Weighty proposal for rewrite of the Rules

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Yep.  I've noticed that too.  Dropping isn't that complex, yet I'm always surprised about how poorly understood it seems to be.

I was pretty young then, but I remember when you used to have to drop it backwards over your shoulder.

Yep.  I rolled many a ball off my shoulder blade in my earlier days of playing.

[Lihu]

[QUOTE][/QUOTE][quote name="TJBam" url="/t/68925/weighty-proposal-for-rewrite-of-the-rules#post_877178"]Sounds about right. [/quote] I thought beer or ale were the preferred beverage of Red Sox fans? :-D

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by turtleback

Why should you be guaranteed a good lie when you have incurred a penalty?  The quality of your lie, including the possibility of ending in a divot is always present in a struck shot, why should you be insulated from that possibility because you did something bad?  A lot of the skill/scoring differences in golf come from the type of lie you end up with.

I could ask you a similar question- when you have incurred a stroke penalty to take an unplayable, why should it be possible to have your drop roll back to the EXACT same location it was BEFORE you took the stroke penalty?

To answer your question- sure you did something bad, but you already paid the price for it in the form of a penalty stroke.  Since the player has already paid the price/done the time, why not give him a good chance to succeed on the next shot.  The original rules of golf called for this, so I see no reason to add complexity and the possibility of an extra penalty in the form of rolling into a bad lie after you have already been penalized...one penalty is enough for me (and most of the players I observe on the course)

http://www.scottishgolfhistory.net/rules_of_golf.htm

5. If your Ball comes among watter, or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and Teeing it, you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

[Asheville]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

It's only difficult for people who have never bothered to try and learn the rule.  I could take just about anyone out on the course and in 15 minutes take them through every basic scenario for taking relief under rules 24 (obstructions), 25 (abnormal ground), 26 (water hazards), and 28 (ball unplayable), and covering the actual dropping procedures under rule 20.  There is really only one dropping procedure and two methods for measuring one's dropping zone by using clublengths.  You just have to remember that for relief without penalty your reference point is the nearest point of relief from where the ball lies, and for relief with penalty your reference point is where the ball lies (Rule 28) or where the ball crossed the margin of the hazard (Rule 26).  For relief without penalty the measured area from the NPR is always one clublength, and for penalty relief, the measured area from the ball or from the margin of the hazard is always 2 clublengths.

(I'm not discussing the stroke and distance option because that is self explanatory).

We all can teach it, Rick, but just try getting a small group or even an individual to want the lesson is trying. The USGA video clips are there for everyone, but they're not used either. The authors of the "rewrite" are merely acknowledging the reality that many, if not most, people just want to whack around a golf ball but have little interest in the Rules.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtleback

Why should you be guaranteed a good lie when you have incurred a penalty?  The quality of your lie, including the possibility of ending in a divot is always present in a struck shot, why should you be insulated from that possibility because you did something bad?  A lot of the skill/scoring differences in golf come from the type of lie you end up with.

I could ask you a similar question- when you have incurred a stroke penalty to take an unplayable, why should it be possible to have your drop roll back to the EXACT same location it was BEFORE you took the stroke penalty?

To answer your question- sure you did something bad, but you already paid the price for it in the form of a penalty stroke.  Since the player has already paid the price/done the time, why not give him a good chance to succeed on the next shot.  The original rules of golf called for this, so I see no reason to add complexity and the possibility of an extra penalty in the form of rolling into a bad lie after you have already been penalized...one penalty is enough for me (and most of the players I observe on the course)

http://www.scottishgolfhistory.net/rules_of_golf.htm

5. If your Ball comes among watter, or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and Teeing it, you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

Your 250 year old quote was only intended to apply to what we now call water hazards.  It's irrelevant for ball unplayable, and in any event only applies if you have a Delorian equipped with a flux capacitor.

The reason that Rule 28 offers 3 options is so that the player can get relief from any lie in one way or another.  If option c, doesn't work, then consider another.

[David in FL]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I could ask you a similar question- when you have incurred a stroke penalty to take an unplayable, why should it be possible to have your drop roll back to the EXACT same location it was BEFORE you took the stroke penalty?

To answer your question- sure you did something bad, but you already paid the price for it in the form of a penalty stroke.  Since the player has already paid the price/done the time, why not give him a good chance to succeed on the next shot.  The original rules of golf called for this, so I see no reason to add complexity and the possibility of an extra penalty in the form of rolling into a bad lie after you have already been penalized...one penalty is enough for me (and most of the players I observe on the course)

http://www.scottishgolfhistory.net/rules_of_golf.htm

5. If your Ball comes among watter, or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and Teeing it, you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

Nothing requires you to replay from the position of the original shot.  It's simply an option allowed, if you feel that it's to your advantage to do so.  If you don't want to take that particular option, don't.

