"The Principles Behind the Rules of Golf" by Richard S. Tufts

[Rulesman]

And a back pocket to fit

[cipher]

Purchased.

[Perfect Slicer]

Just received mine in the mail today, and am planning on reading it while I'm on vacation next week.

Many thanks for the suggestion!

Others may know this, but just in case I'm not the only one who didn't, the USGA site offers free copies of the latest edition of the Rules of Golf. Just have to pay shipping. I had a copy sent along with the Principles.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman

"Six inches" is relatively new. It used to be "a scorecard length". Very easy to measure.

I suspect this was one the R&A; conceded to the USGA.

1cl was only introduced in 2000.

But then some clubs would have scorecards that were a yard long.  LOL

My biggest problem with the one clublength in this particular situation is that it varies so drastically when you have someone like Adam Scott with nearly a 5 foot putter.  That extra distance can potentially take a tree branch out of play which would still be in play for the player using a 45" driver.

It's not as big an issue in my opinion when it's taking relief under the normal rules, because that happens at most maybe once or twice each round.  With the preferred lies local rule they get this opportunity every time the ball lies on short grass.  If the rule is one scorecard, then it's the same for every player.

[David in FL]

Just received mine in the mail.  I thought the opening couple of paragraphs were worth sharing by themselves......

1.  There Must Be a Purpose

It is indeed unfortunate that in a game as fascinating as golf, an appreciation of the Rules under which the game is played should be the exception rather than the order.  Even a modest understanding of the Rules can greatly enhance the pleasure to be derived from the sport.  Further, it is difficult to understand how it is possible to become a devotee of golf without at least becoming inquisitive about the code which governs its play.

To be sure, the language of the Rules is dry and precise - it must be so.  To understand the Rules demands careful reading, and they can hardly be skimmed through lightly in one session.  However, for those who make the effort, the reward is great.  The Rules of Golf are indeed a beautifully balanced code, rich with logic, drama and the traditions of a great sport.

It is the purpose of this brief work to breathe a little life into the dry bones of the Rules with the hope that they may become a pleasant companion in the enjoyment of the game of golf.

I can tell already, I'm gonna enjoy this little book.

[Fourputt]

Just received mine in the mail.  I thought the opening couple of paragraphs were worth sharing by themselves......

1.  There Must Be a Purpose

It is indeed unfortunate that in a game as fascinating as golf, an appreciation of the Rules under which the game is played should be the exception rather than the order.  Even a modest understanding of the Rules can greatly enhance the pleasure to be derived from the sport.  Further, it is difficult to understand how it is possible to become a devotee of golf without at least becoming inquisitive about the code which governs its play.

To be sure, the language of the Rules is dry and precise - it must be so.  To understand the Rules demands careful reading, and they can hardly be skimmed through lightly in one session.  However, for those who make the effort, the reward is great.  The Rules of Golf are indeed a beautifully balanced code, rich with logic, drama and the traditions of a great sport.

It is the purpose of this brief work to breathe a little life into the dry bones of the Rules with the hope that they may become a pleasant companion in the enjoyment of the game of golf.

I can tell already, I'm gonna enjoy this little book.

He is quite good at conveying his love of the game and the rules, isn't he?

[boogielicious]

Mine came yesterday.  Looking forward to it.

[luu5]

"Six inches" is relatively new. It used to be "a scorecard length". Very easy to measure.

I suspect this was one the R&A; conceded to the USGA.

1cl was only introduced in 2000.

During this years Seve Trophy, GB&I; player got a drop on the fringe. After dropping many times for some reason (my TV was on mute), he after the last drop then used LCP to move the ball and used long unfolded scorecard to measure the new place.

[iacas]

Let's keep this thread to the overall topic. The specifics of how much one measures are a bit too narrow.

[Rulesman]

CREED OF THE AMATEUR
The work that I have done has been done for amateur
sport, and I hope that you won't mind if I leave you with my
creed on amateurism.

