Following the Rules= A Good Way to Piss People Off

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Maybe not hurt, but definitely changed.

Right.  My thinking is that they started with the original 13 rules as a basis, without being able to foresee what different scenarios could pop up.  Then as time went on, they tweaked and tweaked as needed and did their best to keep it as simple as possible.

I don't think the rules are intentionally convoluted (like some portions of the tax code probably are ;)) or confusing ... it's just a really complex game.

And, as fourputt mentions ... probably at least part of the reason we all love it so much.

I agree with most of the bold section, but I think the priority is in not fundamentally changing the rules rather than keeping them simple.

I think it is a very small minority that love golf because of the rules.  The one thing that we all seem to agree upon is that most golfers do not follow the current rules.  If love of the game was based on love for the rules, this would not be the case.

Originally Posted by iacas

You've been asked to show examples of simplifying the rules in a way that doesn't fundamentally change them and have, thus far, been unable to.

We've also refuted your last point or belief that the players would suddenly start playing by the rules if they were only made simpler. They would not - unless your simplified rules included gimmes, mulligans, moving your ball out of that "unfair" lie and propping it up in the rough, nudging it in the fairway, etc.

To the people who want to follow the rules, 99.9% of the time they can with some VERY simple guidelines. Play it as it lies. Know a few basic procedures.

Specifically, I don't remember the last time I had to look at the rules book. I know a bit more than the average rules-abiding guy, but still. It's been years since I've had to look up the Rules on the golf course.

I agree that a lot of players would not suddenly start following all the rules if they were made simpler, but I think a higher % would.  I know I like to play by the rules, but don't 100% of the time mainly because some of the rules are inconsistent with fast play.

I could present a set of simplified rules that would NOT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE GAME (IMO for 99.9% of the people who tee it up on golf courses), but SOME OF THE RULES WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE.  I think the reluctance to have a perceived fundamental change in the rules is what has made the rules tweaks over the years result in rules that are way more complicated than they were originally.

Bottom line- the game would be helped, not hurt by simplifying the rules.

[mad max]

Originally Posted by saevel25

Actually its more technical then that,

"Q.At a par-3 hole, a player hits his tee shot into dense woods. He then hits a provisional ball which comes to rest near the hole. In view of the position of the provisional ball, the player does not wish to find his original ball. He does not search for it and walks directly towards his provisional ball to continue play with it. His opponent (or fellow-competitor) believes it would be beneficial to him if the original ball were found. May the opponent (or fellow-competitor) search for the player's ball?

A.Yes. In equity (Rule 1-4), he may search for five minutes provided that in the meantime the player does not play a stroke with the provisional ball, it being nearer the hole than the place where the original ball is likely to be. The player is entitled to play such a stroke. If he does, the original ball is then lost under Rule 27-2b and further search for it would serve no purpose. In match play, if the player so proceeds and his provisional ball is closer to the hole than his opponent's ball, his opponent may recall the stroke (Rule 10-1c). However, recalling the stroke would not change the status of the original ball, which was lost when the provisional ball was played out of turn. See also Decision 27-2c/2."

So yes, a player doesn't have to search for a ball. But an opponent can. He is then given 5 minutes to complete this task, or before the other player plays his ball. Though if the player plays out of turn, lets say he hits in the tap in. He has still played that ball and the first ball is out of play. Though the opponent then can go by Rule 10 and have him replace that tap-in, negating the stroke, and wait for his turn. But it doesn't stop the fact that the provisional was played and the 1st ball deemed lost.

This happened to Phil a few years ago, he jacked a tee shot left. He told people not to go find it. He was going to go play his provisional. Well a spectator found his ball before 5 minutes and before he played his provisional. Phil had to go back to the tee box and play a new ball.

Just out of curiosity if the player hits his provisional in the hole can he immediately declare his fist lost?  If not, does the opponent get a full 5 minutes to look for the original ball?