[Lihu]

We all can teach it, Rick, but just try getting a small group or even an individual to want the lesson is trying. The USGA video clips are there for everyone, but they're not used either. The authors of the "rewrite" are merely acknowledging the reality that many, if not most, people just want to whack around a golf ball but have little interest in the Rules.

They seemed to indicate that pace of play was one of the factors as well. Should I be learning the current rules, or wait a decade or so for these rules to be ratified?

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

I could ask you a similar question- when you have incurred a stroke penalty to take an unplayable, why should it be possible to have your drop roll back to the EXACT same location it was BEFORE you took the stroke penalty?

To answer your question- sure you did something bad, but you already paid the price for it in the form of a penalty stroke.  Since the player has already paid the price/done the time, why not give him a good chance to succeed on the next shot.  The original rules of golf called for this, so I see no reason to add complexity and the possibility of an extra penalty in the form of rolling into a bad lie after you have already been penalized...one penalty is enough for me (and most of the players I observe on the course)

http://www.scottishgolfhistory.net/rules_of_golf.htm

5. If your Ball comes among watter, or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and Teeing it, you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

Nothing requires you to replay from the position of the original shot.  It's simply an option allowed, if you feel that it's to your advantage to do so.  If you don't want to take that particular option, don't.

David:  McFree was referring to the issue that when you take the option of a 2 clublength drop, if the ball rolls back onto the same condition which you are trying to get out of, you simply have to declare it unplayable again.  No redrops for that, no guarantee of actually obtaining relief.  The player needs to examine the situation before proceeding to be sure he has made a viable choice.

[David in FL]

We all can teach it, Rick, but just try getting a small group or even an individual to want the lesson is trying. The USGA video clips are there for everyone, but they're not used either. The authors of the "rewrite" are merely acknowledging the reality that many, if not most, people just want to whack around a golf ball but have little interest in the Rules.

Will they have more interest in a different set of rules? Will allowing relief from any animal hole instead of only those caused by a "burrowing" animal cause Jimmy Rolltheball to suddenly care about playing properly? I don't think so......

[David in FL]

David:  McFree was referring to the issue that when you take the option of a 2 clublength drop, if the ball rolls back onto the same condition which you are trying to get out of, you simply have to declare it unplayable again.  No redrops for that, no guarantee of actually obtaining relief.  The player needs to examine the situation before proceeding to be sure he has made a viable choice.

Got it. I misunderstood. Reading is fundamental.......:~(

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Asheville

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

It's only difficult for people who have never bothered to try and learn the rule.  I could take just about anyone out on the course and in 15 minutes take them through every basic scenario for taking relief under rules 24 (obstructions), 25 (abnormal ground), 26 (water hazards), and 28 (ball unplayable), and covering the actual dropping procedures under rule 20.  There is really only one dropping procedure and two methods for measuring one's dropping zone by using clublengths.  You just have to remember that for relief without penalty your reference point is the nearest point of relief from where the ball lies, and for relief with penalty your reference point is where the ball lies (Rule 28) or where the ball crossed the margin of the hazard (Rule 26).  For relief without penalty the measured area from the NPR is always one clublength, and for penalty relief, the measured area from the ball or from the margin of the hazard is always 2 clublengths.

(I'm not discussing the stroke and distance option because that is self explanatory).

We all can teach it, Rick, but just try getting a small group or even an individual to want the lesson is trying. The USGA video clips are there for everyone, but they're not used either. The authors of the "rewrite" are merely acknowledging the reality that many, if not most, people just want to whack around a golf ball but have little interest in the Rules.

That's my point.  Too many so-called golfers don't even try to learn the most basic rules so why cater to them?  It will never make an impression  because they are no more likely to learn the new rules than they were the old ones.  Most would rather play by what they pick up through word of mouth, half of it questionable, the rest just plain wrong, and they aren't going to be any more diligent with a rule simplification.  If they have to make any effort at all, it's not going to happen.

Those who put forth these ideas have their hearts in the right place, but they don't seem to understand that most casual players just don't care.   Even on a forum like this one you get a lot of people saying "Who cares?" when a rules question comes up, so why would a player who isn't even as serious as those guys bother with learning a different set of rules when he has never even looked at the current ones?

