So really...re: divots...

[Pepperturbo]

> @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.

 

I don't make the rules of golf found in my book. USGA Rules committee make them for ALL of US, we just follow them, like we follow the rules of cycling, bowling, tennis and other sports. In cycling competitions, pros face ugly cobblestone streets. Nobody likes them because lot's of things can happen when riding on cobblestone. Nobody IMO has offered up a valid reason for being able to get a drop from divots. Being man-made is not a reasonable argument because every aspect of the golf course is man-made, except for Links courses in Europe.

 

Greens are expected to be smooth for putting. When courses punch the greens, we don't get relief from punch holes, they are just part of the challenge and maybe the PRO shop will call them 2-putt greens. Fairways are not expected to be smooth or for that matter manicured like many are.

 

I played in a tournament last weekend. For whatever the reason maintenance didn't cut the rough surrounding a few bunkers and one of my shots landed in 6-7" deep, thick and ugly, nothing like the rest of the course. Was it unfair, sure but still had to play the ball as it lies? Thankfully, all the practice and developed skills helped me to execute an open-faced LW shot to 4' from the pin and made the putt to save par. I put the ball there, it was nobody's else's fault, no different than putting the ball in the fairway and having it run out and suddenly be stopped by sand in a divot. Divots are a normal result of playing the game. How they are repaired or not, varies. It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

[Mr. Bean]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:>

> > I am not sure if I should laugh of weep or both. You just seem to be plain stupid.

> >

> > It was you who draw this concept of 'man made' into the discussion and all I was trying to do is to explain to you what is and what is not 'man made'. **Divots or divot holes are NOT 'man made**' nor are ball-marks or foot prints or branches broken off a tree.

> >

> > Was that simple enough for you to comprehend or are you still lost between a broken branch and a divot?

>

> This post is a new low even for you. So you think divots are natural? I wont some of whatever you are smoking.

 

I give up. In the future I will only reply to posts written by people with brain.

[Vindog]

> @hybrid25 said:

> Amazing what logic some use to make a point. Everybody knows what the rule is right now concerning divots, and those who play by the rules abide by that particular rule as well. There are no free drops from a divot and I think everybody agrees to that. What some don't agree with, and me as well, is that there isn't a rule allowing a free drop from an unrepaired divot. No, it isn't a natural part of the golf course, similar to how ball marks are not a natural part of a green. How some cannot understand that is beyond me, I just think they like to argue.

 

I disagree on the ball mark opinion, respectfully of course.

 

I feel as if ball marks are a natural progression and a result of balls landing on the green through the normal course of playing a ball towards the hole. To extrapolate on that idea, I also feel that the taking of divots, and the divots/holes themselves are a natural part of playing a golf ball towards the hole.

 

[sui generis]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @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.

>

> I don't make the rules of golf found in my book. USGA Rules committee make them for ALL of US, we just follow them, like we follow the rules of cycling, bowling, tennis and other sports. In cycling competitions, pros face ugly cobblestone streets. Nobody likes them because lot's of things can happen when riding on cobblestone. Nobody IMO has offered up a valid reason for being able to get a drop from divots. Being man-made is not a reasonable argument because every aspect of the golf course is man-made, except for Links courses in Europe.

>

> Greens are expected to be smooth for putting. When courses punch the greens, we don't get relief from punch holes, they are just part of the challenge and maybe the PRO shop will call them 2-putt greens. Fairways are not expected to be smooth or for that matter manicured like many are.

>

> I played in a tournament last weekend. For whatever the reason maintenance didn't cut the rough surrounding a few bunkers and one of my shots landed in 6-7" deep, thick and ugly, nothing like the rest of the course. Was it unfair, sure but still had to play the ball as it lies? Thankfully, all the practice and developed skills helped me to execute an open-faced LW shot to 4' from the pin and made the putt to save par. I put the ball there, it was nobody's else's fault, no different than putting the ball in the fairway and having it run out and suddenly be stopped by sand in a divot. Divots are a normal result of playing the game. How they are repaired or not, varies. It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

 

Well, what do you know? Mikey and Roadkill are self-proclaimed geniuses and know way more than you or even those people who manage the Rules for a living!

[Roadking2003]

> @"sui generis" said:> Well, what do you know? Mikey and Roadkill are self-proclaimed geniuses and know way more than you or even those people who manage the Rules for a living!

 

So anybody who disagrees with you is a "self-proclaimed genius"? Got it.

 

I always know that your argument is weak when you resort to name calling.

[Roadking2003]

> @Pepperturbo said:> > Greens are expected to be smooth for putting. When courses punch the greens, we don't get relief from punch holes, they are just part of the challenge and maybe the PRO shop will call them 2-putt greens.