Amateurism, after all, must be the backbone of all sport, golf
or otherwise. In my mind an amateur is one who competes
in a sport for the joy of playing, for the companionship it
affords, for health-giving exercise, and for relaxation from
more serious matters. As a part of this light-hearted
approach to the game, he accepts cheerfully all adverse
breaks, is considerate of his opponent, plays the game fairly
and squarely in accordance with its rules, maintains self-
control, and strives to do his best, not in order to win, but
rather as a test of his own skill and ability. These are his
only interests, and, in them, material considerations have no
part. The returns which amateur sport will bring to those
who play it is this spirit are greater than those any money
can possibly buy.
Richard S. Tufts

[Meltdwhiskey]

Great idea for a thread.  I recommend that anytime a rule change is proposed, justification under these principles is a requirement.

Almost every current rule can be tied to one of the two most fundamental principles:

1)  That you play your ball from the tee and never touch it until you remove it from the hole, and...

2)  That you play the course as you find it.

That doesn't mean that the game should be played strictly under those conditions, only that the game adheres to those principles as closely as possible while still maintaining playability.

OK, I just bought it.  Hope that allows me to post in the thread.

I really like the simplicity of the 2 principles above.  I actually read that in a magazine in a dentist office or something a while back.  I liked the sound of it so much that I took a picture of the paragraph with my phone so I could later quote it. I still have it.

The article actually reads, "...he wrote, 'if there is one principle more basic than any of the rest, it must be that you play the course as you find it." Later, he added: 'The second great principle of golf is that you put your ball in play at the start of the hole and play only your own ball and do not touch it before you lift it from the hole.'"

This is awesome - except that we never ever do that. Everyone lifts the ball from the green, marks it, cleans it, lines it up, etc on every green weather the ball is dirty or anyone else's line or not. It is a great principle, but one we never follow.  I am of the opinion that we should make every effort (and maybe even some rule changes) to actually do this.  But since it probably actually goes down that way less than 1% of the time, can we consider it a basic principle?

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Great idea for a thread.  I recommend that anytime a rule change is proposed, justification under these principles is a requirement.

Almost every current rule can be tied to one of the two most fundamental principles:

1)  That you play your ball from the tee and never touch it until you remove it from the hole, and...

2)  That you play the course as you find it.

That doesn't mean that the game should be played strictly under those conditions, only that the game adheres to those principles as closely as possible while still maintaining playability.

OK, I just bought it.  Hope that allows me to post in the thread.

I really like the simplicity of the 2 principles above.  I actually read that in a magazine in a dentist office or something a while back.  I liked the sound of it so much that I took a picture of the paragraph with my phone so I could later quote it. I still have it.

The article actually reads, "...he wrote, 'if there is one principle more basic than any of the rest, it must be that you play the course as you find it." Later, he added: 'The second great principle of golf is that you put your ball in play at the start of the hole and play only your own ball and do not touch it before you lift it from the hole.'"

This is awesome - except that we never ever do that.  Everyone lifts the ball from the green, marks it, cleans it, lines it up, etc on every green weather the ball is dirty or anyone else's line or not. It is a great principle, but one we never follow.  I am of the opinion that we should make every effort (and maybe even some rule changes) to actually do this.  But since it probably actually goes down that way less than 1% of the time, can we consider it a basic principle?

I often don't mark and lift before I putt.  It simply isn't always necessary.

What you have to consider is that Tufts is focusing on the underlying principles, not the actual playing rules.  The rules depart from those principles as necessary to preserve the playability of the game.  The option of marking and lifting the ball from the green didn't come into the rules until greens became more well manicured, to the point that putting was more of a science than a mix of art and luck.   Because of that change in the way courses were maintained, dirt or mud or whatever on the ball had a  more direct and negative effect on play, thus a modification of the principle was reasonable.

This is how most rules evolve, and how the base principles have become separated from actual play in some respects.

[Meltdwhiskey]

I often don't mark and lift before I putt.  It simply isn't always necessary.

What you have to consider is that Tufts is focusing on the underlying principles, not the actual playing rules.  The rules depart from those principles as necessary to preserve the playability of the game.  The option of marking and lifting the ball from the green didn't come into the rules until greens became more well manicured, to the point that putting was more of a science than a mix of art and luck.   Because of that change in the way courses were maintained, dirt or mud or whatever on the ball had a  more direct and negative effect on play, thus a modification of the principle was reasonable.

This is how most rules evolve, and how the base principles have become separated from actual play in some respects.