[Asheville]

Perhaps Rulesman posted this in hopes that we all might discuss whether any or all of the proposals have a hope of being implemented in our lifetime. I do see a chance that a single water hazard Rule has a chance, that all animal holes has a chance and perhaps others, too. I'm not optimistic about the chances for much innovation in dropping/placing Rule changes. I'd like to see the line on the ball thing go away, the unlimited voluntary marking and cleaning the ball on the putting green go away, and the penalty for striking the flagstick with a putted ball go away.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I could ask you a similar question- when you have incurred a stroke penalty to take an unplayable, why should it be possible to have your drop roll back to the EXACT same location it was BEFORE you took the stroke penalty?

To answer your question- sure you did something bad, but you already paid the price for it in the form of a penalty stroke.  Since the player has already paid the price/done the time, why not give him a good chance to succeed on the next shot.  The original rules of golf called for this, so I see no reason to add complexity and the possibility of an extra penalty in the form of rolling into a bad lie after you have already been penalized...one penalty is enough for me (and most of the players I observe on the course)

So you want to guarantee a perfect placed lie because of a one out of, what?  hundred, chance that the ball will roll back to its original place?  When even the possibility of that happening should cause the player to use one of the the other relief options?  Because frankly, if that happens more than once in a thousand times it means the player is exercising pretty poor judgment in his choice of relief options.  There is a reason that pros look very carefully at where they are going to drop a ball.  And carefully consider what relief option they will take or even if they WILL take relief.

But to a lot of players the notion that they should consider what their next shot will be is not something they think about, whether in their shot selection or their relief options.  How many players would have automatically pulled out driver to measure the club-length if in the situation Tiger was in on 18 on Friday?  But Tiger thought about where his ball might end up and chose to measure his club-length with a putter, so if his drop put him in the treeline he would get to redrop.  I don't see the point in taking such strategic thinking out of the game through the Rules.

Originally Posted by Asheville

We all can teach it, Rick, but just try getting a small group or even an individual to want the lesson is trying. The USGA video clips are there for everyone, but they're not used either. The authors of the "rewrite" are merely acknowledging the reality that many, if not most, people just want to whack around a golf ball but have little interest in the Rules.

I have no confidence that any "simplification: of the rules is going to improve compliance or improve pace of play.  Too many people either don't bother to learn even the simple rules or disregard them when convenient, for me to think that the Rules should cater to the lowest common denominator.  Why change the rules because people want to whack the ball around with little interest in the rules?  They didn't read the current rules and they aren't going to read any new set of rules.  And they aren't going to follow either set.

[David in FL]

Perhaps Rulesman posted this in hopes that we all might discuss whether any or all of the proposals have a hope of being implemented in our lifetime. I do see a chance that a single water hazard Rule has a chance, that all animal holes has a chance and perhaps others, too. I'm not optimistic about the chances for much innovation in dropping/placing Rule changes. I'd like to see the line on the ball thing go away, the unlimited voluntary marking and cleaning the ball on the putting green go away, and the penalty for striking the flagstick with a putted ball go away.

What the heck do you not like about marking and cleaning the ball on the green?!

[Asheville]

Originally Posted by David in FL

What the heck do you not like about marking and cleaning the ball on the green?!

I'm in favor of marking, lifting and cleaning it on the putting green ... once . I'm in favor of subsequent marking, lifting and cleaning only if it assists or interferes with another's play. The fewer times a player is permitted to touch his golf ball the better!

[David in FL]

I'm in favor of marking, lifting and cleaning it on the putting green ... [U]once[/U]. I'm in favor of subsequent marking, lifting and cleaning [U]only[/U] if it assists or interferes with another's play. The fewer times a player is permitted to touch his golf ball the better!

Why? It's certainly not significant in terms of pace of play.... Gotta say, in my entire golf career, that's the first time I've ever heard that one come up.

[Rulesman]

Originally Posted by Asheville

Perhaps Rulesman posted this in hopes that we all might discuss whether any or all of the proposals have a hope of being implemented in our lifetime. I do see a chance that a single water hazard Rule has a chance, that all animal holes has a chance and perhaps others, too. I'm not optimistic about the chances for much innovation in dropping/placing Rule changes. I'd like to see the line on the ball thing go away, the unlimited voluntary marking and cleaning the ball on the putting green go away, and the penalty for striking the flagstick with a putted ball go away.

Coincidentally, I think, the USGA/R&A; have said they are working on a major revision for 2020.

The last one was in 1984.

[Asheville]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Why? It's certainly not significant in terms of pace of play....

Gotta say, in my entire golf career, that's the first time I've ever heard that one come up.

If Rule 22 didn't exist in its present form there'd be very few occasions, apart from retrieving it from the hole, in which it would be necessary to ever touch your ball on the putting green. And really, 16-1b is unnecessary if not for the fact that not cleaning is virtually unenforceable.