So really...re: divots...

[BlackDiamondPar5]

> @Sawgrass said:

> I sunk a 40' putt for par to halve the 9th hole in my Club Championship match a week ago. I should have conceded the next hole since randomly sinking such a long putt was clearly not "fair."

 

Was that after your tee shot was headed OB, bounced off a tree back to the fairway, skipped over a divot and stopped with a perfect lie? :)

[bladehunter]

> @davep043 said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> >

> > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> >

> >

> I have said in the past "That's a bad break, but I'm sure you can handle it". I've said it to my opponent, and I've said it to myself. I never felt guilty when it was my opponent, I never felt like I'd been shafted when it was me. I've said it when it was a divot hole causing it, when one of us got a bad bounce in the fairway, when there was mud on the ball. Its just golf, as it should be.

>

 

I’ll add to that.

 

You also have to just grow the “F u” attitude. Put me in a divot. Watch me hit it closer than you from a good lie. Put me behind a tree. Watch me get out. It’s all about the mentality you take in. If hitting it in a divot means in your mind that you lose. Well. You will lose.

 

Can’t never could and won’t never will.

 

Nothing about this life is fair. “ get up , get out , and get something “.

[Argonne69]

> @BlackDiamondPar5 said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > I sunk a 40' putt for par to halve the 9th hole in my Club Championship match a week ago. I should have conceded the next hole since randomly sinking such a long putt was clearly not "fair."

>

> Was that after your tee shot was headed OB, bounced off a tree back to the fairway, skipped over a divot and stopped with a perfect lie? :)

 

No, I believe it actually wound up on the adjacent hole's teebox. A luck would have it there was a tee that was left in the ground by a player earlier in the round, and the ball wound up on the tee! What are the odds?

[HatsForBats]

> @ThinkingPlus said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> > > @DaveLeeNC said:

> > > Back on the topic of divots, this is an interesting (I thought) story regarding that.

> > >

> > > Back when I was involved with our MGA and Handicap Committee I got involved in a discussion regarding the upcoming MGA Match Play event which was in the spring. We had been playing 'winter rules' and things were just barely beginning to green up (bermuda, no over-seeding, in NC). The fairways here by spring are beaten down (by carts) to 'bare carpet'-like turf. The lies are fine for low handicappers but the older, higher handicap golfers had trouble, particularly hitting longer clubs off the deck. The truth is that LCP did little to help, but seemed helpful.

> > >

> > > So we were going to play it down except that a concern was raised over a couple of areas where lots of balls end up that had 6 months of unhealed, maybe filled or maybe not, divots. So one morning I went out to one of the worst areas where golfers typically hit wedges for their 3rd shot (par 5 at the bottom of a hill). I took 30 golf balls and I just tossed them around and counted how many ended up in divots. I was quite surprised at how rare that was even in this area of MANY divots. I don't recall the numbers (it was maybe 13 years ago), but it was an interesting experiment. We were considering LCP on just a couple holes, but we played it down everywhere.

> > >

> > > dave

> >

> > The way I see it is the fact that it doesn't happen frequently makes the impact on that particular event that much more significant as the unlucky player that ends up in a fairway is likely the only player to do so during that event (of course depending on number of rounds played in the event).

> >

> > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> >

> >

>

> It is neither a better game nor a worse game. It is the game of golf.

 

Ah, so they make changes to the game just to keep a job? They are not trying to make the game better?> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> > > @DaveLeeNC said:

> > > Back on the topic of divots, this is an interesting (I thought) story regarding that.

> > >

> > > Back when I was involved with our MGA and Handicap Committee I got involved in a discussion regarding the upcoming MGA Match Play event which was in the spring. We had been playing 'winter rules' and things were just barely beginning to green up (bermuda, no over-seeding, in NC). The fairways here by spring are beaten down (by carts) to 'bare carpet'-like turf. The lies are fine for low handicappers but the older, higher handicap golfers had trouble, particularly hitting longer clubs off the deck. The truth is that LCP did little to help, but seemed helpful.

