Should Pros Play by a Different Set of Rules?

[LovinItAll]

Coincidentally there are sports where people switch balls to their advantage all the time, and yet I was thinking of them when I suggested (in another thread) that all players should use the same ball. Football - QBs can request a new ball. Punters and place kickers do this as well. Tennis - the person putting the ball into play (i.e. serving) can switch balls serve to serve or continue using the same one Baseball - same as tennis (one of only a few sports where the defense has the ball)

And bowling (I know, we can debate whether it's really a sport). Pro bowlers use multiple balls every game (no spin for taking out 7 or 10, for example). I made this poll after I heard Feherty call for the Tour to make their own rules. Frankly, I don't really care. Unless they change the ball, I'm going to try to play the same rule set as the pros even though I know we play different games. I just like that idea, but I respect other people's position on the matter. Re: Long putters - I have to respect Els' comment that the long putter made a huge impact on his game, whether it was just mentally or whatever. I remember Els and Woods and their battle in Kapalua (Els playing with the short putter). Don't know when he 'lost his nerve' or whatever, but somewhere along the line, he felt like the long putter restored his confidence on the green. To me, controlling/embracing one's nerves should be a part of the game, and there shouldn't be a club that removes nerves from the equation. With that said, Scott was making everything until Sunday, and even the long putter wasn't enough on his last putt on 18 when, I'm sure, his nerves where shot at that point.

[Mattplusness]

Originally Posted by LovinItAll

And bowling (I know, we can debate whether it's really a sport). Pro bowlers use multiple balls every game (no spin for taking out 7 or 10, for example).

I made this poll after I heard Feherty call for the Tour to make their own rules. Frankly, I don't really care. Unless they change the ball, I'm going to try to play the same rule set as the pros even though I know we play different games. I just like that idea, but I respect other people's position on the matter.

Re: Long putters - I have to respect Els' comment that the long putter made a huge impact on his game, whether it was just mentally or whatever. I remember Els and Woods and their battle in Kapalua (Els playing with the short putter). Don't know when he 'lost his nerve' or whatever, but somewhere along the line, he felt like the long putter restored his confidence on the green. To me, controlling/embracing one's nerves should be a part of the game, and there shouldn't be a club that removes nerves from the equation. With that said, Scott was making everything until Sunday, and even the long putter wasn't enough on his last putt on 18 when, I'm sure, his nerves where shot at that point.

I remember watching the last... 5-6 holes that morning. All of his putts were dead on the line, but almost all of them left short. The anchored putters don't fix how you hit the ball, it fixes where you hit the ball.

[Fourputt]

It would be silly and redundant to have different rules for different levels of the game.  One set of rules handles the job quite nicely.  The rules have the built in flexibility of local rules and conditions of the competition to control many aspects of the game which address the special circumstances faced in competitions at all levels.  Things like TV towers and cables are addressed in the Local Rule for Temporary Obstructions, and such conditions as the so-called "one ball rule" are part of the Tour Conditions of the Competition.   Even my own public course Mens Club had a hard card to spell out particular condtitions.

There is no reason to muck around with the basic Rules of Golf to address these things.

[ThominOH]

Originally Posted by Mattplusness

I remember watching the last... 5-6 holes that morning. All of his putts were dead on the line, but almost all of them left short. The anchored putters don't fix how you hit the ball, it fixes where you hit the ball.

That might be the case for some.. I know it wasn't the case for me..  I was much worse using a belly putter.. However, I really noticed a difference in using a "perimeter" weighted putter.. Will that be next on the chopping block because someone got their butts beat by someone using one? In fact I have yet this year play with anyone using a long putter.. It appears to me the only ones against it are the loud minority .. lol

[newtogolf]

At one level I agree one set of rules is preferred but I think we're at a point where the priorities between pro's and ams is different.  Seems R&A; wants to make the game tougher for the pro's by eliminating anchored putting.   If the USGA adopts the rule for all then we're going to have a lot of unhappy golfers at our local courses who are using long / belly putters either due to putting preference, injury or age.

