What is the one rule you wish could be changed

[davep043]

If people plan their shots with the idea that OB is the same as a lateral hazard, they're morons. Just as good planning takes into account the difficulty of ensuing shots (short in a bunker v. over a green in the rough), good planning takes into account the severity of potential penalties (left OB stroke and distance v. right in a Red PA, lateral relief). A player's inability to plan properly is no reason to change the rules.

[CaseyC]

"... What if the player decided that he wanted a different ball than the one he teed off with? According to you, even if he genuinely believes his ball is playable, he can dishonestly say it is unplayable, move it back, and change his ball.."

 

Not according to the rules United States Golf AssociationOther Rules (e.g. Rule 18, Rule 24, and Rule 25-1) permit the player to substitute another ball only if the original ball is not immediately recoverable.

 

[Mr. Bean]

LICC, I am still waiting for your answer to my question(s). Check posts #894 and #613.

[davep043]

That's the old rule. Rule 14.3a says the player may use the original ball or any other ball when required to drop it.

[LICC]

No, there are not a number of legitimate reasons to deem a ball unplayable. A ball is unplayable if ... it cannot be played. Not because you just don't like the line of the next shot.

Let's say someone grabs the wrong ball out of his bag on a par-5, say a higher spin ball than he prefers, and fades it just off the fairway behind a tree. The lie is perfectly fine, stance, everything. But because it is behind a tree his only shot is a pitch-out. According to you, he can dishonestly say his ball is unplayable, move it back to get clear of the tree and have a good line up the fairway for his next shot, and change his ball! That none of this would bother you from the perspective of Rule 1.2's requirement to be honest in all aspects of play is mind-boggling.

[HatsForBats]

LICC Said: I find this argument to be overblown. If you are on the tee and see houses lining the right side of the fairway, you are going to be inclined to not hit the houses. Having two penalties for your shot that hits the houses instead of one is not going to make a person change his approach to try to avoid hitting the houses.

 

I Say: If you are on the tee and see O/B Stakes lining the right side of the fairway, you should be inclined to not hit towards the O/B area. Having two penalties for your shot that goes O/B instead of one IS not going to influence most players, in a competitive environment, change their approach to try to avoid hitting into the O/B.LICC Said: If you want a hole to have different levels of consequence for different areas that you can hit the ball, then design harder hazards in those areas. Don't rely on inconsistent application of penalties.

 

I say: If there were different levels of consequences, no matter how they are defined, LICC would complain about perceived inconsistencies. If you are OK with different levels of consequence then I don't see your issue with O/B being more of a penalty than other areas that are physically part of the course.

[KevCarter]

How is your call to the USGA going on this matter?

[CaseyC]

You are correct, my mistake. Forgot about that and apparently the USGA hasn't updated all the FAQs...

[LICC]

You seem to assume that most golfers have the ability to hit shots within planned windows. Most golfers will see trouble and plan to play near or away from the trouble. Except for probably the 0.1% who are good enough to target their drives in 10 yard windows, everyone else is picking a general direction toward a part of the fairway.

[davep043]

@LICC says:
A ball is unplayable if ... it cannot be played. Not because you just don't like the line of the next shot.
Please explain where in the rules you have found this requirement. Please also reconcile that with this, from the Interpretations:
"If the player decides that he or she cannot (or does not wish to) play the ball as it now lies, the player may again take unplayable ball relief, for an additional penalty, using any available relief option under Rule 19."
Note that if the player DOES NOT WISH to play the ball as it lies, the player may take unplayable ball relief. That seems a direct contradiction to your claim. Is that another rule you'd like to revise?
And for your hypothetical, if there was a specific requirement regarding a player's choice to invoke unplayable ball relief, I might have an issue. But it is specifically acceptable under the rules. All I expect from any opponent is that he play by the rules, not make up his own.

[LICC]

Ah, @Shilgy chimes in with zero substance or value ...

[Newby]

"A ball is unplayable if ... it cannot be played"

Under the Rules of Golf a ball is unplayable if the player deems it so.

 

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

In this case the USGA/R&A are the masters.

 

[HatsForBats]

Oh, I see players at the beginning of most every year that don't factor in the harsher penalty of O/B. They are mostly new to competitive golf (beer league) and many of them have played O/B as a 1-stroke penalty up until that point. The overwhelming majority of them change their behavior towards O/B after they get bit by it a few times. In my mind the more severe penalty is working as intended and as it should be.

