Why is there such contempt for The Rules?

[clevited]

5 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

Your are changing the premise of the game of play it as it lies. There has to be a reason to not play it that way. The reason has to be well defined for when you can and you can’t. Your definition basically eliminates the play it as it lies. It’s bad for the game. It eliminates some skills from the game and rewards a bad break. It’s not good for the game. From a pro level giving the best golfers in the chance to set the ball down and the ability to control spin even more makes the game easier for them and allows them a wider selection of clubs to hit with minimal risk.

This exceptions are usually due to safety concerns which has been explained in one or both of the threads.

 

 

 

We currently don't play it as it lies though.  There are tons of exceptions in the rules and not all are safety related.  One of which off the top of my head is casual water, another is ground under repair, another is on the green we allow lift clean and place as well as fixing any and all blemishes.  My definition eliminates play it as it lies to a degree on the fairway only since you are supposed to be rewarded for hitting the fairway as it is supposed to be the best grass to hit you next shot from.  Rough and beyond makes much more sense to be play it as it lies.  

 

I see inconsistencies everywhere, and even the arguement I see of "it takes skill to hit out of a divot" can be said about other exceptions in the game that currently nobody blinks an eye at.

[clevited]

24 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

 

You'll have to give some circumstances.  The overarching rule is quite simple, start at the teeing ground, put the ball in play, don't touch it until you have holed out, and count your strokes.  The exceptions to that rule and the specific circumstances to proceed under in those circumstances are where there can be confusion.  When people want to or must exercise exceptions is where they run afoul in my opinion.

 

 

The point of the thread isn't really why people don't play by The Rules, it is why they get angry and so (insert adverb) hurt when The Rules are applied to others, both in circumstances where it helps a player ("He is a cheater!") or where it penalizes him ("The Rules are unfair!").  I think it funny and was wanting to understand why people get all up in their feels when that happens.

 

Sure, I agree with you that the areas where there are exceptions, people run afoul. Your point about wanting to understand why people get mad in both positive and negative circumstances is where I come in.  I think it is because the rules are largely flawed (ill use that instead of dumb because that seems to trigger people in here).  As you know, some of these outrage instances reoccurring over the years have undoubtedly helped motivate the ruling bodies to update or change some rules and I think they will continue to do so.  Over the years the rules have become messy and cleaning them up is what I would like to see.  There will still be some outrage, but there are plenty of rules that are confusing, contradictory, and in my opinion (and many others) poorly thought out that can be addressed.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, clevited said:

I can see the handful of you in here that are getting seemingly emotionally triggered by a dissenting voice and are completely void of any ability to see the other side.

 

The only person I've seen being triggered and reacting emotionally wrote the quoted text above. The latter bit about "void of any ability to see the other side" also applies almost exclusively to the quoted user.

 

3 hours ago, clevited said:

You guys need to open your eyes and understand that I am not even close to the only one that thinks the rules of golf are confusing, too many, and contradictory in many circumstances.

 

It doesn't mean you're "right." Or that you could write better rules. Did you skip the post before where I showed you that EVERY game (I gave the four largest sports leagues here in the U.S.) have hundreds of pages of Rules? And they play on relatively uniform surfaces/fields.

 

3 hours ago, clevited said:

There are rules that are petty and not needed as well in many cases (keep in mind, I am not just talking tour golf, I am talking golf at large which is where most of this issue occurs).

 

This is not a topic for dress code topics or whatever, and I'd ask you to name a Rule of Golf that's "petty."

 

3 hours ago, clevited said:

I have never stepped into a thread with as many closed minded individuals not willing to have a real conversation about something and look at it at a different angle.  You guys really need to grow up, step out of your comfort zone and think about something outside of your bubble.  I am in here describing why there is contempt for the rules, you are dissing that effort with your holier than thou attitudes.

 

Read that back to yourself.

 

2 hours ago, clevited said:

I want honest conversation and as soon as I stepped in here with a point of view you all don't agree with, you immediately mocked, put down and try to rail road me out of here.

 

Pointing out where you are literally wrong is not "mocking" you.

 

2 hours ago, clevited said:

When people do that, it just makes me want to be in here more.

 

Almost the definition of a troll.

 

2 hours ago, clevited said:

hmmmm maybe that guy was right, maybe this should be improved.

