Should Rule 4.4 (Maximum of 14 clubs) be altered?

[Bastid]

14 is a fine number. Gives players multiple options to what they can fill their bag out before a tournament round.

You want to play faster? Then take up speed walking or something...4 hours for an 18 hole round is what it takes. I enjoy being outside on a beautiful day for that long, I keep pace but am in no hurry whatsoever. Boring thread...but still had to add my few cents.

[Fourputt]

In my opinion, part of the skill factor in the game of golf is in selecting the set of no more than 14 clubs which most suits your own game and the course you will be playing.

It's like the expert fisherman who chooses the proper rod, line weight, and lure for the type of fish he is after.  He may be limited by game laws which restrict him to artificial lures only (no live or formerly living bait), or it may be catch and release only, or only certain species at certain times of the year.  Failure to comply will eventually draw the unwelcome attention of the game warden.

The golfer must also choose the proper clubs, ball, etc., and then play within the rules of golf and any applicable competition or local rules.  Failure to comply may not have the same legal implications as breaking fish and game laws, but it's still a statement of the player's unwillingness to fairly test himself within the limits imposed by the rules of the game.

[inthehole]

I understand the feelings of those who feel strongly about obeying the rules & spirit of the game.     My only comment is that this way of thinking would apply more to competition/tournament players than beginners or developing golfers.     Me for example - I've been playing very seriously for a year and a half & have a situation currently that I can not decide if I prefer a 4h over my beloved 4i.     I'm carrying both (15 clubs), and plan on doing so for most of this year, as I want to play both for various shots on the course & hopefully by years end, I can form an educated decision as to which I will carry & which works best for the majority of on course situations (this kind of experience can't be had on a driving range).     My goal is to establish a formal handicap next year & at that time, I'll obviously be playing legit ... for me, I'm still in the developing stage - only thing I don't like is the feeling that it's seemingly a moral character flaw if you break the rules (for any reason) ...

[Divot Master]

To paraphrase the ROG stroke play penalty for an extra club: 2 strokes per hole up to a maximum of 4 strokes penalty, and the extra club must be declared out of play immediately upon discovery.  But what if this rule were modified to be a 2 stroke penalty per extra club, assessed once only, and then you could use the extra club for the rest of the round?  In effect, you could buy the use of extra clubs at the beginning of the round, for a two stroke penalty each.  Would you take advantage of such a rule, or do you feel the price is too steep?

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Divot Master

To paraphrase the ROG stroke play penalty for an extra club: 2 strokes per hole up to a maximum of 4 strokes penalty, and the extra club must be declared out of play immediately upon discovery.  But what if this rule were modified to be a 2 stroke penalty per extra club, assessed once only, and then you could use the extra club for the rest of the round?  In effect, you could buy the use of extra clubs at the beginning of the round, for a two stroke penalty each.  Would you take advantage of such a rule, or do you feel the price is too steep?

If you study the rules, you will find that they are written in such a way that the penalties are so formulated that the procedures or strokes assessed ensure that the player does not gain an advantage by breaching a rule.  Your suggestion would be contrary to that philosophy.  In my opinion, it would be in effect, no penalty at all - certainly not enough to be a deterrent.

[Divot Master]

Originally Posted by Divot Master

To paraphrase the ROG stroke play penalty for an extra club: 2 strokes per hole up to a maximum of 4 strokes penalty, and the extra club must be declared out of play immediately upon discovery.  But what if this rule were modified to be a 2 stroke penalty per extra club, assessed once only, and then you could use the extra club for the rest of the round?  In effect, you could buy the use of extra clubs at the beginning of the round, for a two stroke penalty each.  Would you take advantage of such a rule, or do you feel the price is too steep?

To answer my own question...

No, I would not take advantage of such a rule.  In analyzing my game, I do not see any situations where an extra club would consistently improve my score by at least two strokes.

As a hypothetical example, a typical 90 shooting amateur, using driver about 12 times a round and taking about 30 putts, will use each of the other 12 clubs an average of 4 times per round.  Say I want to carry a 4th wedge, and leave out the 5 iron.  I'm 170 from the pin, a perfect 5 iron for me.  The pin is back so I hit a hard 6 and come up a bit short, or the pin is forward so I ease up on a hybrid and still go a bit past the flag.  In either case, I probably have a 30 foot putt, versus the 15 footer I might have had with the 5.  And in either case, I probably two-putt, so no real difference in my overall score, maybe a tenth of a stroke on the average.  The same sort of logic can be applied to every other club in the bag.

As long as you have selected your 14 clubs wisely for your game and the course, a 15th club would likely be of very little value.