 

Not true. See Local rule E-4: Relief from Aeration Holes

> Fairways are not expected to be smooth or for that matter manicured like many are.

 

How did you decide that? Most courses spend lots of money trying to make their fairways smooth and manicured.

 

> Divots are a normal result of playing the game.

 

So are pitch marks.

[Sawgrass]

So now I’m wondering if you really understand the limitations of E-4. You do not get relief from putting over aeration holes, only for one you may lie in.

[LeoLeo99]

I'm still trying to figure out why the rulies feel a need to continuously post in this thread. But it is funny. 62 posts to 1000.

[Roadking2003]

> @Sawgrass said:

> So now I’m wondering if you really understand the limitations of E-4. You do not get relief from putting over aeration holes, only for one you may lie in.

 

 

Correct. That's how I read it. If you had to putt out of an aeration hole your ball would pup up and distance control would be pretty bad.

[Vindog]

> @LeoLeo99 said:

> I'm still trying to figure out why the rulies feel a need to continuously post in this thread. But it is funny. 62 posts to 1000.

 

Everyone keeps posting.

Even you. You are posting about people posting. And I'm posting about you posting about people posting

 

We are all part of the same hypocrisy. Strange days indeed. Most peculiar, Mama

 

[SNIPERBBB]

> @LeoLeo99 said:

> I'm still trying to figure out why the rulies feel a need to continuously post in this thread. But it is funny. 62 posts to 1000.

 

I just want to see how far down this rabbit hole people want to go. Plus it will delay the next divot thread.

[LeoLeo99]

> @SNIPERBBB said:

> > @LeoLeo99 said:

> > I'm still trying to figure out why the rulies feel a need to continuously post in this thread. But it is funny. 62 posts to 1000.

>

> I just want to see how far down this rabbit hole people want to go. Plus it will delay the next divot thread.

 

You think it can get deeper?

[Shilgy]

> @LeoLeo99 said:

> > @SNIPERBBB said:

> > > @LeoLeo99 said:

> > > I'm still trying to figure out why the rulies feel a need to continuously post in this thread. But it is funny. 62 posts to 1000.

> >

> > I just want to see how far down this rabbit hole people want to go. Plus it will delay the next divot thread.

>

> You think it can get deeper?

 

It can get snarkier is about all. There really is nothing on page 32 that wasn't on all of the previous pages. Or previous threads for that matter.

[Mikey5e]

The best post I have seeing in this thread is the one that stated "divots are not man-made". This is the type of logic that supports the idea play it as it lies in an unrepaired divot.

[antip]

> @LeoLeo99 said:

> I'm still trying to figure out why the rulies feel a need to continuously post in this thread. But it is funny. 62 posts to 1000.

 

Why would you limit this question to "rulies"? But I agree it is funny. It is like playing "wack a mole", you just get in the groove.

 

[Vindog]

> @Mikey5e said:

> The best post I have seeing in this thread is the one that stated "divots are not man-made". This is the type of logic that supports the idea play it as it lies in an unrepaired divot.

 

My favorite was divot = bunker rake.

 

 

[HatsForBats]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @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.

>

>

>It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

 

I don't see it as arguing for perfect fairway conditions but rather arguing for relief from an area that is **much worse** than just average fairway conditions. People pay a lot of money to play at courses that are heavily maintained which includes the filling of divot holes. If it wasn't a big deal then they wouldn't spend time providing that service. Heck, even the USGA admits properly fixed divots make a **BIG** difference - https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2019/05/divot-repair--why-and-how.html

 

How can you benefit from the condition? You certainly can put in practice to lessen the **disadvantage** of the situation but no matter how you look at it you are **almost** always at a disadvantage when in a divot hole.

 

 

[Roadking2003]

> @Mikey5e said:

> The best post I have seeing in this thread is the one that stated "divots are not man-made". This is the type of logic that supports the idea play it as it lies in an unrepaired divot.

 

That post will be in the Hall Of Fame for the most entertaining post. I'm still laughing over that one.

[Roadking2003]

> @Pepperturbo said: It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

 

I don't think it's entitlement any more than thinking you are entitled to a perfect green. On the green, you are "entitled" to a putting surface free of man made imperfections. On the fairway, you should be "entitled" to a lie that is free of man made imperfections. Not entitled to "perfect conditions" in either situation.

 

[sui generis]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @Pepperturbo said: It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

>

> I don't think it's entitlement any more than thinking you are entitled to a perfect green. On the green, you are "entitled" to a putting surface free of man made imperfections. On the fairway, you should be "entitled" to a lie that is free of man made imperfections. Not entitled to "perfect conditions" in either situation.