Originally Posted by Fourputt

It would be silly and redundant to have different rules for different levels of the game.  One set of rules handles the job quite nicely.  The rules have the built in flexibility of local rules and conditions of the competition to control many aspects of the game which address the special circumstances faced in competitions at all levels.  Things like TV towers and cables are addressed in the Local Rule for Temporary Obstructions, and such conditions as the so-called "one ball rule" are part of the Tour Conditions of the Competition.   Even my own public course Mens Club had a hard card to spell out particular condtitions.

There is no reason to muck around with the basic Rules of Golf to address these things.

[dsc123]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

At one level I agree one set of rules is preferred but I think we're at a point where the priorities between pro's and ams is different.  Seems R&A; wants to make the game tougher for the pro's by eliminating anchored putting.   If the USGA adopts the rule for all then we're going to have a lot of unhappy golfers at our local courses who are using long / belly putters either due to putting preference, injury or age.

What sort of injury requires a belly putter?

I don't see the big deal of banning it.  Weekend hackers don't need to conform to the USGA's rules unless except for handicap purposes.  Courses can permit them via local rule if that will upset the membership.

[NM Golf]

Different set of rules, period. They should be similar of course but despite what others have said we do not play the same game as the pros. The pros play perfectly manicured courses, in general most ams don't. There are just subtle differences that would make the game more enjoyable for the average amateur and more challenging for the big boys. First, the amateur sets of rules should be simplified. Let's face it most amateur players have no idea how to play by them. No other professional sport lets the amateur bodies determine their rules for them. Football had several rule books. One for high school, One for college, and one for the NFL. The same goes for baseball and basketball. Yet golf should be the same. Makes no sense to me.

[newtogolf]

People with back injuries seem to prefer belly / long putter over traditional ones, claim it takes pressure off their back not having to lean over as much.

Originally Posted by dsc123

What sort of injury requires a belly putter?

I don't see the big deal of banning it.  Weekend hackers don't need to conform to the USGA's rules unless except for handicap purposes.  Courses can permit them via local rule if that will upset the membership.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

People with back injuries seem to prefer belly / long putter over traditional ones, claim it takes pressure off their back not having to lean over as much.

Freddy Couples is a great example of this.  He said a few years ago that he couldn't play tournament golf anymore without the belly putter.  It allows him to stand up straighter, which takes pressure off of his back.  It's a much more comfortable position that allows him to spend the time practicing his putting.

[dsc123]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

People with back injuries seem to prefer belly / long putter over traditional ones, claim it takes pressure off their back not having to lean over as much.

Originally Posted by k-troop

Freddy Couples is a great example of this.  He said a few years ago that he couldn't play tournament golf anymore without the belly putter.  It allows him to stand up straighter, which takes pressure off of his back.  It's a much more comfortable position that allows him to spend the time practicing his putting.

I guess I figured an injury that made it impossible to put would make it impossible to hit every other club in the bag.  But I guess not.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Don't most sports leagues use one ball for everyone? I'd start there.

In all of the sports you're thinking of the shared equipment is "one" type (one hockey puck, one football, one baseball, one tennis ball). Yet tennis players can use different rackets, baseball players different hats and gloves, football players different cleats and helmets, etc.

Shared equipment is more strictly regulated than personal equipment. The golf ball in golf is not shared equipment. Your analogy quickly falls apart.

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Often it's the same guys who say things like "the professionals play an entirely different game than we do" and "the great thing about golf is we all play the same game - from amateurs on a muni to the guys on the PGA Tour". Sure you do.

And yet, more than virtually any other sport, they are. A kid can go from playing his local muni to qualifying for the U.S. Open. In fact, it happens every year (depending on your definition of "kid").

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Don't most sports leagues use one ball for everyone? I'd start there.

In all of the sports you're thinking of the shared equipment is "one" type (one hockey puck, one football, one baseball, one tennis ball). Yet tennis players can use different rackets, baseball players different hats and gloves, football players different cleats and helmets, etc.

Shared equipment is more strictly regulated than personal equipment. The golf ball in golf is not shared equipment. Your analogy quickly falls apart.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Often it's the same guys who say things like "the professionals play an entirely different game than we do" and "the great thing about golf is we all play the same game - from amateurs on a muni to the guys on the PGA Tour". Sure you do.

And yet, more than virtually any other sport, they are. A kid can go from playing his local muni to qualifying for the U.S. Open. In fact, it happens every year (depending on your definition of "kid").

My analogy is fine. You just disagree is all - that's okay too.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

My analogy is fine. You just disagree is all - that's okay too.

