Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Red stakes and provisional drive


Note: This thread is 4040 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

Whoops, sorry, Zeg. I missed your wall of text that addresses this very issue. Additionally, I had not read the decisions on 4.1 and 4.2, which do insert some ambiguity I had not seen before. Unfortunate since the decisions are meant to remove ambiguity, not add it.

It's a big issue in my opinion, because there is a lot of slow play out there by higher handicappers like myself that want to keep a handicap, but don't understand that they *can* break the rules occasionally and still have a score to post.


Posted

In my view, the question becomes whether the hole was completed "under the principles of the rules of golf" as opposed to what I thought before, which was "under the rules of golf." There's no clear answer presented under the decision, but my answer would be "No" because he never put a second ball in play. The USGA really could simplify the interplay between 4.1 and 4.2 of the handicap rules in my opinion.

4-2/1. Explaining the Phrase "Principles of the Rules of Golf" in Accordance with "The USGA Handicap System" Manual

Q: What is meant by the phrase "in accordance with the principles of the Rules of Golf" in "The USGA Handicap System" manual?

A: The phrase "in accordance with the principles of the Rules of Golf " refers to situations where the player has played a hole in such a manner that the score would be sufficiently accurate to be used for handicap computation purposes. Occasionally, holes are not played strictly in accordance with the Rules of Golf. Thus, flexibility has been provided in the USGA Handicap System for a score to remain acceptable for handicap posting purposes in certain situations. This policy better ascertains the player's potential ability by attempting to capture more scores for handicap purposes than just those made in accordance with the Rules of Golf. For example, a player starting but not finishing a hole in stroke play (e.g., picking up before holing out) records the "most likely score" for handicap purposes (see Section 4-1).

If a player uses a distance (only) measuring device or plays a round under preferred lies, regardless of the Local Rule established, the score remains acceptable for handicap purposes. (See Decision 5-1e/2 and Section 7.) This policy also includes situations that are generally out of the player's control, such as incorrectly installed hole liners or an incorrectly marked golf course. (See Section 15-5.) (NEW)


Note: This thread is 4040 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 12: stole about 10 minutes in the garage, doing my drill with foam balls. 
    • Day 116 12-6 Still working on getting to lead side. Tonight I also tried some skill work with clubface awareness.  Hit foam balls. 
    • To flog this subject even further, if that's even possible, this article from Golf Monthly just appeared today in one of my news feeds. Written by a golf writer in the UK who I never heard of, he's basically saying that there should be only 3-5 rounds from the most recent 20 that should count towards the average and only competitive rounds should count. He claims the erratic scorers would have less of an advantage than they do now. He makes a lot of references to "club golfers" in the UK being the ones who are mostly dissatisfied. https://share.google/qmZZBEoJvOxHxJGil  In my experience with my league where we have golfers with indexes ranging from 5 to 40, looking at the weekly results from the past two years, I can detect no pattern that would substantiate the claim that the current system gives an unfair advantage to either erratic golfers (aren't we all?) or higher handicappers. Apparently though, at least in the UK, this seems to be "a thing."
    • Day 26 (6 Dec 25) - Another day of rainy weather - got in some mirror work rehearsing forward weight shift as finishing back swing. 
    • Wordle 1,631 3/6* 🟨⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟩🟩⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 no eagle -  but a birdie is a nice follow-up
×
×
  • 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.