 

Go ahead and find a rule that you think is "petty" or something and improve it. Then we can comment on that, and most likely, explain WHY the rule is the way it is NOW, after a hundred plus years of refinement.

 

2 hours ago, clevited said:

I mean, that is right up there with correcting someone's grammar or spelling online.

 

Words matter, buddy. Especially in the "Rules of Golf" forum.

 

2 hours ago, clevited said:

That means they need work if even myself

 

Others have learned them without too much issue. Arguing that the Rules of Golf are too complicated because you can't seem to learn them is a big, big stretch.

 

2 hours ago, clevited said:

Lets have an honest discussion here.  Stop nitpicking my "knowledge" and play devils advocate if you must in order to get through to your heads the real problems the rules have.  

 

Almost everyone except you IS trying to have that kind of discussion.

 

1 hour ago, clevited said:

I have already done this in the other thread.  If you just allow for any blemish, real or not that is under the ball when in the fairway to merit a free drop a couple inches behind (you can even say no cleaning of the ball may be done, you can even say the ball must be carefully placed 2 inches or something behind the original resting spot to eliminate any mud from being taken off during drop if you want).

 

@clevited: "The Rules of Golf are too complicated!"

Also @clevited: "I'm going to make up a rule that is unlike almost any other rule in how it handles lifting, cleaning, and replacing or dropping a ball."

 

1 hour ago, clevited said:

These are discussions worth having.

 

And the "divots in the fairway" thing has been discussed for decades, at least, and yet… there are very, very good reasons why that rule hasn't been implemented.

 

You're acting like you're the first person to argue this side of things. I've been involved in likely over a hundred of these "divots are GUR" discussions.

 

My advice to you: stop playing the martyr, stop with the "always/never/everyone/nobody" type reaches, stop with the allegations… and just discuss the actual topic, and listen to (read) what other people are saying to you.

[smashdn]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

My definition eliminates play it as it lies to a degree on the fairway only since you are supposed to be rewarded for hitting the fairway as it is supposed to be the best grass to hit you next shot from. 

 

Why is the fairway always seen as the best or "right" place to play from?

 

@iacas what does your work and sort of the premise on Decade and other types of strategies tell us about rough versus fairway in terms of distance?

[iacas]

22 minutes ago, smashdn said:

@iacas what does your work and sort of the premise on Decade and other types of strategies tell us about rough versus fairway in terms of distance?

 

On the PGA Tour, it's about a 40-80 yard disadvantage (i.e. Tour players average 2.98 from 160 in the fairway and 2.96 from 80 yards in the rough, 3.32 from 220 fairway, 3.31 180 rough).

 

For typical golfers, though, situations are different:

• They don't strike the ball as well.
• Their rough isn't as penal.
• They appreciate (sometimes) the cushion beneath the ball that rough can provide.
• They're not looking to "control spin" as much, and often the slight flier can be beneficial as they typically under-club anyway. 😄

For most golfers, though, as long as they have a distance that is manageable, and a relatively clear line to the green, they score about the same. The rough vs. the fairway is far, far less important.

 

We talk about in our GamePlanning stuff avoiding penalty shots and "dark" areas of the course in our "Shades of Grey" system, so… the rough for many is a very light shade of grey. If there's a pond left, the best aim line for many golfers is the right edge of the fairway/rough, which means maybe half of their tee shots should miss the fairway and wind up right. And that's okay.

 

I've played in scrambles where guys PUT their ball in the rough if we're close enough.

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, clevited said:

 

Sure, I agree with you that the areas where there are exceptions, people run afoul. Your point about wanting to understand why people get mad in both positive and negative circumstances is where I come in.  I think it is because the rules are largely flawed (ill use that instead of dumb because that seems to trigger people in here).  As you know, some of these outrage instances reoccurring over the years have undoubtedly helped motivate the ruling bodies to update or change some rules and I think they will continue to do so.  Over the years the rules have become messy and cleaning them up is what I would like to see.  There will still be some outrage, but there are plenty of rules that are confusing, contradictory, and in my opinion (and many others) poorly thought out that can be addressed.

casual water has a definition in the rulebook.

lcp or what’s called preferred lies is an MLR. It’s layed out in the rulebook when and what it’s used for, abnormal conditions throughout the course.

 

the green is a separate area of the course than the fairway and rough, just like there are rules specifically ties to the tee box or teeing ground.

 

As has been repeated there needs to be a definition of what a divot is, when it’s not a divot anymore and so on.

