or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › MEfree Challenge: New Rules of Golf - Simplified but not Fundamentally Changed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MEfree Challenge: New Rules of Golf - Simplified but not Fundamentally Changed - Page 2  

post #19 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by saevel25 View Post

So for one, i don't get your arguement about it increase enjoyment, because that is subjective and really i think its just a beef you have with the game.

I don't think he was saying it would increase enjoyment, but rather it would not decrease enjoyment, while at the same time, making the game easier to understand, and potentially faster.

 

But I disagree.  I don't think it will make the game faster because the only real drastic changes are for OB and lost balls, and how many people not playing in a tournament ever actually drive back to the tee to re-hit if they didn't hit a provisional?  Almost none.  And even when they do, overall, this doesn't slow down the game that much, in the grand scheme of things.

 

However, I don't know that I agree with Tristan/Erik/Et. Al. that there has to be a greater penalty for OB than there does for hazards.  (I keep going back and forth on this)  Admittedly, my opinion is extremely biased on this because I tend to hit it OB more than your average golfer, but the fact that different courses seem to arbitrarily mark certain areas OB vs. hazard is what gets me.  I had one last week that was, literally, 12" beyond the cart path, and sitting perfectly on top of the mulch with a clear shot to the green.  I mean, this shot wasn't 10 yards from being in the fairway, it was perfectly playable, and it cost me stroke and distance.

 

I think I would be on board with a re-write of the rules that changed OB to the equivalent of an ESA hazard.  Not stroke and distance, but since it's usually off the courses property, you cannot play it from there.  That seems like a reasonable compromise.  (Of course, I'm also fine with the rules how they are, but if, for whatever reason, they changed that one, I don't think it would fundamentally change the game, nor would it affect my enjoyment any)

 

Lost balls are trickier because you never quite know where they were.

post #20 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

Not debatable if you understand what the foundation is for that difference.  Since play is not allowed from any point not on the golf course, when your ball is out of bounds, it is not in play.  You should be required to play from the last point where the ball was in play on the golf course.  You should not receive a distance reward for a ball hit so poorly that it leaves the course.  

 

A ball hit into a water hazard, may or may not be playable, but it is still the ball in play until the player takes some action to change its status.  Some better resolution (i.e. some potential - but not guaranteed - distance gain) should be allowed for that status.  Again, it goes right back the the fundamental principles of the game and of the penalty balanced against the offense.

 

A question on this one??  What if a water hazard runs down the side of the course.  The actually property line is roughly 50' into the water.  Would you have to decide where the ball landed?  In the water closer to the course (lateral hazard).  Or in the water further away (out of bounds).

 

My main issue is this.  I can hit a hook a shot that lands 2' out of bounds (roughly 30'-40' offline) and be penalized with stroke and distance.  On the same hole, I could slice one 2 fair ways over, (roughly 200'-300' offline) and not be penalized as bad. 

post #21 of 138

Your fatal flaw is allowing the fairway drop.  If you just kept it to 2 club lengths from the margin of the hazard/ob, you'd get a better reception, I think.  

post #22 of 138
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14ledo81 View Post

 

A question on this one??  What if a water hazard runs down the side of the course.  The actually property line is roughly 50' into the water.  Would you have to decide where the ball landed?  In the water closer to the course (lateral hazard).  Or in the water further away (out of bounds).

 

 

I believe that under the current rules, it is where the ball ends up, not where it landed that is relevant.  If the ball landed in the hazard, but drifted to the OB section of the water, then you would be deemed to be OB- pretty straight forward according to all the rules experts here.  

 

Don't forget that if you think you hit it in a hazard, you have to have virtual certainty that it is actually there to avoid having to play it as a lost ball- personally I am not sure how you can ever be virtually certain that moving water did not move the ball outside the hazard, but I see most players assume that their ball stayed in the hazard even when the water is moving swiftly.

 

26-1/7

Ball Moved Out of Bounds by Flow of Water in Water Hazard

Q.The flow of water in a water hazard carries a ball out of bounds. May the player invoke Rule 26-1?

A.No. Since the ball lies out of bounds, the player must proceed under Rule27-1. Water is not an outside agency - see Definition of "Outside Agency" - and thus the ball would not be replaced under Rule 18-1.

In a situation where it is likely that a ball will be carried out of bounds by the flow of water in a water hazard, it is suggested that a screen be installed to prevent such an occurrence.

post #23 of 138
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsc123 View Post

Your fatal flaw is allowing the fairway drop.  If you just kept it to 2 club lengths from the margin of the hazard/ob, you'd get a better reception, I think.  

