Should Divots Be Considered Ground Under Repair?

[HoganApexFan]

10 hours ago, iacas said:

New rules for this topic (because I'm effectively the USGA/R&A here):

• If you are a "No" voter (and not just by changing your vote, but because it's what you believe), you may continue to post as normal, because there's really nothing to say.
• If you are a "Yes" voter, and you've made more than three posts, in this topic, you must now provide a definition deemed suitable by at least three "No" type people before you may attempt to clear the second hurdle: justifying how a divot hole warrants ignoring one of the Principles of the Rules of Golf.

The only thing the "No" people will have to do now is to point out why the definitions offered by the "Yes" people are doomed to failure.

There, I've just saved us all a lot of time.

And THIS is why I tried to provide a definition that was acceptable to at least 3 "No type People"...RUKM???  For some reason I have to convince supporters of the cult before I am allowed to even try to clear the "Second Hurdle".  BTW, I'm kinda sorta believing that my definition of Divot Hole can come close (although cults do tend to stick together...)

[billchao]

1 minute ago, HoganApexFan said:

And THIS is why I tried to provide a definition that was acceptable to at least 3 "No type People"...RUKM???  For some reason I have to convince supporters of the cult before I am allowed to even try to clear the "Second Hurdle".  BTW, I'm kinda sorta believing that my definition of Divot Hole can come close (although cults do tend to stick together...)

You’re weakening your own position with the “cult” stuff. Keep to the topic at hand.

[Shorty]

8 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

 BTW, I'm kinda sorta believing that my definition of Divot Hole can come close (although cults do tend to stick together...)

Can I have your ruling on my photo please? We're holding up the group behind.

Gotta say - it's a bit odd to describe people who expect evidence and logic to back up a claim as "cultists". It's usually the other way around.

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by Shorty

[HoganApexFan]

3 minutes ago, billchao said:

You’re weakening your own position with the “cult” stuff. Keep to the topic at hand.

Point taken.  But please provide your position on the proposed definition of Divot Hole that I provided,

[billchao]

2 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

Point taken.  But please provide your position on the proposed definition of Divot Hole that I provided,

I’ll look it over again later, but what came to mind was it doesn’t really identify when a divot hole has sufficiently healed to stop allowing relief. By my interpretation of your definition, a divot hole in the process of healing will likely end up classified in the second paragraph and thus allow no relief, so you’ll still end up having to hit the ball out of a hole at some point.

[HoganApexFan]

3 hours ago, Shorty said:

You did not!

It was brief, highly inaccurate and totally open to interpretation.

You persist in this thread as if you have made points that are solid, fair and not subject to debate.

In the picture below, if I am a dick and I want to call any area in the middle a divot, tell me how I am wrong, according to your definition.

What about that little spot at 7 o'clock? Looks shitty, but......could be  a divot........I want relief.

I am not talking about obvious GUR which should be marked but isn't - and that only exacerbates the problem - and underlines why the rule can never be changed. For the sake of your argument, assume that course in the picture has management that has a thing about never playing preferred lies.

 

 

minutes ago

  19 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

 "Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.  Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair."  

Not sure who you were upset with or responding to, but IMHO my post included a reference to "Barren Areas" that needed to be evaluated by the committee.  That's their job!  (And BTW, the Rules of Golf actually state that these areas of GUR "SHOULD" be marked by either paint, stakes, or other means, despite what some golf "gurus" claim.

[Shorty]

5 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

minutes ago

  19 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

 "Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.  Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair."  

Not sure who you were upset with or responding to, but IMHO my post included a reference to "Barren Areas" that needed to be evaluated by the committee.  That's their job!  (And BTW, the Rules of Golf actually state that these areas of GUR "SHOULD" be marked by either paint, stakes, or other means, despite what some golf "gurus" claim.

The committee is made up of guys who don't get out and evaluate the dozens of barren areas on the course every week.

I don't think it's a "barren area" because there's grass there. I think it's a divot. I'm taking relief. I saw someone take relief yesterday and it wasn't that bad. He was pretty sure it was a partially recovered divot. Your "barren area" is my "divot". 

This is hypothetical, BTW.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Shorty

[HoganApexFan]

2 minutes ago, billchao said:

I’ll look it over again later, but what came to mind was it doesn’t really identify when a divot hole has sufficiently healed to stop allowing relief. By my interpretation of your definition, a divot hole in the process of healing will likely end up classified in the second paragraph and thus allow no relief, so you’ll still end up having to hit the ball out of a hole at some point.

 

YES!  Thank You!  Please be one of the people that acknowledges that the definition at least has merit.  Mike Davis seemed to be overly concerned about this healing aspect, and in my opinion really dismissed the perspective of one of the Greatest Golfers of All Time!!!  He wasn't being gentle, he was a hack golfer/lawyer being polite to a legend.

