Should Divots Be Considered Ground Under Repair?

[14ledo81]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 14ledo81

We already have disputes as is.  Why make the rules more discretionary so as to add more possible disputes?

That is a much stronger argument in favor of hitting from divots than your previous one.

That is my whole point.  "Who gets to decide?"

Define - "Divot Hole", so everyone who plays golf will make the same assessment when they hit into one.

[Gunther]

That is my whole point.  "Who gets to decide?" Define - "Divot Hole", so everyone who plays golf will make the same assessment when they hit into one.

I don't believe that's an issue. I have never, in all my years of golf, had a question about what is a divot created from an earlier swing. Not saying it couldn't happen, just saying that I've never seen it as a factor, not once. Completely different when it comes to pitch marks. I often (once every 3 or 4 rounds) have to confirm with a partner whether something I want to repair on the green is, in fact, an old pitch mark. My experience only so take it for what it's worth. I've had plenty of balls roll into holes or depressions in the fairway that very clearly were not created from an earlier iron strike. It's an honorable game, I believe most would honor the rule if ever enacted.

[Abu3baid]

[QUOTE name="Abu3baid" url="/t/70984/should-divots-be-considered-ground-under-repair/414#post_1019912"]     I don't really need to show you where in the rules it is defined.. The fairway is well known to everyone. It is used when they apply the LCP don't they? They deferentiate it when thy calculate fairway hits don't they? I think this is a very small issue that can be dealt with later and has no bearing on the conversation.. Granted everything I am saying doesn't apply to outside this fairway as play as it lay applies there! In the mean time my comment still stands :)[/QUOTE] Your entire statement has a null connotation when you use undefined terms.  There is no such thing as LCP either.  Understanding the terminology is key to understanding the rules.  That is why the Definitions section is placed before the list of Rules.   Just for the point of discussion, there is no mention of rough in the rules either.  "Rough" is simply a colloquialism within the game, the same as "fairway", "pin", or "sand trap".  None of those terms has any existence in the rules. When you use such terminology in a rules discussion, you demonstrate your lack of understanding of the rules and their underlying principles.   [QUOTE]  Come on... I do have a reasonable expectation that I will have a pretty good lie on the fairway.. [/QUOTE] Maybe you need to change your expectations then.

Yeah.. I never said I was a rules expert.. I'm giving my opinion and I will talk about terms that I know everyone understands and if they don't they can ask for clarification.. I will leave being an expert at the rules to you, if you feel that only experts such as your self should be allowed to discuss rules then that is up to you and the admins to enforce that.. Until that time take it easy, it's only a thread about divots.. Didn't know the rules police were going to come out of the woodwork for this one.. Remember not everyone has time to study the rules and their guiding principles.. Nor do I care to either just incase you were wondering! Cheers

[David in FL]

I don't believe that's an issue. I have never, in all my years of golf, had a question about what is a divot created from an earlier swing. Not saying it couldn't happen, just saying that I've never seen it as a factor, not once. Completely different when it comes to pitch marks. I often (once every 3 or 4 rounds) have to confirm with a partner whether something I want to repair on the green is, in fact, an old pitch mark. My experience only so take it for what it's worth. I've had plenty of balls roll into holes or depressions in the fairway that very clearly were not created from an earlier iron strike. It's an honorable game, I believe most would honor the rule if ever enacted.

Honorable has nothing to do with it. You cannot clearly define what a divot is, and the exact point when it is no longer a divot. Until you can do that, without subjectivity, your honorable golfer has nothing upon which to make a decision.

[Abu3baid]

[quote name="14ledo81" url="/t/70984/should-divots-be-considered-ground-under-repair/450#post_1020250"] That is my whole point.  "Who gets to decide?" Define - "Divot Hole", so everyone who plays golf will make the same assessment when they hit into one.

