If you could change ONE rule, what would it be?

[norcalgolf]

Golf appears to have a number of rules which are archaic & need to be either eliminated or toned down. The one that got Sergio DQ'd is obviously one of them. Everyone knows what his actual score was, signing his card with the mistake that Boo wrote down wouldn't change his score.

I agree with the PGA Tour this is the case, but for tournaments below this level this rule is still applicable. I have worked amateur tournaments local to our area, the way scoring is done is important and you want people responsible for their scorecard.

[norcalgolf]

I have three that are ones I would like examined.

1) divots in the fairway. I am even okay with sand filled divots, but it is non sand filled divots that can be a huge problem. If something was done, I would like to see something along the lines of 6 inches of relief, no closer to the hole, and you may not clean your ball, and you can place it (you are in the fairway so there should be no issue with placing versus drop, but I would even be okay with drop).

2) spike marks on the green. This is less of an issue than it used to be. Still can be an issue at times. I had it this past weekend in a tournament. Ball went right off line after hitting a spike mark. This one I could see being better if there was better education, but we all know how well that works.

3) O.B./Lost Ball - this is a tricky one. Sometimes it makes sense, other times it doesn't. I think better course designation maybe better. There are some places where O.B. makes sense. There are others where it does not and I think it would make more sense to make the O.B. a lateral.

A great example is Wente in Livermore. They have vineyards surrounding the course. The vineyards play O.B. and it makes for some very tight holes in some cases. I think the vineyards should play as hazards which would be more in line with the vineyards just being "water". There are some courses around that do lateral hazards instead of O.B. for internal roads, etc.

In the end it is a difficult issue. O.B. in some cases is worse than a lost ball, but it is easier to set up rules around O.B. than it is around lost ball. I am not really sure what is the best way to handle this. For the most part, I am okay with O.B./lost ball the way it is right now.

But I think divots and spike marks are definitely something that should be examined and look into if there is a fair way to deal with them while not penalizing golfers.

[Golf_Relocation]

i would love to play without shirt. sometimes the sun is too hot. :D

[Fourputt]

lie in the rough.. ball kicked out from the trees is irrelevant--players are supposed to repair their divots (replace the, fill them with mix, w/e). somebody shouldn't basically be penalized for succeeding in what every golfer tries for off the tee: hit the fairway.

I've been in plenty of divots in the rough... where do you draw the line? Practice more, complain less.... learn to hit the shot and you won't have anything to complain about..

While I may not be 100% in favor of all the rules as written, I know that they all have a logical reason for being. Those who cant see that should attend a USGA seminar (which I have done) and ask the guys who have the answers. There is either a real life reason behind the logic, or the rule is there for equity, i.e. for equal treatment across the board for all players. The reason OB is not treated as a hazard is because it isn't a hazard. You hit such a bad shot that you knocked the ball clean off the golf course... you SHOULD be penalized more than for just hitting into water on the course. For those who say that they rules don't matter because they don't compete, that's fine by me... you can play any game you want with your buddies. But then don't bother to post your handicap, because you don't actually have one. And don't tell us what you just shot, because that is also irrelevant if it wasn't done by the rules. The Rules of Golf don't exist just for the PGA Tour, they are there so that all golfers can play their rounds, and still have a common yardstick for comparison. If you play by the rules, then it doesn't matter if you played at Augusta National, or at Podunk Muni, the score when applied against the course slope and rating is still going to be equally valid.

[Big Lex]

I echo much of what four-putt said. Usually there is something behind the rule--a decision in the past, etc.--that makes a seemingly "bad" rule actually make sense.

But I agree that I'd rather OB not be stroke and distance.

Hitting from divots is often called out, but it's tough to police. Jack's suggestion that a sand-filled divot is "ground under repair" I guess could work, although defining the sand filled divot wouldn't always be easy.

