So really...re: divots...

[Roadking2003]

> @Newby said:

> > @Mikey5e said:

>

> > See this is where I have the issue, on other points where you are allowed relief from man-made flaws so to speak.

> No. You are allowed relief from artificial objects. You may be allowed relief from flaws such as GUR but each has to be defined and identified individually. A difficult job with divot holes.

>

 

Hmmm..... except pitch marks.... man made....

[Sawgrass]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Mikey5e said:

> >

> > > See this is where I have the issue, on other points where you are allowed relief from man-made flaws so to speak.

> > No. You are allowed relief from artificial objects. You may be allowed relief from flaws such as GUR but each has to be defined and identified individually. A difficult job with divot holes.

> >

>

> Hmmm..... except pitch marks.... man made....

 

Hmmm . . . no doubt pitch marks are manmade, or at least ballmade, but there's no relevant "except" as you suggest. Unmarked pitch marks are not GUR, nor artificial objects, and in any case Newby was not contending that you can't fix a pitch mark on the green. (If a pitch mark is off the green, fixing it could in some circumstances get you the general penalty.)

[Pepperturbo]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:> Landing in a repaired or unrepaired divot in the middle of the fairway is the luck of the draw.

>

> So is landing on a cart path, but you get relief.

>

> So is having to putt over a pitch mark, but you get relief.

 

All types of problems hit us in life. We can either tackle them head on or look for someone or something to provide us with relief. Unfortunately, the ladder relief doesn't always benefit us, leaving us with a choice.

 

Yes. I have no issues with dealing with each of those conditions, as is. Yes, we get relief but there have been times when I have elected to not take relief from the cart path or said obstacle, as doing so would have left me with an uglier shot. The benefits of preparation and practice. Side note, I miss my RoadKing. :)

[Mikey5e]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > @nsxguy said:> A fairway and its divots are integral parts of the course.

> > Divots are man made and not an integral part of the course

> >

> >

> >

>

> Let's remember that "integral objects" have a specific golf definition, and the word "integral" should, therefore, be avoided in this debate as technically a divot cannot be an integral object:

>

> Integral Object

>

> An artificial object defined by the Committee as part of the challenge of playing the course from which free relief is not allowed.

>

> Artificial objects defined by the Committee as integral objects are treated as immovable (see Rule 8.1a). But if part of an integral object (such as a gate or door or part of an attached cable) meets the definition of movable obstruction, that part is treated as a movable obstruction.

>

> Integral objects are not obstructions or boundary objects.

>

>

 

blah blah blah, your logic has failed, unrepaired divots are man made, not a natural part of the course.

[Sawgrass]

> @Mikey5e said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:> A fairway and its divots are integral parts of the course.

> > > Divots are man made and not an integral part of the course

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Let's remember that "integral objects" have a specific golf definition, and the word "integral" should, therefore, be avoided in this debate as technically a divot cannot be an integral object:

> >

> > Integral Object

> >

> > An artificial object defined by the Committee as part of the challenge of playing the course from which free relief is not allowed.

> >

> > Artificial objects defined by the Committee as integral objects are treated as immovable (see Rule 8.1a). But if part of an integral object (such as a gate or door or part of an attached cable) meets the definition of movable obstruction, that part is treated as a movable obstruction.

> >

> > Integral objects are not obstructions or boundary objects.

> >

> >

>

> blah blah blah, your logic has failed, unrepaired divots are man made, not a natural part of the course.

 

Blah, blah, blah, your reading comprehension has failed. In hundreds of posts, not a single person has suggested that divot holes are made by anything other than people.

 

I look forward to your further contributions with palm pre-positioned on my face.

[Newby]

> @Mikey5e said:

 

> unrepaired divots are man made, not a natural part of the course.

Where do the rules mention 'man made' ?

 

[sui generis]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @nsxguy said:> A fairway and its divots are integral parts of the course.

> Divots are man made and not an integral part of the course

>

>

>

 

For the most part, all golf courses are "man made." You know, bulldozers, scrapers and then later on mowers, et al.

[Shilgy]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Mikey5e said:

> >

> > > See this is where I have the issue, on other points where you are allowed relief from man-made flaws so to speak.

> > No. You are allowed relief from artificial objects. You may be allowed relief from flaws such as GUR but each has to be defined and identified individually. A difficult job with divot holes.

> >

>

> Hmmm..... except pitch marks.... man made....