[Darkfrog]

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

OK, here's my try at a definition of a divot hole that might help:

A divot hole in the fairway is any disruption in an otherwise smooth contour of soil that even appears to have resulted from a torn-up piece of turf:  e.g. by a club in making a stroke (including practice strokes), by a horse's hoof, or any similar damage that may have been caused by golfers, golf carts, vehicles, animals, or any landscaping or mowing equipment.

 Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.  Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair.

 Furthermore, if any part of the ball is resting in a sand/seed filled area in the fairway (or ANY closely mown area through the green), then it is presumed to be resting in Ground Under Repair and entitled to full relief under this rule.  Whether the sand/seed completely or partially fills this area is irrelevant; once the sand/seed is placed into any disruption in a fairway it shall be deemed as Ground Under Repair.

 

Some thoughts, as someone only somewhat familiar with the ROG.

• I can't find a definition of fairway, only general area, so would fairway need definition since this only applies to fairways? Along those same lines, what about a divot hole that is partially in the fairway and partially in the rough?
• How do you define whether or not the soil is disrupted and how can someone tell what caused the disruption other than speculation?
• When does a soil disruption cease to be disrupted and no longer in scope of the relief?

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

  I do not care what some of the "purist/elitist" consider "divot holes" and are trying to limit the definition to support their position.

You mean guys who understand and have a thorough knowledge of the rules? 

[HoganApexFan]

2 minutes ago, Darkfrog said:

Some thoughts, as someone only somewhat familiar with the ROG.

• I can't find a definition of fairway, only general area, so would fairway need definition since this only applies to fairways? Along those same lines, what about a divot hole that is partially in the fairway and partially in the rough?
• How do you define whether or not the soil is disrupted and how can someone tell what caused the disruption other than speculation?
• When does a soil disruption cease to be disrupted and no longer in scope of the relief?

One of the unfortunate changes in the recent ROG is that they introduced a "General  Area", and eliminated the "Closely mown areas through the green" concept, which included fairways, fringes, and greens, including closely mown areas through the rough (as well as the walking path for golfers from the tee to the fairway).  

Great point regarding whether or not the soil is disrupted. We should not care what caused the disruption, only that it occurred.  Some golfers are sweepers, others are diggers...OTOH, it seems like a reasonable decision for competitors to make (without a rules official) if the soil was disrupted.  (They have been doing this for years regarding pitch marks on the green vs spike marks).

Absolutely no clue how to answer the third question

[HoganApexFan]

3 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

You mean guys who understand and have a thorough knowledge of the rules? 

I have been lectured and condescended to by people like you who think they know everything and are therefore above reproach.  

Your response to my response to this thread and specifically to @iacas who unilaterally changed the rules and REQUIRED that people who voted in favor of the rule change (AKA,  the topic of this FREAKING discussion) indicated that you not only didn't read it, but that you are CLUELESS as well!  You must be on the inner circle to be able to get away with such flagrant bullshit...

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

OK, here's my try at a definition of a divot hole that might help:

A divot hole in the fairway is any disruption in an otherwise smooth contour of soil that even appears to have resulted from a torn-up piece of turf:  e.g. by a club in making a stroke (including practice strokes), by a horse's hoof, or any similar damage that may have been caused by golfers, golf carts, vehicles, animals, or any landscaping or mowing equipment.

 Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.  Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair.

 Furthermore, if any part of the ball is resting in a sand/seed filled area in the fairway (or ANY closely mown area through the green), then it is presumed to be resting in Ground Under Repair and entitled to full relief under this rule.  Whether the sand/seed completely or partially fills this area is irrelevant; once the sand/seed is placed into any disruption in a fairway it shall be deemed as Ground Under Repair.

 

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Over???  What about my proposed definition of a divot hole offended your delicate arse so much???

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Billy Z said:

Man, you guys are something. I am not admitting defeat, what I do admit is an successful effort. I am not asking you to change your opinion, because your opinion is just your opinion.

You were defeated. You can "not admit defeat," but your definition came nowhere near passing any muster at all.

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

A divot hole in the fairway is any disruption in an otherwise smooth contour of soil that even appears to have resulted from a torn-up piece of turf:  e.g. by a club in making a stroke (including practice strokes), by a horse's hoof, or any similar damage that may have been caused by golfers, golf carts, vehicles, animals, or any landscaping or mowing equipment.

So, any bad lie at all, and since we can't see the soil below, it's a guess as to whether there is a "disruption" at all.

In other words, preferred lies wherever, year-round, period.

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.

What about a divot hole that's filled in with sand? Or is partially growing back? Or a divot hole after a rain that "smooths" the soil? What if a person steps on a divot hole and makes the soil "smooth" again? Or a cart tire rolls over it and packs it down smooth?

