Should OB Not Be Stroke & Distance?

[saevel25]

This came up in another topic, but it got me thinking. Should OB penalty not be stroke and distance, but like a lateral hazard? 

I just wonder why OB is suppose to be more penal than a water hazard. 

I have no big beef with this rule, just more curious really. 

[ChetlovesMer]

I voted no for the negative. Which I think means I voted for the positive. 
So, No, OB should not not be a stroke plus distance. 

.... You all know where I went to school..........

[boogielicious]

OB is still in the books and they defined why in the last rules update. Courses can change OB to lateral at their discretion. There is also a 2 stoke drop now to help pace of play. So I voted no.

[Darkfrog]

I think I voted for stroke & distance is fine for balls OB. I don't remember what the Principles of the Rules of Golf says about this.

I know that a ball OB cannot be played, but a ball in a penalty area can, so maybe that has something to do with the different penalty between the two.

[Missouri Swede]

Being unable to keep the ball on the course is worse than putting it into a penalty area.

I'm not voting because I'm confusing myself with the double negative. (Should OB not be...? Shouldn't OB be...? No? Yes?)

Keep it on the course.  If they've got internal OB marked, then it must be for an important reason. Worse penalty than for relief from penalty area.

[woodzie264]

10 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

Being unable to keep the ball on the course is worse than putting it into a penalty area.

I'm not voting because I'm confusing myself with the double negative. (Should OB not be...? Shouldn't OB be...? No? Yes?)

Keep it on the course.  If they've got internal OB marked, then it must be for an important reason. Worse penalty than for relief from penalty area.

Agreed

[CarlSpackler]

OB should be S&D. It is not on the golf course, so it should be more penal. I don’t whether that means a yes or no vote. 

[mohearn]

OB means houses, streets, etc. Golfers need to have extra incentive to not hit their golf balls OB. 

[billchao]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

I just wonder why OB is suppose to be more penal than a water hazard. 

My understanding of this has always been because out of bounds is defined as off the course, it should be a more severe penalty.

Internal OB, now that’s a different discussion.

[jlbos83]

48 minutes ago, CarlSpackler said:

OB should be S&D. It is not on the golf course, so it should be more penal. I don’t whether that means a yes or no vote. 

True.  On both counts!

[DaveP043]

We are given 100 acres or more on which to play our game, if we can't hit those 100 acres the penalty should be severe.  Stroke and distance is right.  We should note that "distance only" was tried for a year, and the penalty returned to S&D.

The real question is whether ANY ball you can't play should be S&D.  The game is to play your ball from the tee to the hole, if you can't play the ball, why do you get credit for distance if you hit it in the water?  I say that a little tongue in cheek, but its probably closer to the true principles.

[dennyjones]

1 hour ago, CarlSpackler said:

OB should be S&D. It is not on the golf course, so it should be more penal. I don’t whether that means a yes or no vote. 

that isn't always the case.   One of the private course near me has  adjacent fairways between 9 and 10 and there is OB between them.  

There are local rules where off of the course isn't S&D in my area also.

I voted that OB should be stroke and distance.

[xrayvizhen]

I voted NO.

I've always been incredulous about the rule where a ball that lands on the other side of white stakes is a 2 stroke penalty and a ball hit over yellow or red stakes or into the drink is a one stroke penalty. They're all equally crappy shots and should be penalized equally.

[GolfLug]

I voted no. Hitting off the course always a greater penalty. I hate nothing more (who doesn't) than a re-tee hitting 3rd.

59 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

The real question is whether ANY ball you can't play should be S&D.  The game is to play your ball from the tee to the hole, if you can't play the ball, why do you get credit for distance if you hit it in the water?  I say that a little tongue in cheek, but its probably closer to the true principles.

Because, there should be some mercy and/or incentive for hitting it within the given 100 acres 😇.

 

[DaveP043]

12 minutes ago, xrayvizhen said:

They're all equally crappy shots and should be penalized equally.

In some ways, this is a safety issue.  On one side of a fairway is a stream, and anyone near that stream is a golfer, someone who knows to be watching for stray shots, someone who has accepted a certain amount of risk.  On the opposite side are houses, children in the back yards playing, completely unaware of deadly missiles in the air.  Shouldn't GOLF (in all caps, the game as  a whole) find a way to highly discourage you form making the kind of mistake that puts the innocent folks in danger.  Off of the property IS a worse shot than ON the property, in my mind.

[DaveP043]

2 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Because, there should be some mercy and/or incentive for hitting it within the given 100 acres 😇.

Yet to be truly consistent, the rules would require very similar treatments any time you can't continue playing your ball, whether its lost, OB, or not found in a hazard (or Penalty Area).  This particular case is one of the relatively few logical inconsistencies in the rules.  I agree, on the course in a relatively known location is better than off the course or simply lost.  But there is an interesting discussion of this issue in the Principles behind the Rules of Golf.

[colin007]

I view OB like I view playing out of divots, ground under repair....

🙂

Edited March 24, 2021 by colin007
Spelling

[GolfLug]

32 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

  This particular case is one of the relatively few logical inconsistencies in the rules.  

You CAN hit it out of water (technically even for middle of a lake) or penalty brush. It's still in play really. The stroke is just for taking an unplayable for personal reasons (for e.g. haven't tried but I am guessing I would have a hard time swinging the club while treading water). I am actually curious why previously termed lateral hazards are called penalty areas when it is not mandatory penalty. 

Why should you loose distance for technically keeping the ball in play unlike OB?

32 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

But there is an interesting discussion of this issue in the Principles behind the Rules of Golf.

Hmm.. I might check it out. 

Edited March 24, 2021 by GolfLug