> > >

> > > So we were going to play it down except that a concern was raised over a couple of areas where lots of balls end up that had 6 months of unhealed, maybe filled or maybe not, divots. So one morning I went out to one of the worst areas where golfers typically hit wedges for their 3rd shot (par 5 at the bottom of a hill). I took 30 golf balls and I just tossed them around and counted how many ended up in divots. I was quite surprised at how rare that was even in this area of MANY divots. I don't recall the numbers (it was maybe 13 years ago), but it was an interesting experiment. We were considering LCP on just a couple holes, but we played it down everywhere.

> > >

> > > dave

> >

> > The way I see it is the fact that it doesn't happen frequently makes the impact on that particular event that much more significant as the unlucky player that ends up in a fairway is likely the only player to do so during that event (of course depending on number of rounds played in the event).

>

> Geezz... honestly, Batman, do you really think that this divot thing with all its odds is the ONLY thing creating situations where luck is involved?!?!? Every single round I play there are MANY bounces that are either lucky or unlucky, depending how one chooses to look at them.

>

> Just grow up to match the level of this game and stop whining, honestly!!

 

You already know the answer to your question so not sure why you are asking it. If the rules were unconcerned with trying to curb luck as you put it then there would be no repairing greens, raking of sand traps, relief from cart paths etc. There is a reason the tour courses are preened and primped to near immaculate condition before an event.

 

If all you want to do is whine about the discussion then just stop and let it go.

[HatsForBats]

> @davep043 said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> >

> > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> >

> >

> I have said in the past "That's a bad break, but I'm sure you can handle it". I've said it to my opponent, and I've said it to myself. I never felt guilty when it was my opponent, I never felt like I'd been shafted when it was me. I've said it when it was a divot hole causing it, when one of us got a bad bounce in the fairway, when there was mud on the ball. Its just golf, as it should be.

>

 

If we are unconcerned with the bad luck of it then why allow reparing of ball marks, relief for certain situations etc.? I don't feel guilty about an opponent ending up in a divot but I would still rather they were allowed relief. I think it would be a definite improvement just like the improvement to fixing the greens this year. Is the change to how greens are allowed to be fixed this year 'golf how it should be' or was last year golf as it should be?

[HatsForBats]

> @Sawgrass said:

> I sunk a 40' putt for par to halve the 9th hole in my Club Championship match a week ago. I should have conceded the next hole since randomly sinking such a long putt was clearly not "fair."

 

I sank a 2 foot putt in my mind a few milliseconds ago. My ball came to rest in the ball mark caused by my previous shot. If I had not been able to repair the ball mark before making the putt then I am certain my chances of making the putt would have been diminished.

[davep043]

> @HatsForBats said:

> > @davep043 said:

> > > @HatsForBats said:

> > >

> > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > >

> > >

> > I have said in the past "That's a bad break, but I'm sure you can handle it". I've said it to my opponent, and I've said it to myself. I never felt guilty when it was my opponent, I never felt like I'd been shafted when it was me. I've said it when it was a divot hole causing it, when one of us got a bad bounce in the fairway, when there was mud on the ball. Its just golf, as it should be.

> >

>

> If we are unconcerned with the bad luck of it then why allow reparing of ball marks, relief for certain situations etc.? I don't feel guilty about an opponent ending up in a divot but I would still rather they were allowed relief. I think it would be a definite improvement just like the improvement to fixing the greens this year. Is the change to how greens are allowed to be fixed this year 'golf how it should be' or was last year golf as it should be?

 

I didn't support those changes, and I didn't support some of the changes that involved the intent of the player (i.e. accidental movement when searching) But I don't make the rules, the USGA/R&A did what they felt was appropriate. Just as they specifically chose NOT to allow relief from divot holes, for appropriate reasons.

[HatsForBats]

> @Vindog said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

>

> >

> > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> >

> >

> I can't speak to being able to convince you of such, but the game would certainly be worse by letting that kind of thing happen . People would want relief...just because. It's already happening, and to allow this type of relief would encourage that type of entitlement and further reduce the expectations and responsibilities of the player(s).

>

> What we would be creating wouldn't be"fair" or "equitable." It would be more along the lines of pampering.

 

Why do they preen courses before PGA and high level events? Why are their caddies so meticulous about how the sand traps are raked and divots are repaired during an event?

 

Some players have wanted relief just because as long as I have been playing this game. Way back when you couldn't mark your ball on the green. These days you can fix just about anything on the greens as opposed to last year and years before. Why coddle to those that wanted to allow these changes? Obviously you believe some pampering is acceptable, correct?

