• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
lville lefty

Out-of-Bounds Rule Change Discussion

154 posts in this topic

Why is the penalty for hitting your ball out-of-bounds (stroke and distance) more severe than the penalty for hitting your ball into a lateral hazard (one-stroke penalty)?

At my home course, #8 is marked  white down the right side and red down the left side.  I fully understand the rules and the difference between white and red stakes. The land to the right side of this hole is not owned by the golf course.  My question is posed to help gain an understanding of why the rules were written to penalize the out-of-bounds ball to the right side more severely than the lateral hazard ball to the left in this example.

It would certainly speed play and make the game a little more enjoyable if the rules were amended to allow amateur golfers to take a drop at the point of entry (or should I say exit) on a ball hit out-of-bounds with a one-shot penalty rather than stroke and distance which is essentially a two-shot penalty.  No expectation this post will cause a rules change but any thoughts on why the difference in red versus white are appreciated.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

I guess I would explain it as being "out of bounds" you are off the property of the course and can not play the ball from that place.  However, the lateral hazard is on the property and you are more than welcome to walk into the hazard and play your ball (or try).  I understand that really their isn't much difference...you could essentially play an out of bounds ball as a lateral but I guess hitting the ball off the course property is considered worse and deserves a more severe penalty.

I don't exactly agree that it would speed up play if they made out of bounds a lateral hazard.  If you know there is OB to the right..and your ball goes that way, always hit a provisional.  This will ensure that you do not slow down play.

IMO, golf is a game of options.  You are on the tee, there is a hazard to the left and OB to the right, you can choose to hit away from the OB if you tend to slice or you can risk hitting a normal shot with the chance of it going OB.  It is one of the many things that make golf challenging and I don't think it should be changed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why shouldn't it be a stiffer penalty if you hit the ball off the property itself?

That's why there's a stiffer penalty. Your ball has left the property.

And I don't see anything wrong with that. Lots of other sports have different levels of penalty (or reward).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by iacas

Why shouldn't it be a stiffer penalty if you hit the ball off the property itself?

That's why there's a stiffer penalty. Your ball has left the property.

Exactly this. There are gradations of penalty all over the course. If you play the ball accurately, you stay on the fairway and short grass. If you miss a small amount, you're "penalized" by the rough, sometimes in several grades as the shot becomes increasingly errant. If you hit a somewhat worse shot, you may end up in a bunker, or perhaps a water hazard. Finally, the worst penalty for an errant shot is OB, where you pay with stroke and distance.

As was suggested above, you need to know where the OB is and play accordingly. As a practical matter, it's usually OB because it's off the property, but in some cases it's strategically placed on golf course property. You need to be aware of it, and play away from it or pay the price.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I first started I thought OB was played like a water hazard. Not till I started reading about the rules on this forum did I learn otherwise. After learning about it, I thought it was a bit odd, but quickly got used to it. Stroke plus distance makes sense to me now, and I've had to put it into use quite often.

My home course demands decent driver accuracy. 17 out of 18 holes have a lateral water hazard on one side and OB hugging the other. The average yardage between the two hazards in the common landing zones is 75 yards. If your aiming right inbetween the two hazards and miss hit by 40 yards in either direction, your gonna be in one or the other. So I have indeed learned to lean more towards the water. This is something I have to take into consideration on almost every tee shot, and OB gets old fast. So does water for that matter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Jimbo Slice

When I first started I thought OB was played like a water hazard. Not till I started reading about the rules on this forum did I learn otherwise. After learning about it, I thought it was a bit odd, but quickly got used to it. Stroke plus distance makes sense to me now, and I've had to put it into use quite often.

My home course demands decent driver accuracy. 17 out of 18 holes have a lateral water hazard on one side and OB hugging the other. The average yardage between the two hazards in the common landing zones is 75 yards. If your aiming right inbetween the two hazards and miss hit by 40 yards in either direction, your gonna be in one or the other. So I have indeed learned to lean more towards the water. This is something I have to take into consideration on almost every tee shot, and OB gets old fast. So does water for that matter.

Sounds like you need to find a new home course!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Jimbo Slice

My home course demands decent driver accuracy. 17 out of 18 holes have a lateral water hazard on one side and OB hugging the other. The average yardage between the two hazards in the common landing zones is 75 yards. If your aiming right inbetween the two hazards and miss hit by 40 yards in either direction, your gonna be in one or the other.

75 yards is a pretty big target.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by TourSpoon

75 yards is a pretty big target.

Not when you suck lol. When I first started I had the drastic 80 yard slice at times.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's off the property which doesn't necessarily mean it should be more of a penalty, but thats just the way it is.

It's kind of like how US dollars only really mean something because everyone agrees that those little slips of paper have value.

OB is just more of a penalty because everyone agrees it is, and it adds more variety to the game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by jshots

It's off the property which doesn't necessarily mean it should be more of a penalty, but thats just the way it is.

It's kind of like how US dollars only really mean something because everyone agrees that those little slips of paper have value.

OB is just more of a penalty because everyone agrees it is, and it adds more variety to the game.

