Should Divots Be Considered Ground Under Repair?

[iacas]

Please tell us how a properly sanded divot reflects negligence on anyone's part......

In other words, @Kenn , while you and many others might like this to be a rule (divot holes = GUR), there are a number of humdrum impracticalities that prevent it from becoming one, not to mention the principle talked about in the Tufts book.

P.S. @Kenn , are you going to require walkers to carry around buckets of sand as well? Seems kind of harsh…

[mvmac]

I think Kenn would prefer if you chased down the pieces of your divot and put them pack into place like a jigsaw puzzle so that it doesn't appear as if you ever took one.  Of course the rest of us on the course don't mind waiting so Kenn isn't required to hit from a properly repaired divot.

Yeah no wonder we have a pace of play problem lol

[wils5150]

That is unless it's GUR, or on the green, or a burrow caused by an animal or any other number of reasons one of which should be the negligence of another golfer.

Dude take up pool or tennis because you really dont want to play golf.

[iacas]

OK - let's call it my primary point, the point that I joined the thread to make.

Originally Posted by birlyshirly

Funny how so many posters get so heated and moralistic and spirit-of-the-game-ish. The current rule is the current rule, but it's pretty arbitrary IMO. I don't recall any great hoo-ha in the years when you could legally move your ball from a divot.

If there's a justification for the current rule, it's probably to save wear and tear on the course.

The moderator who restricted you from this thread made these points in explaining why.

1) If, as you say, your only point was to point out that an undetermined number of clubs had the local rule, then you've made that point and continued participation is unnecessary, and you've really been wasting everyone's time.

2) Nobody believes for a second that's your only point, or even your main point. Your quoted post starts off with an insulting, mocking, high-horse tone about how "funny" everyone is being. Then it calls the current rule "arbitrary" (which indicates that you don't understand the basic principle of playing the course as you find it). Then you state a factually incorrect thing about how you could "legally move your ball from a divot" when that situation never existed.

We're not a fan of people who waste our time OR disingenuous people here, birly. For the reasons stated above, as well as the fact that you repeatedly - despite being asked to stop - threw in little digs about being "close minded" or "evasive" or several other silly things, I'll stand by the moderator's decision to restrict you from this thread again . And no, I will not be reversing that decision as I did once already.

P.S. I'm aware that birlyshirly can only see this if he logs out. I'm fine with that. This is as much a notice to others as it is to him.

[Kenn]

Al Tompkins of Taylors , South Carolina , a finleyongolf.com contributor (see his article, “A Game of Civility”) has considerable experience with the game of golf as an active participant and formerly as a PGA tournament coordinator. Just recently he had a particular on course experience for the first time. He had previously seen the touring pros encounter this situation and he obviously got a little warm under the collar when it happened to him. Al offered the following:

I knew the rule was there. I even read it several times while really looking for another rule. I've imagined touring pros thinking nasty thoughts while looking down and contemplating their situation. I've even lip read a few. But, I never thought too much of it. Why… simply because in my 40+ years of playing golf my ball had never landed in a fairway divot…until last week.

I hit a drive of about 230 yards to the left center of the fairway, just where I aimed it (I love target golf). When I arrived at my ball, I not only saw that it had found a divot, but it was also sitting on top of a one-inch pile of sand that had been left there by a earlier player with an over exuberant sand can. Or maybe it was a member of the grounds crew, who knows.

I had hit, what was for me a perfect drive, in my own fairway, and now I had to hit my second shot, out of a mini-bunker. Not fair! Yeah, I know about the rub of the green and all that, but a divot, filled or not, is not fairway, it's really ground under repair . When there is regulated ground under repair, it is so designated, and you can drop one club length, no nearer the hole. You can do it around a burrowing animal hole (as an aside I used to play with friends, when I lived in Virginia, who found burrowing animals everywhere…you would have thought it was an epidemic or an invasion of furry rodents).

In my opinion, if your ball lands, in your own fairway (not “through the green”) and it lands in a divot, filled with sand or au natural, the rules should treat it as ground under repair. Drop within one club length or one score card length or directly adjacent to the divot, whatever, no nearer the hole .

