What is the one rule you wish could be changed

[antip]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > @antip said:

> > > > > @slocagolfer said:

> > > > > Back to 5 minutes for a lost ball instead of 3.

> > > > I like the new rule, helps rebalance the game to the skill of controlling the ball, something the equipment changes are taking away.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Lol, what? All it means is you’ll go back to the tee faster to replay the shot. Where on earth did you get anything to do with equipment out of that.

> >

> > 1) I've always played a provisional, haven't taken a walk back to the tee in many years.

> > 2) The clubs are far more forgiving now than in the past. Mishits do not go so far off target lines. That's my experience from 50+ years in the game. If you have a different experience, I'm happy to hear it.

>

> I’m sure I’m not the only golfer to hit what they thought was a good shot only to get to where they think the ball should be and it’s nowhere to be found. Should we always hit 2 just to be safe?

 

It is a judgement call, but on a familiar course you have a fair idea if there may be a problem finding it. And no, I'm not hitting provisional after the initial shot has gone down the middle. I play more provisionals in stroke play - but most of our competition golf is stableford so a lost ball normally means no points for the hole anyway (unless you have a handicap stroke on the hole).

[Mr. Bean]

> @"sui generis" said:

> > @larrybud said:

> > The new pin rule sucks.

> > Played in a tourney this past week, 2 guys in, 2 guys out. One of the "in" guys wanted it for a freakin' 1 footer.

>

> The previous flagstick procedure inconvenienced everyone.

 

How?

 

As this particular change in the Rules was made for one and only one reason i.e. time saving it just does not make any sense to have the pin put back once removed.

[Mr. Bean]

> @Shipwreck said:

> > @"sui generis" said:

> > > @Shipwreck said:

> > > Practice swing in a hazard. I get that they are meant to pose more of a challenge and you’re not supposed to be there, but the majority of us don’t play at PGA quality courses and the depth of sand varies. If I can take a practice swing in the rough to gauge how to play the shot, I should be able to take one in a bunker or in a staked area.

> > >

> >

> > You're half in luck. Since 1/1/19, you may make a "practice swing" in a penalty area so long as you don't improve the Conditions Affecting the Stroke (CATS from Rule 8).

>

> Not according to the USGA site. It still states you can’t touch the ground in making a practice swing, unless I’m reading it wrong?

>

>

>

 

Well, you did read Sui's post wrong. Penalty Area is not a Bunker and vice versa. You are allowed to do in a Penalty Area all the same things as in the General Area but in a Bunker you are restricted.

[Mr. Bean]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > @antip said:

> > > > > @slocagolfer said:

> > > > > Back to 5 minutes for a lost ball instead of 3.

> > > > I like the new rule, helps rebalance the game to the skill of controlling the ball, something the equipment changes are taking away.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Lol, what? All it means is you’ll go back to the tee faster to replay the shot. Where on earth did you get anything to do with equipment out of that.

> >

> > 1) I've always played a provisional, haven't taken a walk back to the tee in many years.

> > 2) The clubs are far more forgiving now than in the past. Mishits do not go so far off target lines. That's my experience from 50+ years in the game. If you have a different experience, I'm happy to hear it.

>

> I’m sure I’m not the only golfer to hit what they thought was a good shot only to get to where they think the ball should be and it’s nowhere to be found. Should we always hit 2 just to be safe?

 

How often does that happen to you? If more than twice a year you'd better check your parameters for a 'good shot'.

[Newby]

> @"CAT GOLFER" said:

> If I’m playing alone, I don’t inconvenience myself with unintentional bad lies (beaver pelts not replaced, giant and deep foot prints in sand trap, tire tracks in wet areas). When I play with others or in a league, I accept that luck plays at least some part in the game.

 

Do you return all or any of your scores?

[CAT GOLFER]

I stopped posting scores for handicap. I keep an unofficial spreadsheet with all scores though to have an idea of my progress from an index standpoint. I don’t play in tournaments and any scramble I would play in doesn’t ask for official index anyway.

[Mr. Bean]

> @"CAT GOLFER" said:

> I stopped posting scores for handicap. I keep an unofficial spreadsheet with all scores though to have an idea of my progress from an index standpoint. I don’t play in tournaments and **any scramble I would play in doesn’t ask for official index anyway.**

 

Cheater's heaven... (not referring to you).

