Jump to content
Foursum Golf

Should divots be considered ground under repair?

Should divot holes be considered GUR under the Rules of Golf?  

97 members have voted

  1. 1. Should divot holes be considered GUR under the Rules of Golf?



774 posts / 40406 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Yes, and the resulting hole is that thing that you can't repair with your divot repair tool.

Sure you can.  And should.

But not until AFTER you play your shot. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

Or use a McDivot.

http://mcdivot.com/cms/

.

LOL, If only divots looked as perfect in real life as they do in their samples.  Reminds me of all of the burgers and tacos, etc, on TV commercials for fast food restaurants versus the real thing.

One question though:  If somebody were to replace their divot with one of those tools, and then my ball was to roll on top of it, what would happen?  I feel like there is an opportunity to screw up my next shot (and maybe my club too) moreso than if it rolled into a divot hole, because now the club, and perhaps even the ball is going to deflect off a piece of plastic when I hit it.  Not to mention, the fact that I'm also going to break the tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman

Or use a McDivot.

http://mcdivot.com/cms/

.

LOL, If only divots looked as perfect in real life as they do in their samples.  Reminds me of all of the burgers and tacos, etc, on TV commercials for fast food restaurants versus the real thing.

One question though:  If somebody were to replace their divot with one of those tools, and then my ball was to roll on top of it, what would happen?  I feel like there is an opportunity to screw up my next shot (and maybe my club too) moreso than if it rolled into a divot hole, because now the club, and perhaps even the ball is going to deflect off a piece of plastic when I hit it.  Not to mention, the fact that I'm also going to break the tool.

From the website (of course it only helps if you see it):

McDivot is a 'MOVABLE OBSTRUCTION', R&A; and USGA Rule of Golf 24-1 applies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I have heard people say that sand-filled divots should be considered ground under repair. Thoughts?

it's opening the floodgates.    I vote no.    Divots are part of the game, and if you wind up in one, it's just the rub of the green.

However, the one similar judgement I have a serious problem with is IMPROPERLY RAKED BUNKERS.     I've wound up in 3-4 inch deep footprints which are the sole result of people not properly raking traps.     Have to hack your way out of them or take an unplayable penalty for someone else's carelessness.       To me, thats been the most frustrating penalty I've taken to date in my golf career - a penalty for someone else's carelessness.   Sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

From the website (of course it only helps if you see it):

McDivot is a 'MOVABLE OBSTRUCTION', R&A; and USGA Rule of Golf 24-1 applies

OK, but that doesn't really help.  If the divot has not healed yet, then how in the world could pull that tent stake out of the ground without causing your ball to move.  Or at least oscillate. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ernest Jones

From the website (of course it only helps if you see it):

McDivot is a 'MOVABLE OBSTRUCTION', R&A; and USGA Rule of Golf 24-1 applies

OK, but that doesn't really help.  If the divot has not healed yet, then how in the world could pull that tent stake out of the ground without causing your ball to move.  Or at least oscillate. ;)

24-1 b. If the ball lies in or on the obstruction , the ball may be lifted and the obstruction removed. The ball must through the green or in a hazard be dropped, or on the putting green be placed, as near as possible to the spot directly under the place where the ball lay in or on the obstruction , but not nearer the hole .

:smartass:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

24-1 b. If the ball lies in or on the obstruction, the ball may be lifted and theobstruction removed. The ball must through the green or in a hazard be dropped, or on the putting green be placed, as near as possible to the spot directly under the place where the ball lay in or on the obstruction, but not nearer the hole.

Oh, OK ... wait.  (Honest question here, not sarcasm) ... Then what is the technical term for twigs and leaves and such?  I thought those were "movable obstructions" because you could, you know, move them, so long as you didn't move your ball.  It's pretty obvious I don't know what I'm talking about here though. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernest Jones View Post

24-1 b. If the ball lies in or on the obstruction , the ball may be lifted and the obstruction removed. The ball must through the green or in a hazard be dropped, or on the putting green be placed, as near as possible to the spot directly under the place where the ball lay in or on the obstruction , but not nearer the hole .

:smartass:

Oh, OK ... wait.  (Honest question here, not sarcasm) ... Then what is the technical term for twigs and leaves and such?  I thought those were "movable obstructions" because you could, you know, move them, so long as you didn't move your ball.  It's pretty obvious I don't know what I'm talking about here though. :)

No, twigs and crap are "loose impediments" (or are the lose impediments??)