I don't believe that's an issue. I have never, in all my years of golf, had a question about what is a divot created from an earlier swing. Not saying it couldn't happen, just saying that I've never seen it as a factor, not once. Completely different when it comes to pitch marks. I often (once every 3 or 4 rounds) have to confirm with a partner whether something I want to repair on the green is, in fact, an old pitch mark. My experience only so take it for what it's worth. I've had plenty of balls roll into holes or depressions in the fairway that very clearly were not created from an earlier iron strike. It's an honorable game, I believe most would honor the rule if ever enacted.[/quote] My thoughts exactly.. Not many people here would really wonder if they are in a divot or not, seems easy to me! That's what thy keep saying, it's an honorable game, but when it comes to application it seems everyone thinks that people are out to cheat!

[Golfingdad]

Maybe you need to change your expectations then.

LOL, good one.  This might possibly be the most true statement ever uttered ... and it applies to every golfer, in every aspect of the game, everywhere.

It's either positively a pitch mark, or you're not allowed to repair it on the green.  The ball either moved, or it oscillated.  It either meets the definition of casual water, or it does not.  All of your examples are well defined.  If someone chooses to ignore those definitions, or take liberty with them, then that's an issue for the committee, or in a casual round it's their decision how to play the game, but it doesn't mean that those items are subjective.

But there are still disputes about these things, no?  I might say it's "positively" a pitch mark, but my a-hole opponent says its not.  I remember (this is so random, I have no idea why) a situation from, I think, the British Open 4, 5, maybe 8 years ago where David Frost was arguing with a rules official because he was claiming that something (cart path, maybe) was interfering with his stance, and the rules official said no.  He basically called him a liar because he said that's not how you would stand for that shot, no relief, tough noogies.

And of course, lets not forget Tiger Woods BMW debacle last year.  The rules may have cut and dried definitions, but the application can, in many cases, be anything but.

I don't believe that's an issue. I have never, in all my years of golf, had a question about what is a divot created from an earlier swing. Not saying it couldn't happen, just saying that I've never seen it as a factor, not once.

Completely different when it comes to pitch marks. I often (once every 3 or 4 rounds) have to confirm with a partner whether something I want to repair on the green is, in fact, an old pitch mark.

My experience only so take it for what it's worth. I've had plenty of balls roll into holes or depressions in the fairway that very clearly were not created from an earlier iron strike. It's an honorable game, I believe most would honor the rule if ever enacted.

I agree with this, seems perfectly reasonable.

You cannot clearly define what a divot is, and the exact point when it is no longer a divot. Until you can do that, without subjectivity, your honorable golfer has nothing upon which to make a decision.

Speaking of definitions ... I'm trying to find in the rules where it defines a ball mark or pitch mark on the green as something more than "damage to the putting green caused by the impact of the ball."  Does it provide anything more anywhere else?  (Asking sincerely, not snarkily ;))

Because if not, then here you go:

Divot Hole: Damage to the course caused by the impact of a golf club on the ground.

[14ledo81]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunther

I don't believe that's an issue. I have never, in all my years of golf, had a question about what is a divot created from an earlier swing. Not saying it couldn't happen, just saying that I've never seen it as a factor, not once.

Completely different when it comes to pitch marks. I often (once every 3 or 4 rounds) have to confirm with a partner whether something I want to repair on the green is, in fact, an old pitch mark.

My experience only so take it for what it's worth. I've had plenty of balls roll into holes or depressions in the fairway that very clearly were not created from an earlier iron strike. It's an honorable game, I believe most would honor the rule if ever enacted.

Honorable has nothing to do with it.

You cannot clearly define what a divot is, and the exact point when it is no longer a divot. Until you can do that, without subjectivity, your honorable golfer has nothing upon which to make a decision.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunther

Quote:

Originally Posted by 14ledo81

That is my whole point.  "Who gets to decide?"

Define - "Divot Hole", so everyone who plays golf will make the same assessment when they hit into one.

I don't believe that's an issue. I have never, in all my years of golf, had a question about what is a divot created from an earlier swing. Not saying it couldn't happen, just saying that I've never seen it as a factor, not once.

Completely different when it comes to pitch marks. I often (once every 3 or 4 rounds) have to confirm with a partner whether something I want to repair on the green is, in fact, an old pitch mark.