[HatsForBats]

> @davep043 said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> > > @davep043 said:

> > > > @HatsForBats said:

> > > >

> > > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > I have said in the past "That's a bad break, but I'm sure you can handle it". I've said it to my opponent, and I've said it to myself. I never felt guilty when it was my opponent, I never felt like I'd been shafted when it was me. I've said it when it was a divot hole causing it, when one of us got a bad bounce in the fairway, when there was mud on the ball. Its just golf, as it should be.

> > >

> >

> > If we are unconcerned with the bad luck of it then why allow reparing of ball marks, relief for certain situations etc.? I don't feel guilty about an opponent ending up in a divot but I would still rather they were allowed relief. I think it would be a definite improvement just like the improvement to fixing the greens this year. Is the change to how greens are allowed to be fixed this year 'golf how it should be' or was last year golf as it should be?

>

> I didn't support those changes, and I didn't support some of the changes that involved the intent of the player (i.e. accidental movement when searching) But I don't make the rules, the USGA/R&A did what they felt was appropriate. Just as they specifically chose NOT to allow relief from divot holes, for appropriate reasons.

 

Right, the 'appropriate' and 'how it should be' are just matters of opinion. Obviously you don't agree with some of the decisions and 'golf as it should be' is not a good argument against change.

[Shilgy]

> @HatsForBats said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > > @HatsForBats said:

> >

> > >

> > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > >

> > >

> > I can't speak to being able to convince you of such, but the game would certainly be worse by letting that kind of thing happen . People would want relief...just because. It's already happening, and to allow this type of relief would encourage that type of entitlement and further reduce the expectations and responsibilities of the player(s).

> >

> > What we would be creating wouldn't be"fair" or "equitable." It would be more along the lines of pampering.

>

> Why do they preen courses before PGA and high level events? Why are their caddies so meticulous about how the sand traps are raked and divots are repaired during an event?

>

> Some players have wanted relief just because as long as I have been playing this game. Way back when you couldn't mark your ball on the green. These days you can fix just about anything on the greens as opposed to last year and years before. Why coddle to those that wanted to allow these changes? Obviously you believe some pampering is acceptable, correct?

 

Why? For a guy that really really seems to not like being able to repair most anything on the green why would you want divot hole relief?

 

Rather than posting about wanting divot hole relief would your desires not be better served by writing the USGA and wanting the other relief situations rescinded?

 

[MooJersey]

Wow this one is still going...bravo folks lol

[Mr. Bean]

> @MooJersey said:

> Wow this one is still going...bravo folks lol

 

Indeed... we should all stop feeding the trolls (mainly Hats). I stop now, will not write on this thread nor read it.

[Roadking2003]

> @HatsForBats said:

> > @DaveLeeNC said:

> The way I see it is the fact that it doesn't happen frequently makes the impact on that particular event that much more significant as the unlucky player that ends up in a fairway is likely the only player to do so during that event (of course depending on number of rounds played in the event).

Correct. The frequency of hitting into a divot is immaterial. Just like the frequency of ending up on a sprinkler head. It's a rare event but that is immaterial.

 

[Roadking2003]

> @nsxguy said:

> Actually you bring up a very interesting point. Mud on the ball. What's fair about 2 drives being pretty much in the exact same area of the fairway but one has a glob of mud on it but the other ball is clean ? That's not very fair (either), is it ?

>

> I wonder if the 3 gentlemen so supportive of free relief from divots, wanting things to be "fair" of course, think the player with the mud on the ball should be allowed to clean it. I mean they DO want things to be fair, no ?

 

We can clean mud on a ball when on the green. Why not on the fairway? I would rather putt a mud ball than hit a full shot.

 

So, I'm on the green 80 feet from the hole with a mud ball and can clean it. You are one inch off the green and 10 feet from the hole and cannot. Silly rule.

[Vindog]

> @HatsForBats said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > > @HatsForBats said:

> >

> > >

> > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > >

> > >

> > I can't speak to being able to convince you of such, but the game would certainly be worse by letting that kind of thing happen . People would want relief...just because. It's already happening, and to allow this type of relief would encourage that type of entitlement and further reduce the expectations and responsibilities of the player(s).