 

You can’t just say well this happens in X area on the course it should be allowed in Y area. Preferred lies is for the fairway and not the rough so someone that is just off the fairway when lcp is in use doesn’t get the benefit of the rule.

 

There are good and bad breaks in golf. That the nature of the game. 

Edited July 28, 2023 by GoGoErky

[clevited]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

 

The only person I've seen being triggered and reacting emotionally wrote the quoted text above. The latter bit about "void of any ability to see the other side" also applies almost exclusively to the quoted user.

 

 

It doesn't mean you're "right." Or that you could write better rules. Did you skip the post before where I showed you that EVERY game (I gave the four largest sports leagues here in the U.S.) have hundreds of pages of Rules? And they play on relatively uniform surfaces/fields.

 

 

This is not a topic for dress code topics or whatever, and I'd ask you to name a Rule of Golf that's "petty."

 

 

Read that back to yourself.

 

 

Pointing out where you are literally wrong is not "mocking" you.

 

 

Almost the definition of a troll.

 

 

Go ahead and find a rule that you think is "petty" or something and improve it. Then we can comment on that, and most likely, explain WHY the rule is the way it is NOW, after a hundred plus years of refinement.

 

 

Words matter, buddy. Especially in the "Rules of Golf" forum.

 

 

Others have learned them without too much issue. Arguing that the Rules of Golf are too complicated because you can't seem to learn them is a big, big stretch.

 

 

Almost everyone except you IS trying to have that kind of discussion.

 

 

@clevited: "The Rules of Golf are too complicated!"

Also @clevited: "I'm going to make up a rule that is unlike almost any other rule in how it handles lifting, cleaning, and replacing or dropping a ball."

 

 

And the "divots in the fairway" thing has been discussed for decades, at least, and yet… there are very, very good reasons why that rule hasn't been implemented.

 

You're acting like you're the first person to argue this side of things. I've been involved in likely over a hundred of these "divots are GUR" discussions.

 

My advice to you: stop playing the martyr, stop with the "always/never/everyone/nobody" type reaches, stop with the allegations… and just discuss the actual topic, and listen to (read) what other people are saying to you.

 

Grow up.  I was having a good discussion with two people until you posted this garbage.  Just stay out of it if you can't stop being so upset about me disagreeing with you and calling you out for your crap.

[clevited]

27 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

casual water has a definition in the rulebook.

lcp or what’s called preferred lies is an MLR. It’s layed out in the rulebook when and what it’s used for, abnormal conditions throughout the course.

 

the green is a separate area of the course than the fairway and rough, just like there are rules specifically ties to the tee box or teeing ground.

 

As has been repeated there needs to be a definition of what a divot is, when it’s not a divot anymore and so on.

 

You can’t just say well this happens in X area on the course it should be allowed in Y area. Preferred lies is for the fairway and not the rough so someone that is just off the fairway when lcp is in use doesn’t get the benefit of the rule.

 

There are good and bad breaks in golf. That the nature of the game. 

 

I can't help but feel like you are still stuck in a mentality that is, "the current rules are ok with me because they are the current rules" and you are being incredibly conservative in that manner which I understand and can appreciate.  I think however, the rules have been amended many times and I think they need to be further amended to clean them up, make them more concise and make them make more sense.  It makes sense to me for example, that divots SHOULD be repaired and a player should have a reasonable expectation that they are.  They therefore are not a normal condition of the fairway.  The fairway is kept short and well maintained for a very good reason.  It gives you an almost perfect tight lie to hit from.  I already defined how to handle deciding when a divot is or is not a divot by making the rule very loose.  It isn't like you can fluff a lie on the fairway and gain a huge advantage.  You are simply removing it from an unrepresentative or damaged lie to a representative and effectively undamaged lie.  Two inches back is all it takes.  I am saying a rule change to allow this would be common sense and to be honest, I would not be surprised whatsoever if the RBs make it happen in the near future. 

 

Were you against the green rule change where you can now pretty much fix everything or was that also a play it as it lies issue that you were against changing?  Rules can and should be examined and amended as they become clear they are problems.  I am advocating for rule updates and changes for the same reason I am against any ball roll back.  I am a big fan of logic and common sense.  The rules need simplifying, and fixing to be more logical and more intuitive to the average golfer.  I think this will help grow the game, and grow the population of serious golfers beyond what it is today thus increasing future participation with future generations.  