[Dave2512]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Bottom line- the game would be helped, not hurt by simplifying the rules.

This is a tough sell, especially when you take into consideration the way you described the situation in your first post. I can't imagine it being more straight forward than that. In what way would a simpler set of rules, no penalties etc, affected what you were to do after finding your ball? You hit an errant shot that took a bad bounce and discovered that it left you with a difficult shot. What could possibly simplfy that situation short of a do-over? This is the consquence for not hitting a solid shot. That's about as simple as it gets.

[mad max]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I could present a set of simplified rules that would NOT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE GAME (IMO for 99.9% of the people who tee it up on golf courses), but SOME OF THE RULES WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE.  I think the reluctance to have a perceived fundamental change in the rules is what has made the rules tweaks over the years result in rules that are way more complicated than they were originally.

Bottom line- the game would be helped, not hurt by simplifying the rules.

What are your suggestions?  I have a few minor ones that I think would not affect scores much but would be simpler and improve pace of play.

1  A player may elect to have the flag removed, tended, or left in at any time.

2  There is only way to drop.  It is a set distance (maybe the length of a 45 inch driver or whatever but it doesn't matter if you only carry irons or if you have a 55 inch putter you get the same relief.)  All drops weather penalty drops or relief drops are treated the same.

3 No more relief if your feet are on a cart path, only if the cart path could affect your club contacting the ball.

I know if I get to my ball and see that my feet will be on the path I look to see if I have a good lie and if I have a clear shot, if I don't I will l see where my nearest point of relief would be and then decide what would be most advantageous to me.  I also think now that almost everyone uses soft spikes that most golfers can attempt a decent swing even if they are standing on the path.

This one is more controversial but I it is one that I like.

4  If a players ball moves they must replace it before playing their next shot.

No more what is addressing the ball,l did the player deemed to have caused the ball to move, did an outside agency cause the ball to move.

I know many will not agree with me but if they can give me a good argument as to why these changes would fundamentally change the game I will listen.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lefty-Golfer

He hit a provisional, he looked for original, found it, missed it, decided he couldn't play it.... It was a casual round where he was holding up strangers. Go to the provisional and play it. For god sake it was a nothing round and followed the rules in spirit! Nobody is going to have problem with his actions and if they do they need to see a shrink! Lol

Relax.  I was just answering a question which your reply has nothing to do with.  You don't need to get all hot to trot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mad max

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

Actually its more technical then that,

"Q. At a par-3 hole, a player hits his tee shot into dense woods. He then hits a provisional ball which comes to rest near the hole. In view of the position of the provisional ball, the player does not wish to find his original ball. He does not search for it and walks directly towards his provisional ball to continue play with it. His opponent (or fellow-competitor) believes it would be beneficial to him if the original ball were found. May the opponent (or fellow-competitor) search for the player's ball?

A. Yes. In equity (Rule 1-4), he may search for five minutes provided that in the meantime the player does not play a stroke with the provisional ball, it being nearer the hole than the place where the original ball is likely to be. The player is entitled to play such a stroke. If he does, the original ball is then lost under Rule 27-2b and further search for it would serve no purpose. In match play, if the player so proceeds and his provisional ball is closer to the hole than his opponent's ball, his opponent may recall the stroke (Rule 10-1c). However, recalling the stroke would not change the status of the original ball, which was lost when the provisional ball was played out of turn. See also Decision 27-2c/2 ."

So yes, a player doesn't have to search for a ball. But an opponent can. He is then given 5 minutes to complete this task, or before the other player plays his ball. Though if the player plays out of turn, lets say he hits in the tap in. He has still played that ball and the first ball is out of play. Though the opponent then can go by Rule 10 and have him replace that tap-in, negating the stroke, and wait for his turn. But it doesn't stop the fact that the provisional was played and the 1st ball deemed lost.

This happened to Phil a few years ago, he jacked a tee shot left. He told people not to go find it. He was going to go play his provisional. Well a spectator found his ball before 5 minutes and before he played his provisional. Phil had to go back to the tee box and play a new ball.