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair.

They do that anyway. That has no place in this definition. They're free to mark whatever they want as GUR.

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

Furthermore, if any part of the ball is resting in a sand/seed filled area in the fairway (or ANY closely mown area through the green)

Remember before how I was saying how frustrating it can be to discuss the rules with people who don't actually understand/know the rules? There's no such thing as "through the green."

Anyway, how much sand? You do realize you don't even get embedded ball relief for a ball "embedded" in sand right now, yes? How much sand needs to be there? What if it's a heavy soil mix with only a little sand and seed? What if the rain washes the sand away a little bit?

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

Whether the sand/seed completely or partially fills this area is irrelevant; once the sand/seed is placed into any disruption in a fairway it shall be deemed as Ground Under Repair.

When does the divot hole cease to be "under repair" and deemed fully repaired? What if there are ten grains of sand under the ball, but you can't see them? What if the sand was splashed out of a bunker onto the fringe, and the player's ball came to rest on top of some of that sand?

---

Your definition fails to meet any kind of standard that could be applied universally and consistently. It includes many bits that don't even need to be in there, and when it boils down to it, you tried to define a divot hole as:

@HoganApexFan's definition of "Divot Hole:" Any disruption in the soil's "smooth contours" including any time a ball is resting on sand/seed.

That's about it, really. That's your definition.

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

While I am patiently waiting for the inevitable attacks from the holy warriors, I am convinced that even the GOAT, Mr. Jack Nicklaus, would agree with this definition and also would not be so kind in telling former USGA (whatever his position was) and lawyer Mike Davis to stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

Well, you're a pleasant fella.

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

I do not care what some of the "purist/elitist" consider "divot holes" and are trying to limit the definition to support their position.

Ignoring the bolded bullshit for now…

Let's be clear about something: this isn't about "supporting [our] position," it's about your inability to support yours.

You cannot create a definition for a divot hole that doesn't basically devolve into preferred lies at all times.

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

I wanted to present a definition that DEFIED all of the nitpicking

You failed at this.

51 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

And THIS is why I tried to provide a definition that was acceptable to at least 3 "No type People"...RUKM???  For some reason I have to convince supporters of the cult before I am allowed to even try to clear the "Second Hurdle".  BTW, I'm kinda sorta believing that my definition of Divot Hole can come close (although cults do tend to stick together...)

Knock it off. All the bold here, stop.

8 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

One of the unfortunate changes in the recent ROG is that they introduced a "General  Area", and eliminated the "Closely mown areas through the green" concept, which included fairways, fringes, and greens, including closely mown areas through the rough (as well as the walking path for golfers from the tee to the fairway).

How is that unfortunate?

They renamed "Through the green" to the "General Area." And your "closely mown areas" still exist, with some slightly different words:

Quote

But a Committee may adopt a Local Rule restricting relief to a ball embedded in those parts of the general area cut to fairway height or less.

Again, all 16.3 did was flip the default position from "closely mown areas" to the entire general area.

4 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

I have been lectured and condescended to by people like you who think they know everything and are therefore above reproach.

You have not. Meanwhile, you've called those you disagree with "cultists," holy warriors, elitist/purist, etc.

Stop.

4 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

Your response to my response to this thread and specifically to @iacas who unilaterally changed the rules and REQUIRED that people who voted in favor of the rule change (AKA,  the topic of this FREAKING discussion) indicated that you not only didn't read it, but that you are CLUELESS as well!  You must be on the inner circle to be able to get away with such flagrant bullshit...

Dude.

And yeah, I changed the rules. You've had your say. You've voted. If you want a change, then tell us how to change it. Otherwise, you're accomplishing what? Repeatedly saying "I want a change!" What's the point in that?

4 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Over???  What about my proposed definition of a divot hole offended your delicate arse so much???

Dude.

[HoganApexFan]

1 hour ago, HoganApexFan said:

OK, here's my try at a definition of a divot hole that might help:

A divot hole in the fairway is any disruption in an otherwise smooth contour of soil that even appears to have resulted from a torn-up piece of turf:  e.g. by a club in making a stroke (including practice strokes), by a horse's hoof, or any similar damage that may have been caused by golfers, golf carts, vehicles, animals, or any landscaping or mowing equipment.

 Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.  Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair.

 Furthermore, if any part of the ball is resting in a sand/seed filled area in the fairway (or ANY closely mown area through the green), then it is presumed to be resting in Ground Under Repair and entitled to full relief under this rule.  Whether the sand/seed completely or partially fills this area is irrelevant; once the sand/seed is placed into any disruption in a fairway it shall be deemed as Ground Under Repair.