You are probably right and ultimately this might be the way to go.

post #24 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14ledo81 View Post

A question on this one??  What if a water hazard runs down the side of the course.  The actually property line is roughly 50' into the water.  Would you have to decide where the ball landed?  In the water closer to the course (lateral hazard).  Or in the water further away (out of bounds).

 

My main issue is this.  I can hit a hook a shot that lands 2' out of bounds (roughly 30'-40' offline) and be penalized with stroke and distance.  On the same hole, I could slice one 2 fair ways over, (roughly 200'-300' offline) and not be penalized as bad. 

Right.  This is precisely why I'm inclined to go with Mefree on this one.  It's arbitrary.  Course A calls everything off the edge of the fairways a hazard, course B calls them ESA hazards, and course C calls them OB.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsc123 View Post

Your fatal flaw is allowing the fairway drop.  If you just kept it to 2 club lengths from the margin of the hazard/ob, you'd get a better reception, I think.  

Yes, I agree with this too.  Allowing drops willy-nilly all over the course is pretty fundamentally different.  Just make OB play like an ESA hazard, 2 clublengths, and I'm in.

post #25 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

 

26.    Drops- Under penalty of 1 stroke, the Player may drop, no nearer to the hole, as follows:

a.       Unplayable Lie- the point where the ball is found

 

So if I'm in a green side bunker I can take an unplayable, walk out of the bunker and drop my ball anywhere I like as long as it's no closer to the hole? Depending on the shape of the green and the position of the bunker I could very well be dropping on the green.

post #26 of 138
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mordan View Post

 

So if I'm in a green side bunker I can take an unplayable, walk out of the bunker and drop my ball anywhere I like as long as it's no closer to the hole? Depending on the shape of the green and the position of the bunker I could very well be dropping on the green.

Yup...I knew this would be controversial and is ultimately why it might have to go to the two club lengths proposed by others.  

 

My thinking is that 98% of the time pros on the PGA Tour would still hit the bunker shot figuring they could get closer to the hole, 0-10 cappers would probably still hit 80+% of their bunker shots even if given this option.  You average player would probably hit about 50% of their bunker shots and total hacks would take their 1 shot penalty and get out of the sand as quick as they could most of the time.  This could be tweaked pretty easily to keep more of the challenge.

post #27 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanhilton85 View Post

 

 

 

 

The penalty for hitting the ball off of the course should be more severe than hitting the ball into a hazard.

 

 

 

 

More than that, the penalty for hitting the ball off the course, should be more severe than simply hitting it somewhere other than where you wanted it to be!

 

 

More than that though.....

 

.....as with all the "let's simplify the rules" threads, the same holds true.  This isn't about simplifying the rules.  It's just about replacing rules that we don't like, with something else.  If that's the case, don't play golf......invent a new game that better suits your taste and play it instead.

post #28 of 138

OB is a little tricky. I have no idea what spawned the rule but I suspect some of the modern courses have veered from the initial determination. At some of the courses I play OB is everywhere on the course, not just remote edges. Some wind through housing developments others are rural and they coexist amongst land leased by oil companies. In some instances the OB can be just a few yards off the fairway. Doesn't take being off target much to hit it over there.

 

However I get why they don't want people over there, it's not course property. Because of that I make adjustments. It's all part of the course strategy as far as I'm concerned and I assume part of the course rating. To pull a club you can't control on these holes is too flirt with danger. I don't consider it to be unfair just because a few holes away you can slice it across two fairways and still be in play. It's kind of like a fairway bunker that comes into play, you know it's there and if you don't take measures to avoid it the potential for a bummer is high.

post #29 of 138

MEfree, I have a question.  In your rules, can I still anchor my putter, or use square grooves on my wedges?  z5_smartass.gif

post #30 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachcomber View Post

MEfree, I have a question.  In your rules, can I still anchor my putter, or use square grooves on my wedges?  z5_smartass.gif

I say yes!  And you can keep throwing your driver and cursing after every snap hook as well. c2_beer.gif

post #31 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14ledo81 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

Not debatable if you understand what the foundation is for that difference.  Since play is not allowed from any point not on the golf course, when your ball is out of bounds, it is not in play.  You should be required to play from the last point where the ball was in play on the golf course.  You should not receive a distance reward for a ball hit so poorly that it leaves the course.  

 

A ball hit into a water hazard, may or may not be playable, but it is still the ball in play until the player takes some action to change its status.  Some better resolution (i.e. some potential - but not guaranteed - distance gain) should be allowed for that status.  Again, it goes right back the the fundamental principles of the game and of the penalty balanced against the offense.