Just out of curiosity if the player hits his provisional in the hole can he immediately declare his fist lost?  If not, does the opponent get a full 5 minutes to look for the original ball?

This Decision will give you the answer:

Quote:

27-2b/2

When Provisional Ball Holed Becomes Ball in Play

Q. At a short hole, A's tee shot may be out of bounds or lost, so he plays a provisional ball, which he holes. A does not wish to look for his original ball. B, A's opponent or a fellow-competitor, goes to look for the original ball. When does the provisional ball become the ball in play?

A. In equity (Rule 1-4 ) the provisional ball becomes the ball in play as soon as A picks it out of the hole, provided his original ball has not already been found in bounds within five minutes of B starting to search for it.

[mad max]

Thanks, Fourputt

So if this ever happens to me I should use all my anger/aggression from missing an ace and get that ball out of the hole ASAP.  Thanks again, you pretend not to know the rules perfectly but when you reply confidently, you are always right.

[iacas]

This isn't really the topic here, but I'll allow it through the end of today (though I'm heading to bed soon, and as far as I'm concerned today ends in an hour, so make hay while you've got the chance).

Originally Posted by MEfree

I agree with most of the bold section, but I think the priority is in not fundamentally changing the rules rather than keeping them simple.

I think you meant to say that a bit differently.

My assertion: you cannot simplify the rules significantly without fundamentally altering the game.

Originally Posted by MEfree

I think it is a very small minority that love golf because of the rules.

Straw man. Probably nobody "loves golf because of the rules." But change the rules and you don't have "golf" anymore. Change them enough and you really don't have golf anymore.

Originally Posted by MEfree

If love of the game was based on love for the rules, this would not be the case.

Again, a straw man. Nobody's arguing that people LOVE golf because of the Rules.

Originally Posted by MEfree

I agree that a lot of players would not suddenly start following all the rules if they were made simpler, but I think a higher % would.

I don't think you can make the rules simple enough for more than a teeny tiny percentage of golfers to decide to start using them. Heck, I bet the majority of golfers didn't follow the rules back when they had the original 13 rules. It was likely a higher percentage than follow them now, but that probably had more to do with the kinds of people playing than the simplicity of the rules.

Originally Posted by MEfree

I know I like to play by the rules, but don't 100% of the time mainly because some of the rules are inconsistent with fast play.

The situation raised here is rare. And you could have written down the score you'd most likely have made and just played out. You could have also ignored your first ball, especially if you were 150 out on a par five in three (i.e. still a chance to get up and down for par).

Originally Posted by MEfree

I could present a set of simplified rules that would NOT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE GAME (IMO for 99.9% of the people who tee it up on golf courses), but SOME OF THE RULES WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE.

Thus far you've failed to do so despite repeatedly saying you could. Do it. Let's see it. Heck, just pick one rule and do it. And none of this "for 99.9%" stuff. It has to keep the game fundamentally the same for all golfers.

Originally Posted by MEfree

I think the reluctance to have a perceived fundamental change in the rules is what has made the rules tweaks over the years result in rules that are way more complicated than they were originally.

No. The rules have gotten slightly more complex as more situations arise. Again, we started with 13 or so. Then someone had a kid pick up their ball and run off with it, and there wasn't a rule for it. Then someone hit into a ball the groundskeeper had dug, so they wrote that rule. Then someone's ball broke apart. Then someone whiffed. Then someone hit their playing partner (or opponent) with their ball. So they wrote rules to cover those things.

The rules of others sports are pretty complex too, especially considering the fact that they're played on relatively uniform playing fields and that there are really no outside agencies, nor hazards, etc. There's simply in bounds and out of bounds (fair or foul, etc.).

Originally Posted by MEfree

Bottom line- the game would be helped, not hurt by simplifying the rules.

