DAMN BALL. But no.... These bozos have to pick it up and peer closely at it. I'm thinking to myself Joe was the only guy down the right side of the fairway why in the world are you picking it up to look at it!!!!????

[I_HATE_SNOW]

> @ThinkingPlus said:

> > @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > > > > @HitEmTrue said:

> > > > > > @dwboston said:

> > > > > > Read closer....

> > > > > > "It was impractical to hit shots from the fringe, fairway, or rough because no human (not even Perfy, my putting/chipping robot) could hit the flagstick often enough or accurately enough to run the test in a reasonable amount of time. **However, by precisely rolling balls on a green from a short distance**, I could measure how the flagstick affected the results. To guarantee measurable, reliable results, **I used a putting machine called the “TruRoller,” which I invented to roll balls precisely controlled directions at carefully controlled speeds**.

> > > > >

> > > > > It doesn't matter how close the ball was to the hole when it began its journey. It is the speed of the ball when it hits the hole/stick that matters. They were using faster speeds in the test, to mimic a chip.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Each test was run at three different speeds: On a perfectly flat green, the speeds were fast enough to send the ball three feet past the hole, six feet past, and nine feet past. Each test also included putts that approached the target at different parts of the hole: dead center; left- and right-center of the pin; left and right edge of the pin. Finally, the tests were run, first on level greens, then on ones that sloped sharply uphill and downhill. (The speeds remained consistent, but because the slope changed, the balls, if they missed, would finish considerably farther away on downhill putts and closer on uphillers. But it is the speed, not the final distance from the hole, that matters.)

> > > > Is this faster speeds?

> > >

> > > How many players do you know that run putts six and nine feet past the hole? Those extreme speeds are why the test was considered a test for chipping with the pin in. A test for putting would typically test for putts that were going much slower-say 1 foot/2 foot/ 3 foot

> >

> > 3 feet was included.

>

> Results for the 3 feet speed showed there was no advantage to having the pin in. Only the higher speeds showed any advantage. This is straight from one of Pelz books. All the data is broken down in the book.

 

Did it show a disadvantage?

[ThinkingPlus]

> @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > @ThinkingPlus said:

> > > @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > > @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > > > > > @HitEmTrue said:

> > > > > > > @dwboston said:

> > > > > > > Read closer....

> > > > > > > "It was impractical to hit shots from the fringe, fairway, or rough because no human (not even Perfy, my putting/chipping robot) could hit the flagstick often enough or accurately enough to run the test in a reasonable amount of time. **However, by precisely rolling balls on a green from a short distance**, I could measure how the flagstick affected the results. To guarantee measurable, reliable results, **I used a putting machine called the “TruRoller,” which I invented to roll balls precisely controlled directions at carefully controlled speeds**.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It doesn't matter how close the ball was to the hole when it began its journey. It is the speed of the ball when it hits the hole/stick that matters. They were using faster speeds in the test, to mimic a chip.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Each test was run at three different speeds: On a perfectly flat green, the speeds were fast enough to send the ball three feet past the hole, six feet past, and nine feet past. Each test also included putts that approached the target at different parts of the hole: dead center; left- and right-center of the pin; left and right edge of the pin. Finally, the tests were run, first on level greens, then on ones that sloped sharply uphill and downhill. (The speeds remained consistent, but because the slope changed, the balls, if they missed, would finish considerably farther away on downhill putts and closer on uphillers. But it is the speed, not the final distance from the hole, that matters.)

> > > > > Is this faster speeds?

> > > >

> > > > How many players do you know that run putts six and nine feet past the hole? Those extreme speeds are why the test was considered a test for chipping with the pin in. A test for putting would typically test for putts that were going much slower-say 1 foot/2 foot/ 3 foot

> > >

> > > 3 feet was included.

> >

> > Results for the 3 feet speed showed there was no advantage to having the pin in. Only the higher speeds showed any advantage. This is straight from one of Pelz books. All the data is broken down in the book.

>

> Did it show a disadvantage?

 

I think it was a wash in Pelz tests. His testing was not the most comprehensive I have seen. I take it pretty much at face value as good results for typical chipping situations where you will likely not have great speed control.