[CAT GOLFER]

Lol, I should note they are all charity scrambles ( for the cause) and my only wins are raffles :D

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @"CAT GOLFER" said:

> > I stopped posting scores for handicap. I keep an unofficial spreadsheet with all scores though to have an idea of my progress from an index standpoint. I don’t play in tournaments and **any scramble I would play in doesn’t ask for official index anyway.**

>

> Cheater's heaven... (not referring to you).

 

 

[Vindog]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > > @Brass_Bullseye said:

> > > No OB anywhere on the golf course. Every white stake is converted to red.

> >

> > How does that work if you are in a red penalty area, yet try to trespass to play out of the private property not owned by the course?

>

> Well just leave it white and and penalize a stroke instead of stroke and distance.

 

But why?

[LICC]

> @Brass_Bullseye said:

> No OB anywhere on the golf course. Every white stake is converted to red.

 

Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

[Vindog]

> @LICC said:

> > @Brass_Bullseye said:

> > No OB anywhere on the golf course. Every white stake is converted to red.

>

> Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

 

It makes perfect sense to me.

 

You hit a ball, that stroke counts, you can’t find it or you hit it OB so you have to play another, that stroke counts plus the drop. Trust me, stroke and distance is penal as hell, and nobody has hit more OB than me, but it’s logical by the counter.

 

 

[Newby]

> @LICC said:

> Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

 

How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

[LICC]

> @Vindog said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Brass_Bullseye said:

> > > No OB anywhere on the golf course. Every white stake is converted to red.

> >

> > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

>

> It makes perfect sense to me.

>

> You hit a ball, that stroke counts, you can’t find it or you hit it OB so you have to play another, that stroke counts plus the drop. Trust me, stroke and distance is penal as ****, and nobody has hit more OB than me, but it’s logical by the counter.

>

>

 

But why is there no distance penalty if you hit it into water, but there is if you hit it into some other unplayable OB? That is the part that is not logical.

[LICC]

> @Newby said:

> > @LICC said:

> > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

>

> How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

 

Because you saw it go in.

[Newby]

> @LICC said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @Brass_Bullseye said:

> > > > No OB anywhere on the golf course. Every white stake is converted to red.

> > >

> > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> >

> > It makes perfect sense to me.

> >

> > You hit a ball, that stroke counts, you can’t find it or you hit it OB so you have to play another, that stroke counts plus the drop. Trust me, stroke and distance is penal as ****, and nobody has hit more OB than me, but it’s logical by the counter.

> >

> >

>

> But why is there no distance penalty if you hit it into water, but there is if you hit it into some other unplayable OB? That is the part that is not logical.

1) because the ball is not on the golf course

2) because you may not know if the ball is on the golf course

 

 

[Newby]

> @LICC said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> >

> > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

>

> Because you saw it go in.

 

But you don't know where it ricoched to

[Newby]

An extract from **The principles Behind The Rules of Golf**

 

Approximately the equivalent of the one stroke penalty without the loss of distance is the penalty of loss of distance only which was experimented with in the early 1960’s by the USGA.

Here it is assumed that a lost ball or a ball out of bounds is a question of fact, wholly beyond the control of the player, and that since the player is therefore not in a position to create an advantage to himself from the situation, a penalty of the loss of the stroke which he has played is no less than the advantage which he might have derived. As was quickly discovered loss of distance only can sometimes be an advantage and not a penalty. It is, for example, always better to play the next stroke from where the last one was played than to play from where it went, when the shanked ball goes into the woods, the half topped approach over the green into deep rough or the too strong putt across the green into a bunker. With the penalty for a lost ball reduced to distance only, a player can escape the results of a badly played stroke by immediately proceeding as if his ball were lost despite the fact that it might be found easily. A penalty must serve to police the chance that by taking advantage of an inadequately protected rule players will play a game wholly different from golf. One of the great features of golf is that one stroke leads to the next and when it becomes easier to recover from adversity by use of the Rule book than a golf club, the game loses its virtue.

[LICC]

> @Newby said:

> An extract from **The principles Behind The Rules of Golf**

>

> Approximately the equivalent of the one stroke penalty without the loss of distance is the penalty of loss of distance only which was experimented with in the early 1960’s by the USGA.

