Jump to content
iacas

PGA Tour's 2020 Pace of Play Changes

PGA Tour's Policy  

33 members have voted

  1. 1. How big of a difference will the PGA Tour's new policy make?

    • None - It's all for show.
      11
    • Some. They'll make an example of a few people, and that'll be that.
      15
    • A moderate amount. Players will speed up after a few get some penalty shots.
      7
    • A bunch. It will noticeably improve the pace of play on the PGA Tour.
      0


87 posts / 6675 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

And so that takes care of Thursday.

On Friday, the tee order is reversed, then you’ve got the opposite problem.

Or do you want to change that as well, to accommodate those who refuse to play In compliance with Rule 5.6?

Once deemed a slower player put them at the back of the line regardless of their score, on Thursday/Friday. Playing last is punishment enough. 

"So in so is -10, but he is playing last?" would identify him/her a slow player.

The idea of 5.6 is get the slower players to either quit the game, or hopefully play faster. That, and to not cause grief for the faster player(s) they may be grouped with.  

I agree it could cause a problem on the weekend if a slower player is in the top 6 or 8 bring up the rear. They would have to play faster than they normally would.

My thinking is,  if they are that close to possibly winning, the slower player would willingly play a little faster. 

The idea of just giving a player extra strokes as a penalty for taking longer than 45 seconds, takes their best game out of their hands to a certain extent. 

Heck, with all the statistics they keep in pro golf today, just rate all the players' starting times according to their rated pace of play. Send the faster players out first. Medium speed players out in the second groups. Slower players out in the third group........lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

59 minutes ago, Patch said:

The idea of just giving a player extra strokes as a penalty for taking longer than 45 seconds, takes their best game out of their hands to a certain extent.

 

Wrong. Playing faster is completely in their hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

6 hours ago, Patch said:

Seems to me that penalizing a guy for being slow could negetively impact their earning ability. These are independent contractors out there trying to make a living.

What?!?!

Seriously… What is your point here? Applying a stroke-and-distance penalty "could negatively impact their earning ability," but you still do it because those are the Rules of the game they willingly choose to play. Their "earning ability" is affected by everything.

6 hours ago, Patch said:

Is the pga exempt from the various right to work laws?

They're the rules of the game… courts can't decide that type of thing so long as the rules aren't "black people are assessed a three-stroke penalty for being black" or something like that.

And, it's the PGA Tour. It's not the PGA.

6 hours ago, Patch said:

My fix for pga slow players would be this; Once a player has been identified as a slow player, send these slower players out last in the tournament.

f*** no, for ten different and entirely good reasons.


@Patch, please stop smoking whatever it is you're smoking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

23 hours ago, dennyjones said:

Well dang.   It's not the first time I've stood alone!  It won't be the last.   

I think the players will push the boundaries. I don't believe they will penalize anyone on the PGA tour.   No data to back it up, just a gut feeling.  

Of course the players will push the boundaries. That's what players do in any professional sports league! 

And I think the only way to do it is to assess strokes! That costs players real money, screw the miniscule fines! I remember from years ago, a player named Glen Day, nicknamed "All" by his comrades because he took "All" Day to hit a shot, said he'd just as soon write a thousand dollar check to the Tour at the beginning of the tournament to play at whatever pace he wanted! 

It's getting ridiculous. The pace of play on Tour is glacial! It doesn't show so much in the middle of a round because there is other action to cut to. But toward the end of a tourney, when there are only a few groups left on the course, it gets tiresome! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

16 hours ago, colin007 said:

Wrong. Playing faster is completely in their hands.

I agree totally. If the rules tell them to play faster, they will. Basketball and football have play times that they adjusted to after the rules were put in place. Pro baseball and golf have a problem and it needs to be fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I don't think it will work until you change the rules and implement a shot clock.  You can have a couple of volunteers carry a shot clock around and start the clock once the player has arrived at his ball and it has been determined that it is his turn.  

Give the first player like 1 minute to execute his shot and 30 seconds for the other players.  Or, just do a flat shot clock since it could be cumbersome to have different times.  Maybe do a flat 45 seconds for all shots when they have arrived at their ball and it's their turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

Give the first player like 1 minute to execute his shot and 30 seconds for the other players.  Or, just do a flat shot clock since it could be cumbersome to have different times.  Maybe do a flat 45 seconds for all shots when they have arrived at their ball and it's their turn.

Rule 5.6:

A player should make a stroke in no more than 40 seconds (and usually in less time) after the player is able to play without interference or distraction

In some of my groups, the "distraction" seldom ends.

😎

 

Edited by Cartboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Patch said:

 The idea of just giving a player extra strokes as a penalty for taking longer than 45 seconds, takes their best game out of their hands to a certain extent. 

It is literally in the rules of golf. 40 seconds per shot with a 20 second addition for certain situations. If a pro golfer can't play their best golf within the rules of golf, they are in the wrong spot. They should pick up classical timed chess instead if they want to take that long. 

11 minutes ago, Cartboy said:

Rule 5.6:

A player should make a stroke in no more than 40 seconds (and usually in less time) after the player is able to play without interference or distraction

In some of my groups, the "distraction" seldom ends.

😎

 

Thanks for posting the rule. The governing bodies need to change "should" to "must" and specify that interference and distraction is only for loud noises or wildlife impeding the shot, not leaves falling or wind picking up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

29 minutes ago, Cartboy said:

Rule 5.6:

A player should make a stroke in no more than 40 seconds (and usually in less time) after the player is able to play without interference or distraction

In some of my groups, the "distraction" seldom ends.

