Anyone else think that hitting it OB or lost balls is too penalizing?

[teddyironboy]

For OB is it really the golfers fault that the course ran out of real estate just because there's houses or a road in the way? For lost balls, we don't have a whole gallery helping us try to find the ball.

 

Seems like hitting 2 off the tee or treating it like a hazard and hitting 3 where it went out won't affect high level competition much. I mean that is plenty punishing enough. But it would definitely be beneficial to the average golfer.

[Newby]

On 1/16/2024 at 8:54 AM, teddyironboy said:

But it would definitely be beneficial to the average golfer.

It would certainly benefit their score. But would it be fair?

If you can't keep it on the defined course surely you deserve a significant penalty. You can still hit a ball in a penalty area.

A tennis player could lose the whole match by not keeping the ball on the court.

Edited February 15 by Newby

[Rocky Ball-boa]

Yeah, for an amateur there simply is no coming back from an OB drive. It's pretty much a guaranteed double, or worse, for most of us. It somehow feels wrong that one bad shot results in essentially two strokes lost.

An eye for an eye seems fair, so treat OB as a lateral and hit three from there would be ideal in my mind.

[ShortGolfer]

I think the rule makes sense.  If the ball leaves the course it may pose a hazard to people who aren't interested in golfing.

It is a good idea to minimize those interactions for the good of the game.

Most people walking around a golf course understand the risks, but someone driving by a course guided by their GPS may not have a clue that there is a golf course nearby.

Edited January 16 by ShortGolfer

[Newby]

59 minutes ago, Rocky Ball-boa said:

Yeah, for an amateur there simply is no coming back from an OB drive. It's pretty much a guaranteed double, or worse, for most of us. It somehow feels wrong that one bad shot results in essentially two strokes lost.

An eye for an eye seems fair, so treat OB as a lateral and hit three from there would be ideal in my mind.

So punching a guy in the face and knocking him over deserves the same penalty as punching a guy in the face and killing him?

[Halebopp]

How would it be beneficial to the average golfer?

 

The skills of keeping the ball on the course and findable after the stroke are at the very core of the game. Like Newby already suggested, practically every game penalises players for going off the course/court/pitch. In football you lose the possession of the ball, in tennis you lose the point etc. In golf you lose a stroke and need to try again. After all, golf is a game of moving a ball from the starting point to the finish with a succession of strokes.

 

Removing the penalty would also result in far more balls leaving the course, which could affect life off the course, whether it's via increasing the number of dangerous situations or property damage.

 

Also, if you hit a bad shot, you should need to deal with its consequences. If you shank a 40-metre pitch shot into the wilderness, you wouldn't need to even think about finding the ball in a bush or in between rocks and tree roots as you'd be much better off by simply playing again from the same spot. It'd make the game quite a bit more dull. Never mind the discrepancy between being let go for free if you lose your ball and being hit with a penalty if you find your ball unplayable. Remove that penalty and we're playing preferred lies on the whole course at all times. No thank you.

[Newby]

Incidentally, the USGA experimented with this in the early sixties and abandoned the idea.

 

As Tufts said 

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.

[Golfinfloridaafter40]

3 hours ago, teddyironboy said:

For OB is it really the golfers fault that the course ran out of real estate just because there's houses or a road in the way? For lost balls, we don't have a whole gallery helping us try to find the ball.

 

Seems like hitting 2 off the tee or treating it like a hazard and hitting 3 where it went out won't affect high level competition much. I mean that is plenty punishing enough. But it would definitely be beneficial to the average golfer.

No.

It is exactly the correct penalty versus the severity of the miss.  Gives you incentive to play within your abilities and learn some self-discipline.  OB and lost ball penalties are not only good for golf, but good in general for shaping minds to the benefits and consequences of their decisions

[ShortGolfer]

I know I'll never hit it as far as the average golfer at my age and size but my stroke consistency and ball tracking skills allow me to play "quick like a bunny" golf.

Which is great for social golf as I'm not wasting my time looking for the ball in the trees.  Better to take an extra stroke to get it back into the fairway instead of going for the pin.

[Hawkeye77]

3 hours ago, teddyironboy said:

For OB is it really the golfers fault that the course ran out of real estate just because there's houses or a road in the way? For lost balls, we don't have a whole gallery helping us try to find the ball.

 

Seems like hitting 2 off the tee or treating it like a hazard and hitting 3 where it went out won't affect high level competition much. I mean that is plenty punishing enough. But it would definitely be beneficial to the average golfer.

Same old, same old. 

 

Edited January 16 by Hawkeye77

[third-times-a-charm]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Same old, same old. 