[HitEmTrue]

> @ThinkingPlus said:

> > @I_HATE_SNOW said:

> > Did it show a disadvantage?

>

> I think it was a wash in Pelz tests. His testing was not the most comprehensive I have seen. I take it pretty much at face value as good results for typical chipping situations where you will likely not have great speed control.

 

Yep...have to look at slower-speed tests from this year, by folks not-named-Pelz, to see that sometimes it can be a disadvantage. Which was the point I was trying to make when I opened up the can of worms.

 

[LeoLeo99]

> @bladehunter said:

> Disagree. It’s 100 % out for me inside 12 feet. I hate the visual of it for short putts. And I’ll add. I had the pin spit the ball out on a 12 foot putt from the fringe Saturday. Was uphill and ball wasn’t moving very fast. Wind blowing. Poof. Ball goes down and comes back out. Blank that.

 

I think pin in hurts more than it helps.

[Babydaddy]

I can't do it- it doesn't look right to me to putt with the flag in when I'm on the green

[davep043]

Having read too many different studies, my best guess is that the pin can only help if the ball is going too fast, and may randomly kick a few out that might have otherwise gone in at moderate speeds. I don't think the pin will kick out a putt with a speed that would have ended up 3 inches past, but it might keep one out that would have ended up 3 feet past, if it hits at just the right angle. And it just might capture one that otherwise would have spun out and ended up 4 feet past. But I don't think there's a player alive who can control either his location within the hole or his speed well enough that you can determine what will happen on any one putt. My choice, keep it in for longer ones, and take it out (most times) for shorter ones.

[Jackal66]

The courses I play have flags that are loose enough, that they don't set true in the hole.

It's not much but with the wind, etc. your ball will bounce away, or wedge between flagstick, and hole edge.

The courses that have tight-fitting flags\cups usually get a sand grain between, and the cup pulls out with the flag.

[KyGolf]

> @Jackal66 said:

> The courses I play have flags that are loose enough, that they don't set true in the hole.

> It's not much but with the wind, etc. your ball will bounce away, or wedge between flagstick, and hole edge.

> The courses that have tight-fitting flags\cups usually get a sand grain between, and the cup pulls out with the flag.

 

If the ball is wedged between the flagstick and the edge of hole it is almost certain that the bottom of the ball is below the surface, and is holed by definition.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Another 18 today and only once the pin came out and that was because it was leaning severely. My foresome rolled some long putts and not once was it rejected.

[Mcgeeno]

I’m a flag in guy but I will admit I played 126 holes this week at an away course with the heavier style pins and in higher winds.

 

16 guys we rotate groups and I did witness 3-4 rejections on normal rolling shots. Dead center pin hit and straight out stopped by the heavier style flag.

 

It has left me questioning if I’m 100 percent on board. I’m easy going and didn’t care but everyone I played with was pulling it for the short putts by the final day.

[Sawgrass]

I'm generally too lazy to change the flagstick's position. If it's in, I'm happy, if it's out, no problem (unless it's a testy downhill putt). The more I play with the pin in the lazier I'm getting because so far I've only observed possible help having been provided and zero harm.

 

I endorse lazy.

 

[nsxguy]

This is just like us remembering all the bad breaks we get and forget all about the good ones - after all, we're supposed to get the good breaks, right ? LOL

 

The thing is, and this should have easily been foreseen, is that we are far more likely to be "sure" the pin rejected a ball that would have gone in than the pin helped the ball go in.

 

Stated a bit differently, of balls that go in, the instances of "it would it have gone in anyway" (after hitting the pin) are far more likely to be the observation than of "that was lucky, it would have missed in if the pin wasn't there".

 

That being the case it doesn't surprise me that (especially) better players, are going back to pulling the flag.

[Newby]

> @nsxguy said:

> This is just like us remembering all the bad breaks we get and forget all about the good ones

> That being the case it doesn't surprise me that (especially) better players, are going back to pulling the flag.

So I've got a better chance of beating them.

Of course I remember all my good breaks as I seem to have so few.

[Sawgrass]

I believe that at least some of us are victims of human nature.

[bladehunter]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @Edward_Majorwin said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > and don’t like that cheaters can just pick up their ball unsupervised to “ identify “ it and tee up their lies.