> >

> > What we would be creating wouldn't be"fair" or "equitable." It would be more along the lines of pampering.

>

> Why do they preen courses before PGA and high level events? Why are their caddies so meticulous about how the sand traps are raked and divots are repaired during an event?

>

> Some players have wanted relief just because as long as I have been playing this game. Way back when you couldn't mark your ball on the green. These days you can fix just about anything on the greens as opposed to last year and years before. Why coddle to those that wanted to allow these changes? Obviously you believe some pampering is acceptable, correct?

 

I'm not about to do your research for you, but if you search the topics you will see that I was and remain pretty hard against the new green fixing regulations (or lack thereof) and for being able to replace the ball on the green after accidental movement. I feel that those things remove too much responsibility on the player's part.

[Sawgrass]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @MooJersey said:

> > Wow this one is still going...bravo folks lol

>

> Indeed... we should all stop feeding the trolls (mainly Hats). I stop now, will not write on this thread nor read it.

 

Oh, let him go on whining. At least, at the end of the day, the rules are the way we prefer them to be in regard to divot holes. I encourage him to stay upset with all the “inconsistency.”> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > Actually you bring up a very interesting point. Mud on the ball. What's fair about 2 drives being pretty much in the exact same area of the fairway but one has a glob of mud on it but the other ball is clean ? That's not very fair (either), is it ?

> >

> > I wonder if the 3 gentlemen so supportive of free relief from divots, wanting things to be "fair" of course, think the player with the mud on the ball should be allowed to clean it. I mean they DO want things to be fair, no ?

>

> We can clean mud on a ball when on the green. Why not on the fairway? I would rather putt a mud ball than hit a full shot.

>

> So, I'm on the green 80 feet from the hole with a mud ball and can clean it. You are one inch off the green and 10 feet from the hole and cannot. Silly rule.

 

It’s a sophisticated rule, apparently not to everybody’s taste.

 

“Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

[antip]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > Actually you bring up a very interesting point. Mud on the ball. What's fair about 2 drives being pretty much in the exact same area of the fairway but one has a glob of mud on it but the other ball is clean ? That's not very fair (either), is it ?

> >

> > I wonder if the 3 gentlemen so supportive of free relief from divots, wanting things to be "fair" of course, think the player with the mud on the ball should be allowed to clean it. I mean they DO want things to be fair, no ?

>

> We can clean mud on a ball when on the green. Why not on the fairway? I would rather putt a mud ball than hit a full shot.

>

> So, I'm on the green 80 feet from the hole with a mud ball and can clean it. You are one inch off the green and 10 feet from the hole and cannot. Silly rule.

 

The putting green is a surface specially prepared for putting. The game's rules have a different framework for play from the putting green and play from off the putting green. End of. You argument is tantamount to saying that every zone on the course must apply the same rules. Well that would re-write the rules for virtually every game I can think of.

[nsxguy]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > Actually you bring up a very interesting point. Mud on the ball. What's fair about 2 drives being pretty much in the exact same area of the fairway but one has a glob of mud on it but the other ball is clean ? That's not very fair (either), is it ?

> >

> > I wonder if the 3 gentlemen so supportive of free relief from divots, wanting things to be "fair" of course, think the player with the mud on the ball should be allowed to clean it. I mean they DO want things to be fair, no ?

>

> We can clean mud on a ball when on the green. Why not on the fairway? I would rather putt a mud ball than hit a full shot.

>

> So, I'm on the green 80 feet from the hole with a mud ball and can clean it. You are one inch off the green and 10 feet from the hole and cannot. Silly rule.

 

Kinda thought that'd be your take on it. LOL

 

You seldom disappoint.

 

So basically you (and the other 2 I assume) just want to determine right there at the time what you should or should not be able to do ? You know, to be "fair" ?

 

Yeah, figured as much,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[LeoLeo99]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @BlackDiamondPar5 said:

> > All this other conversation is noise **until someone can adequately, repeatably and irrefutably** define when a divot stops being a divot.

>

> True. But why define it at all? Just allow players to move their ball 3 inches. Problem solved.

 

The rule will be changed eventually. Maybe not in my lifetime but in another 50 to 100 years you'll get to drop the ball from ankle height to a typical lie in the fairway. In another 200 years you might even be able to use a tee.