Quote:

Loose Impediments

Loose impediments ’’ are natural objects, including:

  • stones, leaves, twigs, branches and the like,
  • dung, and
  • worms, insects and the like, and the casts and heaps made by them,

provided they are not:

  • fixed or growing,
  • solidly embedded, or
  • adhering to the ball.

Sand and loose soil are loose impediments on the putting green , but not elsewhere.

Snow and natural ice, other than frost, are either casual water or loose impediments , at the option of the player.

Dew and frost are not loose impediments .

Obstructions are man made:

Quote:

Obstructions

An “ obstruction ’’ is anything artificial, including the artificial surfaces and sides of roads and paths and manufactured ice, except:

a. Objects defining out of bounds , such as walls, fences, stakes and railings;

b. Any part of an immovable artificial object that is out of bounds ; and

c. Any construction declared by the Committee to be an integral part of the course .

An obstruction is a movable obstruction if it may be moved without unreasonable effort, without unduly delaying play and without causing damage. Otherwise, it is an immovable obstruction .

Note: The Committee may make a Local Rule declaring a movable obstruction to be an immovable obstruction .

I'm just learning my way around the rule book too so I may get corrected but I think it's pretty straight forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

hear hear

it's a shame there wasn't some magic that just made it such that people had to play out of "only whatever condition their personal style of play" leaves the course in.

(the guy that doesn't rake has to play from a crappy sand lie, the guy that does gets a smooth finish.....the guy that repairs his divot/divot holes gets to play from a good lie, the guy the doesn't needs to hit with a shovel.......ball marks, spike marks, etc etc etc.....)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

IMO, regardless of when the divot was made or filled it's not GUR.

GUR has to be decided by the course superintendant and should be

reserved of serious alterations and repairs.

You start declaring a divot as GUR and before you know it guys taking

liberties and moving their balls all over the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just learning my way around the rule book too so I may get corrected but I think it's pretty straight forward.

Yeah, I'm no expert either, but I think you are absolutely right.  I forgot about the "loose impediments" term.  Was thinking that everything either had to fall under "movable" or "immovable" obstructions, and I knew that a leaf wasn't immovable (unless you were a baby ant) so I assumed (whoops) it was a movable obstruction.

Thanks!

----------------------

PS.  In response to the slightly off-topic discussion about raking traps.  I don't get why people don't rake their traps, because I loooooooove to rake traps.  It's a fun, and satisfying, little challenge where I get to see if I can make it look like I was never there, plus it's kinda soothing after having (probably) hit a mediocre shot.  Don't some people actually have little sand zen gardens at home?  I think I saw that in a Hamaker Schlemmer catalog once. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

OK, but that doesn't really help.  If the divot has not healed yet, then how in the world could pull that tent stake out of the ground without causing your ball to move.  Or at least oscillate. ;)

As it is a movable obstruction there is no penalty if the ball moves when removing the obstruction. Just hold the divot in place and pull. Easily done, I have a small sachet in my bag. My club gives them away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it is a movable obstruction there is no penalty if the ball moves when removing the obstruction. Just hold the divot in place and pull. Easily done, I have a small sachet in my bag. My club gives them away.

Thanks.  Now here's my next question:  Do you do it for the sake of the grass, or for the sake of playability?  What I mean is, does your club give you those and have you use them because they believe that replacing divots is the best way to maintain the fairways, or because it's fairer for players?

Because it seems like every course around here just gives you little buckets of sand to fill in all of your divots with, rather than ask you to replace your divots.  If I actually take a solid piece of turf, is it better to replace, or fill in with sand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

let me start by saying it should not be G U R.  What do you do if you are at a busy public course such as mine but do not have the $$ to fill fairway divots all the time? with the amount of divots being made here I could keep 4 or 5 guys busy everyday.  I am sure there will be a lot of "that's not real golf" chatter but everyone at my course plays it up. I wish I could fill em all but the economics right now do not allow me to do so.

I've always thought it is the responsibility of players to repair divot holes. At least that is said in the Etiquette and that is the customary way to encourage golfers in my country. Maybe that is the reason I cannot recall the last time my ball was in a divot hole...

Besides, the more staff you use to do those repairs the less they will be repaired by the players. Stop it and you'll see how people soon will pick up the correct manners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.  Now here's my next question:  Do you do it for the sake of the grass, or for the sake of playability?  What I mean is, does your club give you those and have you use them because they believe that replacing divots is the best way to maintain the fairways, or because it's fairer for players?