No, no, no.  In all of your time here, have you not learned anything?  If somebody disagrees with you, you aren't supposed to be so civil ... you are supposed to say "You miss the point" and go off on them.

[MEfree]

In many practical respects the Pros already play by a different set of rules, especially with regards to lost balls and hazards.

-Even reasonably rules conscious amateurs routinely misplay a ball that is hit towards a hazard and not found by playing it as if it is lost in the hazard even when they is no way they can be virtually certain that it is not lost outside the hazard.

-I realize it happens rarely, but PGA pros almost never lose a ball in a tournament and it is not just because they hit all their shots in the fairway.

-Pros often get help at determining point of entry into a hazard while most amateurs don`t even understand the rule and those that do make a much less educated guess as to the correct drop position.

-Local rules can let amateurs drop on the green side of a hazard (closer to the hole to speed up play) while pros are sometimes permitted to drop closer when they go into a grand stand.

Originally Posted by NM Golf

Different set of rules, period. They should be similar of course but despite what others have said we do not play the same game as the pros. The pros play perfectly manicured courses, in general most ams don't. There are just subtle differences that would make the game more enjoyable for the average amateur and more challenging for the big boys.

First, the amateur sets of rules should be simplified. Let's face it most amateur players have no idea how to play by them.

No other professional sport lets the amateur bodies determine their rules for them. Football had several rule books. One for high school, One for college, and one for the NFL. The same goes for baseball and basketball. Yet golf should be the same. Makes no sense to me.

Personally I think the rules should be simplified for everyone...listening to Azinger at the Open highlighted that even many of the Pros do not fully understand the rules.  NIcklaus says they are too complex and I agree with him.  Originally, there were 13 rules in golf that could fit on one page, now it is moving in the direction of the tax code.  Both should be simplified.

To begin with, I would favor consolidating OBs, Lost Balls and Water Hazards to make them all play like a lateral hazard (or something similar) with the only difference being that you don`t have the option to play a ball that is OB (similar to when it goes into an ESA at some courses).  Why should a whiff be scored more favorably than a 280 yard shot  that ends a foot OB or a good shot that is lost?  As you likely aware, this much more similar to how most amateurs play them anyways.  As for the pros, if this took away too much of a premium on accuracy, then grow out the rough and/or call grand stands a lateral hazard/OB.

As far as Azinger incorrectly thinking that you are allowed to take an unplayable out of a trap, what would be so bad with allowing this as long as it was no nearer the hole?  Most pros would do this about once a career and would still need to get up and down for bogey (assuming they were in a green side trap in regulation) and would even out the luck of getting a really penal lie in a bunker.  For beginners it would help speed up the game.  Wouldn`t the rules be easier to understand if the requirement of all penalty drops was simply that it was taken no nearer the hole?

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MEfree

To begin with, I would favor consolidating OBs, Lost Balls and Water Hazards to make them all play like a lateral hazard (or something similar) with the only difference being that you don`t have the option to play a ball that is OB (similar to when it goes into an ESA at some courses).  Why should a whiff be scored more favorably than a 280 yard shot  that ends a foot OB or a good shot that is lost?  As you likely aware, this much more similar to how most amateurs play them anyways.

I like this idea.  Seems completely sensible to me.  Yes, I am someone who sprays it and is hurt by the stroke and distance occasionally.  But I have never, nor have a ever seen anybody else, in a casual round, lose a ball, or find out theirs is OB when they thought it wasn't, and walk back to the tee to re-hit.  It doesn't happen.  I hate when it happens because I don't like dropping in the trees and calling it 3 because that's wrong, but I also don't like calling it 4 because maybe my second drive wouldv'e ended in the fairway.  A change to the rules there would eliminate that problem.

And on that note, I was watching the Euro Tour this morning and a guy (don't remember his name) hit one in the rough up near a creek running alongside the fairway and immediately hit a "provisional."  One of the things I've learned from this site is that a provisional is only allowed when you think your ball is OB or lost outside of a water hazard, so I have no idea why he thought he could hit one there.  The announcers seemed a little perplexed as to why he was hitting a second tee shot as well, and later (as I was turning off the TV and heading into work) said he found the first one and played it.  I guess he wasn't penalized, but it seemed like he could have been for playing the wrong ball.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

My analogy is fine. You just disagree is all - that's okay too.