 

Damn that AI was high af

[bluedot]

5 hours ago, teddyironboy said:

For OB is it really the golfers fault that the course ran out of real estate just because there's houses or a road in the way? For lost balls, we don't have a whole gallery helping us try to find the ball.

 

Seems like hitting 2 off the tee or treating it like a hazard and hitting 3 where it went out won't affect high level competition much. I mean that is plenty punishing enough. But it would definitely be beneficial to the average golfer.

Nobody likes the stroke and distance penalty, or even the 2 penalty stroke option that is now an option in casual play.

 

But there is a clear difference between hitting a ball that comes to rest in a penalty area vs a ball that LEAVES THE PROPERTY of the golf course, or is it so poorly that it can’t even be found.  Treating a ball that has left the property the same as a ball that is still on the property but in a penalty area isn’t fair, and the definition of “lost” means we don’t even know where the ball is, so that’s not comparable to a penalty area, either.

 

With all due respect, if you’re asking why OB or lost isn’t treated like a penalty area under The Rules, you’re probably asking the wrong question.  If you want to score better, learn how not to hit those shots; don’t look for a Rules change to salvage your round.

[Cliffy2020]

No

[GoGoErky]

Nope. Does it hurt peoples ego because of the higher score? Yup, but that’s golf. Keep the ball on the course 

[davep043]

Is it just me, or have I read this same discussion at least 3 times a year for the last 5 years?

[st1800e]

7 minutes ago, davep043 said:

Is it just me, or have I read this same discussion at least 3 times a year for the last 5 years?

Not just you…..

[bluedot]

33 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

Nope. Does it hurt peoples ego because of the higher score? Yup, but that’s golf. Keep the ball on the course 

It's the same thought process (or lack thereof) that leads to mulligans, raked putts, winter rules, moving the ball out of a divot, "line of flight" relief, the leaf rule, and on and on.  It's also the reason that there are FAR more vanity handicaps than true sandbaggers.

[Shilgy]

@teddyironboy

I think it would be better if we just got one ball on the first tee and were told to go play.

 

Lose it and go home!

[bluedot]

In all seriousness, it is SO much easier to play, and so much more productive in terms of scoring, if you just play fully under the Rules and pre-accept both the good and the bad outcomes that result.  Not getting caught up in the artificial concept of "fairness" is a good way to play, and REALLY critical if you ever try to play any sort of competitive golf. 

[third-times-a-charm]

Golf has lots of really really stupid and convoluted rules only senile old men would enjoy that should just be ignored by 99% of golfers, but this is not one of them.

 

The only commentary I have is that 2 strokes for OB and 1 for a hazard is pretty stupid. They should both just be 1 stroke and if you can hit an OB shot (like a clean backyard lie in a 'house yard' as used in the OP example) you should hit it without penalty like a hazard (if the homeowner obliges). And none of this should be local or situational.

 

 

Edited January 16 by third-times-a-charm

[rogolf]

10 minutes ago, third-times-a-charm said:

Golf has lots of really really stupid and convoluted rules only senile old men would enjoy that should just be ignored by 99% of golfers, but this is not one of them.

 

The only commentary I have is that 2 strokes for OB and 1 for a hazard is pretty stupid. They should both just be 1 stroke and if you can hit an OB shot (like a clean backyard lie in a 'house yard' as used in the OP example) you should hit it without penalty like a hazard (if the homeowner obliges). And none of this should be local or situational.

 

 

January blues - the "rules am stupid" crowd invades again! 🙃

[GoGoErky]

18 minutes ago, third-times-a-charm said:

Golf has lots of really really stupid and convoluted rules only senile old men would enjoy that should just be ignored by 99% of golfers, but this is not one of them.

 

The only commentary I have is that 2 strokes for OB and 1 for a hazard is pretty stupid. They should both just be 1 stroke and if you can hit an OB shot (like a clean backyard lie in a 'house yard' as used in the OP example) you should hit it without penalty like a hazard (if the homeowner obliges). And none of this should be local or situational.

 

 

One is for penalty for areas on the course and the other is for leaving the course. If you leave the course you should be penalized more than if you are still on the course.

 

It’s not always just some homeowners backyard but there are places where it could be across a road. 

[bluedot]

22 minutes ago, third-times-a-charm said:

Golf has lots of really really stupid and convoluted rules only senile old men would enjoy that should just be ignored by 99% of golfers, but this is not one of them.

 

The only commentary I have is that 2 strokes for OB and 1 for a hazard is pretty stupid. They should both just be 1 stroke and if you can hit an OB shot (like a clean backyard lie in a 'house yard' as used in the OP example) you should hit it without penalty like a hazard (if the homeowner obliges). And none of this should be local or situational.

