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 / 40411 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

I think this is called, or used to be called, the "rub of the green".

Nope.

http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!rule-14253,Rub-Of-The-Green

Share this post


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

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

9 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

In a casual round I may move the ball,

I've never really understood this. Why? It's just golf right? Whether you're playing in a tournament or just a casual round, what's the big deal with playing it as it lies? If you shoot your best round you'll just have to remember you fudged it up and thus won't really have that good feeling. And if you hit a bad shot, well...there ya go. How many times do you find yourself in a divot to where if you land in one you're just like...yeah no...not gonna play that ball today, I've had it! Not trying to hammer you here, just don't see any real benefit from moving your ball. 

Share this post


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

12 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I've never really understood this.

of course you do.  you just don't agree.  it's his game, so it doesn't really matter what the other 5 billion people on the planet think.

Share this post


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

2 hours ago, rehmwa said:

of course you do.  you just don't agree.  it's his game, so it doesn't really matter what the other 5 billion people on the planet think.

I don’t disagree I just don’t understand what the point is. If it’s a casual round why does anybody care about stuff like being in a divot? I understand hitting two balls per hole when it’s not crowded or retrying a shot..that kind of stuff if it’s a practice round. I consider a casual round as that but if I’m playing an actual round, but not competing or even keeping score then what’s it matter if I’m in a divot? That’s what I’m asking. If he’s gonna play by the rules in a tournament then consider it practice in case it happens no? I’m not criticizing anyone for this I’m just asking why not just play by the rules? Unless there’s a local rule but otherwise I’m just asking.

Share this post


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

Did Hogan ever lay up to a different place rather than “collection areas” on  par 5’s or aim a tad different day to day to avoid divots or landing in his own?

Our game moves the ball in our own fairway...it isn’t due to divots, but rather the condition of the course. I did prefer high school golf where we played it down everywhere. It feels more real to me

Share this post


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

Consider this: (1) player strikes the ball, creates divot, DOES NOT fill divot w sand. No relief. (2) maintenance staff creates similar “divot” (same depth, etc) only 25x larger. Paints white circle around it designating as GUR.  

See the difference? ( asking from a practical perspective, since OP was a poll as to what “should” be....

 

 

Share this post


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

35 minutes ago, BushwoodCC said:

Consider this: (1) player strikes the ball, creates divot, DOES NOT fill divot w sand. No relief. (2) maintenance staff creates similar “divot” (same depth, etc) only 25x larger. Paints white circle around it designating as GUR.

Huh?

The maintenance staff isn’t creating a divot hole.

Share this post


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

Frankly, I find it a bit fun and challenging to try and get the ball out of a divot. I even practice this occasionally. If you give yourself negative thoughts about the lie, you will have a negative result. If you focus a bit more and expect the ball flight to be different, you can end up with a great shot from a challenging lie. This is the type of shot you put in the thread below.

 

Share this post


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

19 hours ago, iacas said:

Huh?

The maintenance staff isn’t creating a divot hole.

In my example both are creating a “hole” - one is simply a larger version of the other - but they are treated differently.  I think that is why people ask the question... 

Share this post


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

8 minutes ago, BushwoodCC said:

In my example both are creating a “hole” - one is simply a larger version of the other - but they are treated differently.  I think that is why people ask the question... 

The maintenance staff did one. Golfers taking divot and making divot holes is not an "abnormal ground condition."

Share this post


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

On 11/25/2018 at 8:57 PM, iacas said:

Uh, yep. 

Here's a quote from phrases.org.uk regarding "Rub of the green".

Luck; especially in sports and pastimes played on a green surface.

The first citation I've found of the current, sporting meaning of the term does come from the world of golf. The rules of golf have been codified in Scotland since their first publication in 1744. In 1812 the rules included:

Whatever happens to a ball by accident, must be reckoned a Rub of the green.

OK, so the USGA doesn't define it, but maybe they should. They could have rules and decisions under the heading "How regular folks talk about all the rotten crap that can happen to them on a golf course!"

Share this post


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

19 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Uh, yep.

Nope.

19 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

OK, so the USGA doesn't define it, but maybe they should. They could have rules and decisions under the heading "How regular folks talk about all the rotten crap that can happen to them on a golf course!"