[Roadking2003]

> @antip said:>

> The putting green is a surface specially prepared for putting. The game's rules have a different framework for play from the putting green and play from off the putting green. End of.

I understand that, but it's useless information.

> Your argument is tantamount to saying that every zone on the course must apply the same rules.

No, I never said that. The green and the fairway are specially prepared areas. No other areas are specially prepared for play. There is no reason both cannot be governed the same.

>Well that would re-write the rules for virtually every game I can think of.

They re-write the rules of golf quite often. So that's nothing new.

 

[Roadking2003]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > Actually you bring up a very interesting point. Mud on the ball. What's fair about 2 drives being pretty much in the exact same area of the fairway but one has a glob of mud on it but the other ball is clean ? That's not very fair (either), is it ?

> > >

> > > I wonder if the 3 gentlemen so supportive of free relief from divots, wanting things to be "fair" of course, think the player with the mud on the ball should be allowed to clean it. I mean they DO want things to be fair, no ?

> >

> > We can clean mud on a ball when on the green. Why not on the fairway? I would rather putt a mud ball than hit a full shot.

> >

> > So, I'm on the green 80 feet from the hole with a mud ball and can clean it. You are one inch off the green and 10 feet from the hole and cannot. Silly rule.

>

> Kinda thought that'd be your take on it. LOL

>

> You seldom disappoint.

>

> So basically you (and the other 2 I assume) just want to determine right there at the time what you should or should not be able to do ? You know, to be "fair" ?

>

> Yeah, figured as much,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

>

 

No, you misunderstood once again. You seldom disappoint.

Yeah, figured as much.

[HatsForBats]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> > > @Vindog said:

> > > > @HatsForBats said:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > I can't speak to being able to convince you of such, but the game would certainly be worse by letting that kind of thing happen . People would want relief...just because. It's already happening, and to allow this type of relief would encourage that type of entitlement and further reduce the expectations and responsibilities of the player(s).

> > >

> > > What we would be creating wouldn't be"fair" or "equitable." It would be more along the lines of pampering.

> >

> > Why do they preen courses before PGA and high level events? Why are their caddies so meticulous about how the sand traps are raked and divots are repaired during an event?

> >

> > Some players have wanted relief just because as long as I have been playing this game. Way back when you couldn't mark your ball on the green. These days you can fix just about anything on the greens as opposed to last year and years before. Why coddle to those that wanted to allow these changes? Obviously you believe some pampering is acceptable, correct?

>

> Why? For a guy that really really seems to not like being able to repair most anything on the green why would you want divot hole relief?

>

>

Huh? You came to the wrong conclusion about how I feel about repairing greens.

 

[HatsForBats]

> @Vindog said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> > > @Vindog said:

> > > > @HatsForBats said:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > I can't speak to being able to convince you of such, but the game would certainly be worse by letting that kind of thing happen . People would want relief...just because. It's already happening, and to allow this type of relief would encourage that type of entitlement and further reduce the expectations and responsibilities of the player(s).

> > >

> > > What we would be creating wouldn't be"fair" or "equitable." It would be more along the lines of pampering.

> >

> > Why do they preen courses before PGA and high level events? Why are their caddies so meticulous about how the sand traps are raked and divots are repaired during an event?

> >

> > Some players have wanted relief just because as long as I have been playing this game. Way back when you couldn't mark your ball on the green. These days you can fix just about anything on the greens as opposed to last year and years before. Why coddle to those that wanted to allow these changes? Obviously you believe some pampering is acceptable, correct?

>

> I'm not about to do your research for you, but if you search the topics you will see that I was and remain pretty hard against the new green fixing regulations (or lack thereof) and for being able to replace the ball on the green after accidental movement. I feel that those things remove too much responsibility on the player's part.

 

Great. Then you disagree with part of the rules but also agree to the coddling when it comes to marking balls on a green?

[HatsForBats]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @davep043 said:

> > > @HatsForBats said:

> > >

> > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > >

> > >

> > I have said in the past "That's a bad break, but I'm sure you can handle it". I've said it to my opponent, and I've said it to myself. I never felt guilty when it was my opponent, I never felt like I'd been shafted when it was me. I've said it when it was a divot hole causing it, when one of us got a bad bounce in the fairway, when there was mud on the ball. Its just golf, as it should be.