>

 

Competitive golf is not for cry babies. The successful players accept the lucky breaks along with the unfavorable ones. Those tasked with making the Rules are well aware of that and have no inclination to "beer league" the Rules.

[Roadking2003]

> @"sui generis" said:

> > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said: It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

> >

> > I don't think it's entitlement any more than thinking you are entitled to a perfect green. On the green, you are "entitled" to a putting surface free of man made imperfections. On the fairway, you should be "entitled" to a lie that is free of man made imperfections. Not entitled to "perfect conditions" in either situation.

> >

>

> Competitive golf is not for cry babies. The successful players accept the lucky breaks along with the unfavorable ones. Those tasked with making the Rules are well aware of that and have no inclination to "beer league" the Rules.

 

And yet the Rules support the "cry babies" who want perfect greens and "cry babies" who refuse to hit off cart paths. So maybe they have already "beer leagued" the rules.

[sui generis]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @"sui generis" said:

> > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said: It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

> > >

> > > I don't think it's entitlement any more than thinking you are entitled to a perfect green. On the green, you are "entitled" to a putting surface free of man made imperfections. On the fairway, you should be "entitled" to a lie that is free of man made imperfections. Not entitled to "perfect conditions" in either situation.

> > >

> >

> > Competitive golf is not for cry babies. The successful players accept the lucky breaks along with the unfavorable ones. Those tasked with making the Rules are well aware of that and have no inclination to "beer league" the Rules.

>

> And yet the Rules support the "cry babies" who want perfect greens and "cry babies" who refuse to hit off cart paths. So maybe they have already "beer leagued" the rules.

 

Reductio arguments don't wash.

[cval]

This thread is funny in that both sides think their arguments are the most influential. The fact is both sides make good arguments and as of today the rule is what it is. What baffles me is that how a PGA tour lets another governing body write the rules for their league. Can you image that in any other league, especially with all the money at stake. I guess that is what makes golf unique.

 

[HatsForBats]

> @"sui generis" said:

> > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said: It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

> >

> > I don't think it's entitlement any more than thinking you are entitled to a perfect green. On the green, you are "entitled" to a putting surface free of man made imperfections. On the fairway, you should be "entitled" to a lie that is free of man made imperfections. Not entitled to "perfect conditions" in either situation.

> >

>

> Competitive golf is not for cry babies. The successful players accept the lucky breaks along with the unfavorable ones. Those tasked with making the Rules are well aware of that and have no inclination to "beer league" the Rules.

 

All players accept the breaks whether you consider them a cry baby or not. Otherwise they get DQ'ed. Allowing relief from fairway divot holes would be much less Bush League IMO. YMMV.

 

 

[nsxguy]

> @Mikey5e said:

> The best post I have seeing in this thread is the one that stated "divots are not man-made". This is the type of logic that supports the idea play it as it lies in an unrepaired divot.

 

Do you take everything literally ? What about a divot made by a woman ? Is THAT man made ? So why do we drive on the parway and park on the driveway ? LOL

 

Oh, wait. You mean "man" can ALSO refer to "humans" ? NOT to be taken literally ? As in "for all mankind" (mankind of course including both males and females). O,,,,,,M,,,,,,G,,,,,,,

 

It was explained to you that while divots are, of course, "made by a man (or a woman LOL)", the term "man made" is to be taken as created intentionally by "man". A car is man made. A road is man made. A building is man made. A divot is an occasional and often UNintentional result of a player hitting a golf ball. It is NOT the player's intent to make a divot but to hit the ball.

 

See the difference ? (<---- that's a rhetorical question BTW).

 

And no matter how many times you and RK ask why one can repair a ball mark on the green but not a divot on the fairway,,,,,,, and no matter how many time posters explain to both of you that different places are treated differently (just like most everything in life),,,,,,,, and no matter how often you're told the ball flies onto and off of the fairway but is intended to be rolled over the putting surface, you 2 will apparently keep going 'round and 'round in circles 'til you "win".

 

So,,,,,,,,, you "win". At least AFAIC. Unless you bring up some sort of cogent thought about the subject, you can keep patting each other on the back for "winning".

 

Congrats.

 

 

[SNIPERBBB]

> @cval said:

> This thread is funny in that both sides think their arguments are the most influential. The fact is both sides make good arguments and as of today the rule is what it is. What baffles me is that how a PGA tour lets another governing body write the rules for their league. Can you image that in any other league, especially with all the money at stake. I guess that is what makes golf unique.