> Here it is assumed that a lost ball or a ball out of bounds is a question of fact, wholly beyond the control of the player, and that since the player is therefore not in a position to create an advantage to himself from the situation, a penalty of the loss of the stroke which he has played is no less than the advantage which he might have derived. As was quickly discovered loss of distance only can sometimes be an advantage and not a penalty. It is, for example, always better to play the next stroke from where the last one was played than to play from where it went, when the shanked ball goes into the woods, the half topped approach over the green into deep rough or the too strong putt across the green into a bunker. With the penalty for a lost ball reduced to distance only, a player can escape the results of a badly played stroke by immediately proceeding as if his ball were lost despite the fact that it might be found easily. A penalty must serve to police the chance that by taking advantage of an inadequately protected rule players will play a game wholly different from golf. One of the great features of golf is that one stroke leads to the next and when it becomes easier to recover from adversity by use of the Rule book than a golf club, the game loses its virtue.

 

None of that explains how it makes sense that a ball lost into a pond does not cost you a distance penalty, but a ball lost into unplayable woods or bushes costs an extra distance penalty. And that explanation above isn't accurate- " ... a player can escape the results of a badly played stroke by immediately proceeding as if his ball were lost despite the fact that it might be found easily." That ignores that you still must take a penalty for the drop. I am saying that you shouldn't have to take what is effectively a two-stroke penalty.

[Roadking2003]

> @Newby said:

> > @LICC said:

> > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

>

> How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

 

Why do you need to know?

[Newby]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> >

> > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

>

> Why do you need to know?

 

Because you might be able to avoid the distance loss.

[LICC]

> @Newby said:

> > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> > >

> > > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

> >

> > Why do you need to know?

>

> Because you might be able to avoid the distance loss.

 

Why should there be a distance loss?

[Mr. Bean]

> @LICC said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> > > >

> > > > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

> > >

> > > Why do you need to know?

> >

> > Because you might be able to avoid the distance loss.

>

> Why should there be a distance loss?

 

Why not?

 

(I wanted to join the choir of making silly questions...)

[Mr. Bean]

I have a feeling that this topic has been dealt with before. And before...

 

For those who are not familiar with the different features of a golf course I can tell that penalty areas and bunkers are there to influence a player's choices how to play. Out of bounds is there to tell a player where are the boundaries of the course. Hitting a ball in a bunker means some difficulty. Hitting a ball in a penalty area means much more difficulty but one may continue without finding the ball with one penalty. Hitting a ball OB means you have really messed it up and you need to start over.

 

I do realize there a people who do not comprehend this path of reasoning but this is the way it is, and personally I cannot come up one single good reason to change it.

[LICC]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> > > > >

> > > > > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

> > > >

> > > > Why do you need to know?

> > >

> > > Because you might be able to avoid the distance loss.

> >

> > Why should there be a distance loss?

>

> Why not?

>

> (I wanted to join the choir of making silly questions...)

 

Because it destroys the logical fairness of the game of golf, and creates an inconsistent application of scoring based on water or land.

[Mr. Bean]

> @LICC said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

> > > > >

> > > > > Why do you need to know?

> > > >

> > > > Because you might be able to avoid the distance loss.

> > >

> > > Why should there be a distance loss?

> >

> > Why not?

> >

> > (I wanted to join the choir of making silly questions...)

>

> Because it destroys the logical fairness of the game of golf, and creates an inconsistent application of scoring based on water or land.

 

So... you are the one who holds the truth, is that it?

 

I suggest you take some time and get yourself familiar with the origin of different rules by reading some good literature. That just might give you a different point of view.

[LICC]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Why do you need to know?

> > > > >

> > > > > Because you might be able to avoid the distance loss.

> > > >

> > > > Why should there be a distance loss?

> > >

> > > Why not?

> > >

> > > (I wanted to join the choir of making silly questions...)

> >

> > Because it destroys the logical fairness of the game of golf, and creates an inconsistent application of scoring based on water or land.

>

> So... you are the one who holds the truth, is that it?

>

> I suggest you take some time and get yourself familiar with the origin of different rules by reading some good literature. That just might give you a different point of view.

 

No, it's just that I'm smarter than everyone ...

I have read on the origin of this rule. It's applicability to the general golfing public is misplaced. Do you have anything substantial to add to the discussion or do you just want to throw around some snarky remarks?

[Newby]

A summary of the history. I doubt that they'll change it again.