OB isn't always off the property, there are plenty of courses with internal OB for various reasons.

At the end of the day, though, everything in golf---right down to the fundamental "play it as it lies" principle---is only accepted because we all agree to it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by zeg

OB isn't always off the property, there are plenty of courses with internal OB for various reasons.

But that's a problem for the course, not for the rules.  The rules not only don't contemplate such an out of bounds condition, but I know that the USGA frowns on such a use for OB.  They strongly recommend that out of bounds should only be designated when the area so marked is beyond the boundary of the course.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Fourputt

But that's a problem for the course, not for the rules.  The rules not only don't contemplate such an out of bounds condition, but I know that the USGA frowns on such a use for OB.  They strongly recommend that out of bounds should only be designated when the area so marked is beyond the boundary of the course.


Interesting, though they do permit making parts of adjacent holes OB (Decision 33-2a/14). I don't have a problem with it, though it'd be annoying if abused.

What I really meant, though, was that it's not always as simple as "It's the edge of our property." Sometimes there are internal areas, like maintenance yards, decorative patches, etc, that could be used for the course but have been designated as not being part of the course.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by zeg

Interesting, though they do permit making parts of adjacent holes OB (Decision 33-2a/14). I don't have a problem with it, though it'd be annoying if abused.

What I really meant, though, was that it's not always as simple as "It's the edge of our property." Sometimes there are internal areas, like maintenance yards, decorative patches, etc, that could be used for the course but have been designated as not being part of the course.

There is nothing in the rules to forbid it, but the Ruling bodies strongly recommend that all other possibilities be examined before taking that route.  The type of situation that they frown on is creating an out of bounds line between 2 holes just to keep players from taking an unplanned shortcut, or "for safety".  There are other ways of handling such situations, but too often a course takes the easy way out and just pounds a few white stakes into the ground.  In such case the player may be technically "out of bounds" under the rules, yet still on the course, and as such, shouldn't have to face such a harsh penalty.

Maintenance yards should not be part of the course, so out of bounds is a proper way of defining such areas.  Flower beds on the course should be designated as abnormal ground from which play is prohibited, and relief without penalty allowed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Fourputt

There is nothing in the rules to forbid it, but the Ruling bodies strongly recommend that all other possibilities be examined before taking that route.  The type of situation that they frown on is creating an out of bounds line between 2 holes just to keep players from taking an unplanned shortcut, or "for safety".  There are other ways of handling such situations, but too often a course takes the easy way out and just pounds a few white stakes into the ground.  In such case the player may be technically "out of bounds" under the rules, yet still on the course, and as such, shouldn't have to face such a harsh penalty.

Maintenance yards should not be part of the course, so out of bounds is a proper way of defining such areas.  Flower beds on the course should be designated as abnormal ground from which play is prohibited, and relief without penalty allowed.

Well at least now I feel better about that portion of the OB rule. I have always understood off the course as OB but just marking another fairway OB has always seemed ridiculious. Glad to know that it is just a course being lazy (for the most part). I now feel a little bit better about the rule.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have posted elsewhere, I agree with the OP.  Sure, maybe there are times when the course designer wants to penalize an OB more heavily because they deem it a worse shot, but the architect has no leeway to deem areas as lateral hazards (or something equivalent) unless there is water (or the possibility), so they are forced to go with the more penal OB option even if it makes for a harder hole than they would have liked.

I have played some courses which are limited in the amount of land they have where the OB line can be very close to a good shot.  Not saying this was the reason for it, but I was 20 paces from the pin off the tee on a par four a few weeks ago with what would have been a reasonable pitch to try and get up and down for a birdie, except my ball was OB by a foot (after having landed even closer to the green but kicked right and rolled over the cart path which sloped towards the OB).

I also have the same issue as the OP with lost balls.  Today I played the Beaver 9 at Breckenridge for the first time and hit a ball that I was 90+% certain was in a lateral hazard, but couldn`t be "virtually certain" it was in there because it was heavily wooded with OB a further 20 yards to the right..  Playing by the rules, I had to assume it was lost/OB and take the stroke/distance.

I would prefer it if the course designer was able to designate if the OB or a LWH penalty should apply.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Jimdangles

Well at least now I feel better about that portion of the OB rule. I have always understood off the course as OB but just marking another fairway OB has always seemed ridiculious. Glad to know that it is just a course being lazy (for the most part). I now feel a little bit better about the rule.

I actually think that the course designer should be able to penalize a player for hitting it on the wrong fairway/hole.

While I have certainly benefited from it, it never made sense to me that a shot that is a bit off line on some holes can wind up in the rough or trees while a shot further off line in the same direction can have a wide open shot from an adjacent fairway.  Fairness aside, having an adjacent hole considered a forced drop (like an ESA hazard)  or OB will improve safety by preventing people from hitting off the wrong fairway.  I know it is not in the rules, but again, I think course designers should have this option available.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by MEfree

I actually think that the course designer should be able to penalize a player for hitting it on the wrong fairway/hole.