My experience only so take it for what it's worth. I've had plenty of balls roll into holes or depressions in the fairway that very clearly were not created from an earlier iron strike. It's an honorable game, I believe most would honor the rule if ever enacted.

My thoughts exactly.. Not many people here would really wonder if they are in a divot or not, seems easy to me!

That's what thy keep saying, it's an honorable game, but when it comes to application it seems everyone thinks that people are out to cheat!

@Abu3baid and @Gunther ould agree that the divot (hole) is a divot (hole), at which point in the healing process is it no longer?

[David in FL]

Because if not, then here you go: [U] Divot Hole: [/U]  Damage to the course caused by the impact of a golf club on the ground.

At what point is it grown in such that it's no longer a divot? Edited to acknowledge that @14ledo81 beat me too it. Although, let's face it, in 459 posts in this thread alone, no one has been able to answer that, though it's been asked many times.

[Abu3baid]

Ok.. Changing gears.. It is a divot when a prudent honorable golfer looks at it and has no doubt it is a divot. When in doubt bring in your partner! I mean up and till now I have had no problem with identifying a divot.. Not sure why this is a tough question, pretty simple really!

[Golfingdad]

At what point is it grown in such that it's no longer a divot?

Edited to acknowledge that @14ledo81 beat me too it. Although, let's face it, in 459 posts in this thread alone, no one has been able to answer that, though it's been asked many times.

But my point is that there is no real definition for exactly what a ball mark looks like or how it differs from any other damage, yet we manage to figure that one out. @Gunther also explained it pretty well a few posts back when he said "I don't believe that's an issue. I have never, in all my years of golf, had a question about what is a divot created from an earlier swing. Not saying it couldn't happen, just saying that I've never seen it as a factor, not once." Combine that with what you said about pitch marks ... "It's either positively a pitch mark, or you're not allowed to repair it on the green."

You're telling me you can't see how a rule calling divot holes as GUR couldn't be applied pretty fairly using these guidelines?  I don't buy that at all.

Further, why does this have to be the "snag" that keeps them from calling divot holes GUR?  Why can't it simply be "That's a stupid idea, and it's not golf?"

I just don't buy that the application and definitions are really what the problem is.

[iacas]

My thoughts exactly.. Not many people here would really wonder if they are in a divot or not, seems easy to me!

Incorrect, because a divot hole is very obviously a divot hole when it is first made, and very obviously not when it is fully healed, but at almost every point in between, there are going to be differing opinions.

Edited to acknowledge that @14ledo81 beat me too it. Although, let's face it, in 459 posts in this thread alone, no one has been able to answer that, though it's been asked many times.

The only answer anyone's ever given is "I know when it's not, it's obvious to everyone…".

It is a divot when a prudent honorable golfer looks at it and has no doubt it is a divot. When in doubt bring in your partner! I mean up and till now I have had no problem with identifying a divot.. Not sure why this is a tough question, pretty simple really!

People already responded to that type of stuff.

What if you don't have a partner? And what if you only have an opponent? Or you're alone?

And I believe that I could easily show you a range of divot holes and you would not only struggle to define the precise line, but that when you did, your line would be different than someone else's.

And @Golfingdad , a ball mark can be repaired. A divot cannot. In repairing a ball mark, the location of your ball is not changed.

[Abu3baid]

Well, I have nothing more to add.. You guys are a tough crowd! I will continue playing my ball out of divots (I haven't been in one yet and hope it won't happen) until such time that we get a bunch of progressive people on the governing rules bodies who end up changing this rule! I have to admit at least I learned a few things, and maybe I'll take a look at that principle of the rules of golf just out of curiosity! Thanks guys!

[turtleback]

My thoughts exactly.. Not many people here would really wonder if they are in a divot or not, seems easy to me!

That's what thy keep saying, it's an honorable game, but when it comes to application it seems everyone thinks that people are out to cheat!

Sadly, most people DO cheat.  Sometimes through ignorance of the rules, sometimes because they do not care, sometimes because they are dishonest.  Just because golfers are supposed to call infractions on themselves doesn't mean that enforceable rules are not needed.

Come on... I do have a reasonable expectation that I will have a pretty good lie on the fairway..