😎

 

The problem, however, is the rule says the player should, not must.  It should say must.

23 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

It is literally in the rules of golf. 40 seconds per shot with a 20 second addition for certain situations. If a pro golfer can't play their best golf within the rules of golf, they are in the wrong spot. They should pick up classical timed chess instead if they want to take that long. 

Thanks for posting the rule. The governing bodies need to change "should" to "must" and specify that interference and distraction is only for loud noises or wildlife impeding the shot, not leaves falling or wind picking up

You beat me to it.  Agreed 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

The problem, however, is the rule says the player should, not must.  It should say must.

No, it shouldn't say "must," because then that rule applies to everything.

So, if I'm out telling a story that everyone in the group wants to hear, and we're neither waiting on anyone nor being waited on (in fact we're the only group for three holes in either direction), I technically would be breaking the Rules of Golf if I didn't play inside of 40 seconds.

So no, it should not be a "must" in the Rules of Golf. It should be clearly spelled out and enforced — as it can be now, with the 2019 Rules — in a condition of competition and the pace of play guidelines for that event.

But as a general Rule of Golf, no, it should not say "must." For the situation I outlined and a hundred others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, iacas said:

and we're neither waiting on anyone nor being waited on

Doesn't matter.  If it's your turn to play, play your shot.  Besides, when will this rare occurrence you've come up with happen if the shot clock rule is abided by everyone?  That's the whole point here--to not have this situation to begin with.

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

if I'm out telling a story that everyone in the group wants to hear

Sounds more like a casual golf round than the professional context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, ncates00 said:

Sounds more like a casual golf round than the professional context.

Uhm, that's my point. If you make it "must" then it applies ALL the time, to ALL of golf.

Which would be stupid.

The way it's written in 2019 is fine, because it has a general recommendation (not a "must") in the Rules, and then gives the Committee authority to make their own "must" type rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Uhm, that's my point. If you make it "must" then it applies ALL the time, to ALL of golf.

Which would be stupid.

The way it's written in 2019 is fine, because it has a general recommendation (not a "must") in the Rules, and then gives the Committee authority to make their own "must" type rule.

Yeah that's a good point.  Maybe carve out an exception, i.e., "based upon the circumstances" or something.  Although I know the rule governs all play as you stated, I was really responding more to a local rule/Tour rule (although not stated).  

I still think it should say must even in the rule, however.  Just carve out a reasonableness standard or something to cover those instances where you and your buddies are playing with few others on the course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, ncates00 said:

I still think it should say must even in the rule, however.  Just carve out a reasonableness standard or something to cover those instances where you and your buddies are playing with few others on the course.

I don't. That's what "should" does, and leaves room as noted for a Committee to institute their own POPP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, iacas said:

I don't. That's what "should" does, and leaves room as noted for a Committee to institute their own POPP.

You want a general rule of leniency with the ability to elect exceptions.  I'd rather have a strict general rule, with some express exceptions.  I think the latter makes more sense for enforceability and is more fair.  I think as-is, there is no teeth for enforcement.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, iacas said:

Uhm, that's my point. If you make it "must" then it applies ALL the time, to ALL of golf.

Which would be stupid.

The way it's written in 2019 is fine, because it has a general recommendation (not a "must") in the Rules, and then gives the Committee authority to make their own "must" type rule.

Here's the issue that I have with that. No one follows half of the rules at the places I play anyway. Those people aren't going to even look at the rules anyway, so how does it change anything? Just break the rules like everyone else does in the story telling situation. Or consider it a time out on the tee box if it makes you feel better about not following a rule to the t in a situation that isn't really applicable.

I am assuming that as a good golfer, you think about your next shot or the whole next hole while story time is happening. If so, you are gaining an unfair advantage against players that don't have the luxury of stopping for 5 minutes because the course is crowded. That would be gaming the system and being against the spirit of the game even in the "should" rules. Do you have this come up often? What do you do, and how do you feel about getting that much extra time to think/analyze?

Edition edit*

What if you are playing with a player that plays fast, and doesn't want any part of story time? Is it acceptable to let them just play out in front because you would rather talk than golf? Can he still card a score if he plays solo because his playing partners wouldn't follow the "should" rule? I can tell you right now that if someone wanted to tell a 2 minute plus story while I was in their group, I would just tee it up, whack, and start walking. Save the stories for the clubhouse after the round, or when the course is crowded and you are waiting.

Edited by Bonvivant
addition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

9 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

I am assuming that as a good golfer, you think about your next shot or the whole next hole while story time is happening. If so, you are gaining an unfair advantage against players that don't have the luxury of stopping for 5 minutes because the course is crowded. That would be gaming the system and being against the spirit of the game even in the "should" rules. Do you have this come up often? What do you do, and how do you feel about getting that much extra time to think/analyze?

You should have stopped at assuming… because it's pretty easy to go astray at that point.

No, I'm not thinking about stuff while I'm telling some story, nor does it matter if I did as it's clearly not a competitive situation. But like I'll say next… back to the topic, please.

13 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

You want a general rule of leniency with the ability to elect exceptions.

For good reason.

13 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

I'd rather have a strict general rule, with some express exceptions.

Good luck with that. "Based upon the circumstances"? C'mon.

Anyway, the general rule is off topic here. All I'm saying is that adding "must" to the general Rules of Golf that apply to everyone all the time is a bad idea. And reasons like the ones I've given are WHY they're a bad idea.

Back to the topic, which is the PGA Tour's policy post-Masters in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...