[dwsell]

The one rule I would change would still be grounding a club in a hazard. However, I like the one about fixing spike marks. I realize it doesn't happen a lot, but new spikes worn by the wrong individual can cause some damage around the cup. I have come across it before and have knocked the grass back down and not thought twice about it. As mentioned, the fairway divot is another one I might consider if I was able to change a rule.

[iacas]

Holy thread revival, yes, but to those who think "divots in the fairway should be GUR" (like Nicklaus in this video), Mike Davis gives the reason they cannot be:

Also, my reason still has relevance: if you want to correct for the "bad breaks" you sometimes get, you'll have to correct for the "good breaks" you sometimes get, too.

[NEOHMark]

Originally Posted by norcalgolf

I have three that are ones I would like examined.

1) divots in the fairway. I am even okay with sand filled divots, but it is non sand filled divots that can be a huge problem. If something was done, I would like to see something along the lines of 6 inches of relief, no closer to the hole, and you may not clean your ball, and you can place it (you are in the fairway so there should be no issue with placing versus drop, but I would even be okay with drop).

2) spike marks on the green. This is less of an issue than it used to be. Still can be an issue at times. I had it this past weekend in a tournament. Ball went right off line after hitting a spike mark. This one I could see being better if there was better education, but we all know how well that works.

3) O.B./Lost Ball - this is a tricky one. Sometimes it makes sense, other times it doesn't. I think better course designation maybe better. There are some places where O.B. makes sense. There are others where it does not and I think it would make more sense to make the O.B. a lateral.

A great example is Wente in Livermore. They have vineyards surrounding the course. The vineyards play O.B. and it makes for some very tight holes in some cases. I think the vineyards should play as hazards which would be more in line with the vineyards just being "water". There are some courses around that do lateral hazards instead of O.B. for internal roads, etc.

In the end it is a difficult issue. O.B. in some cases is worse than a lost ball, but it is easier to set up rules around O.B. than it is around lost ball. I am not really sure what is the best way to handle this. For the most part, I am okay with O.B./lost ball the way it is right now.

But I think divots and spike marks are definitely something that should be examined and look into if there is a fair way to deal with them while not penalizing golfers.

I agree with all three of your ideas.  Fairways should be a haven of a good lie.  Greens should be a haven of a clean, flat roll.  And there is usually no logical reason why OB or a lost ball can't be treated the same as a lateral.  It would help speed up the pace of play too.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

I agree with all three of your ideas.  Fairways should be a haven of a good lie.  Greens should be a haven of a clean, flat roll.  And there is usually no logical reason why OB or a lost ball can't be treated the same as a lateral.  It would help speed up the pace of play too.

I agree. We should be able to swing as hard as possible on every par 5, take a drop where the ball went OB, then still hit the green in regulation!

[NEOHMark]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

I agree. We should be able to swing as hard as possible on every par 5, take a drop where the ball went OB, then still hit the green in regulation!

That's not at all what I'm saying.  If a hole has a lateral on the right, and OB on the left, there is a much more severe penalty - double the penalty in fact - by missing left than right.  There's no other sport/game, that I can think of, that has this inequity of playing venue.  Launching the drive into the lateral, in the stated example, is just as lost, and has left the bounds of playability just as much as the OB or lost ball.  Yet it's at least a full stroke higher in penalty because there is no guaranty the player will make up the lost distance in a single stroke.

Meanwhile, you're sitting on the tee box waiting for the knuckleheads in the group in front of you to find their ball - utilizing their full five minutes.  Then a lone cart comes driving back to the tee box while the knucklehead sheepishly tells you he has to play another tee shot (because he didn't bother to play a provisional).  By the time he's hit his third from the tee, driven BACK to roughly the same spot he was searching for the lost ball....fifteen minutes has elapsed while NObody behind said knuckleheads has had a chance to play a single shot.

No wonder the game is in dire straits and losing participants by the tens of millions.....

[iacas]

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

That's not at all what I'm saying.  If a hole has a lateral on the right, and OB on the left, there is a much more severe penalty - double the penalty in fact - by missing left than right.