 

Yes, As has been said repeatedly a putting green has special rules. Perhaps because the idea is to roll the ball rather than fly the ball over these pitch marks/divot holes is the difference. if you were in a pitch mark in the fairway you would get relief from it if your ball caused it. Yes, that is called an embedded ball. On the green you get bonus relief. Not only do you get relief from a mark that your ball is sitting in you also get to fix those imperfections in the green that your ball would otherwise need to roll through.

 

You seem to call these inconsistencies and yes there are many in golf. You do not get relief from a boundary fence that interferes with your swing but you would get relief from a fence interfering with your swing elsewhere on the course is just one example.

 

Frankly I do not understand your consternation with not getting divot hole relief. You have stated repeatedly that your idea of a fix is to play LCP at all times in the fairway. That has very little to do with divots and is just your proposal on a way to fundamentally change the game. A proposal that hopefully the ruling bodies will never endorse.

[Newby]

> @Shilgy said: A proposal that hopefully the ruling bodies will never endorse.

From the USGA/R&A on Certain Topics or Proposals Not Addressed in the Proposed New Rules of Golf for 2019

 

**Preserving the Fundamental Challenge of the Game**

 Play the ball as it lies – In its simplest form, golf is about playing the ball from tee to green by hitting it with a golf club, and not otherwise touching the ball. A fundamental challenge of the sport is to deal with whatever position your ball comes to rest in – whether good or bad. While there are some necessary exceptions (such as obstructions and other abnormal course conditions), the essential nature of golf means these must remain exceptions rather than the norm. Therefore, the new Rules do not provide relief without penalty from situations that some golfers complain about, such as when their ball comes to rest in a divot hole on a fairway or in footprints in a poorly raked bunker.

In addition to being contrary to the fundamental principle of playing the ball as it lies, providing free relief in such circumstances would make the Rules harder to apply (for example, what is the difference between an irregularity of surface and an old divot hole?) and would slow down play.

 

 Prohibitions against improving the “conditions affecting the stroke” - In conjunction with “play the ball as it lies”, the fundamental principle of “play the course as you find it” helps reinforce that players need to accept the outcome of their previous stroke (good or bad) and play the ball from where it comes to rest. The core restrictions that support this principle (namely, prohibiting improvements to the lie of the ball, the area of stance or swing and the line of play) are maintained in the new Rules.

 

[Schulzmc]

It seems so counterintuitive to me that they would say, "necessary exceptions... abnormal course conditions" and then say "therefore... (not) a divot hole". If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

 

[Colin L]

Two possible meanings of "man made":

1) Caused by man - e.g. a depression in the ground occasioned by hacking a bit of turf out with a golf club.

2) Manufactured by man - e.g. a tarmac path.

The Rules of Golf understand and acknowledge the difference. Time for some players to get used to it.

[Sawgrass]

> @Schulzmc said:

> It seems so counterintuitive to me that they would say, "necessary exceptions... abnormal course conditions" and then say "therefore... (not) a divot hole". If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

>

 

One can make the argument that the more prevalent divot holes are, the less “abnormal” the ground condition of a particular divot hole. And unlike similarly prevalent artificial objects like paved cart paths, undeserving of free relief. In fact, that is the RB’s argument, and I like it.

 

 

 

 

[SNIPERBBB]

> @Schulzmc said:

> It seems so counterintuitive to me that they would say, "necessary exceptions... abnormal course conditions" and then say "therefore... (not) a divot hole". If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

>

 

Abnormal conditions are those that would make normal play of the course impossible and(note the "and" and lack of "or") not part of the design of the course, excepting those that the course doesn't want you to play from in the case of No Play Zone. Divots arent impossible to play out of.

[Mr. Bean]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @nsxguy said:> A fairway and its divots are integral parts of the course.

> Divots are man made and not an integral part of the course

>

>

>

Divot is man made, huh? What about a footprint, is that also man made? How about a golf course, also man made, huh?

 

You really need to get back to school...

[Newby]

> @Schulzmc said:

> If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

>

If unrepaired (sic) divot holes are so prevalent that some people are making so much noise, they can hardly be described as abnormal (ie not typical, not usual).

 

[Mikey5e]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > @nsxguy said:> A fairway and its divots are integral parts of the course.

> > Divots are man made and not an integral part of the course

> >

> >

> >

> Divot is man made, huh? What about a footprint, is that also man made? How about a golf course, also man made, huh?