You've yet to be able to prove that. The rules have evolved to cover situations and scenarios not covered by a simpler set of rules.

Originally Posted by mad max

Just out of curiosity if the player hits his provisional in the hole can he immediately declare his fist lost?  If not, does the opponent get a full 5 minutes to look for the original ball?

You can't declare a ball lost. You can't force your opponent to look for your ball or not, really, either - you can hit your provisional before he's found your ball.

Originally Posted by Dave2512

This is a tough sell, especially when you take into consideration the way you described the situation in your first post. I can't imagine it being more straight forward than that. In what way would a simpler set of rules, no penalties etc, affected what you were to do after finding your ball? You hit an errant shot that took a bad bounce and discovered that it left you with a difficult shot. What could possibly simplfy that situation short of a do-over? This is the consquence for not hitting a solid shot. That's about as simple as it gets.

Agreed.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I should add that the group behind us was nowhere in sight, so the only players I help up were the threesome I joined.

If you decided to re-hit before whiffing, then you could have just told the 3-some that you were going back to re-tee and they should complete the hole ahead of you and you would resume your spot behind them.  Then no one is inconvenienced.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

I am not saying that most rules don't have some sort of logical explanation.  Simpler rules might be different (and may even make certain holes play easier/harder) which might offend some purists. BUT I think the rules could be sim;ified without having much impact on the fundamental nature/object of the game or altering the current OWGR.  The benefit would be to increase the number of players who understand and follow the rules (which is a very low % currently) as well as some chance to speed up the pace of play.

As it stands currently, some players who would like to follow the rules are pressured to ignore some at times so as not to be "one of those guys" (to quote a previous poster).

You would do well to learn some of the fundamental principles on which the rules are based before you go trying to simplify them.  This book provides those fundamental principles:

https://www.usga.org/PublicationStore/PubStoreProductDetails.aspx?id=2147495587

Originally Posted by mad max

Thanks, Fourputt

So if this ever happens to me I should use all my anger/aggression from missing an ace and get that ball out of the hole ASAP.  Thanks again, you pretend not to know the rules perfectly but when you reply confidently, you are always right.

You could go broke betting against Fourputt on rules questions. LOL

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Dave2512

This is a tough sell, especially when you take into consideration the way you described the situation in your first post. I can't imagine it being more straight forward than that. In what way would a simpler set of rules, no penalties etc, affected what you were to do after finding your ball? You hit an errant shot that took a bad bounce and discovered that it left you with a difficult shot. What could possibly simplfy that situation short of a do-over? This is the consquence for not hitting a solid shot. That's about as simple as it gets.

I am not saying that I should have gotten a free mulligan.  Forgetting about the whiff, what I find complex is that I had the option of not looking for my original and playing my provisional but once the original is potentially spotted my options are limited to IDing the original and a) playing it, b) taking an unplayable which gives me the option of, going two club lengths, going straight back or going back to the tee and hitting a 3rd tee shot.  After spotting the original, the best option in terms of trying to shoot the lowest score was to re-tee, but re-teeing for a second time is slower and more likely to piss people off than just going and playing the provisional (that was already subject to a stroke and distance penalty, so no free lunch IMO).

Originally Posted by iacas

This isn't really the topic here, but I'll allow it through the end of today (though I'm heading to bed soon, and as far as I'm concerned today ends in an hour, so make hay while you've got the chance).

I think you meant to say that a bit differently.

My assertion: you cannot simplify the rules significantly without fundamentally altering the game.

Straw man. Probably nobody "loves golf because of the rules." But change the rules and you don't have "golf" anymore. Change them enough and you really don't have golf anymore.

Again, a straw man. Nobody's arguing that people LOVE golf because of the Rules.

I don't think you can make the rules simple enough for more than a teeny tiny percentage of golfers to decide to start using them. Heck, I bet the majority of golfers didn't follow the rules back when they had the original 13 rules. It was likely a higher percentage than follow them now, but that probably had more to do with the kinds of people playing than the simplicity of the rules.