I am a believer in the rules of golf and try to play by them (I even called a double hit on myself last week which no one saw). But in the future, if I land in a divot in my own fairway, I may claim a very local rule, D.U.R. (Divot Under Repair).

http://www.finleyongolf.com/articles/InSearchoftheWorstRulesinGolf.htm

Obviously there are those that are very knowledgeble about the rules of golf that think relief from someones divot should be a part of them.  I've posted a couple including Payne Stewart.   They know what the rules are but that does not mean they are "wrong" for feeling the way they do.  If they were claiming that "you can", that would be wrong.  If they are claiming that "you should", that would simply be their opinion of the rule and it is obviously shared by many, not just dummies like me.

[Kenn]

Also based on the final sentence of this PGA Tournament Coordinator, " But in the future, if I land in a divot in my own fairway, I may claim a very local rule, D.U.R. (Divot Under Repair)" that such rules obviously do still exist.

I also think that if someone has determined their handicap on just such a course that it is certainly as accurate as doing so on a course that does not have such a rule.  If someone has taken relief from a divot 1 time over the last 20 rounds how inaccurate do you think his handicap actually is?  And 1 time over 20 rounds sounds like a lot to me, I can't remember having done so and am now playing about twice a week.  If we were talking about a common occurance it might be a different story but it is not.  This talk of handicaps determined on such a course as meaningless is ridiculous.

[Kenn]

In other words, @Kenn, while you and many others might like this to be a rule (divot holes = GUR), there are a number of humdrum impracticalities that prevent it from becoming one, not to mention the principle talked about in the Tufts book.

P.S. @Kenn, are you going to require walkers to carry around buckets of sand as well? Seems kind of harsh…

No, I personally share this PGA Coordinator's feelings.......

In my opinion, if your ball lands, in your own fairway (not “through the green”) and it lands in a divot, filled with sand or au natural, the rules should treat it as ground under repair. Drop within one club length or one score card length or directly adjacent to the divot, whatever, no nearer the hole .

[David in FL]

No, I personally share this PGA Coordinator's feelings.......

In my opinion, if your ball lands, in your own fairway (not “through the green”) and it lands in a divot, filled with sand or au natural, the rules should treat it as ground under repair. Drop within one club length or one score card length or directly adjacent to the divot, whatever, no nearer the hole .

How do you define a divot?  At what point is it no longer a divot?

This from Friday.....yep, actually thought of this thread and snapped a pic......

Is it a divot?  If so, am I in it?  Should I get relief?

[Fourputt]

Also based on the final sentence of this PGA Tournament Coordinator, "But in the future, if I land in a divot in my own fairway, I may claim a very local rule, D.U.R. (Divot Under Repair)" that such rules obviously do still exist.

I also think that if someone has determined their handicap on just such a course that it is certainly as accurate as doing so on a course that does not have such a rule.  If someone has taken relief from a divot 1 time over the last 20 rounds how inaccurate do you think his handicap actually is?  And 1 time over 20 rounds sounds like a lot to me, I can't remember having done so and am now playing about twice a week.  If we were talking about a common occurance it might be a different story but it is not.  This talk of handicaps determined on such a course as meaningless is ridiculous.

Aha!!!  Now we see another reason for not legislating the divot holes.  It is such a rare occurrence that it has very little overall effect on ones game.  You worry far too much about something so insignificant.  In 40 years, I've probably been in in a divot hole a dozen or so times.  To me, that just makes this whole discussion irrelevant, which I'm sure is how the R&A; and USGA view it.  Their opinion on this is very clear when you read the dropping rules which are specific on prohibiting the player from repairing a divot in the area where he is going to drop.  It simply isn't a common enough problem to make yet another rule to modify the principle of playing the ball as it lies and playing the course as you find it.

You run up against the issue of relief if you call it GUR.  For relief from ground under repair, you are required to to take complete relief for lie, area of swing, and stance.  I can see a player on a busy course in a popular landing area taking 15 drops from various divots before he meets that requirement.  If you  make a special case just for divots, then you have added a little bit more complexity to the rules, and now you are adding fuel to those who argue that the rules are already too complex ( @MEfree where are you when we need you?).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenn

No, I personally share this PGA Coordinator's feelings.......