[Mr. Bean]

I cannot believe this is still going on...

 

Leave the troll in his cave.

[iacas]

52 minutes ago, clevited said:

Grow up.  I was having a good discussion with two people until you posted this garbage.  Just stay out of it if you can't stop being so upset about me disagreeing with you and calling you out for your crap.

 

I'm not upset about it in the slightest. You seem to be, though.

 

You also haven't "called me out" for anything. I don't know if you're confusing me with someone else or if you're just generally confused.

 

You've offered nothing of substance, and when you try, you contradict yourself or demonstrate a very, very shallow understanding of not only the Rules of Golf but of their history, their implications and tie-ins to other rules, etc.

 

Have a great day.

[clevited]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

I cannot believe this is still going on...

 

Leave the troll in his cave.

 

Thank you for your comment.  I suggest you stay out of this conversation if you can't be an adult.

[clevited]

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

I'm not upset about it in the slightest. You seem to be, though.

 

You also haven't "called me out" for anything. I don't know if you're confusing me with someone else or if you're just generally confused.

 

You've offered nothing of substance, and when you try, you contradict yourself or demonstrate a very, very shallow understanding of not only the Rules of Golf but of their history, their implications and tie-ins to other rules, etc.

 

Have a great day.

 

[GoGoErky]

43 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I can't help but feel like you are still stuck in a mentality that is, "the current rules are ok with me because they are the current rules" and you are being incredibly conservative in that manner which I understand and can appreciate.  I think however, the rules have been amended many times and I think they need to be further amended to clean them up, make them more concise and make them make more sense.  It makes sense to me for example, that divots SHOULD be repaired and a player should have a reasonable expectation that they are.  They therefore are not a normal condition of the fairway.  The fairway is kept short and well maintained for a very good reason.  It gives you an almost perfect tight lie to hit from.  I already defined how to handle deciding when a divot is or is not a divot by making the rule very loose.  It isn't like you can fluff a lie on the fairway and gain a huge advantage.  You are simply removing it from an unrepresentative or damaged lie to a representative and effectively undamaged lie.  Two inches back is all it takes.  I am saying a rule change to allow this would be common sense and to be honest, I would not be surprised whatsoever if the RBs make it happen in the near future. 

 

Were you against the green rule change where you can now pretty much fix everything or was that also a play it as it lies issue that you were against changing?  Rules can and should be examined and amended as they become clear they are problems.  I am advocating for rule updates and changes for the same reason I am against any ball roll back.  I am a big fan of logic and common sense.  The rules need simplifying, and fixing to be more logical and more intuitive to the average golfer.  I think this will help grow the game, and grow the population of serious golfers beyond what it is today thus increasing future participation with future generations.  

It’s not about being stuck in that mentality. There has to be a reason to change how the game is played and then a clear definition of how that change is done. If someone was able to clearly define what a divot is, when it’s not longer a divot and it’s clear to everyone then great let’s get relief from a divot, but that hasn’t been done for the decades of discussion about the subject.

 

The rules are pretty simple and a lot easier than other sports. Trying teaching the rule of football to someone who never watched it. Try teaching hockey rules to someone unfamiliar with the sport. There are a lot more rules than golf.

 

The rules were actually modified and some simplified a few years ago.

 

 But also I’m not one to think people

are entitled to a perfect lies including in the fairway. If Im playing a course with sloping fairways and I end up not getting an even lie im not entitled to a flat lie because im in the fairway. I also don’t expect to go put my ball back in a bad spot after a good break.

 

I don’t get why anyone things they are entitled the perfect conditions 

[clevited]

3 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

It’s not about being stuck in that mentality. There has to be a reason to change how the game is played and then a clear definition of how that change is done. If someone was able to clearly define what a divot is, when it’s not longer a divot and it’s clear to everyone then great let’s get relief from a divot, but that hasn’t been done for the decades of discussion about the subject.

 

The rules are pretty simple and a lot easier than other sports. Trying teaching the rule of football to someone who never watched it. Try teaching hockey rules to someone unfamiliar with the sport. There are a lot more rules than golf.

 

The rules were actually modified and some simplified a few years ago.

 

 But also I’m not one to think people

are entitled to a perfect lies including in the fairway. If Im playing a course with sloping fairways and I end up not getting an even lie im not entitled to a flat lie because im in the fairway. I also don’t expect to go put my ball back in a bad spot after a good break.