Uh... so don't miss left on that hole. The goal isn't to miss. The goal is to hit the ball in play. When you fail to do that, there's a penalty.

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

There's no other sport/game, that I can think of, that has this inequity of playing venue.

How many other sports are played over 200+ acres? In other sports, the "boundary" is still significant. It's significant in golf. Home runs in some baseball stadiums are pop flies (outs) in others.

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

Launching the drive into the lateral, in the stated example, is just as lost, and has left the bounds of playability just as much as the OB or lost ball.

It's not "left the bounds" just as much. One shot left the entire golf course. The other is still on the golf course, but in a hazard.

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

Then a lone cart comes driving back to the tee box while the knucklehead sheepishly tells you he has to play another tee shot (because he didn't bother to play a provisional).

So let's change a rule because someone's a knucklehead?

[WUTiger]

I would have a rule for muddy days that you can substitute a clean putting ball for the ball you played to get to the green. (It would have to be the same brand and model of ball: a clean Gamer.v2 for a dirty Gamer.v2).

Unless you have a ball washer on your cart, it can take 90 seconds to get the sticky clay off the ball with a damp towel. This slows down play.

[NEOHMark]

Originally Posted by iacas

Uh... so don't miss left on that hole. The goal isn't to miss. The goal is to hit the ball in play. When you fail to do that, there's a penalty.

How many other sports are played over 200+ acres? In other sports, the "boundary" is still significant. It's significant in golf. Home runs in some baseball stadiums are pop flies (outs) in others.

It's not "left the bounds" just as much. One shot left the entire golf course. The other is still on the golf course, but in a hazard.

So let's change a rule because someone's a knucklehead?

LOL, I hear you.

It's just the sports official in me (high school/college baseball - and high school basketball) coming out. I can defend virtually ANY rule in baseball, fastpitch softball, and basketball...and explain it with logic, and reason, to any person/coach/player who challenges it.  Golf boundaries and penalties?  Not so much.

OB/foul in any other sport is treated equitably and evenly in any situation.  Your example of home run fences equating to OB doesn't really apply because a home run is only a home run if within the baselines.  A water hazard in the fairway is a better comparison - where the penalty isn't stroke PLUS distance.  In baseball, a foul ball out of play is simply a strike.  If golf rules were applied to baseball, a foul ball into the stands would be a strike, yet would be an out if the ball left the stadium.  No one with any genuine logic would agree that's equitable IMHO, as the 'penalty' isn't nearly the same for virtually identical situations.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

It's just the sports official in me (high school/college baseball - and high school basketball) coming out. I can defend virtually ANY rule in baseball, fastpitch softball, and basketball...and explain it with logic, and reason, to any person/coach/player who challenges it.  Golf boundaries and penalties?  Not so much.

And I can explain the logic and reasoning behind OB penalties in golf. You've hit the ball so badly it has left the entire property! It's literally left the field of play.

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

OB/foul in any other sport is treated equitably and evenly in any situation.  Your example of home run fences equating to OB doesn't really apply because a home run is only a home run if within the baselines. A water hazard in the fairway is a better comparison - where the penalty isn't stroke PLUS distance. In baseball, a foul ball out of play is simply a strike.  If golf rules were applied to baseball, a foul ball into the stands would be a strike, yet would be an out if the ball left the stadium. No one with any genuine logic would agree that's equitable IMHO, as the 'penalty' isn't nearly the same for virtually identical situations.

I equated a ball traveling 350 feet in one direction in two different stadiums. Both balls are in play - one's an out and one's a home run simply because the shape of the stadiums are different. I think the logic holds up just fine. You're trying to say a home run is an out and comparing that to a foul ball. That makes less sense than mine.

Again, no other sport is played on such an irregularly shaped playing surface. If you hit the ball so badly that it leaves 200+ acres of property, then why shouldn't you suffer a penalty as severe as stroke and distance?

And I completely disagree about equity: OB in golf is treated equitably. You always get stroke and distance. That's as equitable as it gets.