 

I wish I had figures on the number of O/B shots this past year since the one league I played in went from years of playing O/B as a 1-stroke penalty with no distance loss to the new optional rule (replay for S&D or drop in fairway hitting 4 if it was their tee shot that went O/B). Beer is involved for many of the players and the season is short. It may take a few seasons to actually sink in for some of them. They are a fun bunch for sure though.

[LICC]

I would think of it more in the other direction. If there is a non-golf reason you can't play the ball (e.g, safety issue, legal issue), then you can't play it. If there is no external constraint, then you should be allowed to play it.

[davep043]

I said nothing about execution, I only mentioned planning the shot, because I was responding to your claim that players don't take the differing penalties into account when planning shots. The wilder a player is, the more erratic, the more important it is for him to PLAN avoid the most severe penalty, while accepting a greater risk of the smaller penalty. People who don't take the differing severity of hazards into account in their planning are foolish.

[CaseyC]

"...Most golfers will see trouble and plan to play near or away from the trouble..."

 

Most golf holes have more than one area of "trouble". Golfers evaluate the severity of the trouble (is missing on one side worse than the other), the likelihood of getting the ball into that trouble and plan accordingly.

 

 

[davep043]

oops

[LICC]

Under the Rules of Golf a ball is unplayable if the player honestly deems it so.

[davep043]

That's completely inconsistent. You're saying that there are legitimate reasons for treating a ball OB differently from a ball that is in a penalty area. I thought you've said that's illogical, the consequences should be the same.

[CaseyC]

And according to the rules of golf, the player can honestly do it anytime they want.

[LICC]

@davep043 I really thought you were better than this. I really did. I thought you were genuine about these things. But that last post was either really bush league or outright disingenuous, and I hope you weren't being disingenuous. The full reading of the interpretation is (bolding after the heading added):19.2/1 – No Guarantee Ball Will Be Playable After Taking Unplayable Ball ReliefWhen taking unplayable ball relief, a player must accept the outcome even if it is unfavourable, such as when a dropped ball comes to rest in its original location or in a bad lie in another location in the relief area:
Once the dropped ball comes to rest in the, the player has a new situation.If the player decides that he or she cannot (or does not wish to) play the ball as it now lies, the player may again take unplayable ball relief, for an additional penalty, using any available relief option under Rule 19.
Clearly, the bullets are being applied to a ball in its original location, which was unplayable, or in a new location that is a bad lie. The fact that they added the words "in a bad lie" supports my argument that a player shouldn't just declare a ball in a good lie as unplayable. The "does not wish to" language in the second bullet is constrained by the beginning of the interpretation, which limits the scope to a ball in its original unplayable position or in its newly dropped position "in a bad lie."

[LICC]

If you just make up your own rules, sure ...

[deadsolid...shank]

You conveniently left out one important fact. All that is done at the cost of a penalty stroke. Which we (you included) know very well. But omitting that important fact serves your narrative better.

[LICC]

How is it inconsistent? If you are unable to play a shot in a PA you can't play it. If you are unable to play a shot in an OB area, you can't play it.

[LICC]

Ok, so if you have a hole with a pond on one side and OB on the other, your preference is to force everyone to hit toward the pond, and that is somehow better for the game of golf.

[CaseyC]

Where is "honestly" in the rule? You just made that up.

 

From the USGA rules Purpose of Rule: Rule 19 covers your relief options for an unplayable ball. This allows you to choose which option to use – normally with one penalty stroke – to get out of a difficult situation anywhere on the course (except in a penalty area).

andYou are the only person who may decide to treat your ball as unplayable. Unplayable ball relief is allowed anywhere on the course, except in a penalty area

 

.

[LICC]

It doesn't make a difference because in one situation, my version, he takes a stroke on his pitch-out back to the fairway. In the dishonest version that people here defend, he takes a penalty stroke on his drop back. He is in the same position with his score in both scenarios, he has a clear shot up the fairway in both scenarios, and in the second he changed his ball.

[CaseyC]

Or lay up before the pond.

Should all penalty areas be removed, all bunkers? Anything that makes golf hard? LOL

[LICC]

That you consider that scenario as acceptable means I don't ever give credence to anything you post regarding honesty or integrity in playing the game.

[LICC]

Rule 1.2 applies to ALL aspects of play.