>

 

Trust me, the pro sports leagues that write their own rules are disasters for amateur levels.

[Mikey5e]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @Mikey5e said:

> > The best post I have seeing in this thread is the one that stated "divots are not man-made". This is the type of logic that supports the idea play it as it lies in an unrepaired divot.

>

> Do you take everything literally ? What about a divot made by a woman ? Is THAT man made ? So why do we drive on the parway and park on the driveway ? LOL

>

> Oh, wait. You mean "man" can ALSO refer to "humans" ? NOT to be taken literally ? As in "for all mankind" (mankind of course including both males and females). O,,,,,,M,,,,,,G,,,,,,,

>

> It was explained to you that while divots are, of course, "made by a man (or a woman LOL)", the term "man made" is to be taken as created intentionally by "man". A car is man made. A road is man made. A building is man made. A divot is an occasional and often UNintentional result of a player hitting a golf ball. It is NOT the player's intent to make a divot but to hit the ball.

>

> See the difference ? (<---- that's a rhetorical question BTW).

>

> And no matter how many times you and RK ask why one can repair a ball mark on the green but not a divot on the fairway,,,,,,, and no matter how many time posters explain to both of you that different places are treated differently (just like most everything in life),,,,,,,, and no matter how often you're told the ball flies onto and off of the fairway but is intended to be rolled over the putting surface, you 2 will apparently keep going 'round and 'round in circles 'til you "win".

>

> So,,,,,,,,, you "win". At least AFAIC. Unless you bring up some sort of cogent thought about the subject, you can keep patting each other on the back for "winning".

>

> Congrats.

>

>

>

 

This post is like reading a comic book!

rotf

[Pepperturbo]

> @HatsForBats said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @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.

> >

> >

> >It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

>

> I don't see it as arguing for perfect fairway conditions but rather arguing for relief from an area that is **much worse** than just average fairway conditions. People pay a lot of money to play at courses that are heavily maintained which includes the filling of divot holes. If it wasn't a big deal then they wouldn't spend time providing that service. Heck, even the USGA admits properly fixed divots make a **BIG** difference - https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2019/05/divot-repair--why-and-how.html

>

> How can you benefit from the condition? You certainly can put in practice to lessen the **disadvantage** of the situation but no matter how you look at it you are **almost** always at a disadvantage when in a divot hole.

>

>

 

A divot in the fairway is like a spot where the grass dies off and becomes concaved hole of sorts, and someone's golf ball ends up in that fairway hole. It doesn't have a painted circle around it so it's not considered ground under repair but your ball sets in the middle. How many people use a foot wedge anyway and whine about it.

 

"Golfers pay a lot of money." Yes, they do. Some of us more than others. I play two-three times per week and at least one of those times pay for two golfers, and multiple 2-3 wk golf vacations each year are filled with golf green fees. Do the math. I am footing a large golf cost, do I see that as unfair or do I feel disadvantage when my ball ends in a fairway divot? "NO." For anyone to say each of us is at a disadvantage is wrong.

It does beg the question. If each golf course hired people to daily properly repair fairway divots by replacing them with sod swatches so a player wouldn't have to feel the game is being unfair to him when his ball ends in a divot; would you all be willing to pay higher greens fee's to cover the costs?

 

I pose that question because I won't support rule changes every time there's a group of complainers that feel something isn't fair to them, and want a rule changed or course design changed at the expense of others. Over time before we know it rules and courses will be watered down to the point the challenge of golf no longer exists. Thank you goes out to complainers.

[HatsForBats]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @HatsForBats said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > @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.

> > >

> > >

> > >It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

> >

> > I don't see it as arguing for perfect fairway conditions but rather arguing for relief from an area that is **much worse** than just average fairway conditions. People pay a lot of money to play at courses that are heavily maintained which includes the filling of divot holes. If it wasn't a big deal then they wouldn't spend time providing that service. Heck, even the USGA admits properly fixed divots make a **BIG** difference - https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2019/05/divot-repair--why-and-how.html

> >

> > How can you benefit from the condition? You certainly can put in practice to lessen the **disadvantage** of the situation but no matter how you look at it you are **almost** always at a disadvantage when in a divot hole.

> >

> >

>

> A divot in the fairway is like a spot where the grass dies off and becomes concaved hole of sorts, and someone's golf ball ends up in that fairway hole. It doesn't have a painted circle around it so it's not considered ground under repair but your ball sets in the middle. How many people use a foot wedge anyway and whine about it.

