Bunkers vs. Water Hazards

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by iacas

They aren't, and I don't appreciate your attempts at sensationalism by burying the lede.

But, alas, this thread is not a total waste of time.

I, for one, just now learned the phrase "burying the lede."  OK, well, not exactly.  I've heard the term before, just never seen it written, and always assumed it was lead.  I've never known of the existence of the word spelled "lede."  (Looks like it could be written lede or lead)

Anyways, since this topic is reta , I mean, dumb, I don't care if I'm going OT here.

Why in tarnation is the word "lead" (rhymes with need, not bed) not always spelled "lede?"  Certainly that would allow us to avoid all confusion with the actual element.

And, you got me looking up through google and re-learning all the different confusing types of speech (homonyms, homographs, homophones, etc, etc) :)  So thanks for that!!

Back on-topic ... mefree, this is quite possibly the dumbest question you have asked to date. ;)

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Back on-topic ... mefree, this is quite possibly the dumbest question you have asked to date. ;)

High praise indeed.

But the real reason is that the quantum probability of a ball spontaneously flying out of a bunker is higher than the analogous probability of a ball flying spontaneously out of a water hazard by several orders of magnitude, therefore the rules have adjusted the relief options to counteract this fundamental imbalance of the probabilities.

[hacker101]

Originally Posted by Shorty

The relationship of swing path and acceleration with aquatic versus granular materials is affetyed negatively despite the axpectation that causal effect will influence ball flight and spike marks.

In other words, WTF is your question?

Also, bunkers aren't more penal than water hazards.

+1 I was LMAO!

[hacker101]

Originally Posted by saevel25

HAHA

how about this,

Though it is known that water hazards are given a +1 to stroke, for those who suffer from inadequate technique to overcome the adverse conditions of granular materials, bunkers can in fact carry a penalty equal to the number of strokes it takes before the golfer storms off the course or breaks his wedge.

I am still LMAO!!

[golfingnooob]

wat

[saevel25]

But in seriousness. I think bunkers tend to garner different rule set is due to the history of the game. Since golf was created on a piece of land that only had access to water by smaller ponds, creeks, and the ocean, its not like in the USA were water is created as a primary source of pain for the golfer, bunkers were the primary defense for the golf course. There's a reason why the Old Course has 112 bunkers.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by saevel25

But in seriousness. I think bunkers tend to garner different rule set is due to the history of the game. Since golf was created on a piece of land that only had access to water by smaller ponds, creeks, and the ocean, its not like in the USA were water is created as a primary source of pain for the golfer, bunkers were the primary defense for the golf course. There's a reason why the Old Course has 112 bunkers.

Thanks...this was the sort of answer I was looking for.

In response to those who feel this thread is a complete waste of time, let me ask you this- Would the rules be more or less complicated for a newbie to learn if your relief options for all hazards, including bunkers, was the same?

Assuming you logically answer LESS COMPLICATED, then the next question is, what are the advantages to having different relief options?  I know you guys will come up with some stuff here including some stuff that I might agree with.

This brings us to the important question- are the advantages of having different relief options for bunkers, water hazards and lateral water hazards worth the extra complication they bring to the rules?

My guess is that a good player would rarely exercise an option of taking a ball out of a bunker at the cost of a 1 stroke penalty- there are exceptions for sure as we see in the Open, but the vast majority of time good players would play bunkers exactly as they do even if bunkers were treated as water hazards.

Bad players tend not to follow the rules anyways, but some might exercise the 1 stroke penalty option- is this such a bad thing or does everyone like watching a guy take 3 to get out of the trap?

[saevel25]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Thanks...this was the sort of answer I was looking for.

In response to those who feel this thread is a complete waste of time, let me ask you this- Would the rules be more or less complicated for a newbie to learn if your relief options for all hazards, including bunkers, was the same?

Assuming you logically answer LESS COMPLICATED, then the next question is, what are the advantages to having different relief options?  I know you guys will come up with some stuff here including some stuff that I might agree with.

This brings us to the important question- are the advantages of having different relief options for bunkers, water hazards and lateral water hazards worth the extra complication they bring to the rules?

My guess is that a good player would rarely exercise an option of taking a ball out of a bunker at the cost of a 1 stroke penalty- there are exceptions for sure as we see in the Open, but the vast majority of time good players would play bunkers exactly as they do even if bunkers were treated as water hazards.

Bad players tend not to follow the rules anyways, but some might exercise the 1 stroke penalty option- is this such a bad thing or does everyone like watching a guy take 3 to get out of the trap?

Not really, its pretty simple. Its not like there are twenty different types of hazards out there. People know you play out of bunkers, i dont' think people really call bunkers hazards, they just call them bunkers.

As for water hazards, you have two types, lateral water, and non lateral water. Lateral marked with red, allows you to drop with in two club lengths of were the ball entered. Yellow marked water hazard, does not. You either play the ball as it lies, or you keep a point of entry between you and the hole, and go back as far as you want, or you play from the previous spot.

I don't get why people think the rules are complicated. Unless you get a freakish ruling, its not hard to remember.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Thanks...this was the sort of answer I was looking for.

In response to those who feel this thread is a complete waste of time, let me ask you this- Would the rules be more or less complicated for a newbie to learn if your relief options for all hazards, including bunkers, was the same?

Assuming you logically answer LESS COMPLICATED, then the next question is, what are the advantages to having different relief options?  I know you guys will come up with some stuff here including some stuff that I might agree with.

This brings us to the important question- are the advantages of having different relief options for bunkers, water hazards and lateral water hazards worth the extra complication they bring to the rules?

My guess is that a good player would rarely exercise an option of taking a ball out of a bunker at the cost of a 1 stroke penalty- there are exceptions for sure as we see in the Open, but the vast majority of time good players would play bunkers exactly as they do even if bunkers were treated as water hazards.

Bad players tend not to follow the rules anyways, but some might exercise the 1 stroke penalty option- is this such a bad thing or does everyone like watching a guy take 3 to get out of the trap?

If you treated bunkers and water hazards the same it would get very confusing when someone tried to rake a pond.

[Asheville]

Originally Posted by turtleback

If you treated bunkers and water hazards the same it would get very confusing when someone tried to rake a pond.

Furthermore, you couldn't touch the water in the bunker with your club or your hand. That's a show stopper along with the floating rakes in the water hazards we'd suddenly have to contend with.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Asheville

Furthermore, you couldn't touch the water in the bunker with your club or your hand. That's a show stopper along with the floating rakes in the water hazards we'd suddenly have to contend with.

Not to mention the debate about where to leave the water hazard rakes.

[Asheville]

Originally Posted by turtleback

Not to mention the debate about where to leave the water hazard rakes.

Caddie, this shot calls for the water wedge.