I guess I see that.  It just seems a huge deviation that a basic principle is the exception and not the rule.  I also don't always mark - and sometimes get strange looks.  I think in most people's minds it has become a rule or at least an etiquette that you are supposed to mark it every time.  I'd love to see it played closer to that principle.  Maybe you would only mark when it was obviously in the way or something similar.  Would speed up play, too.

Anyway, don't want to get off topic.  I love the spirit of the principle.  Look forward to reading the book.

[cipher]

My copy came in the mail today. I am looking forward to it.

[Fourputt]

Other deviations from that principle come into play with Rule 24, 25, and 28.

Immovable obstructions have always been deemed as relief without penalty.  This phrase from the 1744 Rules for the Gentlemen Golfers of Leith includes that idea:

Quote:

Neither Trench, Ditch or Dyke, made for the preservation of the Links, nor the Scholar's Holes, or the Soldier's Lines, Shall be accounted a Hazard; But the Ball is to be taken out and play’d with any Iron Club.

Also their version of the modern Rule 27, Lost Ball (note that it doesn't matter how the ball becomes "lost"):

Quote:

If you shoud lose your Ball, by it's being taken up, or any other way, you are to go back to the Spot, where you struck last, & drop another Ball, And allow your adversary a Stroke for the misfortune.

Also the first principle in the book, playing the course as you find it:

Modern Rule 26:

Quote:

If your Ball comes among watter, or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and Teeing it, you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

Our Rule 23 for Loose Impediments - they were much more strict about it:

Quote:

You are not to remove Stones, Bones or any Break Club, for the sake of playing your Ball, Except upon the fair Green within a Club's length of your Ball.

You can see that there are some significant departures from the modern game here, but the idea remains true to the principles.  You depart from the principles only as far as it is deemed necessary to play the game.

[Meltdwhiskey]

Other deviations from that principle come into play with Rule 24, 25, and 28.

Immovable obstructions have always been deemed as relief without penalty.  This phrase from the 1744 Rules for the Gentlemen Golfers of Leith includes that idea:

Also their version of the modern Rule 27, Lost Ball (note that it doesn't matter how the ball becomes "lost"):

Also the first principle in the book, playing the course as you find it:

Modern Rule 26:

Our Rule 23 for Loose Impediments - they were much more strict about it:

You can see that there are some significant departures from the modern game here, but the idea remains true to the principles.  You depart from the principles only as far as it is deemed necessary to play the game.

Right - but all of these are exceptions to normal play.  You don't take relief from an immovable obstruction on 90%+ of your shots.  You don't experience casual water or move your ball around in the fairway 90%+ of your shots.  These are times when you are more or less adhering to the principle, but something out of the ordinary has happened and we give some temporary suspension of the rule to allow for this semi-rare situation. I don't think that being on the green should constitute such a suspension.  IMO, watching 4 guys walk straight to their respective, unobstructed and mud-free balls and everyone pick it up off the green flies in the face of that principle a little.

Possibly frequent par 4 scenario:

Guy places his ball on a tee and hits it

Plays his approach shot as it lies

Marks/lifts his ball on the green and puts to 5 feet

Marks/lifts his ball again because that is a pucker put and he doesn't want to rush it

1 or 2 putts to end the hole

It is really only 1 shot played without touching it.

BUT - I see what you are saying even if I only begrudgingly agree with it.  Things evolve and the rules get modified and the way the game is played becomes a little different.  I'm not necessarily in favor of bringing back the stimie (sp?).  I am probably just irked about it because I just don't agree with all that marking and lifting as a matter of normal procedure.  I would love to see it played truer to the principle.  Maybe once I read the book, it will make more sense to me.

[boogielicious]

I am part way through it.  I've enjoyed the section on how the principles apply to the differences between match and stroke play and why the penalties differ.

[luu5]

Possibly frequent par 4 scenario:

Guy places his ball on a tee and hits it

Plays his approach shot as it lies

Marks/lifts his ball on the green and puts to 5 feet

Marks/lifts his ball again because that is a pucker put and he doesn't want to rush it

1 or 2 putts to end the hole

If you were playing single, would you lift all those times when on green? There are other rules that nowadays "force" you sometimes to pick up. I think I would not like to play with stymie rule in effect.