 

Normally I'm ridiculed ad nauseum about my absolute cluelessness regarding the rules of golf (3 mistakes in a single sentence...)  This is just a proposed definition from an ignorant bastard who could not ever have been cognizant of the rules of golf, and yet...crickets...What is wrong with this proposed definition???

[iacas]

To get back to the topic at hand, basically, your definition isn't going to work at all. It has numerous problems, includes a whole bunch of unnecessary words that serve to do nothing but confuse and begin to get into rules making itself (rather than just giving a definition of "divot hole"), and again, ultimately, would not be universally or consistently applied.

It's basically just "take relief whenever you want, unless you happen to land on a perfect lie anyway."

It's springtime here, the soil is "disrupted" all over the place, not smooth, etc. Heck, in soft soil footprints can "disrupt" the soil and cause bumps and whatnot.

---

Yeah, I changed the rules on you, because what were you actually accomplishing here?

1 minute ago, HoganApexFan said:

Normally I'm ridiculed ad nauseum about my absolute cluelessness regarding the rules of golf (3 mistakes in a single sentence...)  This is just a proposed definition from an ignorant bastard who could not ever have been cognizant of the rules of golf, and yet...crickets...What is wrong with this proposed definition???

What is wrong with you, man? Jeezus.

• You weren't "ridiculed" let alone "ad nauseam."
• You did make three mistakes in one single sentence. That's just a statement of fact. Cripes.
• Several people have told you what's wrong with your proposed "definition," including me, who just posted.

My goodness.

[HoganApexFan]

2 hours ago, HoganApexFan said:

OK, here's my try at a definition of a divot hole that might help:

A divot hole in the fairway is any disruption in an otherwise smooth contour of soil that even appears to have resulted from a torn-up piece of turf:  e.g. by a club in making a stroke (including practice strokes), by a horse's hoof, or any similar damage that may have been caused by golfers, golf carts, vehicles, animals, or any landscaping or mowing equipment.

 Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.  Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair.

 Furthermore, if any part of the ball is resting in a sand/seed filled area in the fairway (or ANY closely mown area through the green), then it is presumed to be resting in Ground Under Repair and entitled to full relief under this rule.  Whether the sand/seed completely or partially fills this area is irrelevant; once the sand/seed is placed into any disruption in a fairway it shall be deemed as Ground Under Repair.

 

Please do NOT break this post up into parts when you try to attack me, especially since ALL 3 paragraphs are both related and relevant regarding this definition.  If you disagree with this definition, then please provide a recommended improvement.  If you just don't like it because it effectively refutes YOUR opinion regarding a rules change, then maybe you should come up with a better argument.

[iacas]

12 minutes ago, HoganApexFan said:

Please do NOT break this post up into parts when you try to attack me, especially since ALL 3 paragraphs are both related and relevant regarding this definition.  If you disagree with this definition, then please provide a recommended improvement.  If you just don't like it because it effectively refutes YOUR opinion regarding a rules change, then maybe you should come up with a better argument.

You have yet to be "attacked" and I replied to your definition almost an hour ago. Others replied to it much earlier than that.

Keep it up, keep up the name-calling with the "cults" and "elitists" and "holy warriors" crap, the incessant victim-playing, etc. and the new rule will be "no more posts from @HoganApexFan in this topic."

[HoganApexFan]

2 hours ago, HoganApexFan said:

OK, here's my try at a definition of a divot hole that might help:

A divot hole in the fairway is any disruption in an otherwise smooth contour of soil that even appears to have resulted from a torn-up piece of turf:  e.g. by a club in making a stroke (including practice strokes), by a horse's hoof, or any similar damage that may have been caused by golfers, golf carts, vehicles, animals, or any landscaping or mowing equipment.

 Mere disruptions in the surface area where the ball rests, differences in lie or conditions of grass, or even the complete absence of grass without the disruption in the soil shall NOT be considered a divot hole for relief purposes under this rule.  Barren areas of any course, including on or adjacent to greens, should be evaluated by the committee to determine their eligibility as grounds under repair.

 Furthermore, if any part of the ball is resting in a sand/seed filled area in the fairway (or ANY closely mown area through the green), then it is presumed to be resting in Ground Under Repair and entitled to full relief under this rule.  Whether the sand/seed completely or partially fills this area is irrelevant; once the sand/seed is placed into any disruption in a fairway it shall be deemed as Ground Under Repair.

 

Apparently I am no longer able to post in this thread, as I have requested that any and all refutations of my proposed definition address ALL3 paragraphs of this definition.  For example, some people reference the first paragraph and completely ignore the third wrt sand/seed.  Others completely disregard the second paragraph which eliminates most fatuous arguments about different lies, ground conditions, or barren areas.  As We All Know, divot holes have absolutely nothing to do with the natural contours of the fairway or barren areas anywhere on the course.