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by Divot Master

To answer my own question...

No, I would not take advantage of such a rule.  In analyzing my game, I do not see any situations where an extra club would consistently improve my score by at least two strokes.

As long as you have selected your 14 clubs wisely for your game and the course, a 15th club would likely be of very little value.

This thread has gone off track a little, it is too concerned with the rules and misinterpreting the initial idea. Should normal golfers consider carrying less clubs with the benefit being, they will probably play better.

[newtogolf]

As a relative beginner I disagree they will play better with less than 14 clubs.  I can hit all my clubs with a full swing, but once I start going less than that the results are mixed.  I know a full 6i is 150 yards (no wind).  If I have to hit a ball 150 yards with a 3/4 5i or over swing my 7i I'm looking at much greater risk than a full swing 6i.

At some point I hope to be able to control all my clubs and know their distances at less than a full swing, but right now I can't so I don't see the benefit of using less clubs than allowed.

Originally Posted by Patrick57

This thread has gone off track a little, it is too concerned with the rules and misinterpreting the initial idea. Should normal golfers consider carrying less clubs with the benefit being, they will probably play better.

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

As a relative beginner I disagree they will play better with less than 14 clubs.  I can hit all my clubs with a full swing, but once I start going less than that the results are mixed.  I know a full 6i is 150 yards (no wind).  If I have to hit a ball 150 yards with a 3/4 5i or over swing my 7i I'm looking at much greater risk than a full swing 6i.

At some point I hope to be able to control all my clubs and know their distances at less than a full swing, but right now I can't so I don't see the benefit of using less clubs than allowed.

Good point but there is more than one way to play this game, although few really know this.

I played the 14 club game for over 35 years. I was stuck in the normal dial up a club for a specific distance and it all got very boring. E.g. How far do you hit your 6 iron or why didn't you take 9 iron from there. I have been playing with 7 clubs for a few years now and enjoy using imagination, creativity and feel with many more of my shots. When the occasion arises where I do have to play an imaginative escape shot, I am now much more prepared and experienced.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I played the 14 club game for over 35 years. I was stuck in the normal dial up a club for a specific distance and it all got very boring. E.g. How far do you hit your 6 iron or why didn't you take 9 iron from there. I have been playing with 7 clubs for a few years now and enjoy using imagination, creativity and feel with many more of my shots. When the occasion arises where I do have to play an imaginative escape shot, I am now much more prepared and experienced.

Some of us are capable of using our imagination with 14 clubs. Just because they're in the bag and you're at a "specific distance" doesn't mean you need to play that shot.

And again, this topic very clearly pertained to the rules being changed, which I think has definitively been answered "no."

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by iacas

Some of us are capable of using our imagination with 14 clubs. Just because they're in the bag and you're at a "specific distance" doesn't mean you need to play that shot.

And again, this topic very clearly pertained to the rules being changed, which I think has definitively been answered "no."

'Some of us' is the minority though. I don't see much genuine individuality, creativeness or imagination in reality.

I posted the thread as a discussion and didn't expect anyone to answer with a simple 'no'. I could have opened it without my side of the discussion and left it just as stated in the heading. A poll could have been put in place to answer yes or no. That would have been pointless because I would also answer simply 'no' to the topic heading.

I firmly believe that too many golfers are playing the one and same version of this game and although the main feedback is, 'I need all of my clubs' there are some other interesting thoughts on this. I feel too many people failed to realise that the OP wasn't really wanting to change any rules but only suggesting another way to play the game. The rules slant just let alternatives/restrictions seem more realistic.

[newtogolf]

Just to bring you back to your original post where your position was high handicappers should use less clubs because it will allow them to play better.  Your current position is less clubs allows people to use their imagination and be more creative so they don't get bored.

Maybe you've been a scratch golfer for so long you've forgotten what it's like to be a high handicapper but I assure you, high handicappers aren't bored and we're more concerned with lowering our scores than being creative.  I have a lot of problems at a 22 handicap, the least of which is creativity.  I can hit the water with any club I use

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I am not a lover of the handicap system but I know its there and its probably there to stay. It does however make this new rule easier to apply. It goes like this...

Class (1)  Handicap 4.4 or lower may use up to 9 clubs.

Class (2)  Handicap 4.5 to 11.4 may use up to 8 clubs.

Class (3)  Handicap 11.5 to 18.4 may use up to 7 clubs.

Class (4)  Handicap 18.5 to 25.4 may use up to 6 clubs.

Class (5)  Handicap 25.5 or higher may use up to 5 clubs.

Originally Posted by Patrick57

'Some of us' is the minority though. I don't see much genuine individuality, creativeness or imagination in reality.