 

I don’t get why anyone things they are entitled the perfect conditions 

 

I understand this all.  What i am trying to say and nobody seems to be quite understanding themselves is that the rules have been modified to allow exceptions. We no longer play it as it lies, we haven't forever.  I know that the rules were relatively recently updated and largely improved but I am saying they need to continue this and the divot issue is one to add.  I am saying it doesn't need to be defined exactly because then that can lead to more confusion.  I don't want more confusion I want less.  They can add a rule or amend a current rule to reflect such a thing.  I also don't agree with moving your ball to a flat lie.  That is outside the scope of what this rule is about.  The fairway was damaged.  It should have been repaired.  It was not.  A player should not have to hit out of a divot as a result of a great shot but a player expects to have to hit off of whatever angle they have and you can argue their shot wasn't that great if they end up in an extreme angled lie.  

 

We are going to have to agree to disagree.  I see this example as being absolutely no different than the RBs relaxing the fixing of imperfections on greens.  If they are willing to make an update like that, then this is one that to me is completely common sense. 

 

If the game were still truly "play it as it lies" then I would be 100% against making any exceptions that allow free drops because then it would make no logical sense to do so.

[Newby]

@clevited

I can't find your response to these 'contradictions'. Or did you not reply?

 

 

@clevited

Practice swing in hazard vs practice swing in bunker or waste areas.

 

Stroke and distance for OB (which is an unplayable hazard) vs stroke only for water hazard (which are almost always unplayable hazards).

 

Just where is the contradiction? What can or can't you do in a 'hazard' (whatever that is) that you can or can't in a bunker or waste area (whatever that is)?

 

A prime objective of the game is to play on a course. OB is not on the course. You can't play chess with pieces that are not on the board or tennis if the ball is out of the court.

[clevited]

6 minutes ago, Newby said:

@clevited

I can't find your response to these 'contradictions'. Or did you not reply?

 

 

@clevited

Practice swing in hazard vs practice swing in bunker or waste areas.

 

Stroke and distance for OB (which is an unplayable hazard) vs stroke only for water hazard (which are almost always unplayable hazards).

 

Just where is the contradiction? What can or can't you do in a 'hazard' (whatever that is) that you can or can't in a bunker or waste area (whatever that is)?

 

A prime objective of the game is to play on a course. OB is not on the course. You can't play chess with pieces that are not on the board or tennis if the ball is out of the court.

 

-Jack Nicklaus himself has mentioned the OB rule being too harsh, I am in good company and I like his reasoning.  I think OB should be treated the same as any PENALTY AREA.  

-What I was trying to get at is there are circumstances where you can take a practice swing and strike the ground and there are circumstances where you can not.  I think these need to be unified.  I think you should be able to take a practice swing in a bunker and strike the sand accidentally or purposely (while your ball is in it of course and as long as you aren't Patrick Reeding it.) 

[Newby]

6 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

The fairway was damaged.  It should have been repaired.  It was not.  A player should not have to hit out of a divot as a result of a great shot but a player expects to have to hit off of whatever angle they have and you can argue their shot wasn't that great if they end up in an extreme angled lie.  

 

Would you suggest that a player should be allowed to rake a bunker or move their ball if an unraked or badly raked area affected their lie?

[clevited]

Just now, Newby said:

Would you suggest that a player should be allowed to rake a bunker or move their ball if an unraked or badly raked area affected their lie?

 

Potentially yes, but there are problems with that right?  Like what do you do if you had a fried egg in a footprint?  I am for simplifying and unifying and making more sense, not creating more confusion.  If we get into the weeds on this, a bunker is like rough, it isn't the place you should be and is a show of a poor shot most of the time.  To me, anything could go in a bunker and that would make sense as far as lie is concerned.  When it comes to practice swings touching ground however, I don't find it makes logical sense not to allow them in a bunker.

[Nels55]

27 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

It’s not about being stuck in that mentality. There has to be a reason to change how the game is played and then a clear definition of how that change is done. If someone was able to clearly define what a divot is, when it’s not longer a divot and it’s clear to everyone then great let’s get relief from a divot, but that hasn’t been done for the decades of discussion about the subject.

 

The rules are pretty simple and a lot easier than other sports. Trying teaching the rule of football to someone who never watched it. Try teaching hockey rules to someone unfamiliar with the sport. There are a lot more rules than golf.

