MEfree Challenge: New Rules of Golf - Simplified but not Fundamentally Changed

[iacas]

Originally Posted by dsc123

There are several holes at your home course with dog legs, which if you cut, you'd be flying over OB?  Or just several holes where OB comes into play?

More the latter (though there are a few doglegs where lost balls and OB become an issue), but that's off topic. For example a driveable par four with OB around it. If it's a lateral you may just whale away and then take your chances at getting up and down for par if you go "OB."

Again, MEfree was tasked with simplifying the rules, not changing the game. He's done the latter only.

[boogielicious]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

I have an awfully hard time agreeing with this one.  That would be like saying that somebody who's just graduated from college with straight A's is just as much an expert in engineering as somebody who has been practicing for 30 or 40 years.

Experience counts for an awful lot in my book.  Way more than reading it in a book.

Is it a weakening of the penalty structure, or simply a change?  You strike me as simply a 'purist,' for lack of a better word.  Nothing wrong with that, but I don't think it's really people trying to make the game simpler that bothers you.

If Mefree kept having issues with getting beat by long hitters who just bomb it into hazards, take their penalties and play on, and still beat him, and he proposed that ALL penalties should be stroke and distance, I assume you wouldn't be too keen on that either, right?

And how does talking golf with all of us morons really give you your fix?  Seems to me like talking about golf all the time without being able to play it would make it worse for me.

[Just a reminder:  I enjoy talking about this kind of stuff, debating, joking, whatever, and am taking nothing too serious and hopefully nobody else is either ;)]

In my experience (31 years of Engineering), they know very little, as I did 31 years ago.

Originally Posted by Fourputt

That is correct, because I don't see a need for any of this.  The only reason I'm still discussing it is because I'm down here on an island with no golf course, so all I can do is talk golf to get my fix.

I will always be opposed to any such weakening of the penalty structure.  This change would eliminate one third of the double and triple and worse bogies (because that's about the percentage which are caused by stroke and distance penalties) in competition play without having any effect on the casual player (because he doesn't follow the rules now, so why cater to him?).   For that reason alone it is a complete fail in my mind.

Yikes!  Where is the closest course, Turks?  It would kill me to be in a beautiful place on not be able to play.  Hope you like the beach and fishing!

[boogielicious]

Lost balls bother me more when I play than OB.  If I hit a ball toward the OB, I know to play the provisional right away.  It is the lost ball that didn't go into the woods, that makes me crazy.  We've all had them.  You hit the ball in a wide open hole.  It bounces in the fairway and it heads towards the rough.  You and your playing partners are sure it went in a certain spot, but you can't find it because it is under a leaf or plugged or some zombie squirrel ran off with it.  A face palm moment.

These are the toughest because you have to walk back and replay.

[David in FL]

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Lost balls bother me more when I play than OB.  If I hit a ball toward the OB, I know to play the provisional right away.  It is the lost ball that didn't go into the woods, that makes me crazy.  We've all had them.  You hit the ball in a wide open hole.  It bounces in the fairway and it heads towards the rough.  You and your playing partners are sure it went in a certain spot, but you can't find it because it is under a leaf or plugged or some zombie squirrel ran off with it.  A face palm moment.

These are the toughest because you have to walk back and replay.

I HATE THAT!

Happens more than I'd care to admit too......some of our bermuda rough down here just eats balls.  No more than 2" deep, but if you don't step on it, you might not find it.  Of course, the easy answer is to just don't hit it in the rough!  Yeah, right.......

[boogielicious]

Around New England, they use a lot of Kentucky Blue Grass which does the same thing.  It is deep and the blades seem about 1/2 wide.

[saevel25]

The problem with this task of simplifying the rules is that any change is significant. The only thing i can think of is how the rules are organized so that they are easily accessible to golfers.

Like saying, all hazards follow the same dropping procedures. Then you list the three options. But still different hazards call for different drops. Look at TPC sawgrass, i am not sure the type of hazard it is, but even if you hit the green and it rolls off, and there is some space between the marked hazard line and the water, you can't drop on the island green. You have to rehit from the tee box or in the drop zone.

But i agree, in Florida that would be crazy. There are so many golf courses that have homes lining the golf holes. That, you'd have people hitting out of front lawns, back yards, were ever they could get an advantage. The reason is if we treat OB as a hazard, then you can hit from it. If we don't then and we take two club lengths, its still might be worth the risk. How many times have you tried to clear a water hazard on a tee shot? I would think trying to clear the edge of a OB on a dogleg would be similar, if your reward was cutting off 20-30 yards on a par 5 or par 4.