The situation raised here is rare. And you could have written down the score you'd most likely have made and just played out. You could have also ignored your first ball, especially if you were 150 out on a par five in three (i.e. still a chance to get up and down for par).

Thus far you've failed to do so despite repeatedly saying you could. Do it. Let's see it. Heck, just pick one rule and do it. And none of this "for 99.9%" stuff. It has to keep the game fundamentally the same for all golfers.

No. The rules have gotten slightly more complex as more situations arise. Again, we started with 13 or so. Then someone had a kid pick up their ball and run off with it, and there wasn't a rule for it. Then someone hit into a ball the groundskeeper had dug, so they wrote that rule. Then someone's ball broke apart. Then someone whiffed. Then someone hit their playing partner (or opponent) with their ball. So they wrote rules to cover those things.

The rules of others sports are pretty complex too, especially considering the fact that they're played on relatively uniform playing fields and that there are really no outside agencies, nor hazards, etc. There's simply in bounds and out of bounds (fair or foul, etc.).

You've yet to be able to prove that. The rules have evolved to cover situations and scenarios not covered by a simpler set of rules.

You can't declare a ball lost. You can't force your opponent to look for your ball or not, really, either - you can hit your provisional before he's found your ball.

Agreed.

I started this thread and am a bit confused about what topic you are going to allow until the end of the day?  Are you saying that I hijacked my own thread?  I think that a revamping/simplification of the rules would allow more people to follow them without pissing people off.

FWIW, the reason I looked for my first ball is because I thought there was a decent chance of being able to get it to within 100 yards in two had I had a clear swing...in hindsight I was wrong, but making birdie (or better) on the hole was the only way I was going to be able to shoot a personal best at that course, so I thought it was worth the look.

I am heading to bed shortly also, but would like to take you up on your rules challenge later this week.  I am pretty sure that you and Fourputt will not like what I come up with, but think that most players will find that my proposals do not negatively affect their enjoyment of the game.  To prove this, I would like to have a Simplified Rules Experiment with real tst players participating and giving feedback similar to the Forward Tees Experiment you did last year (which I enjoyed participating in).

Maybe I missed GolfingDad's point

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

I don't think the rules are intentionally convoluted (like some portions of the tax code probably are ;)) or confusing ... it's just a really complex game.

And, as fourputt mentions ... probably at least part of the reason we all love it so much.

I guess my point is that the game will still be complex and loveable even if the rules are simplified.

[Spyder]

As Erik stated before, it is not really that hard to play by the rules without carrying a rule book in your back pocket.

Basic principles such as when penalties are in order, how to properly play a provisional, assessing the penalties properly, drop-zones, not grounding your club in a bunker, and playing the ball down and as it lies without moving the ball are all that I can honestly think of in terms of what I typically run into with my group, or myself. In my opinion, you can teach this to any golfer in no time at all.

Sure, most of us do not know the book inside and out and we will occasionally run into a rare instance where we assess a penalty, or ignore one completely on accident. But, simplifying the rules in terms of language is not going to encourage the weekend duffer to not fluff his lie or roll his ball out of a divot, or pick up his ball on the green without a marker, etc.

These golfers know that they are not playing "TV golf" and they are not going to be encouraged to do so if you break the rules down into 10 pages in a pamphlet.