> > > I didn't even know this was a common thing until it happened right in front of me a few weeks ago. Dude saw me looking at him so he offered up "yep, that's mine" and put it down all fluffy from a previous tough lie. I looked away and tried to find the 10 other golfers in our group who had just tee'd off...you know, thereby making such an action slightly justifiable, but alas there were only four of us in the group - we had somehow managed to find our balls using just our eyes.

> > >

> > > Back on topic I now proceed...thought I'd be putting with pin in all year but have now reverted to removing it for anything inside 15 feet. Nobody I play with can putt worth a darn anyway so everyone agrees with leave it for lags and yank for the deuce attempt.

> >

> > I’m telling you they use it. Especially in a hazard. Ball burried in a nest of twigs. “ ah shoot. I need to make sure that’s me ... “ picks it up then clears out all the brush then places it back. Whala clean lie.

>

> Exactly, one of my pet peeves as well. But a few guys in our Saturday group don't even do it the way you mention. They do it to other people's ball as well. Usually you can figure out what the brand and number are WITHOUT TOUCHING THE **** BALL. But no.... These bozos have to pick it up and peer closely at it. I'm thinking to myself Joe was the only guy down the right side of the fairway why in the world are you picking it up to look at it!!!!????

 

Yep. The rolling cheater I describe does that too. Almost as a way of including you in their actions. If that makes sense. So you can’t say anything. I hAd him last weekend on a club comp say this to me. “ if you hit that from there and scuff up your new club you’re an idiot. Move it to the grass “.

 

I had wiped a drive right to the edge of the woods. Clean lie on hardpan with a few pebbles around. I ignored him. Cleared the pebbles and proceeded to hit a high 9 iron to 6 ft. And then Made the putt. Some scratches on the 9 iron sole. Brand new set of irons. And I don’t give a single shat. Tools not jewels. I’m after birdies.

 

I truthfully believe that golf karma exists. And I’m rewarded for playing honest.

[hybrid25]

I think the rule may get overturned and revert back to the old way of removing the flag from the cup while putting. First off, I don't think it really saves a whole lot of time if at all. Secondly, damage to the hole is being noticed because hands don't fit down the hole comfortably and rake the sides of the cup both down and back upward and out causing damage to the putting hole.

[Shilgy]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @Edward_Majorwin said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > and don’t like that cheaters can just pick up their ball unsupervised to “ identify “ it and tee up their lies.

> > > > I didn't even know this was a common thing until it happened right in front of me a few weeks ago. Dude saw me looking at him so he offered up "yep, that's mine" and put it down all fluffy from a previous tough lie. I looked away and tried to find the 10 other golfers in our group who had just tee'd off...you know, thereby making such an action slightly justifiable, but alas there were only four of us in the group - we had somehow managed to find our balls using just our eyes.

> > > >

> > > > Back on topic I now proceed...thought I'd be putting with pin in all year but have now reverted to removing it for anything inside 15 feet. Nobody I play with can putt worth a darn anyway so everyone agrees with leave it for lags and yank for the deuce attempt.

> > >

> > > I’m telling you they use it. Especially in a hazard. Ball burried in a nest of twigs. “ ah shoot. I need to make sure that’s me ... “ picks it up then clears out all the brush then places it back. Whala clean lie.

> >

> > Exactly, one of my pet peeves as well. But a few guys in our Saturday group don't even do it the way you mention. They do it to other people's ball as well. Usually you can figure out what the brand and number are WITHOUT TOUCHING THE **** BALL. But no.... These bozos have to pick it up and peer closely at it. I'm thinking to myself Joe was the only guy down the right side of the fairway why in the world are you picking it up to look at it!!!!????

>

> Yep. The rolling cheater I describe does that too. Almost as a way of including you in their actions. If that makes sense. So you can’t say anything. I hAd him last weekend on a club comp say this to me. “ if you hit that from there and scuff up your new club you’re an idiot. Move it to the grass “.

>

> I had wiped a drive right to the edge of the woods. Clean lie on hardpan with a few pebbles around. I ignored him. Cleared the pebbles and proceeded to hit a high 9 iron to 6 ft. And then Made the putt. Some scratches on the 9 iron sole. Brand new set of irons. And I don’t give a single shat. Tools not jewels. I’m after birdies.