 

A question on this one??  What if a water hazard runs down the side of the course.  The actually property line is roughly 50' into the water.  Would you have to decide where the ball landed?  In the water closer to the course (lateral hazard).  Or in the water further away (out of bounds).

 

 

How many courses do you play where this is an issue?  A properly designed and marked course would have done everything possible to avoid such a situation.  The entire body of water would either be in bounds or out of bounds.  In a case where a river crosses the course, if the ball entered the river on the course, then there would have to be some sort of evidence that the ball had subsequently been carried out of bounds by the current.  Baring such evidence, the ball must be deemed to still be in the hazard and within the course boundaries.

 

 

Quote:
My main issue is this.  I can hit a hook a shot that lands 2' out of bounds (roughly 30'-40' offline) and be penalized with stroke and distance.  On the same hole, I could slice one 2 fair ways over, (roughly 200'-300' offline) and not be penalized as bad. 

 

If there is a risk of such wild inconsistency, then I'd advise you to favor the slice side of the hole.  That's what I'd do. a2_wink.gif

post #32 of 138

The OP has documented the set of rules many newbies and casual golfers use when they play, let's call it FunGolf.  I commend the effort but the overall problem is, these rules aren't golf, so those that play FunGolf will have a difficult time transitioning to real golf.  If they maintain a handicap under FunGolf, it will be meaningless in real golf. 

 

All that said, maybe this is the direction golf can consider to attract more golfers along with some of the ideas that Jack and Arnie have suggested, like 12 holes instead of 18 and a larger cup size.  I wouldn't be interested in playing FunGolf, but I can see how this could be a version of golf for people who want the overall experience without all the rules, just as those who don't want to or aren't able to play fast pitch baseball turn to slow pitch softball in their later years.   

post #33 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

I say yes!  And you can keep throwing your driver and cursing after every snap hook as well. c2_beer.gif

But I only do that on special occasions! 

post #34 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

Why should the penalty for OB be more?  The original rules of golf did not even mention OB.

Why? Because OB is off of the course, hazards are still part of the course. It makes sense to be penalized more for hitting the ball to a place that is off of the course.

post #35 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

I don't think he was saying it would increase enjoyment, but rather it would not decrease enjoyment, while at the same time, making the game easier to understand, and potentially faster.

 

But I disagree.  I don't think it will make the game faster because the only real drastic changes are for OB and lost balls, and how many people not playing in a tournament ever actually drive back to the tee to re-hit if they didn't hit a provisional?  Almost none.  And even when they do, overall, this doesn't slow down the game that much, in the grand scheme of things.

 

However, I don't know that I agree with Tristan/Erik/Et. Al. that there has to be a greater penalty for OB than there does for hazards.  (I keep going back and forth on this)  Admittedly, my opinion is extremely biased on this because I tend to hit it OB more than your average golfer, but the fact that different courses seem to arbitrarily mark certain areas OB vs. hazard is what gets me.  I had one last week that was, literally, 12" beyond the cart path, and sitting perfectly on top of the mulch with a clear shot to the green.  I mean, this shot wasn't 10 yards from being in the fairway, it was perfectly playable, and it cost me stroke and distance.

 

I think I would be on board with a re-write of the rules that changed OB to the equivalent of an ESA hazard.  Not stroke and distance, but since it's usually off the courses property, you cannot play it from there.  That seems like a reasonable compromise.  (Of course, I'm also fine with the rules how they are, but if, for whatever reason, they changed that one, I don't think it would fundamentally change the game, nor would it affect my enjoyment any)

 

Lost balls are trickier because you never quite know where they were.

I agree 100% about O.B should be played as ESA.  I think this is a great idea.  

 

I don't understand the thought procces that O.B. should be more penal than a water hazard.  I can see a lake or the ocean and know that I don't want to hit my ball in that direction, but when playing a new course I don't always know that there are these little white stakes, sometimes put there by the course that have no obvious reason from the tee.  Even if you know the course why should the color of the stakes change the way you play the hole.  I.E. they are red on the left and white on the right so I would rather be left than right.

post #36 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanhilton85 View Post

Why? Because OB is off of the course, hazards are still part of the course. It makes sense to be penalized more for hitting the ball to a place that is off of the course.

I don't know about you but where I am from course's sometimes put O.B. in the middle of the course because of space limitations or a design flaw.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rules of Golf
This thread is locked  
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › MEfree Challenge: New Rules of Golf - Simplified but not Fundamentally Changed