 

 

To be clear, there is NOT a 1 stroke penalty for hitting a ball into a penalty area.  There IS a 1 stroke penalty for taking relief FROM a penalty area.  Don’t want that penalty? Don’t take relief…

 

The idea that the penalty should be the same for hitting a shot that is so bad that it LEAVES THE PROPERTY of the golf course (or can’t be found) as the penalty for hitting a ball into an integral part of the golf course has zero logic.   
 

Look, we’ve all hit balls OB, or that we couldn’t find, and a two stroke penalty for doing so hurts both score and ego, no doubt about it.  But wishing that the rules were the same when the situations are completely different isn’t the answer.  

[rzitup]

4 hours ago, Golfinfloridaafter40 said:

No.

It is exactly the correct penalty versus the severity of the miss. 

 

So, a player hits a push drive 230 down the right and it ends up 1 foot over the hazard line and in the water.

Next player hits a push drive 230 down the right and it ends up 1 foot over the OB line.  

 

Severity of both misses exactly the same.

One guy gets to drop his ball right there and hit it.

Next guy gets to moan and mumble, then drive back to the tee, slow down the group behind, and re-tee

 

The local rule that is now available should be made a regular USGA rule.  

[davep043]

4 minutes ago, rzitup said:

Severity of both misses exactly the same.

No, the Rules define the severity, OB is more severe than a Penalty Area.  The distance of the miss is the same, if both golfers are fools and aim in the same spot.  Smart golfers will aim further from a OB line than from a Penalty, because they KNOW the penalty is more severe for OB.    

[ChaosTheory]

It would be easier to treat OB the same as a penalty area than it would be to treat a lost ball like that.  I could support a change that would treat OB as a penalty area.  Lost ball could definitely be trickier.

 

[GoGoErky]

8 minutes ago, Snowman9000 said:

It would be easier to treat OB the same as a penalty area than it would be to treat a lost ball like that.  I could support a change that would treat OB as a penalty area.  Lost ball could definitely be trickier.

 

It should be the opposite if we want to keep it consistent. Stroke and distance for all penalties. 

[bluedot]

6 minutes ago, Snowman9000 said:

It would be easier to treat OB the same as a penalty area than it would be to treat a lost ball like that.  I could support a change that would treat OB as a penalty area.  Lost ball could definitely be trickier.

 

You can’t treat OB like a penalty area, if only because one integral option if your ball is in a penalty area is to play it as it lies, and another is to keep the point at which it entered the penalty area between you and the hole, take a drop and a penalty stroke, and play.  Neither of those options are available when you have left the property, so you’re really saying treat OB as if it is a lateral hazard minus the option of playing the ball as it lies.

 

Said another way, you’re advocating playing golf as if the entire world is red staked.

[ChaosTheory]

2 minutes ago, bluedot said:

You can’t treat OB like a penalty area, if only because one integral option if your ball is in a penalty area is to play it as it lies, and another is to keep the point at which it entered the penalty area between you and the hole, take a drop and a penalty stroke, and play.  Neither of those options are available when you have left the property, so you’re really saying treat OB as if it is a lateral hazard minus the option of playing the ball as it lies.

 

Said another way, you’re advocating playing golf as if the entire world is red staked.

 

Somewhat just semantics, but I wouldn't say I'm advocating it.  I said I could support it, and that's the best description of how I feel about it.  It could be a "white hazard" with its own specific options, I suppose.  The only option not available versus the red hazard would be play it as it lies.  I would not be shocked if something like this comes about at some point.

[bluedot]

32 minutes ago, rzitup said:

 

So, a player hits a push drive 230 down the right and it ends up 1 foot over the hazard line and in the water.

Next player hits a push drive 230 down the right and it ends up 1 foot over the OB line.  

 

Severity of both misses exactly the same.

One guy gets to drop his ball right there and hit it.

Next guy gets to moan and mumble, then drive back to the tee, slow down the group behind, and re-tee

 

The local rule that is now available should be made a regular USGA rule.  

You’ve constructed a situation in which the penalty for OB seems unduly harsh for the same shot, but it really isn’t.  One player’s ball is in an integral part of the golf course, while the other has left the property.  Those two shots just aren’t the same, and good players play away from OB areas.  
 

And you can turn this around, too.  The player whose ball is in a penalty area but still on the golf course might justifiably ask why a player whose ball has left the course entirely gets the same penalty as he does.

 

Think the penalty for OB is too harsh? Get better at golf, or have less attachment to your score.