Honestly golf is pretty easy to understand. Heck its color coded most of the time

Water hazard - Yellow

Lateral hazard - Red

OB - White

What makes it hard to understand, the top two you have 3 dropping options for, the last one is stroke and distance. Lost ball can happen anywere not in a hazard, so that is by itself a unique circumstance.

The problem with the rules is, people don't want to play by them or don't want to learn them. Why change golf when people refuse to even try to learn the game properly.

[MEfree]

I just started a poll about penalties

Poll: Should the penalties for Out of Bounds and Lost Balls be more severe than penalties for Hazards and Unplayables?

http://thesandtrap.com/t/67379/poll-ob-lost-ball-vs-hazard-unplayable-lie-penalties

[iacas]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I just started a poll about penalties

Poll: Should the penalties for Out of Bounds and Lost Balls be more severe than penalties for Hazards and Unplayables?

http://thesandtrap.com/t/67379/poll-ob-lost-ball-vs-hazard-unplayable-lie-penalties

Once again, polling people doesn't make it right. The Rules of Golf are not about appeasement.

Poll people and they'll tell you they want to pay $0 in taxes. Poll the same people and they'll tell you they like having nice roads to drive on.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by iacas

Once again, polling people doesn't make it right. The Rules of Golf are not about appeasement.

Poll people and they'll tell you they want to pay $0 in taxes. Poll the same people and they'll tell you they like having nice roads to drive on.

I agree that getting people's opinions is just one step in the process- and you are right about the taxes/roads dichotomy.  However, golf is a game most people play for enjoyment, so why not try to incorporate players' opinions when feasible?  If the rules are such that the majority of people don't like them, is that really a good way to sustain and grow the sport?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I agree that getting people's opinions is just one step in the process-

We don't agree on that. It's not a step at all. It's irrelevant.

Originally Posted by MEfree

However, golf is a game most people play for enjoyment, so why not try to incorporate players' opinions when feasible?

I mean this with far, far more niceness than it will sound like, but that's the stupidest thing you've said yet. Goodness, talk about irrelevant. I'm sure wide receivers would love it if the rules said they weren't allowed to be bumped inside of five yards (or tackled, for that matter), but I'm also pretty sure safeties and linebackers would love it if you could tackle wide receivers right off the snap, too.

"Enjoyment" is far and away one of the LAST reasons to change a rule of the game. Give me a break.

Originally Posted by MEfree

If the rules are such that the majority of people don't like them, is that really a good way to sustain and grow the sport?

Again, with far more niceness than it will sound like (and I assure you when I'm being stupid I expect those I care about and trust to tell me too): the stupidity continues.

I'll put it this way: the day golf becomes a sport where you get to pick your ball up and throw it, nudge it into a different lie, drop where you think you lost it, take gimmes, etc. is the day I will quit playing golf. I don't "dislike" the Rules of Golf but I don't particularly "like" them either. The Rules define the game, and I love the game of golf.

Here's what you really, really, REALLY don't seem to get: the rules of the game are nowhere near the top of the list why people don't play the game, nor are the rules responsible for any failing to "sustain" or "grow" the sport. It's pace of play (time), cost, and overall difficulty of hitting a ball into a 4.25-inch hole from 400 yards away with screwy sticks across varying terrain, water, sand, bushes, trees, etc.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by iacas

Once again, polling people doesn't make it right. The Rules of Golf are not about appeasement.

Poll people and they'll tell you they want to pay $0 in taxes. Poll the same people and they'll tell you they like having nice roads to drive on.

Originally Posted by MEfree

I agree that getting people's opinions is just one step in the process- and you are right about the taxes/roads dichotomy.

Originally Posted by iacas

We don't agree on that. It's not a step at all. It's irrelevant.

Instead of democracy, what form of government do you advocate King Erik?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Instead of democracy, what form of government do you advocate King Erik?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not being a jerk just then, and that you clearly understand the difference between, I don't know, a country's g overnment and the rules of a game .

I'm hopeful that I've made the right choice, because if I'm wrong, there are really only two options:

1. You're being a massive jerk (while missing the point by a wide margin).
2. You don't see any differences between government, inalienable rights that affect the very way in which we LIVE, and a game we play from time to time.

Suffice to say you've failed (by quite a lot) to simplify the rules without fundamentally changing the game, and now you've resorted to making weird jabs and conflating government and games, so this thread has clearly run its course.