>

> "Golfers pay a lot of money." Yes, they do. Some of us more than others. I play two-three times per week and at least one of those times pay for two golfers, and multiple 2-3 wk golf vacations each year are filled with golf green fees. Do the math. I am footing a large golf cost, do I see that as unfair or do I feel disadvantage when my ball ends in a fairway divot? "NO." For anyone to say each of us is at a disadvantage is wrong.

> It does beg the question. If each golf course hired people to daily properly repair fairway divots by replacing them with sod swatches so a player wouldn't have to feel the game is being unfair to him when his ball ends in a divot; would you all be willing to pay higher greens fee's to cover the costs?

>

> I pose that question because I won't support rule changes every time there's a group of complainers that feel something isn't fair to them, and want a rule changed or course design changed at the expense of others. Over time before we know it rules and courses will be watered down to the point the challenge of golf no longer exists. Thank you goes out to complainers.

 

No need to discuss the foot wedge players. No real bearing on this conversation IMO.

 

If relief was allowed why would the course maintainence not be able to continue the way it already is? Some courses would have crews to take care of it, others would rely on the membership or daily fee players and some courses would have minimal repair done by daily fee players only. I see no need to add additional costs the way your question is posed. IMO I wouldn't think of it as watering down the game at all but rather levelling out the individual competition more. There would be plenty of challenge left in golf if players no longer needed to hit from divots (or divot holes if you prefer). Just like there is plenty of challenge left in golf now that you can fix greens to the extent you can starting this year.

[Pepperturbo]

> @HatsForBats said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @HatsForBats said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @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.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >It's beyond comprehension why people argue as if they are entitled to perfect fairway conditions, yet don't put the time in to be skilled enough to benefit from said conditions.

> > >

> > > I don't see it as arguing for perfect fairway conditions but rather arguing for relief from an area that is **much worse** than just average fairway conditions. People pay a lot of money to play at courses that are heavily maintained which includes the filling of divot holes. If it wasn't a big deal then they wouldn't spend time providing that service. Heck, even the USGA admits properly fixed divots make a **BIG** difference - https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2019/05/divot-repair--why-and-how.html

> > >

> > > How can you benefit from the condition? You certainly can put in practice to lessen the **disadvantage** of the situation but no matter how you look at it you are **almost** always at a disadvantage when in a divot hole.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > A divot in the fairway is like a spot where the grass dies off and becomes concaved hole of sorts, and someone's golf ball ends up in that fairway hole. It doesn't have a painted circle around it so it's not considered ground under repair but your ball sets in the middle. How many people use a foot wedge anyway and whine about it.

> >

> > "Golfers pay a lot of money." Yes, they do. Some of us more than others. I play two-three times per week and at least one of those times pay for two golfers, and multiple 2-3 wk golf vacations each year are filled with golf green fees. Do the math. I am footing a large golf cost, do I see that as unfair or do I feel disadvantage when my ball ends in a fairway divot? "NO." For anyone to say each of us is at a disadvantage is wrong.

> > It does beg the question. If each golf course hired people to daily properly repair fairway divots by replacing them with sod swatches so a player wouldn't have to feel the game is being unfair to him when his ball ends in a divot; would you all be willing to pay higher greens fee's to cover the costs?

> >

> > I pose that question because I won't support rule changes every time there's a group of complainers that feel something isn't fair to them, and want a rule changed or course design changed at the expense of others. Over time before we know it rules and courses will be watered down to the point the challenge of golf no longer exists. Thank you goes out to complainers.

>

> No need to discuss the foot wedge players. No real bearing on this conversation IMO.

>

> If relief was allowed why would the course maintainence not be able to continue the way it already is? Some courses would have crews to take care of it, others would rely on the membership or daily fee players and some courses would have minimal repair done by daily fee players only. I see no need to add additional costs the way your question is posed. IMO I wouldn't think of it as watering down the game at all but rather levelling out the individual competition more. There would be plenty of challenge left in golf if players no longer needed to hit from divots (or divot holes if you prefer). Just like there is plenty of challenge left in golf now that you can fix greens to the extent you can starting this year.

 

As I said, can't support rule changes to satisfy complainers. And you're welcome to your perception. Have you ever been part of the management team that runs a course and listens to criticisms? I have been on the BOD and held various committee leadership roles and seen associated department costs at my last two equity clubs.

 

The way my question was posed as the result of meeting with course superintendents and learning the costs associated with maintaining a golf course. Each of your thoughts, manpower costs appear to be absorbed in various ways. That to my P&L thinking is incorrect, as manpower itself is a huge fixed cost to the business. To see anything other than bias led conclusion one first needs to see the big picture followed by downstream tentacle influences and costs. Anyhow, have a good day.