In my opinion, if your ball lands, in your own fairway (not “through the green”) and it lands in a divot, filled with sand or au natural, the rules should treat it as ground under repair. Drop within one club length or one score card length or directly adjacent to the divot, whatever, no nearer the hole .

How do you define a divot?  At what point is it no longer a divot?

This from Friday.....yep, actually thought of this thread and snapped a pic......

Is it a divot?  If so, am I in it?  Should I get relief?

And this is yet the other compelling argument against such a rule.  Identification becomes nearly impossible as the divot starts to fill in.  There are any number of ways that a scrape could be made which is not a divot, but is not really distinguishable from one.

Lastly, there is nothing anywhere in the rules which says that the player is entitled to a good lie anywhere on the course.  That belief is a myth, and needs to be set aside, right along with the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny.

[iacas]

No, I personally share this PGA Coordinator's feelings.......

In my opinion, if your ball lands, in your own fairway (not “through the green”) and it lands in a divot, filled with sand or au natural, the rules should treat it as ground under repair. Drop within one club length or one score card length or directly adjacent to the divot, whatever, no nearer the hole .

You didn't even answer the questions or address the points I asked of you. And read your PMs and stop with the multi-posting or moderators will continue to do their jobs.

[Kenn]

Aha!!!  Now we see another reason for not legislating the divot holes.  It is such a rare occurrence that it has very little overall effect on ones game.  You worry far too much about something so insignificant.  In 40 years, I've probably been in in a divot hole a dozen or so times.  To me, that just makes this whole discussion irrelevant, which I'm sure is how the R&A; and USGA view it.  Their opinion on this is very clear when you read the dropping rules which are specific on prohibiting the player from repairing a divot in the area where he is going to drop.  It simply isn't a common enough problem to make yet another rule to modify the principle of playing the ball as it lies and playing the course as you find it.

You run up against the issue of relief if you call it GUR.  For relief from ground under repair, you are required to to take complete relief for lie, area of swing, and stance.  I can see a player on a busy course in a popular landing area taking 15 drops from various divots before he meets that requirement.  If you  make a special case just for divots, then you have added a little bit more complexity to the rules, and now you are adding fuel to those who argue that the rules are already too complex (@MEfree where are you when we need you?).

And this is yet the other compelling argument against such a rule.  Identification becomes nearly impossible as the divot starts to fill in.  There are any number of ways that a scrape could be made which is not a divot, but is not really distinguishable from one.

Lastly, there is nothing anywhere in the rules which says that the player is entitled to a good lie anywhere on the course.  That belief is a myth, and needs to be set aside, right along with the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny.

How you want to define what is or what is not a divot is an entirely different issue or question.  The fact that many golfers including pros and PGA tour professionals feel the same as I do does not make us wrong and your silly picture does not change that.

[iacas]

How you want to define what is or what is not a divot is an entirely different issue or question.  The fact that many golfers including pros and PGA tour professionals feel the same as I do does not make us wrong and your silly picture does not change that.

No, it isn't.

You want free relief from divots. Define "divot" (or "divot hole").

Nobody has said you were "wrong." It's an opinion that you should be able to get relief from a divot. It's just an opinion you haven't thought through very well, and an opinion that would have some seemingly insurmountable and very real practical issues as well as modifying one of the most fundamental principles of the game: that you play the course as you find it.

You've yet to address any of those issues, nor do any of the quotes you want to post.

Millions of people thought the earth was flat… it didn't make them right simply because it was the popular view (slight difference as the shape of the earth is a fact, this is opinion). You can't "win" this debate or convince many people simply by quoting others. You need to address the very real points being made by others. Because if you truly have nothing else to offer to this thread, stop posting in it.

[Ernest Jones]

How you want to define what is or what is not a divot is an entirely different issue or question.  The fact that many golfers including pros and PGA tour professionals feel the same as I do does not make us wrong and your silly picture does not change that.

