What is the one rule you wish could be changed

[LICC]

I’ve said all along to treat it as the rules treat water hazards. You proposed treating as yellow stake only. Why?

[LICC]

I don’t think you understand how water hazards rules work.

[HitEmTrue]

 

Stroke and distance isn’t to make it equivalent to breaking a rule with a two stroke penalty.

Was watching a replay of the Solheim Cup the other day. On the 9th hope, Ciganda missed the fairway and it took her two shots to get the ball back to the fairway...not advancing the ball at all.

She had already hit a provisional into the fairway in case it was lost.

Allowing her to ignore her first ball (not look for it) and proceed with the provisional lying 2, as you would suggest, would be absolutely silly. A bad shot can indeed cost two strokes, and it did cost her two strokes.

You are proposing a fundamental change in the way the game is played, with less risk on losing a golf ball or OB.

[HitEmTrue]

 

Then a ball lost on the course becomes a bigger penalty the ball hit off the planet.

[Halebopp]

No, I'm quite sure I'm familiar enough with the rules regarding penalty areas, I can't be bothered with the rules regarding water hazards anymore though. It would be kind of you to, for once, actually answer the questions presented to you.

 

Edit: Make your way back to September in this thread and pretty much everything was covered back then, it seems like that discussion was slightly more constructive, or at least started that way. But, unsurprisingly, it didn't really lead anywhere.

[davep043]

Actually, it wouldn't, if there's no Reference Point that qualifies. That's the point I was trying to make, that you can treat it exactly the same as a Yellow Penalty Area, and end up having to take stroke and distance in almost every case. But again, I agree, I see a clear logical differentiation between a ball that has missed the entire playing field, and one that has found an unfortunate position ON the playing field. But you're right, a ball lost in deep jungle shouldn't be penalized MORE than a ball that missed the jungle entirely and went OB.
I said it before, and @LICC completely ignored it. Every penalty of this type costs a stroke, and every penalty describes a specific location to play from. These are two aspects of every single penalty in which you cannot play your ball as it lies. If you want to define stroke and distance as two penalties, you can also describe penalty relief for a red penalty area as two penalties. One stroke, and you MUST drop within a prescribed area. For a yellow penalty area, that could mean one stroke, and you must drop hundreds of yards back from where the ball was last in the General Area. One penalty, two parts, every single time.
If you read Tufts, he suggests that the consistent thing to do would be to use stroke and distance every time you cannot play the ball as it lies. This includes 4 basic situations: OB, lost ball, unplayable lie, and ball lost in a hazard (at the time he was writing). I'd recommend that anyone interested in really understand the rules give it a read.

[LICC]

I have not suggested ignoring first balls at all. That was never part of the discussion.

[Mr. Bean]

In this respect I do not agree with Tuft's view as losing a ball altogether is different from knowing where it is on the course but not being able to make a stroke at it. Besides, IMO this view of his does not really help in understanding the current Rules as they differ quite substantially from his view.

[HitEmTrue]

You didn’t suggest it at all.

A player can currently ignore the original (not look for it), but normally that isn’t the best option

But under your proposed rules, ignoring the original and playing the provisional would become the better option in many cases.

[LICC]

A ball at the bottom of a pond is not on the PLAYING field. OB usually is not a design of the course, it is a constraint to be designed around. I wish someone could give a logical explanation why OB is differentiated from the bottom of a pond. “Off the property” is not an explanation.

[Newby]

A penalty area is not confined to the bottom of ponds. There are other areas where a ball may not be accessible.

[LICC]

True. And when you know that and you make a bad swing that results in your ball being in an inaccessible area that is not part of a physically possible playing area, it should be treated the same as OB. In my opinion, either case should be one penalty, not two.

[Mr. Bean]

This question has been raised on this forum many times and none of the times the person presenting that question has accepted the given answers. Nevertheless, I will try to give my view on it.

A penalty area (maybe a pond) is on the course so playing from a penalty area is allowed. Out of bounds is not on the course so playing from outside the course is not allowed. Sometimes it is actually possible to play from a penalty area, even from a pond if the ball lies in an area dry enough. I cannot imagine how we could treat different areas of a pond differently but same rule must apply to all balls within the margins of that pond. Thus a penalty area must be treated differently from OB even though sometimes the ball is so deep in the water that it cannot be found nor played.

Hope this helps.

[isaacbm]

The simple reason that the two are not the same is to make the game harder. There are areas of a golf course that are defined certain ways for the simple reason of making the game a challenge. If you think it’s challenging enough that’s fine. But it’s perfectly logical to say that a bunker is defined as something different than a waist area. A bunker is worse. The rules define it so. Rules define out of bounds as worse than the bottom of a pond. It’s simply a definition of a section of a golf course and the only reason they do that is to make the game harder. They apply that rule and it’s definition by making it more penal. Again, you simply want the game to be easier than it is. I understand.

[Sean2]

I have found there is nothing easy about this game. Which, while being frustrating, is also part of its attraction. Not trying to be too philosophical here, but I think there is a lot more to this game than hitting a ball, finding it and hitting it again. You can learn a lot about a person (and yourself) on not how they play golf, but how they handle playing golf.

[KevCarter]

Freudian slip? ???

[Sean2]

I think it was Pete Dye who once said that golf is not supposed to be fair...probably explains a lot of his course designs, lol.

[isaacbm]

Kevcarter

 

oops.... ;)

[KevCarter]

LOL Cheers!

[Vindog]

I mean, why treat two things that are different differently? It makes no sense!

 

 

[Newby]

How many liked comments in this thread?

[LICC]

You are still incapable of giving any rational explanation why it should be treated differently.

[CaseyC]

You are not the sole arbiter of what is rational, or logical....

[LICC]

No, but I seem to understand it better than most here ...

[CaseyC]

Another good illistration of the point I'm trying to get across.

The USGA and R&A explained their reasoning, their logic. You disagree. That doesn't make their logic irrational or illogical.

[Newby]

Because it is different.

Why are there different rules for fairways, teeing areas, bunkers and putting greens ? Why are parking regulations not the same for the highway and a car park (parking lot)?

Perhaps it's because they are not the same.

 

[LICC]

Their explanation included that the added danger of people off the course getting hit by a ball needs an added penalty to disincentivize golfers from hitting it OB. Which is ridiculous and irrational. You can just follow along like sheep and try to defend this no matter how irrational, but I question it as a bad and illogical rule.

[LICC]

There is no material difference between the two that warrants a different penalty. Do you really need for me to explain to you the difference between a fairway, a bunker, and a teeing area?

[CaseyC]

Again, that you say it is irrational, doesn't make it so

Some can argue that the entire game of golf is illogical.

[davep043]

The biggest difference between a ball in a Penalty area and a ball OB is permission. You are specifically permitted to play a shot from a penalty area of you can, and choose to. You are specifically NOT permitted to play a shot from OB. The logical reason is that this is NOT within the property dedicated to playing golf. You aren't permitted to trespass into a neighbor's property, you are not permitted to play from the public street, you simply have no right to play golf from somewhere that's not on the golf course's property. If you are permitted to play the shot, but are physically are unable to play it (too deep in the water, up in a tree, deep in thorn bushes, as a few examples) you're not required to go back to the tee. In this way, the penalties for Penalty Area relief and Unplayable Lie relief are similar. A ball OB is most similar to a lost ball, and those penalties are identical.