I posted the thread as a discussion and didn't expect anyone to answer with a simple 'no'. I could have opened it without my side of the discussion and left it just as stated in the heading. A poll could have been put in place to answer yes or no. That would have been pointless because I would also answer simply 'no' to the topic heading.

I firmly believe that too many golfers are playing the one and same version of this game and although the main feedback is, 'I need all of my clubs' there are some other interesting thoughts on this. I feel too many people failed to realise that the OP wasn't really wanting to change any rules but only suggesting another way to play the game. The rules slant just let alternatives/restrictions seem more realistic.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I posted the thread as a discussion and didn't expect anyone to answer with a simple 'no'. I could have opened it without my side of the discussion and left it just as stated in the heading. A poll could have been put in place to answer yes or no. That would have been pointless because I would also answer simply 'no' to the topic heading.

The problem is you made it a question of "should the rules be changed" and not "is it to a golfer's benefit, either spiritually/in terms of enjoyment OR to the benefit of their game to play with less clubs on occasion or always."

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I feel too many people failed to realise that the OP wasn't really wanting to change any rules but only suggesting another way to play the game. The rules slant just let alternatives/restrictions seem more realistic.

Then the title flat out sucks, as does the fact that you wrote up actual restrictions based on handicap index.

Just sayin'.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I feel too many people failed to realise that the OP wasn't really wanting to change any rules but only suggesting another way to play the game. The rules slant just let alternatives/restrictions seem more realistic.

If that was the intent of the OP then you are, sad to say, a really lousy communicator.  Go reread your original post and you will see what I mean

A clue:  if you are just suggesting that there is another way to play the game you might want to actually include those words in your post.

Another clue:  if you aren't talking about making rules changes then you probably want to avoid saying things like: "It does however make this new rule easier to apply. It goes like this..."

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by turtleback

If that was the intent of the OP then you are, sad to say, a really lousy communicator.  Go reread your original post and you will see what I mean

A clue:  if you are just suggesting that there is another way to play the game you might want to actually include those words in your post.

Another clue:  if you aren't talking about making rules changes then you probably want to avoid saying things like: "It does however make this new rule easier to apply. It goes like this..."

Calm down, calm down! I didn't force anyone to read or answer my post and I don't accuse anyone of being a really lousy commentator.

That being said, my very first sentence clearly stated;

"Before I begin, I have written this article as a conversation piece and if someday they do change this rule, I am not looking for any remuneration. Its definitely not Spam."

This makes my topic a conversation piece and not an attempt to actually change the rules.

I am not a lover of the handicap system but I know its there and its probably there to stay. I should have added, (for the sake of this conversation) It does however make this new rule easier to apply. It goes like this...

Class (1)  Handicap 4.4 or lower may use up to 9 clubs. And so on...

I was still in conversation mode here, sorry.

I'm not stupid, I know they are not going to consider changing this rule - mainly because of the manufacturers - and the present rule already allows everyone to play with 7 clubs if they want to. Once again, the rule slant only enhanced the point.

I am not interested in standing on a soapbox with a big placard stating, 'Old rule out, new rule in'

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Just to bring you back to your original post where your position was high handicappers should use less clubs because it will allow them to play better.  Your current position is less clubs allows people to use their imagination and be more creative so they don't get bored.

Maybe you've been a scratch golfer for so long you've forgotten what it's like to be a high handicapper but I assure you, high handicappers aren't bored and we're more concerned with lowering our scores than being creative.  I have a lot of problems at a 22 handicap, the least of which is creativity.  I can hit the water with any club I use

My position was stated as my personal opinion. I was finding the dial up a club for a specific distance side of the game boring, not other people's opinion, and I find the 7 club version more fun.

The game remains a challenge no matter what level you play at. I prefer the way I am playing it now.

Oh those hazards are sooo magnetic. Ha ha!

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by iacas

Then the title flat out sucks, as does the fact that you wrote up actual restrictions based on handicap index.

Just sayin'.

Good conversation starter though!

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

This makes my topic a conversation piece and not an attempt to actually change the rules.

Patrick, on this, you're wrong. You don't get to claim that the conversation was NOT about the "rules" when you use the word "rules" throughout, including in the title, and even propose language and specific rules based on handicap index.

It's revisionist history at best, and insulting to everyone else's intelligence. Including the word "conversation" does not make your topic a "conversation piece" that's NOT about changing the RULES when you say the word "RULES" several times, including in the title.

Drop the defense of the "it's not about the 'rules'" act. If you didn't want the discussion to be about the rules, then you really screwed up.