Because it seems like every course around here just gives you little buckets of sand to fill in all of your divots with, rather than ask you to replace your divots.  If I actually take a solid piece of turf, is it better to replace, or fill in with sand?

Unless it is a links course in dry weather, a replaced divot will knit better than a sand filled hole (even with seed in the mix). That is why we issue them.

In my experience working on greens, a divot taken which leaves a good proportion of roots showing, cures on its own. A small amount of sand will probably improve the appearance and restore the original level. Sand on fairways rarely stays in place for long though. Regular mowing disturbs it too much.

A divot carved out below the roots is better handled by replacement and fixing.

Incidentally, Valderrama tells players not to replace divots as they have a gang following the players filling the holes in 'properly'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it is a links course in dry weather, a replaced divot will knit better than a sand filled hole (even with seed in the mix). That is why we issue them.

In my experience working on greens, a divot taken which leaves a good proportion of roots showing, cures on its own. A small amount of sand will probably improve the appearance and restore the original level. Sand on fairways rarely stays in place for long though. Regular mowing disturbs it too much.

A divot carved out below the roots is better handled by replacement and fixing.

Incidentally, Valderrama tells players not to replace divots as they have a gang following the players filling the holes in 'properly'.

Replacing the divot works somewhat if its a large pelt. In the summer months they usually die. My guys use a 70-30 sand soil mix with seed and it stays put just fine and grows. It really depends on grass species and region of the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, regardless of when the divot was made or filled it's not GUR. GUR has to be decided by the course superintendant and should be reserved of serious alterations and repairs. You start declaring a divot as GUR and before you know it guys taking liberties and moving their balls all over the place.

I'm willing to bet that those people who want divot holes (filled or not) to become GUR don't play out of the divot holes anyway - they move the ball and are just looking for justification under the Rules for their current behavior. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it is a links course in dry weather, a replaced divot will knit better than a sand filled hole (even with seed in the mix). That is why we issue them.

In my experience working on greens, a divot taken which leaves a good proportion of roots showing, cures on its own. A small amount of sand will probably improve the appearance and restore the original level. Sand on fairways rarely stays in place for long though. Regular mowing disturbs it too much.

A divot carved out below the roots is better handled by replacement and fixing.

Incidentally, Valderrama tells players not to replace divots as they have a gang following the players filling the holes in 'properly'.

Replacing the divot works somewhat if its a large pelt. In the summer months they usually die. My guys use a 70-30 sand soil mix with seed and it stays put just fine and grows. It really depends on grass species and region of the country.

Thanks guys, good to know.  This is sort of what I've always instinctually done anyway, so I'm not really going to change anything.  When I do happen to produce a nice one piece divot, I feel weird not replacing it when I know it will fit perfectly.  OTOH, when the turf explodes, I'll stick with the sand mix. :)

I'm willing to bet that those people who want divot holes (filled or not) to become GUR don't play out of the divot holes anyway - they move the ball and are just looking for justification under the Rules for their current behavior. :)

I wouldn't make that bet.  Before this website, I'd have agreed with you.  But I've since learned that there are a lot of people out there who have issues with some of the rules, yet they still follow them.  I wouldn't put it past some people who follow the rules correctly to wish that divot holes became GUR.

----------------------------------------------------------

Hey @David in FL and @iacas , I just figured out the answer to your "What's the definition of a divot" question.  In addition to giving everybody a tube of sand to fill in divot holes, they can also give everybody a can of spray paint.  After each shot, just draw a circle around your divot hole, and Voila!!!  Instant GUR.