>

> I truthfully believe that golf karma exists. And I’m rewarded for playing honest.

 

Not to threadjack but....holy crap!! You made the putt?!?! You had said it was improved and now we have proof. Way to go. :)

 

[bladehunter]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @Edward_Majorwin said:

> > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > and don’t like that cheaters can just pick up their ball unsupervised to “ identify “ it and tee up their lies.

> > > > > I didn't even know this was a common thing until it happened right in front of me a few weeks ago. Dude saw me looking at him so he offered up "yep, that's mine" and put it down all fluffy from a previous tough lie. I looked away and tried to find the 10 other golfers in our group who had just tee'd off...you know, thereby making such an action slightly justifiable, but alas there were only four of us in the group - we had somehow managed to find our balls using just our eyes.

> > > > >

> > > > > Back on topic I now proceed...thought I'd be putting with pin in all year but have now reverted to removing it for anything inside 15 feet. Nobody I play with can putt worth a darn anyway so everyone agrees with leave it for lags and yank for the deuce attempt.

> > > >

> > > > I’m telling you they use it. Especially in a hazard. Ball burried in a nest of twigs. “ ah shoot. I need to make sure that’s me ... “ picks it up then clears out all the brush then places it back. Whala clean lie.

> > >

> > > Exactly, one of my pet peeves as well. But a few guys in our Saturday group don't even do it the way you mention. They do it to other people's ball as well. Usually you can figure out what the brand and number are WITHOUT TOUCHING THE **** BALL. But no.... These bozos have to pick it up and peer closely at it. I'm thinking to myself Joe was the only guy down the right side of the fairway why in the world are you picking it up to look at it!!!!????

> >

> > Yep. The rolling cheater I describe does that too. Almost as a way of including you in their actions. If that makes sense. So you can’t say anything. I hAd him last weekend on a club comp say this to me. “ if you hit that from there and scuff up your new club you’re an idiot. Move it to the grass “.

> >

> > I had wiped a drive right to the edge of the woods. Clean lie on hardpan with a few pebbles around. I ignored him. Cleared the pebbles and proceeded to hit a high 9 iron to 6 ft. And then Made the putt. Some scratches on the 9 iron sole. Brand new set of irons. And I don’t give a single shat. Tools not jewels. I’m after birdies.

> >

> > I truthfully believe that golf karma exists. And I’m rewarded for playing honest.

>

> Not to threadjack but....holy crap!! You made the putt?!?! You had said it was improved and now we have proof. Way to go. :)

>

>

 

Lol. Believe it or not. That gif is the way I feel inside sometimes when A putt goes in. I hope one day to not be elated every single time a make a putt. Still be happy but not in awe. Lol

[BlackDiamondPar5]

> @hybrid25 said:

> I think the rule may get overturned and revert back to the old way of removing the flag from the cup while putting. First off, I don't think it really saves a whole lot of time if at all. Secondly, damage to the hole is being noticed because hands don't fit down the hole comfortably and rake the sides of the cup both down and back upward and out causing damage to the putting hole.

 

I sure hope not! It's definitely saving time with all the people I play with. It's great to be able to walk up and putt without worrying about the flag when others aren't ready.

 

A agree hands don't fit well but there is a trick... Simply reach in from the side opposite the stick and no fit issues. I'm showing all the guys that trick.

[Roadking2003]

> @BlackDiamondPar5 said:

> > @hybrid25 said:

> > I think the rule may get overturned and revert back to the old way of removing the flag from the cup while putting. First off, I don't think it really saves a whole lot of time if at all. Secondly, damage to the hole is being noticed because hands don't fit down the hole comfortably and rake the sides of the cup both down and back upward and out causing damage to the putting hole.

>

> I sure hope not! It's definitely saving time with all the people I play with. It's great to be able to walk up and putt without worrying about the flag when others aren't ready.

>

> A agree hands don't fit well but there is a trick... Simply reach in from the side opposite the stick and no fit issues. I'm showing all the guys that trick.

 

I agree. The new rule saves our group lots of time and I have yet to see a damaged hole after about 70 rounds.