Originally Posted by MyrtleBeachGolf
Originally Posted by tristanhilton85
The penalty for hitting the ball off of the course should be more severe than hitting the ball into a hazard.
I'm sorry, but as others have already stated, I have an issue with this. I understand the fundamental principal here, but question it's application. On an up and back wide open cow pasture layout, I could slice my shot off the tee 100 yards right across 2 other fairways and still play it with no penalty. But most courses here are closely lined with resort condos or homes. And I could just slightly push my drive, have it land IN THE FAIRWAY, and bound across 5 yards of rough, an asphalt cart path and be next to an OB stake just because the course is lined with condos.
I fail to see how missing a fairway by 5-10 yards should require a stiffer penalty than slicing your drive 50 yards off target, just because the course decided to build condos along every single hole.
I know the suggestion, play away from the OB. Yes, obviously. And I take every precaution in order to do exactly that. Usually resulting in a straight pull down the left to avoid any interaction with the condos on the right. But I just can't believe that the spirit of the rules are being followed with OB stakes placed everywhere on the course because of condos. There are plenty of courses here where the course itself winds through an entire community. In many situations both sides of the hole are marked OB the entire length to keep you out of people's yards. Is this really how the rules were intended??
I've played many such courses over the years, and the ones which didn't leave enough land to make a proper golf course I only play once. I agree that such courses aren't much fun for the average player, so I don't play them. I've played a few residential courses which do leave enough room to route the holes through the development even though there is out of bound on both sides of the hole. While that type of course may not be my preferred style, I can deal with it.
When you must play that kind of course, you modify your game to fit. If you are one of those players who is long and often crooked, then I suggest when you play a tight course, you change your style. Play a shorter tee, use FW woods or irons instead of driver, and find a way to manage your game so the the course becomes more playable. Changing a rule because you don't like the way it fits on some courses just doesn't make any sense. It's much more logical to adjust your game to suit the track.
Originally Posted by MEfree
Originally Posted by iacas
This thread is, as I said, pretty much a non-starter. MEFree, you've been tasked with "simplifying" the rules without fundamentally changing the game. Your "simpler" rules fundamentally change the game about twelve times over.
Ok, so which 5 Keys to the Golf Swing would change? What changes to Evolvr's online lessons would you make if these rules were implemented tomorrow? Who do you think would be OWGR #1 a year after these rules were implemented?
My point is that while these rules are fundamentally different than the current rules, the game is still basically the same- hitting a little white ball into a hole in as few strokes as possible. I will concede that with a lesser OB penalty, some players might be a bit more aggressive on some holes, but most players will likely play most holes the same way they currently do. To me, the rules provide a framework for the game, but they are NOT the fundamental essence of the game.
Here is the disconnect. You feel that the rules are not fundamental to the game. I dispute that. The rules ARE the game. They are what define the game. And the basic fundamental principles of the game are what determine how far those rules can stray without it becoming a different game. For an "invented game" (like baseball for instance), the rules may have been built to fit a basic premise.
I don't know how much evolution over time may have affected how baseball is played (the only significant rules change I know of is the DH bastardization by the American League), but when someone decided to make it easier for the ordinary Joe to play, he added a bigger ball, shorter base paths, a different pitching method. As a result, it was no longer baseball - it became softball. Looks sort of like baseball, but the differences are monumental, even though the goal is still the same, to throw and hit the ball and score runs.
Golf is not an invented game like baseball. It is almost 100% evolutionary. It started simply with Scottish shepherds batting balls around the pasture. Someone else saw that and picked up on it, started playing during leisure time, giving the game some structure in the process. Since it was still very localized and only played as a simple one on one match format, the rules were simple. It was a purely local phenomenon, so the rules were just passed around verbally. Stroke play evolved from match play when a playing club wanted to find a way to play an entire competition in a single day, yet still be able to involve the entire membership. However, they started to find issues with the game which needed a resolution to make it fair to a large field. That resulted in 1744 at Edinburgh with the first documented Rules of Golf. They worked as needed after a fashion, but there were conditions at other clubs which didn't exist at St. Andrews, so those clubs added or modified as necessary to fit their course and conditions. However, they all still held one thing in common - they all still remained true to the basic concept of the game, and they occasionally got together to compare notes and work toward a more standard set of rules. For 250 years the stroke game has continued to evolve in a similar manner while still holding true to those roots and adhering to a couple of basic fundamental principles.
I'm not sure just who came up with the concept or when it was applied, but at some point it was determined that penalties should be applied to balance the advantage which might be gained as a result of the breach, rather than just being punishment. In part it goes back to the original 13 rules (see quote below) This is why there are one stroke, two strokes, varying distance allowances, and even relief without penalty.
5. 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.
The so called penalty stroke in this case really only represents the stroke you would have taken to pitch out of the hazard had you had the ability to do so. Other penalties are graded in like fashion, and it is quite fundamental that a ball lying in play (but unplayable) in a water hazard on the course should have the potential of a more favorable penalty than a ball which lies out of play, out of bounds.
The modifications which MEFree has so far put forth would create a new game - let's call it "Softgolf", since it relates to golf much as softball relates to baseball. It may look like golf to an inexperienced eye, but you have already unbalanced a fundamental part of the of the game by messing around with the penalty structure. I contend that a ball out of bounds is nothing similar to a ball lost in a water hazard. A lost ball is not remotely like a ball which lies unplayable. And we haven't even gotten to the obstruction rule yet.
Softgolf may bear a passing similarity to golf, but it ain't golf.
Edited by Fourputt - 5/30/13 at 10:15am