While I have certainly benefited from it, it never made sense to me that a shot that is a bit off line on some holes can wind up in the rough or trees while a shot further off line in the same direction can have a wide open shot from an adjacent fairway.  Fairness aside, having an adjacent hole considered a forced drop (like an ESA hazard)  or OB will improve safety by preventing people from hitting off the wrong fairway.  I know it is not in the rules, but again, I think course designers should have this option available.

I think if you're trying to make the hole a shortcut that should be OB but From another fairway being better off only sometimes. Today the only time I was in another fairway it turned into a 6 while a tree line you can make it almost a for sure bogie by punching out. Complete other side of the trees you have to get all the way through or all the way over. I myself have never made the decision to hit it farther down the wrong fairway to have a shot over the trees. because in that case I feel like it would be wrong. I prefer to make a creative punch shot through trees or running it up.

I do understand your reasoning though. but with neither being penalties I feel that is fair.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by MEfree

I actually think that the course designer should be able to penalize a player for hitting it on the wrong fairway/hole.

While I have certainly benefited from it, it never made sense to me that a shot that is a bit off line on some holes can wind up in the rough or trees while a shot further off line in the same direction can have a wide open shot from an adjacent fairway.  Fairness aside, having an adjacent hole considered a forced drop (like an ESA hazard)  or OB will improve safety by preventing people from hitting off the wrong fairway.  I know it is not in the rules, but again, I think course designers should have this option available.

By your way of thinking, it would make any course built on a classic parkland style layout with a few parallel holes into the same sort of pain in the ass as one that threads through a residential development, with OB everywhere.  That's just a bad idea.  Out of bounds should be just what the phrase indicates - outside of the course boundary, not just anywhere they feel like putting it. You should never be penalized the same for keeping your ball through the green as if you hit your ball off the course .  That just flies in the face of all logic.  Sometimes an errant shot will get a good break.  That is just part of the charm of golf.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • How long should my ball test be?
      Just wanted some thoughts on how long I should test each ball Im considerring. What is a good sample size. 9 holes, 18 or even longer?
    • Question on Twitter: Easiest Way to Shoot Lower Scores in a Week
      What I have learned as I have improved and keep reading about in Bob Rotella's books is that the best way to shoot the score of your life is to focus on practicing the short game, but mostly developing confidence in your putting. Since most of our strokes consist of the short game, by getting just a percentage better there it will translate to more overall success than anywhere else.
    • No Forearm Rotation - Biggest Swing Flaw?
      @Golfer2223 what does forearm rotation have to do with the shoulders?-They are not connected. Forearms can rotate regardless of what the shoulders are doing.
    • No Forearm Rotation - Biggest Swing Flaw?
      Correct. For example: He also says that the forearms rotate during the backswing. Which we know that they do, and quite a bit. How much is too much? On the left, below in both images, is his depiction of zero rotation: On the right, in both images, he demonstrates nearly 90° of turning at the wrist. based on what I know, little of this comes from the upper arm - the majority of it comes from the forearm. Do you disagree with any of that, @Golfer2223? Notice one thing, then, too please. On the left, the plane of the left wrist is pretty much parallel to the sagittal plane. On the right images, it's perpendicular to it. What do we find at the top of the backswing of the game's best players? The issue now appears to be simply trying to determine what in the world you mean by the bold above, particularly because there's really nothing "natural" about the golf swing. What feels natural to you, or seems natural to you, is definitely not natural to all or possibly even the majority of golfers. in my experience I've learned that you can't really talk about the golf swing in terms of what's "natural" or not. The truth of the matter is that for golfers who do this the right amount "naturally" then it simply isn't something we talk about in a lesson. For golfers who do it an improper amount, it may or may not be their priority. Here's a wrist graph from AMM for a very, very good golfer. Note that the wrist (blue line, top left) starts with 50° of supination. It pronates, relative to the upper arm, to a position of 16° pronation at the top. That's a pronation from 50° on one side of the zero mark to 16° on the other side - a pronation of 66°. This doesn't even account for how much the upper arm rotates - the forearm has rotated 66° from the setup position. (Note that above when I said 25° or 32°, that was relative to totally neutral, not to the setup position. The forearms rotated quite a bit more than the 25-32° cited, because they started somewhat supinated.) This graph and these numbers are not unusual. Look, @Golfer2223, it's somewhat incumbent upon you to be clear in what you're saying. It's far from ideal to say things like how you expect to see "zero forearm rotation" (or whatever) but then to claim that it's "relative to the natural shoulder motion" (obviously both paraphrased). Nobody has a clue what you mean by the "natural shoulder" whatever, and many would disagree that anything in this topic area is "natural" to begin with. So, please clarify what you're saying, and be precise and use specific words, or at least define them, provide examples, or both.
    • Best Shot of the Week
      Teeing of on Northdale #7 a short par four 336 from white tees. There is a pond water hazard about 235 or 240 ahead covering a lot of right hand side. Left hand is a small area and high trees to carry. Hit driver and blasted it, carried trees on left hand side and must have gotten a good cart path bounce. When we drove up was 50 yards from center of green. That's a loooong drive for me. Longest yet. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

  • Blog Entries