>

> You really need to get back to school...

 

Then why do we repair ball marks on the Green? You just can't apply the rule to some things and not all things. You are very selective in your descriptions of what is and isn't man-made.

[SNIPERBBB]

What rule isnt being applied to all things? Divots arent animal holes, GUR, immovable obstructions or temporary water. And divots generally dont occur on putting greens so...

[sui generis]

> @Mikey5e said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:> A fairway and its divots are integral parts of the course.

> > > Divots are man made and not an integral part of the course

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > Divot is man made, huh? What about a footprint, is that also man made? How about a golf course, also man made, huh?

> >

> > You really need to get back to school...

>

> Then why do we repair ball marks on the Green? You just can't apply the rule to some things and not all things. You are very selective in your descriptions of what is and isn't man-made.

 

There are different Rules for each of the five defined areas that make up the course: (1) the general area, (2) the teeing area you must play from in starting the hole you are playing, (3) all penalty areas, (4) all bunkers, and (5) the putting green of the hole you are playing.

[davep043]

> @Schulzmc said:

> It seems so counterintuitive to me that they would say, "necessary exceptions... abnormal course conditions" and then say "therefore... (not) a divot hole". If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

>

 

Divots were being taken long before the first rules of golf were established. To the framers of the very first rules divot holes were a normal part of the game, as they remain to this day. There's not a thing abnormal about a divot hole on a golf course.

[LeoLeo99]

> @davep043 said:

> > @Schulzmc said:

> > It seems so counterintuitive to me that they would say, "necessary exceptions... abnormal course conditions" and then say "therefore... (not) a divot hole". If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

> >

>

> Divots were being taken long before the first rules of golf were established. To the framers of the very first rules divot holes were a normal part of the game, as they remain to this day. There's not a thing abnormal about a divot hole on a golf course.

 

Some folks opposed the elimination of the stymie rule.

[Mikey5e]

I see my ideas as having the most logic to them, and I think most in here agree to that. The rest that are posting in here are just making lame excuses without any foundation to them at all.

[Downtown_Brown_41]

I can’t believe this is still going on. It’s the rules so just play by them. It requires skill to hit it out of a divot. Either learn how to perform such skill or you are entitled to an unplayable if you so chose. If you’re worried about injury, you aren’t healthy enough to play the game

[sui generis]

Mikey, you've been watching too much TV.

[rogolf]

> @Mikey5e said:

> **I see my ideas as having the most logic to them**, and I think most in here agree to that. The rest that are posting in here are just making lame excuses without any foundation to them at all.

"That's nice..." (dripping with sarcasm). The ruling bodies don't see or agree with your "logic" and have expressed that in the quote posted by Newby.

 

[Sawgrass]

> @Mikey5e said:

> I see my ideas as having the most logic to them, and I think most in here agree to that. The rest that are posting in here are just making lame excuses without any foundation to them at all.

 

Life must be very frustrating for you, what with all your under-appreciated logic and all.

[Krt22]

> @Mikey5e said:

> I see my ideas as having the most logic to them, and I think most in here agree to that. The rest that are posting in here are just making lame excuses without any foundation to them at all.

 

Do you know what the Dunning-Kruger effect is?

[SNIPERBBB]

> @Mikey5e said:

> I see my ideas as having the most logic to them, and I think most in here agree to that. The rest that are posting in here are just making lame excuses without any foundation to them at all.

 

 

Man: Is this the right room for an argument?

 

Other Man:(John Cleese) I've told you once.

 

Man: No you haven't!

 

Other Man: Yes I have.

 

M: When?

 

O: Just now.

 

M: No you didn't!

 

O: Yes I did!

 

M: You didn't!

 

O: I did!

 

M: You didn't!

 

O: I'm telling you, I did!

 

M: You did not!

 

O: Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

 

M: Ah! (taking out his wallet and paying) Just the five minutes.

 

O: Just the five minutes. Thank you.

 

O: Anyway, I did.

 

M: You most certainly did not!

 

O: Now let's get one thing quite clear: I most definitely told you!

 

M: Oh no you didn't!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: Oh no you didn't!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: Oh no you didn't!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: Oh no you didn't!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: Oh no you didn't!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: Oh no you didn't!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: No you DIDN'T!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: No you DIDN'T!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: No you DIDN'T!

 

O: Oh yes I did!