I would say that it is an integral part of any discussion on whether the rule should be changed. It speaks to the feasibility as well as the sensibility of such a change. Using the opinions of tour pros is probably not going to yield the most objective results, especially if you're using the opinions of tour pros who happen to be sitting in a divot hole at the time. ;-)

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Aha!!!  Now we see another reason for not legislating the divot holes.  It is such a rare occurrence that it has very little overall effect on ones game.  You worry far too much about something so insignificant.  In 40 years, I've probably been in in a divot hole a dozen or so times.  To me, that just makes this whole discussion irrelevant, which I'm sure is how the R&A; and USGA view it.  Their opinion on this is very clear when you read the dropping rules which are specific on prohibiting the player from repairing a divot in the area where he is going to drop.  It simply isn't a common enough problem to make yet another rule to modify the principle of playing the ball as it lies and playing the course as you find it.

You run up against the issue of relief if you call it GUR.  For relief from ground under repair, you are required to to take complete relief for lie, area of swing, and stance.  I can see a player on a busy course in a popular landing area taking 15 drops from various divots before he meets that requirement.  If you  make a special case just for divots, then you have added a little bit more complexity to the rules, and now you are adding fuel to those who argue that the rules are already too complex (@MEfree where are you when we need you?).

And this is yet the other compelling argument against such a rule.  Identification becomes nearly impossible as the divot starts to fill in.  There are any number of ways that a scrape could be made which is not a divot, but is not really distinguishable from one.

Lastly, there is nothing anywhere in the rules which says that the player is entitled to a good lie anywhere on the course.  That belief is a myth, and needs to be set aside, right along with the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny.

How you want to define what is or what is not a divot is an entirely different issue or question.  The fact that many golfers including pros and PGA tour professionals feel the same as I do does not make us wrong and your silly picture does not change that.

At least figure  out who your are responding to.  I didn't post the photo.  And there is nothing silly about it.  You tell me unequivocally which of those spots is a divot and which isn't.  You can't do it from that photo any more than you can on the course.  You are just pissed because your soapbox is being shredded from under your feet and you have no way to respond to that.

[Kenn]

At least figure  out who your are responding to.  I didn't post the photo.  And there is nothing silly about it.  You tell me unequivocally which of those spots is a divot and which isn't.  You can't do it from that photo any more than you can on the course.  You are just pissed because your soapbox is being shredded from under your feet and you have no way to respond to that.

In my opinion I would say no that is not a divot deserving of relief.  I would not ask for relief from such a lie.  If 2 others playing with me disagreed and said the guy hitting there deserved relief then he can have it and I won't cry about it either.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

At least figure  out who your are responding to.  I didn't post the photo.  And there is nothing silly about it.  You tell me unequivocally which of those spots is a divot and which isn't.  You can't do it from that photo any more than you can on the course.  You are just pissed because your soapbox is being shredded from under your feet and you have no way to respond to that.

In my opinion I would say no that is not a divot deserving of relief.  I would not ask for relief from such a lie.  If 2 others playing with me disagreed and said the guy hitting there deserved relief then he can have it and I won't cry about it either.

And that is exactly how the rules cannot be applied.  It shows your basic lack of understanding about the rules of the game.  The Rules of Golf must be written in such a way that they are applied the same way for all players playing under similar conditions, and your method would lead to inconsistent application and would be a clear breach of equity.

[David in FL]

In my opinion I would say no that is not a divot deserving of relief.  I would not ask for relief from such a lie.  If 2 others playing with me disagreed and said the guy hitting there deserved relief then he can have it and I won't cry about it either.

So we're going to vote on issues of relief? :-\. Any other things we should be voting on instead of addressing as actual rules that govern play? In a stroke play competition, do all 99 fellow competitors get to vote on your unique situation? We talked about it before. One of the principles under which the rules are written require that like situations are treated the same for each player. The principle of equity. Without specifically defining exactly what constitutes eligibility for relief, equity cannot be achieved. Edited to add that Fourputt, as usual, beat me too it.....

[MS256]

So we're going to vote on issues of relief? .

In that case I'm only playing with my best friends and/or very generous people. No more bad lies for me.