 

The rules were actually modified and some simplified a few years ago.

 

 But also I’m not one to think people

are entitled to a perfect lies including in the fairway. If Im playing a course with sloping fairways and I end up not getting an even lie im not entitled to a flat lie because im in the fairway. I also don’t expect to go put my ball back in a bad spot after a good break.

 

I don’t get why anyone things they are entitled the perfect conditions 

Agreed, LOL here is my lie in the center of the third fairway yesterday:

Hey, it was a rough winter and I played this hole a few times when most of it was under water.  This area should be marked as GUR but who's going to do that?  Would take a lot of paint to do every possible GUR on our course once a week that's for sure.  At any rate I don't mind playing out of a bad lie in the fairway every now and then and when my ball does end up in a divot I see it as an opportunity to make a skilled shot.  Sometimes I even pull it off!

[Mr. Bean]

27 minutes ago, clevited said:

If the game were still truly "play it as it lies" then I would be 100% against making any exceptions that allow free drops because then it would make no logical sense to do so.

 

I promised not to post any more but this post of yours is simply too much...

 

The reason Rules of Golf are so covering (someone might say complex) is that this game is being played outdoors on a course with much more that just nature. Irrigations systems, benches, teeing areas supported by large rocks, ponds surrounded by logs, paths covered with tarmac or gravel, sign posts, etc. And even nature has to be taken into account, such as ant hills, bird nests, holes made by a rabbit, and so on. And how are you supposed to "play as it lies" when your ball is two meters under water??

 

Play it as it lies is a principle but it is not all of it. There are quite a few situations where playing a ball as it lies is simply unfair. So Rules have been made to adjust those situation to be, well, at least reasonably fair.

 

Oh, and one more thing. Even though Rules are there to make game more fair it does not mean golf is fair. Rules just make things equitable for all of us, i.e. same situations are dealt with alike, formerly called "equity". That is why you do not get a free relief from a divot hole, not now and not in the future.

[clevited]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

I promised not to post any more but this post of yours is simply too much...

 

The reason Rules of Golf are so covering (someone might say complex) is that this game is being played outdoors on a course with much more that just nature. Irrigations systems, benches, teeing areas supported by large rocks, ponds surrounded by logs, paths covered with tarmac or gravel, sign posts, etc. And even nature has to be taken into account, such as ant hills, bird nests, holes made by a rabbit, and so on. And how are you supposed to "play as it lies" when your ball is two meters under water??

 

Play it as it lies is a principle but it is not all of it. There are quite a few situations where playing a ball as it lies is simply unfair. So Rules have been made to adjust those situation to be, well, at least reasonably fair.

 

Oh, and one more thing. Even though Rules are there to make game more fair it does not mean golf is fair. Rules just make things equitable for all of us, i.e. same situations are dealt with alike, formerly called "equity". That is why you do not get a free relief from a divot hole, not now and not in the future.

 

Thanks for finally conversing like an adult!  I hope more of you do so.

 

You seem to ignore the fact that what is fair is completely subjective.  If you really believe in play it as it lies, then you should never have "free" relief from anything.  Being as there are a great many exceptions, all made with a subjective interpretation of what is fair, I don't see why desiring more of this fairness is wrong.  Yes, you can go to far but I would suggest it already has.  What I have been essentially describing with regards to divots is basically clean lift and place.  I don't see good reason to not be able to do that on a fairway when there are other similar exceptions like casual water and GUR.  As was described in the post above, he landed in an area that should be GUR but not every course is going to run around and mark all as such, and there in lies the inconsistency and contradiction.  It SHOULD be ground under repair but is not marked. This is the kind of stuff that I loathe when it comes to rules.  All you would have to do is add a rule that boils down to essentially lift clean and place on the short grass only.

 

I think it makes sense to do so, and I would be absolutely willing to negotiate and discuss how that would play out, and whether cleaning should be allowed etc if such a rule were to be humored.   

[iacas]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

 

I'm not sure how you can post stuff like this while telling others to "grow up" or "be an adult."

 

50 minutes ago, clevited said:

We no longer play it as it lies, we haven't forever.

 

That doesn't mean we should move even further from doing it as much as possible. Once we put a ball in play, we really DO play it as it lies unless:

• We encounter something abnormal.
• We incur a penalty type situation.
• We're on the putting green, where special provisions are allowed.