Oh my goodness, whoever told you THAT??  Where was the guarantee issued, since you want warranty service when you do not get what you expect.  I expect a well struck putt to go in.  If it doesn't should I ignore the stroke and, say, take a drop right over the hole so it goes in?

An expectation is not a certainty.

As to the divot/casual water part of the discussion you miss the essential difference.  Casual water is the result of an outside factor causing an abnormal ground condition.  No one would think it unusual in the slightest if a course happened to have no casual water.  But divots are the direct result of the playing of the game.  How can something that is a direct consequence of playing the game be considered abnormal?

Yeah.. I never said I was a rules expert.. I'm giving my opinion and I will talk about terms that I know everyone understands and if they don't they can ask for clarification.. I will leave being an expert at the rules to you, if you feel that only experts such as your self should be allowed to discuss rules then that is up to you and the admins to enforce that.. Until that time take it easy, it's only a thread about divots.. Didn't know the rules police were going to come out of the woodwork for this one.. Remember not everyone has time to study the rules and their guiding principles.. Nor do I care to either just incase you were wondering!

Cheers

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.  But do not expect knowledgeable people to take that opinion seriously when you do not use correct terminology nor have an understanding of the principles behind the Rules.  Speaking of reasonable expectations, is it not an reasonable expectation that someone wishing to discuss the rules, and even changing them, should have some understanding beyond the surface?

But there are still disputes about these things, no?  I might say it's "positively" a pitch mark, but my a-hole opponent says its not.  I remember (this is so random, I have no idea why) a situation from, I think, the British Open 4, 5, maybe 8 years ago where David Frost was arguing with a rules official because he was claiming that something (cart path, maybe) was interfering with his stance, and the rules official said no.  He basically called him a liar because he said that's not how you would stand for that shot, no relief, tough noogies.

Something similar happened in the Ryder Cup match between Sergio and Anthony Kim a while back.  Sergio was trying to get stance relief because he claimed he was going to try to hit the ball backwards and it was THAT stance that was interfered with.   AK was rather disdainful of Sergio's transparently lame effort.  So was the match official and Sergio did not get his drop.  I think it was the '08 Ryder Cup

[Golfingdad]

And @Golfingdad, a ball mark can be repaired. A divot cannot. In repairing a ball mark, the location of your ball is not changed.

This is a great reason as to why the two situations aren't comparable, but does this really relate directly to the question of "What is a divot hole?"  Because that's all I'm driving at.  You guys keep saying that a divot hole HAS to be defined very precisely for some type of rule to be changed, and I'm just saying I don't see why.  A ball mark isn't precisely defined either.

Only as far as the application of this (silly) rule in terms of when it would be applied and when it wouldn't, why couldn't it simply follow what @David in FL said about ball marks:  If you don't know for 100% certain that it's a divot hole, then you can't apply the rule.

[Golfingdad]

Something similar happened in the Ryder Cup match between Sergio and Anthony Kim a while back.  Sergio was trying to get stance relief because he claimed he was going to try to hit the ball backwards and it was THAT stance that was interfered with.   AK was rather disdainful of Sergio's transparently lame effort.  So was the match official and Sergio did not get his drop.  I think it was the '08 Ryder Cup

Sooo ... what's the deal with these Euros??

[turtleback]

Sooo ... what's the deal with these Euros??

When did South Africa become part of Europe?

Or perhaps your example was a pro-am and it was David Frost the British broadcaster who died about a year ago you were talking about?? Buuuut, I don't think the British Open HAS a pro-am, so maybe not.

LOL

[Gunther]

At what point is it grown in such that it's no longer a divot? Edited to acknowledge that @14ledo81 beat me too it. Although, let's face it, in 459 posts in this thread alone, no one has been able to answer that, though it's been asked many times.

At what point is a pitch mark deemed nit to be repairable? Same scenario.

[Golfingdad]

When did South Africa become part of Europe?

Or perhaps your example was a pro-am and it was David Frost the British broadcaster who died about a year ago you were talking about?? Buuuut, I don't think the British Open HAS a pro-am, so maybe not.

LOL

Ummm ... oops.