 

M: Oh look, this isn't an argument!

 

(pause)

 

O: Yes it is!

 

M: No it isn't!

 

(pause)

 

M: It's just contradiction!

 

O: No it isn't!

 

M: It IS!

 

O: It is NOT!

 

M: You just contradicted me!

 

O: No I didn't!

 

M: You DID!

 

O: No no no!

 

M: You did just then!

 

O: Nonsense!

 

M: (exasperated) Oh, this is futile!!

 

(pause)

 

O: No it isn't!

 

M: Yes it is!

 

(pause)

 

M: I came here for a good argument!

 

O: AH, no you didn't, you came here for an argument!

 

M: An argument isn't just contradiction.

 

O: Well! it CAN be!

 

M: No it can't!

 

M: An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.

 

O: No it isn't!

 

M: Yes it is! 'tisn't just contradiction.

 

O: Look, if I *argue* with you, I must take up a contrary position!

 

M: Yes but it isn't just saying 'no it isn't'.

 

O: Yes it is!

 

M: No it isn't!

 

O: Yes it is!

 

M: No it isn't!

 

O: Yes it is!

 

M: No it ISN'T! Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.

 

O: It is NOT!

 

M: It is!

 

O: Not at all!

 

M: It is!

 

(The Arguer hits a bell on his desk and stops.)

 

O: Thank you, that's it.

 

M: (stunned) What?

 

O: That's it. Good morning.

 

M: But I was just getting interested!

 

O: I'm sorry, the five minutes is up.

 

M: That was never five minutes just now!!

 

O: I'm afraid it was.

 

M: (leading on) No it wasn't.....

 

O: I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to argue any more.

 

M: WHAT??

 

O: If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.

 

M: But that was never five minutes just now!

Oh Come on!

Oh this is...

This is ridiculous!

O: I told you... I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you PAY!

 

M: Oh all right. (takes out his wallet and pays again.) There you are.

 

O: Thank you.

 

M: (clears throat) Well...

 

O: Well WHAT?

 

M: That was never five minutes just now.

 

O: I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid!

 

M: Well I just paid!

 

O: No you didn't!

 

M: I DID!!!

 

O: YOU didn't!

 

M: I DID!!!

 

O: YOU didn't!

 

M: I DID!!!

 

O: YOU didn't!

 

M: I DID!!!

 

O: YOU didn't!

 

M: I don't want to argue about it!

 

O: Well I'm very sorry but you didn't pay!

 

M: Ah hah! Well if I didn't pay, why are you arguing??? Ah HAAAAAAHHH! Gotcha!

 

O: No you haven't!

 

M: Yes I have! If you're arguing, I must have paid.

 

O: Not necessarily. I *could* be arguing in my spare time.

 

M: I've had enough of this!

 

O: No you haven't.

 

M: Oh shut up!

 

 

--Monty Python

[Shilgy]

?

[davep043]

> @LeoLeo99 said:

> > @davep043 said:

> > > @Schulzmc said:

> > > It seems so counterintuitive to me that they would say, "necessary exceptions... abnormal course conditions" and then say "therefore... (not) a divot hole". If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

> > >

> >

> > Divots were being taken long before the first rules of golf were established. To the framers of the very first rules divot holes were a normal part of the game, as they remain to this day. There's not a thing abnormal about a divot hole on a golf course.

>

> Some folks opposed the elimination of the stymie rule.

 

That's accurate, for sure, but I was responding specifically to the premise that divot holes are in some way an "abnormal course condition". In my opinion, and apparently in the opinion of the Ruling Bodies, they are not. Divot holes have been a normal part of golf since golf started.

[Mikey5e]

> @davep043 said:

> > @LeoLeo99 said:

> > > @davep043 said:

> > > > @Schulzmc said:

> > > > It seems so counterintuitive to me that they would say, "necessary exceptions... abnormal course conditions" and then say "therefore... (not) a divot hole". If an unrepaired divot hole is not an abnormal condition, what is?

> > > >

> > >

> > > Divots were being taken long before the first rules of golf were established. To the framers of the very first rules divot holes were a normal part of the game, as they remain to this day. There's not a thing abnormal about a divot hole on a golf course.

> >

> > Some folks opposed the elimination of the stymie rule.

>

> Divot holes have been a normal part of golf since golf started.

 

Normal?

A man made defect to a fairway is normal? No wonder the world has so many problems!