OMG. They DO define it. I linked to the freaking definition.

image.png

THAT is what Rub of the Green means.

Share this post


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

25 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

OK, so the USGA doesn't define it, but maybe they should.

Ok...be honest...did you follow the link and read it? Gotta razz ya a bit on that one.

Share this post


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

The Oxford English Dictionary (1931)* defines rub more specifically in the context of bowls (a game which predates golf by centuries)

An obstacle or impediment by which a bowl is hindered in, or diverted from its proper course; also the fact of the bowl meeting with such impediment.

The origin of the term "rub of the green" seems clear. The natural and expected curving of the bowl toward the jack is a rub. A bowl that is deflected by the uneven ground of the green is called a rub of the green. Adaptation of this concept to golf was natural because of the similarities in playing a ball to a target over a green. (See below.)

The idea that rub means bad luck simply has no support in the definition or early uses of the term. (Even Shakespeare's famous "…aye there's the rub…" does not mean bad luck; Hamlet was musing about whether he would dream if he "slept" permanently (i.e. died). But death, though appearing like sleep, was the "rub" [i.e. obstruction, impediment] to dreaming.) The sources make it clear that "rub" means to impede, interfere, obstruct. Such action may be bad luck, but the term does not mean that.

But rub makes an appearance as a noun in the late 16th century in the gloriously titled The Paine of Pleasure published in 1580 and attributed to Anthony Munday. In describing the delights and tribulation of playing a game of bowls, the fourteenth pleasure, he wrote, “How some delight to see a round bowl run/ smoothly away, until he catch a rub:/ then hold thy bias, if that cast were won/ the game were up as sure then as a club”.  Rub is clearly being used as some kind of imperfection in the bowling green, an obstacle or impediment to a true lie.

Edited by Rulesman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what the point of all that was. We aren't living in the late 16th century, and this discussion is in the Rules of Golf forum. Hence, "Rub of the Green" means what it's defined to mean.

The definition isn't included in the 2019 Rules, so it'll likely shift over time to mean "bad luck," since that's how people have mis-interpreted it to be. 😛

Share this post


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

Surprised I haven't answered this yet. The answer to me is no it shouldn't be considered GUR if your ball finds a Fairway divot. Sometimes golf is just hard.....not to mention its just another challenge to rise up to. 

Share this post


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

2 hours ago, HJJ003 said:

Surprised I haven't answered this yet. The answer to me is no it shouldn't be considered GUR if your ball finds a Fairway divot. Sometimes golf is just hard.....not to mention its just another challenge to rise up to. 

That, and I like having an excuse for my bad shots 🤪

Share this post


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

On 11/25/2018 at 7:09 PM, Vinsk said:

I've never really understood this. Why? It's just golf right? Whether you're playing in a tournament or just a casual round, what's the big deal with playing it as it lies? If you shoot your best round you'll just have to remember you fudged it up and thus won't really have that good feeling. And if you hit a bad shot, well...there ya go. How many times do you find yourself in a divot to where if you land in one you're just like...yeah no...not gonna play that ball today, I've had it! Not trying to hammer you here, just don't see any real benefit from moving your ball. 

I am with Vinsk on this, for 2 reasons.  One:  If you always play the ball "down" by the rules, even in casual rounds, you won't get any surprises when playing a competition.  Two:  It would make me sick to shoot a personal best, only to have it invalidated by not having played a proper round of golf.  For me, every round is a new chance for a milestone, although at age 72, those markers are getting harder to find.

Having to play from a divot hole is such a rare occurrence that it does little or nothing to really affect one's score.  I've hit some really good shots from nasty lies, including from some quite significant divot holes, and it always feels especially good when I can successfully meet the challenge of adversity.  To me, that's one of golf's real joys.

Edited by Fourputt

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. He hit it about 267 or so when he was 40-43. Tiger hits it about 297 at the age of 43 with a fused back. And I couldn't care less… if Tiger hit it 350 or 250, he won a major this year. 15 >> 18, 81 >>> 72. That's 90% of the GOAT discussion for me. Y'all can make up whatever reasons you want, but own them, and accept that you're speculating on some of them.
    • 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...