> >

>

> I’ll add to that.

>

> You also have to just grow the “F u” attitude. Put me in a divot. Watch me hit it closer than you from a good lie. Put me behind a tree. Watch me get out. It’s all about the mentality you take in. If hitting it in a divot means in your mind that you lose. Well. You will lose.

>

> Can’t never could and won’t never will.

>

> Nothing about this life is fair. “ get up , get out , and get something “.

 

That is the best approach in the moment but doesn't do anything to change my feelings toward the rule or lack thereof.

[Vindog]

> @HatsForBats said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > > @HatsForBats said:

> > > > @Vindog said:

> > > > > @HatsForBats said:

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > A hypothetical question comes to my mind. If I had been playing in a club championship for 25 years, coming close on more than a few occasions, but never wining the event. If it came down to the last hole of the event, I was tied with the player I dislike the most in my club, we both hit drives into the same area of the fairway but their ball ends up in a divot and mine does not. Forgetting, for just a moment, about the 'issue' of defining a divot would I feel the game of golf would be a better game if this player, that I disliked the most, was allowed relief in the same general area as where their tee shot stopped in the fairway? I don't think anyone can convince me that the game of golf is a better game with them not being allowed relief.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > I can't speak to being able to convince you of such, but the game would certainly be worse by letting that kind of thing happen . People would want relief...just because. It's already happening, and to allow this type of relief would encourage that type of entitlement and further reduce the expectations and responsibilities of the player(s).

> > > >

> > > > What we would be creating wouldn't be"fair" or "equitable." It would be more along the lines of pampering.

> > >

> > > Why do they preen courses before PGA and high level events? Why are their caddies so meticulous about how the sand traps are raked and divots are repaired during an event?

> > >

> > > Some players have wanted relief just because as long as I have been playing this game. Way back when you couldn't mark your ball on the green. These days you can fix just about anything on the greens as opposed to last year and years before. Why coddle to those that wanted to allow these changes? Obviously you believe some pampering is acceptable, correct?

> >

> > I'm not about to do your research for you, but if you search the topics you will see that I was and remain pretty hard against the new green fixing regulations (or lack thereof) and for being able to replace the ball on the green after accidental movement. I feel that those things remove too much responsibility on the player's part.

>

> Great. Then you disagree with part of the rules but also agree to the coddling when it comes to marking balls on a green?

 

As has been mentioned several times in the thread these comparisons don't actually work very well, and I have no idea what you are talking about at this point. Therefore I am unable to answer that question. Just because they allow "x" doesn't mean they have to allow "y"

 

But if someone were to ask me, I would generally be in favor of LESS relief, than more more relief. Not sure if that helps but that's my overview.

[smashdn]

Teeing grounds. Through the green. The green. Hazards er (spit) penalty areas. < The only areas that exist on a golf course. (Maybe you throw in "ground under repair" but it is supposed to be marked and not so the golfer can decide on his own what is and isn't.)

 

The game was conceived to be man against elements against another man battling those same elements. How you handled "rub of the green" was a factor in whether you beat the other guy or not.

 

Caution: Opinion to follow.

The PGA Tour has given us some false sense that the game of golf is a target match. More akin to darts with clubs and balls than a sporting endeavor. We've all but removed the skill of judging distance from the game. We have manicured and homogenized lies almost to the point where the skill of recognizing how the ball will behave from [un]certain lies is lost. Now we are wanting to attempt to remove the chance of having to play from an uncertain lie.

 

The best shot I hit all last year, the most memorable too, was a 210 yard five iron from hard pan. Literally hit from bare dirt from what should have been fairway where a tree had sucked all the moisture away and prohibited grass from growing. I wasn't playing for money, or handicap or even pride. I was playing for fun. I got a great sense of satisfaction from executing that shot (and the following putt for eagle) because I overcame a dicey lie in the fairway. I strung together three good shots and was rewarded with a nice score on the hole.

[Sawgrass]

> @smashdn said:

> Teeing grounds. Through the green. The green. Hazards er (spit) penalty areas. < The only areas that exist on a golf course. (Maybe you throw in "ground under repair" but it is supposed to be marked and not so the golfer can decide on his own what is and isn't.)