Divots on the course are not abnormal, it's not a penalty situation, and unlike "the putting green," "the fairway" is not a defined area of the course.

 

And, as has been pointed out likely millions of times at this point, until someone can define a "divot hole" so that everyone can apply it uniformly… it's not a discussion worth having.

 

 

50 minutes ago, clevited said:

I know that the rules were relatively recently updated and largely improved but I am saying they need to continue this and the divot issue is one to add.

 

The divot issue is not one to add.

 

50 minutes ago, clevited said:

I am saying it doesn't need to be defined exactly because then that can lead to more confusion.  I don't want more confusion I want less.

 

An exact definition would lead to less confusion than a loose definition.

 

50 minutes ago, clevited said:

A player should not have to hit out of a divot as a result of a great shot

 

Why? That's golf (and life, sometimes). Neither are always perfectly "fair." A friend of mine bounced a ball off a passing cart for an eagle. The cart was about 40 yards right of the hole and likely stopped the ball from being lost. Should he have taken a bogey or double?

 

35 minutes ago, clevited said:

-Jack Nicklaus himself has mentioned the OB rule being too harsh, I am in good company and I like his reasoning.  I think OB should be treated the same as any PENALTY AREA.

 

I don't know why you have a problem with different levels of penalty. Don't want to incur a stroke-and-distance penalty? Keep your ball on the course. Plus, if OB was the same as a penalty area, you can take a bunch of divots out of Mr. Smith's yard, because you can play from a PA.

 

45 minutes ago, clevited said:

-What I was trying to get at is there are circumstances where you can take a practice swing and strike the ground and there are circumstances where you can not.  I think these need to be unified.  I think you should be able to take a practice swing in a bunker and strike the sand accidentally or purposely (while your ball is in it of course and as long as you aren't Patrick Reeding it.) 

 

It's really not very confusing right now.

[clevited]

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

I'm not sure how you can post stuff like this while telling others to "grow up" or "be an adult."

 

 

That doesn't mean we should move even further from doing it as much as possible. Once we put a ball in play, we really DO play it as it lies unless:

• We encounter something abnormal.
• We incur a penalty type situation.
• We're on the putting green, where special provisions are allowed.

Divots on the course are not abnormal, it's not a penalty situation, and unlike "the putting green," "the fairway" is not a defined area of the course.

 

And, as has been pointed out likely millions of times at this point, until someone can define a "divot hole" so that everyone can apply it uniformly… it's not a discussion worth having.

 

 

 

The divot issue is not one to add.

 

 

An exact definition would lead to less confusion than a loose definition.

 

 

Why? That's golf (and life, sometimes). Neither are always perfectly "fair." A friend of mine bounced a ball off a passing cart for an eagle. The cart was about 40 yards right of the hole and likely stopped the ball from being lost. Should he have taken a bogey or double?

 

 

I don't know why you have a problem with different levels of penalty. Don't want to incur a stroke-and-distance penalty? Keep your ball on the course. Plus, if OB was the same as a penalty area, you can take a bunch of divots out of Mr. Smith's yard, because you can play from a PA.

 

 

It's really not very confusing right now.

 

1. I treat others the way they treat me but usually I pay it back with interest.

2. The fairway should become a defined area then.

3. Unfilled divots are abnormal imo.  The fairway I think should be treated as prime real-estate from which to hit your shots from.  It should be rewarded and that reward should be a reasonably consistent example of fairway turf to hit from. 

4. Divot hole does not need to be defined if you allow any blemish, booger, hole, turd, scratch, leaf, or what have you that lies underneath the ball be worthy of relief of a few inches.

5. I don't think an exact definition would lead to less confusion, if anything, it would lead to more than just saying you can move your ball X inches back on the fairway if you subjectively feel there is a defect on the surface that would hinder your shot compared to a normal fairway turf lie.

6. I understand that life and golf are not fair, but in golf we already allow for many things to get relief from that a "play it as it lies" purist would take issue with.

7.  The green had recent rule changes to allow the repair of almost anything and everything when that was not the case prior.  One can say that should not have happened either and that golf just isn't fair.

8. I have a problem with OB having stroke plus distance because it doesn't make sense.  Hazards, or penalty areas as they are now called are areas that are meant to punish bad shots and when you go in one, you get punished appropriately.  OB is the same thing only you can't play it.  That should be punishment enough when combined with a stroke penalty for a drop say within two club lengths of where it crossed to OB line.  2 stroke MLR is too harsh as is stroke and distance.  

