Originally Posted by Dave2512
This is a tough sell, especially when you take into consideration the way you described the situation in your first post. I can't imagine it being more straight forward than that. In what way would a simpler set of rules, no penalties etc, affected what you were to do after finding your ball? You hit an errant shot that took a bad bounce and discovered that it left you with a difficult shot. What could possibly simplfy that situation short of a do-over? This is the consquence for not hitting a solid shot. That's about as simple as it gets.
I am not saying that I should have gotten a free mulligan. Forgetting about the whiff, what I find complex is that I had the option of not looking for my original and playing my provisional but once the original is potentially spotted my options are limited to IDing the original and a) playing it, b) taking an unplayable which gives me the option of, going two club lengths, going straight back or going back to the tee and hitting a 3rd tee shot. After spotting the original, the best option in terms of trying to shoot the lowest score was to re-tee, but re-teeing for a second time is slower and more likely to piss people off than just going and playing the provisional (that was already subject to a stroke and distance penalty, so no free lunch IMO).
Originally Posted by iacas
This isn't really the topic here, but I'll allow it through the end of today (though I'm heading to bed soon, and as far as I'm concerned today ends in an hour, so make hay while you've got the chance).
I think you meant to say that a bit differently.
My assertion: you cannot simplify the rules significantly without fundamentally altering the game.
Straw man. Probably nobody "loves golf because of the rules." But change the rules and you don't have "golf" anymore. Change them enough and you really don't have golf anymore.
Again, a straw man. Nobody's arguing that people LOVE golf because of the Rules.
I don't think you can make the rules simple enough for more than a teeny tiny percentage of golfers to decide to start using them. Heck, I bet the majority of golfers didn't follow the rules back when they had the original 13 rules. It was likely a higher percentage than follow them now, but that probably had more to do with the kinds of people playing than the simplicity of the rules.
The situation raised here is rare. And you could have written down the score you'd most likely have made and just played out. You could have also ignored your first ball, especially if you were 150 out on a par five in three (i.e. still a chance to get up and down for par).
Thus far you've failed to do so despite repeatedly saying you could. Do it. Let's see it. Heck, just pick one rule and do it. And none of this "for 99.9%" stuff. It has to keep the game fundamentally the same for all golfers.
No. The rules have gotten slightly more complex as more situations arise. Again, we started with 13 or so. Then someone had a kid pick up their ball and run off with it, and there wasn't a rule for it. Then someone hit into a ball the groundskeeper had dug, so they wrote that rule. Then someone's ball broke apart. Then someone whiffed. Then someone hit their playing partner (or opponent) with their ball. So they wrote rules to cover those things.
The rules of others sports are pretty complex too, especially considering the fact that they're played on relatively uniform playing fields and that there are really no outside agencies, nor hazards, etc. There's simply in bounds and out of bounds (fair or foul, etc.).
You've yet to be able to prove that. The rules have evolved to cover situations and scenarios not covered by a simpler set of rules.
You can't declare a ball lost. You can't force your opponent to look for your ball or not, really, either - you can hit your provisional before he's found your ball.
I started this thread and am a bit confused about what topic you are going to allow until the end of the day? Are you saying that I hijacked my own thread? I think that a revamping/simplification of the rules would allow more people to follow them without pissing people off.
FWIW, the reason I looked for my first ball is because I thought there was a decent chance of being able to get it to within 100 yards in two had I had a clear swing...in hindsight I was wrong, but making birdie (or better) on the hole was the only way I was going to be able to shoot a personal best at that course, so I thought it was worth the look.
I am heading to bed shortly also, but would like to take you up on your rules challenge later this week. I am pretty sure that you and Fourputt will not like what I come up with, but think that most players will find that my proposals do not negatively affect their enjoyment of the game. To prove this, I would like to have a Simplified Rules Experiment with real tst players participating and giving feedback similar to the Forward Tees Experiment you did last year (which I enjoyed participating in).
Maybe I missed GolfingDad's point
Originally Posted by Golfingdad
I don't think the rules are intentionally convoluted (like some portions of the tax code probably are ;)) or confusing ... it's just a really complex game.
And, as fourputt mentions ... probably at least part of the reason we all love it so much.
I guess my point is that the game will still be complex and loveable even if the rules are simplified.