>

> The game was conceived to be man against elements against another man battling those same elements. How you handled "rub of the green" was a factor in whether you beat the other guy or not.

>

> Caution: Opinion to follow.

> The PGA Tour has given us some false sense that the game of golf is a target match. More akin to darts with clubs and balls than a sporting endeavor. We've all but removed the skill of judging distance from the game. We have manicured and homogenized lies almost to the point where the skill of recognizing how the ball will behave from [un]certain lies is lost. Now we are wanting to attempt to remove the chance of having to play from an uncertain lie.

>

> The best shot I hit all last year, the most memorable too, was a 210 yard five iron from hard pan. Literally hit from bare dirt from what should have been fairway where a tree had sucked all the moisture away and prohibited grass from growing. I wasn't playing for money, or handicap or even pride. I was playing for fun. I got a great sense of satisfaction from executing that shot (and the following putt for eagle) because I overcame a dicey lie in the fairway. I strung together three good shots and was rewarded with a nice score on the hole.

 

You’re a bit off/out of date on defining areas of the course (bunkers?) but in spirit, regarding most of the rest, yeah.

[smashdn]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @smashdn said:

> > Teeing grounds. Through the green. The green. Hazards er (spit) penalty areas. < The only areas that exist on a golf course. (Maybe you throw in "ground under repair" but it is supposed to be marked and not so the golfer can decide on his own what is and isn't.)

> >

> > The game was conceived to be man against elements against another man battling those same elements. How you handled "rub of the green" was a factor in whether you beat the other guy or not.

> >

> > Caution: Opinion to follow.

> > The PGA Tour has given us some false sense that the game of golf is a target match. More akin to darts with clubs and balls than a sporting endeavor. We've all but removed the skill of judging distance from the game. We have manicured and homogenized lies almost to the point where the skill of recognizing how the ball will behave from [un]certain lies is lost. Now we are wanting to attempt to remove the chance of having to play from an uncertain lie.

> >

> > The best shot I hit all last year, the most memorable too, was a 210 yard five iron from hard pan. Literally hit from bare dirt from what should have been fairway where a tree had sucked all the moisture away and prohibited grass from growing. I wasn't playing for money, or handicap or even pride. I was playing for fun. I got a great sense of satisfaction from executing that shot (and the following putt for eagle) because I overcame a dicey lie in the fairway. I strung together three good shots and was rewarded with a nice score on the hole.

>

> You’re a bit off/out of date on defining areas of the course (bunkers?) but in spirit, regarding most of the rest, yeah.

 

What are the rules calling bunkers these days? I was pretty sure they did away with "water hazard" and now it is a "penalty area," to be honest, I play golf for fun, rarely in competitions, so I'll play the game in a manner that makes sense to me and keeps me moving down the fairway without holding anyone up. I never worried myself over that stupid groove rule either. I can't spin a wedge to save my life with any flavor of grooves so woop-tee-doo.

[Schulzmc]

This has been a really interesting thread. All the people I normally agree with, and have a ton of respect for, totally disagree with me. And some of their more caustic comments, which I would have laughed at and applauded in any other thread, actually stung a little.

[hornet67]

 

> @Schulzmc said:

> This has been a really interesting thread. All the people I normally agree with, and have a ton of respect for, totally disagree with me. And some of their more caustic comments, which I would have laughed at and applauded in any other thread, actually stung a little.

 

that part I don't get either, I don't know why if you disagree with someone they must be an idiot or just trying to cheat. I am guessing that when the game of golf was created there weren't very many rules except the hole is completed win the ball rests in the cup. Then out of bounds were created, hazards, tee markers, bunkers, rules to cover lost ball etc etc etc. The rules of golf evolved and are evolving. I believe most of us who are in favor of relief from divots are not trying to cheat or take the skill out of the game we are just lobbying for a rule to address an issue we think would make the game better and yes fairer. I like someone mentioned in an earlier post would not want to win or lose a match because a perfectly struck shot happened to land in the exact same spot where another perfectly struck shot landed. That being said if the rules of golf don't

allow for relief from divots then I wont take relief and I wont hate anyone but I will curse the golfing gods for cursing me.