[Ernest Jones]

[S]after your second shot (wifff) I beleive you may use the unplayable rule and drop where you played the shot. then from there use the unplayable again to go back to your tee shot. there you will play your 5th shot.[/S] [S]I'll have to check this but It reminds a bell.[/S] actually no, unplayable rule and decision 28/5 shows that your only option after the second shot (for example) is to use the unplayable rule on a lateral basis as many times as necessary to get releif and continu the hole. you could have probably finished your round over 100 lol [SIZE=12px]28/5[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Régression selon la Règle de la balle injouable[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Q.[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Un joueur joue un coup du point A vers le point B. Le point B[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]est dans une zone de[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]laquelle il est très difficile de sortir la balle. Le joueur envisage de[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]considérer[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]la balle[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]injouable mais ceci impliquerait une pénalité de coup et distance (Règle 28a).[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Dropper derrière selon la Règle 28b est en effet impossible à[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]cause d'une clôture[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]de hors limites et dropper à[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]l'intérieur[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]de deux longueurs de club selon la Règle 28c[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]n'est pas faisable parce que cela exigerait un nombre considérable de drops pour[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]se dégager de la zone. Le joueur joue du point B[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]; la balle avance de[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]quelques[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]mètres et s'immobilise au point C, où elle est manifestement injouable. Selon la[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Règle 28a, le joueur peut[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]-[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]il[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]:[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px](a)[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]considérer[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]la balle injouable au point C et dropper une balle avec une pénalité[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]d'un coup au point B, et ensuite[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px](b)[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]considérer[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]la balle i[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]njouable au point B et dropper une balle, avec une pénalité[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]supplémentaire d'un coup, au point A[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]?[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]R.[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Non. Selon la Règle 28a, le joueur est autorisé à dropper une balle seulement à[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]l'emplacement d'où il a joué son dernier coup (point B).[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Dans les circonstances mentionnées, la seule alternative du joueur est d'invoquer la[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Règle 28c un nombre de fois suffisant (en commençant au point C et en droppant la[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]balle latéralement à[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]l'intérieur[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px] [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]de deux longueurs de club chaque fois) pour amener la balle dans une position jouable.[/SIZE]

Alors! Finalement, un "poster" qui je peut comprend. C'est pas facile de parle avec une gang des têtes carré. Lol.

[Dave2512]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I am not saying that I should have gotten a free mulligan.  Forgetting about the whiff, what I find complex is that I had the option of not looking for my original and playing my provisional but once the original is potentially spotted my options are limited to IDing the original and a) playing it, b) taking an unplayable which gives me the option of, going two club lengths, going straight back or going back to the tee and hitting a 3rd tee shot.  After spotting the original, the best option in terms of trying to shoot the lowest score was to re-tee, but re-teeing for a second time is slower and more likely to piss people off than just going and playing the provisional (that was already subject to a stroke and distance penalty, so no free lunch IMO).

I still can't see how anything could be shaved from the rules that would have simplified your situation other than you get to avoid going back to the tee. I'm trying to envision the trees you speak of but it doesn't sound like your ball was lost in the jungle just that playing your ball would have been difficult. Maybe I'm confused because the thread has twisted and turned and it's apparent we're now looking for a way to provide an answer that would have changed the potential outcome based on ignoring the whiff. So hypothetically no whiff, you don't search for and find the ball you still had options, none of which are overly complicated.

Given that you were on the 18th hole with a threesome you just joined at 16 I don't see how choosing any of the options had the potential to irritate them. I don't think they were obligated to stay with you being you joined them just two holes before. It's the 18th hole and you said nobody was behind you. What's to stop them from moving on and you going back to the tee and doing your thing? It doesn't seem complicated or the cause for concern.

Honestly it appears you are disappointed with the outcome, how trying to play by the rules affected your score. But again the options you had are simple. I don't see how simplifying rule 28 helps you improve your scoring opportunity short of pretending the errant shot and bad bounce didn't happen. You still haven't proposed a possible alternative. It's only a best ever round if you play best ever. Having more forgiving rules to assist in making the game easier (simple) doesn't sound like the road to golf nirvana. The rules didn't get ya', the bad shot did . That's pretty much the essence of the game right? You said it yourself, playing the game well means hitting it in the intended direction and with the least amount of strokes. That should be up to the player to accomplish not the rules.

[MEfree]

I mostly agree with you Dave- it was definitely the bad shot that got me, not the rules...once I determined that I couldn't play the original back to the fairway, there was no way for me to post a personal best score on the course.