9. Rules are very confusing as is evident by the dozens of videos about them you can find online.

 

[iacas]

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

1. I treat others the way they treat me but usually I pay it back with interest.

 

I still think you're confusing me with someone else, but whatever man. You seem to take disagreement with reason(s) as a personal attack or "childish" or something, but you're the one calling people names and telling them to "grow up" and "not get upset" and stuff.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

2. The fairway should become a defined area then.

 

If the only purpose is to push forth this rule, then no, it shouldn't.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

3. Unfilled divots are abnormal imo.

 

They're not. One can expect to find divot holes on a golf course. One can expect to find uneven lies, better and worse areas of rough, trees, etc.

 

And even if you replace them, the mower often rips them right back out.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

The fairway I think should be treated as prime real-estate from which to hit your shots from. It should be rewarded and that reward should be a reasonably consistent example of fairway turf to hit from.

 

Most of the time, it is. I've been in one divot hole in the past two years.

 

"You should be punished if you hit it in the rough, so if you hit a tree and it kicks your ball back into the fairway, you should have to put it back in the rough."

 

Golf isn't always fair. Sometimes you get a good break or a bad break. You think there are too many rules and they're too complicated now, but you want to ADD to the rules (touching and moving your ball more than we do now). No thank you.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

4. Divot hole does not need to be defined if you allow any blemish, booger, hole, turd, scratch, leaf, or what have you that lies underneath the ball be worthy of relief of a few inches.

 

I don't. Because you may as well call it lift, clean, and place because then everyone will be finding "blemishes" under their ball. And it won't be a matter of a few inches, because… you'd have to find a "blemish-free" area to take relief, and, wow, look at Gary's luck… the nearest blemish-free area is ten yards away, just beyond where that tree is no longer blocking his approach shot. What luck for Gary!

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

5. I don't think an exact definition would lead to less confusion, if anything, it would lead to more than just saying you can move your ball X inches back on the fairway if you subjectively feel there is a defect on the surface that would hinder your shot compared to a normal fairway turf lie.

 

So now we have to measure not only a "club length" (pretty standard, everyone has the tools to do it) but also some number of inches?

 

Your proposed rule has a lot of issues.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

6. I understand that life and golf are not fair, but in golf we already allow for many things to get relief from that a "play it as it lies" purist would take issue with.

 

It's a little out of date because it hasn't been updated with the new rules numbers or anything, but you should really read the Tufts pamphlet: The Principles Behind the Rules of Golf.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

7.  The green had recent rule changes to allow the repair of almost anything and everything when that was not the case prior.  One can say that should not have happened either and that golf just isn't fair.

 

The putting green isn't the fairway, and for quite awhile you've been able to repair some damage to the putting green. In the interests of speeding up play and because the putting green is generally played by rolling your ball, they allowed you to repair all damage. You still play your ball from the same location that you hit it - you don't generally get to move your ball unless temporary water or something interferes with your ability to putt the ball toward the hole, similar to how it would be in the fairway. You don't often get to MOVE your ball on the putting green, like you're suggesting we should be able to do in the fairway.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

8. I have a problem with OB having stroke plus distance because it doesn't make sense.

 

It makes sense. You literally failed to keep your ball on the golf course. OB is stroke-and-distance because you really aren't allowed to advance your ball by any means other than playing a stroke. A PA is still on the course, and you can play from it most of the time (there are no play zones). You can't play from OB; it may be someone's yard or a parking lot or something.

 

If you want to play the MLR for OB/lost balls, it'll cost you two strokes, but you're welcome to do that - a concession to regular daily play and pace of play.

 

It makes sense. It's just a more severe penalty… as it should be, because again, you failed to keep your golf ball on the course. Rule 1 says "Golf is played in a round of 18 (or fewer) holes on a course by striking a ball with a club." It does not say "off the course." You have to stay ON the course.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

OB is the same thing only you can't play it.

 

It is not the same. It is literally not ON the course.

 

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

9. Rules are very confusing as is evident by the dozens of videos about them you can find online.

 

They're clearly more confusing to some people than others.

[SheriffBooth]

We're closing this thread since it's so far off the rails - can't have two or three posters just going back and forth with each other.  We'll look into whether discipline is needed.

 

/thread