Additionally, players sometimes take stroke and distance when they hit into a water hazard... it's an option.

OB is worse. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. If I were to rank bunkers, water hazards, and then OB in terms of stiffness of penalty, they'd be Bunkers (lightest "penalty"), lateral hazards (next most severe), water hazards (third stiffest), and OB (stiffest penalty, along with a lost ball of course).

I may not convince you - I don't plan on it, in fact - but you're not going to convince me either. OB is a stiff penalty, and to me, rightfully so. You've hit the ball off the entire freakin' golf course.

[uttexas]

I'd recommend going back to the continuous putting rule. Would speed up play and make the game more enjoyable to watch on TV (considering how many putts the networks like to show) The old 35-3e rule e. Play to be continuous On the putting green, each competitor shall play continuously until his ball is holed. However, if the fellow-competitor consider that the competitor would stand on his line of play, the fellow-competitor may require the competitor to lift his ball and play in turn

[dhanson]

Originally Posted by uttexas

I'd recommend going back to the continuous putting rule. Would speed up play and make the game more enjoyable to watch on TV (considering how many putts the networks like to show)

The old 35-3e rule

e. Play to be continuous

On the putting green, each competitor shall play continuously until his ball is holed. However, if the fellow-competitor consider that the competitor would stand on his line of play, the fellow-competitor may require the competitor to lift his ball and play in turn

considering the amount of time some take to line up putts, i don't know if it would speed up play. consider: 1st putt: 10 feet short. (kneels down, marks ball, lines up ball, goes through routine) 2nd putt: 4 feet past the hole. (kneels down, marks ball, lines up ball, goes through routine) 3rd putt: holes out.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by norcalgolf

I have thr

3) O.B./Lost Ball - this is a tricky one. Sometimes it makes sense, other times it doesn't. I think better course designation maybe better. There are some places where O.B. makes sense. There are others where it does not and I think it would make more sense to make the O.B. a lateral.

I beg your pardon?

It is never tricky and it always makes sense.

Please give us an example of where it's confusing. On any course on the planet.

Make OB a "lateral"?

A lateral hazard and OB are completely different things.

That is as logical as suggesting that occasionally a bunker should be called fairway.

If a ball is OB, it is no longer on the golf course, it is not in a hazard. How could you possibly frame a rule where things that have physical characteristics (as in one's a hazard, the other is someone else's backyard) are said to be something that they aren't?  And...this is in a thread about rules that could be changed!!!

What I am thinking you are saying is that at times you prefer to be penalised a stroke and not distance.  If that is the case, then I suggest you don't hit it OB.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

If golf rules were applied to baseball, a foul ball into the stands would be a strike, yet would be an out if the ball left the stadium.  No one with any genuine logic would agree that's equitable IMHO, as the 'penalty' isn't nearly the same for virtually identical situations.

I'll boast of having "genuine logic" and your analogy indicates that you don't understand the difference between OB and a hazard.  The fact that you admit to not being able to explain this obviously proves it. Would 20 seconds with a rule book be too taxing?

How's this for a mindset on a hole I played this morning:

OB on the right. Lateral hazard on the left.

My thought: "I don't want to hit it in the hazard, but if I do, at least my penalty is the same as if I'd hit it into the bush and can chip out.

I certainly don't want to hit it OB, because I'm back on the tee playing 3, and could easily end up hitting 5 off the tee." with the winds we had today.

"I'll make damn sure I go well left."  There was danger on both sides, but a less severe scenario by going left.  Left and right were not "virtually identical situations" as you would describe them and they never are.  You can lose a ball on both sides just as easily, but the rules make you understand that one side has more dire consequences.

How on earth can you be thinking about baseball rules and think that somehow there is a parallel?

By your logic, a ball struck  in baseball that is a foul because it drifted over the line just short of 3rd base is "virtually identical" to one that drifted in and ended up being a hit. Pretty different results, don't you think, especially if the one that drifted in ended up giving the team a couple of runs?