No it's not. You're saying the ball in other sports is the same. It is, but it's shared equipment, and personal equipment in other sports is not the same. The shared stuff in golf is, as in all sports, the same.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

I like this idea.  Seems completely sensible to me.  Yes, I am someone who sprays it and is hurt by the stroke and distance occasionally.  But I have never, nor have a ever seen anybody else, in a casual round, lose a ball, or find out theirs is OB when they thought it wasn't, and walk back to the tee to re-hit.  It doesn't happen.  I hate when it happens because I don't like dropping in the trees and calling it 3 because that's wrong, but I also don't like calling it 4 because maybe my second drive wouldv'e ended in the fairway.  A change to the rules there would eliminate that problem.

And on that note, I was watching the Euro Tour this morning and a guy (don't remember his name) hit one in the rough up near a creek running alongside the fairway and immediately hit a "provisional."  One of the things I've learned from this site is that a provisional is only allowed when you think your ball is OB or lost outside of a water hazard, so I have no idea why he thought he could hit one there.  The announcers seemed a little perplexed as to why he was hitting a second tee shot as well, and later (as I was turning off the TV and heading into work) said he found the first one and played it.  I guess he wasn't penalized, but it seemed like he could have been for playing the wrong ball.

The guy might have just wanted to be able to hit a practice shot, but playing a  provisional on the chance that a ball is lost/OB outside the hazard is the correct thing to do.  A quirk with the rules in my opinion is that you can`t assume a ball is lost in a hazard simply because you hit in the general direction of a hazard and can`t find it.  You have to be "virtually certain" that it is in the hazard which means that considering all the factors (like length of grass outside the hazard, nearby trees, etc.) that there is nowhere else the ball could be but in the hazard.  If the grass outside the hazard is long enough that the ball might be lost there, then you have to play it as a lost ball.  Also, if the water in the creek carried the ball out of bounds, you have to play it as OB.  Despite playing competitive golf as a teenager, I only learned about this rule recently.  IMO, almost no amateurs play this rule correctly which is one reason why the rules should be simplified so that we are actually playing by the same rules as the pros.

"A rule that nobody follows isn`t much of a rule."  (quoted from another thread, IIRC)  Simplifying the rules makes it more likely that more players will be playing by the same rules.  I think this can be done so as not to fundamentally change the game (like increasing the size of the hole would as discussed on another thread) and if implemented properly should increase the speed and enjoyment of the game for everyone.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MEfree

The guy might have just wanted to be able to hit a practice shot, but playing a  provisional on the chance that a ball is lost/OB outside the hazard is the correct thing to do.  A quirk with the rules in my opinion is that you can`t assume a ball is lost in a hazard simply because you hit in the general direction of a hazard and can`t find it.  You have to be "virtually certain" that it is in the hazard which means that considering all the factors (like length of grass outside the hazard, nearby trees, etc.) that there is nowhere else the ball could be but in the hazard.  If the grass outside the hazard is long enough that the ball might be lost there, then you have to play it as a lost ball.  Also, if the water in the creek carried the ball out of bounds, you have to play it as OB.  Despite playing competitive golf as a teenager, I only learned about this rule recently.  IMO, almost no amateurs play this rule correctly which is one reason why the rules should be simplified so that we are actually playing by the same rules as the pros.

"A rule that nobody follows isn`t much of a rule."  (quoted from another thread, IIRC)  Simplifying the rules makes it more likely that more players will be playing by the same rules.  I think this can be done so as not to fundamentally change the game (like increasing the size of the hole would as discussed on another thread) and if implemented properly should increase the speed and enjoyment of the game for everyone.

OK.  Then I imagine the bolded part is what made his provisional allowable because the reason why it didn't go into the creek is because the rough around it was 6 inches high.  I don't know what he was actually thinking (obviously) but it certainly could have been argued that he thought he might not find it in that rough.

The italics part is another reason why your consolidated rule makes perfect sense.  So if I hit the ball into a creek with clear water and I see that it got carried OB, then I have to go back and re-hit?  But if I hit into the same creek after a big rain and the water is murky, I get to assume the ball sank straight to the bottom and play it as a lateral hazard?  Yeah, that makes sense.