 

_Out of Bounds

The term out of bounds was first defined in 1886 Royal Isle of Wight, with a penalty of stroke and distance. R&A 1899 defined it as being outside the recognised boundaries of the course; penalty distance only.

 

1908 Redefined as all ground on which play is prohibited. Penalty distance only still, but may be changed to stroke and distance by local rule for both forms of play. Also, a ball out of bounds may be treated as lost by local rule, (i.e. lost hole in match play). This change was not adopted by the USGA until 1915, although the local rule adjustment was not incorporated.

 

1920 Stroke and distance, but now the penalty stroke may be remitted by local rule.

 

1947 USGA and 1950 R&A. Distance only, and no provision for change by a local rule.

 

1952 Stroke and distance.

 

1960 USGA experimentally changed to distance only.

 

1961 USGA back to stroke and distance. in addition, the USGA allowed an alternative procedure of stroke only - dropping a ball within two club lengths of where the ball went out of bounds on courses where the penalty of stroke and distance would be "unduly severe".

 

1964 USGA allowed a local rule to be adopted which allowed a stroke-only option if it was felt that stroke and distance would be "'unduly severe."

The player could drop a ball within two club-lengths of where the original ball crossed the out of bounds line. Reasonable evidence was required both that the ball had gone out of bounds and as to the point of crossing. In the absence of either, stroke and distance was the only option.

Rescinded in 1968 _

[LICC]

> @Newby said:

> A summary of the history. I doubt that they'll change it again.

>

> _Out of Bounds

> The term out of bounds was first defined in 1886 Royal Isle of Wight, with a penalty of stroke and distance. R&A 1899 defined it as being outside the recognised boundaries of the course; penalty distance only.

>

> 1908 Redefined as all ground on which play is prohibited. Penalty distance only still, but may be changed to stroke and distance by local rule for both forms of play. Also, a ball out of bounds may be treated as lost by local rule, (i.e. lost hole in match play). This change was not adopted by the USGA until 1915, although the local rule adjustment was not incorporated.

>

> 1920 Stroke and distance, but now the penalty stroke may be remitted by local rule.

>

> 1947 USGA and 1950 R&A. Distance only, and no provision for change by a local rule.

>

> 1952 Stroke and distance.

>

> 1960 USGA experimentally changed to distance only.

>

> 1961 USGA back to stroke and distance. in addition, the USGA allowed an alternative procedure of stroke only - dropping a ball within two club lengths of where the ball went out of bounds on courses where the penalty of stroke and distance would be "unduly severe".

>

> 1964 USGA allowed a local rule to be adopted which allowed a stroke-only option if it was felt that stroke and distance would be "'unduly severe."

> The player could drop a ball within two club-lengths of where the original ball crossed the out of bounds line. Reasonable evidence was required both that the ball had gone out of bounds and as to the point of crossing. In the absence of either, stroke and distance was the only option.

> Rescinded in 1968 _

 

They modified it this year to allow a drop on the fairway with a two-stroke penalty.

None of that explains how it makes any sense to treat a ball lost in water differently than a ball lost in an OB area of bushes and trees.

[Vindog]

> @LICC said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > Eliminate distance penalties. It makes no sense that if you hit a ball into water you drop at the point the ball went in and take a one-stroke penalty, but if you hit it into a bunch of trees and brush you have to effectively take a two-stroke penalty.

> > > >

> > > > How do you know where it is if you can't find it?

> > >

> > > Why do you need to know?

> >

> > Because you might be able to avoid the distance loss.

>

> Why should there be a distance loss?

 

Because your first ball is either lost or out of bounds. There is no end point thus the distance gained is cancelled. But the stroke should count.

 

As far as comparing OB to what formerly was known as water hazards you get into the argument of definitions. You can play out of red/yellow staked PAs (if you can find it) but not from outside the boundaries of the course. Why should you be able to play from off the property? In my opinion you shouldn't be able to.

[davep043]

As @Vindog says, the difference between a Penalty Area and OB is that a ball in the PA is known to be ON the property dedicated to playing golf, and is in play if found, the other is OFF of the hundreds of acres you have been allocated to play golf on. The penalty for the OB should be steeper, for completely missing those hundreds of acres. As for a lost ball, if you were to find it, it could take you 2 or 3 or more strokes to extricate it to a point where you can play toward the hole. Why should the penalty be smaller than the consequences of finding the shot?