"Do you feel that?  Huh?  Huh?  Oh Yeah!!!  I have exorcised the demons!!!!!!!!!  This house ... is clear!!!" :banana:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2018 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    More to come…
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • It's speculation that doesn't actually matter. GOAT is not the longest driver or we'd already be throwing Cameron Champ's or Jamie Sadlowski's names in the discussion.
    • How far would golf's legends drive the ball using modern equipment? At the 2016 Ryder Cup, the 6-foot-5 Thomas Pieters belted a drive 324...   An interesting article on how players way back would have driven the ball with today's ball and equipment.  I didn't realize that Jack had driven the ball 341 yards in a longest drive competition when he was 18.  
    • Oy. I don't give a shit about two top ten finishes in a decade. Nor am I comparing Jack to Vijay Singh, a guy whose putting stroke has been AWOL since roughly 2011. He wasn't. That's easily refuted. As for straighter you're not comparing like to like - you don't know what the fairway widths were, how far the ball bounced, etc. But we do KNOW that Tiger was longer than Jack. Tiger at 43 with a fused back is longer than Jack was when Jack was 40, 41, 42, or 43. Tiger @ 43: 297.8 Jack @ 40: 269.0 Jack @ 41: 264.3 Jack @ 42: 264.6 Jack @ 43: 266.1 Tiger was almost 30 yards longer at 43 than Jack was at 40, 41, 42, or 43. Now, several posts in, you're changing that up to say that, given modern equipment or whatever, Jack would probably have been as long as Tiger. But that's not what you said. Uhhhhh… He didn't do that. Neither did I. No they aren't. Furthermore, if all Tiger had to do was hit the ball 266 yards, he could probably hit 80% of the fairways. Fairways that are likely narrower, etc. So you lost the distance one, and if you want to measure "accuracy" by "fairway hit percentage" I again will point out you're not comparing like to like. They aren't playing the same golf courses, the same fairways, or hitting it the same distances. Furthermore, and more importantly, I don't care about stats like this when determining who the GOAT is. If you do, that's cool, but what I care about is wins, dominance, scoring averages, that sort of thing. I don't care who had a better short game (Tiger by far), who was a better putter (tie?), who hit a better 7-iron (almost surely Tiger), or whatever. I care about Ws. So not only are you provably wrong on distance, possibly off-base on accuracy, but you're arguing about things that most people don't even care about. Nobody considers Calvin Peete in the GOAT discussion because of how accurate he was off the tee. Huh? No. 🤦‍♂️ Uhhh, according to Jack, it was 118 MPH. I call bullshit on that. Oy. I don't give a shit about two top ten finishes in a decade. Nor am I comparing Jack to Vijay Singh, a guy whose putting stroke has been AWOL since roughly 2011. He wasn't. That's easily refuted. As for straighter you're not comparing like to like - you don't know what the fairway widths were, how far the ball bounced, etc. But we do KNOW that Tiger was longer than Jack. Tiger at 43 with a fused back is longer than Jack was when Jack was 40, 41, 42, or 43. Tiger @ 43: 297.8 Jack @ 40: 269.0 Jack @ 41: 264.3 Jack @ 42: 264.6 Jack @ 43: 266.1 Tiger was almost 30 yards longer at 43 than Jack was at 40, 41, 42, or 43. Now, several posts in, you're changing that up to say that, given modern equipment or whatever, Jack would probably have been as long as Tiger. But that's not what you said. Uhhhhh… He didn't do that. Neither did I. No they aren't. Furthermore, if all Tiger had to do was hit the ball 266 yards, he could probably hit 80% of the fairways. Fairways that are likely narrower, etc. So you lost the distance one, and if you want to measure "accuracy" by "fairway hit percentage" I again will point out you're not comparing like to like. They aren't playing the same golf courses, the same fairways, or hitting it the same distances. Furthermore, and more importantly, I don't care about stats like this when determining who the GOAT is. If you do, that's cool, but what I care about is wins, dominance, scoring averages, that sort of thing. I don't care who had a better short game (Tiger by far), who was a better putter (tie?), who hit a better 7-iron (almost surely Tiger), or whatever. I care about Ws. So not only are you provably wrong on distance, possibly off-base on accuracy, but you're arguing about things that most people don't even care about. Nobody considers Calvin Peete in the GOAT discussion because of how accurate he was off the tee. Huh? No. 🤦‍♂️ Uhhh, according to Jack, it was 118 MPH. I call bullshit on that. Ha ha ha.
    • I’ve never been one to sit on my donkey for too long. The past four and half decades have pretty much been work for me , as so I know, for many others as well.  Developing my golf game will (not) dominate my new found free time. It will though give me a new avenue of pursuits that I hope will keep my mind expanding. Thanks for the input and reply. 
    • That sort of extrapolation is not possible.  You are talking that he would be hitting the golf ball further than the average long drive competitor. I am not buying it. He would be one of the longer hitters on tour. Jack is not the physical freak like Dustin Johnson. I would put him probably a top 10 in distance yearly if he was in his prime competing today.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Dan42nepa
      Dan42nepa
      (63 years old)
    2. James Dalton
      James Dalton
      (78 years old)
    3. JMHARDING
      JMHARDING
      (29 years old)
    4. mwh1023
      mwh1023
      (52 years old)
    5. Skeesh
      Skeesh
      (47 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...