FWIW, the threesome did in fact move up to the green while I went back to the tee, but they were nice guys with some time on their hands so they waited for me at the green after they holed out.

The guys didn't see my whiff and they couldn't understand why I didn't just go ahead and play my provisional instead of going back to the tee.  I agree with them, but I could have tied my personal best had I played loose with the rules and done this.

Overall, I would like to change more than just 1 rule as tweaking one rule doesn't really do much to make the rules as a whole simpler.  Looking at this situation in isolation, given that the rules allow you not to look for your original and go ahead and play your provisional, I don't seem the harm in allowing the player to play his provisional (along with the stroke and distance penalty associated with it) instead of having to go back to the tee when the original ball is found unplayable with no other good alternatives.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Dave2512

I'm trying to envision the trees you speak of but it doesn't sound like your ball was lost in the jungle just that playing your ball would have been difficult.

correct- I knew it was 50/50 whether I would have a shot or not, but unfortunately the low hanging branches on the tree I was near made even a chip out very difficult.  Had it been located a bit differently, I might have been able to get it to within 100 yards of the hole.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=keystone+river+golf+course≪=39.597593,-105.997227&spn;=0.000908,0.002064&fb;=1≷=us&hq;=keystone+river+golf+course&cid;=0,0,13240230494915743703&t;=h&z;=20

[Dave2512]

Originally Posted by MEfree

correct- I knew it was 50/50 whether I would have a shot or not, but unfortunately the low hanging branches on the tree I was near made even a chip out very difficult.  Had it been located a bit differently, I might have been able to get it to within 100 yards of the hole.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=keystone+river+golf+course≪=39.597593,-105.997227&spn;=0.000908,0.002064&fb;=1≷=us&hq;=keystone+river+golf+course&cid;=0,0,13240230494915743703&t;=h&z;=20

Originally Posted by MEfree

Overall, I would like to change more than just 1 rule as tweaking one rule doesn't really do much to make the rules as a whole simpler.  Looking at this situation in isolation, given that the rules allow you not to look for your original and go ahead and play your provisional, I don't seem the harm in allowing the player to play his provisional (along with the stroke and distance penalty associated with it) instead of having to go back to the tee when the original ball is found unplayable with no other good alternatives.

That's I figured you'd say and honestly IMO that's why this particular rule is good as stands. There's a chance the ball could be played and therefore a reason to look for it. If you'd found your ball and it was playable and resulted in tying your personal best you'd be posting in the shot of the week thread.

[Fourputt]

Alright.  Here are some things for you to consider if you are actually going to try and do your rules simplification.  Golf's underlying principles are essentially as follows.  Any deviation will be indefensible under the rules of the challenge because any such deviation will significantly change the game.

Your rules must satisfy these fundamental principles of the game of golf:

1) Play the ball from tee to hole without touching it except as allowed under the rules.

2) Play the course as you find it

3) Never advance the ball without benefit of a stroke

4) Never modify any of the above principles without a commensurate penalty to ensure that no advantage is gained over your opponent/fellow competitor from a breach of the principle.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Alright.  Here are some things for you to consider if you are actually going to try and do your rules simplification.  Golf's underlying principles are essentially as follows.  Any deviation will be indefensible under the rules of the challenge because any such deviation will significantly change the game.

Your rules must satisfy these fundamental principles of the game of golf:

1) Play the ball from tee to hole without touching it except as allowed under the rules.

2) Play the course as you find it

3) Never advance the ball without benefit of a stroke

4) Never modify any of the above principles without a commensurate penalty to ensure that no advantage is gained over your opponent/fellow competitor from a breach of the principle.

[iacas]

I started this thread and am a bit confused about what topic you are going to allow until the end of the day?  Are you saying that I hijacked my own thread?

Just because you start a thread doesn't mean you get to change the topic in the thread whenever you want. Threads should stick to their topic.