Originally Posted by MEfree
Originally Posted by Dave2512
But isn't that how it should be? There's more to it than skill. It's the ability to make decisions on the course based on your skill relative to the difficulty of the course, including the ability to avoid obstacles. It makes sense that better players would avoid trouble. Some of it is due to their reasoning, their ability to exercise control and evaluate risk.
I am not saying that isn't how it should be...all I am saying is that my proposed rules wouldn't change that- pros would still keep it in play and high cappers wouldn't. You aren't going to see an 18 capper beat Tiger playing under my rules.
On the course you play most often Dave, how many holes would you change your strategy if you were playing under my rules?
Which has nothing to do with anything. You keep trying to make it sound better by this odd fixation you have about comparing pros and amateurs. I'm an amateur, (and by handicap comparison, never as good a player as you are) and I don't think that we need different rules. I played 22 years of amateur competition by the rules with a whole lot of other amateurs who felt as I do.
Strategy has nothing to do with it. I never play with the plan to incur a penalty. I play with the intent of getting the best result, an sometimes that means flirting with a penalty. That may be skirting a hazard, or it may be risking OB, or a lost ball to accomplish my goal. What I don't want to see, and what I feel would not be beneficial for the game, is a risk reward decision which equates the two types of issues. As Dave said, risk evaluation is a big part of the game. Some would say that it's the single biggest factor in course management. You want to completely remove an entire level of risk.
I don't think that your easy rules for amateurs would make a whit of difference in how most weekend hackers play the game. They don't play by the rules now and they still won't by your rules. They simply don't care. And for formal, by the rules competitions, the current rules work just fine.
Admit it. All of this really came about because you missed out on a PB because of a lost ball and you want to skip the distance part of the penalty so that next time you maybe make it. The trouble is, it won't really be a new PB because it would be played under a very different penalty structure than your previous PB.
Originally Posted by dsc123
Originally Posted by Fourputt
Contrived? But these proposed rules changes aren't contrived? That's about all I have to say to you about that. Have you ever stood on the tee and hit more than one ball out of bounds before finally getting a ball in play? Yet now you want the get out of jail free card. Maybe you should just stick with Monopoly.
(And yes, I've played several courses with doglegs which hook around and OB area. A course close to my house in Denver had exactly such a par 5 hole. The tee shot was typically played as far down the left as possible, and the only real way to reach the green in two was to cut the dogleg from the tee. I played a lot of provisional balls off that tee.)
Yes, I have hit two straight drives OB. I'm not sure who gains by that. Especially if I have to walk back to the tee.
And if you've played "several" courses like that, how often is that? Say you've play 50 rounds a year, and encounter this three times a year, and every time you see this it changes your incentive. That's what, once every three hundred holes?
And you want this changed, not so that you don't have to go back, but so that you don't have to face that risk ever again. If you are honest with yourself, you will admit that.
What difference does it make how many? If there is even one then that is all it takes for this to be a bad idea. I've never bothered to count them but suffice it to say that I've played at least 10 courses which would have this possibility on one or more holes.
Edited by Fourputt - 5/30/13 at 2:04pm