Jump to content
Dormie1360

PGA/USGA Rules of Golf Workshops

34 posts / 7256 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

So I just sat through the 3 1/2 day seminar.  Not sure why but I have that kind of time on my hands.  The presentations were mediocre at best.   Basically just read the rules to us one by one.  A few video enhancements here and there but not at all what I expected.  This course is stuck in the past.  It could really use an update to more modern teaching techniques such as case studies, group activities and try to teach critical thinking skills rather than try to memorize and regurgitate.

I am a good student and an exceptional test taker, at least in my other endeavors, but I bombed this test.  78% if you must know.  Could not get my brain around the logic of the test questions and how they want us to think through application of the rules.  I don't think any professional educators were involved in the design of the course or the test!

Mostly this was a therapeutic post as I was disappointed in my test but did any one else have experiences with this class?

Share this post


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

So I just sat through the 3 1/2 day seminar.  Not sure why but I have that kind of time on my hands.  The presentations were mediocre at best.   Basically just read the rules to us one by one.  A few video enhancements here and there but not at all what I expected.  This course is stuck in the past.  It could really use an update to more modern teaching techniques such as case studies, group activities and try to teach critical thinking skills rather than try to memorize and regurgitate.

I am a good student and an exceptional test taker, at least in my other endeavors, but I bombed this test.  78% if you must know.  Could not get my brain around the logic of the test questions and how they want us to think through application of the rules.  I don't think any professional educators were involved in the design of the course or the test!

Mostly this was a therapeutic post as I was disappointed in my test but did any one else have experiences with this class?

I've attended 2 workshops in the past (the last one was 5 or 6 years ago), and enjoyed both.  I'm not sure how you could really cover all of the material and still have time to break down a class of 100 into "group activities".  We did do such a breakdown on the third afternoon and went out on the course for some problem exercises, mostly on the common issues like how to find the NPR in different situations, and how to take relief from various obstacles.  I did somewhat better on the exams, scoring 80% the first time and 85% the second.

Share this post


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

I just attended one and I didn't feel the same way.

I thought the grouping of rules into related sections was quite useful, as were the video and animations. My favorite part was the "challenging concepts" discussion.

I'm not sure how you could conduct the class without going through the individual rules.  They exact reading of them and understanding of them, is after all, the point.

I can see the value incorporating some new teaching methods.  The problem of course is time.  The course is already 4 days if you take the test.  Every minute of every break is taken up with instructors answering questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really need to attend one of these when the SCGA does them. I'm a little intimidated by the test now, though; if +fourputt didn't get 100%, I don't think I stand much of a chance.

Share this post


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

I just attended one and I didn't feel the same way.

I thought the grouping of rules into related sections was quite useful, as were the video and animations. My favorite part was the "challenging concepts" discussion.

I'm not sure how you could conduct the class without going through the individual rules.  They exact reading of them and understanding of them, is after all, the point.

I can see the value incorporating some new teaching methods.  The problem of course is time.  The course is already 4 days if you take the test.  Every minute of every break is taken up with instructors answering questions.


It appears then that you actually had "challenging concept discussions."  Every time it started to get interesting with the questions and discussions, the instructors cut it off saying we had to keep on schedule.

(bold sentence)  Yeah easily.  Some of them should be left to the student to study and not use class time.  Clubs, balls, flagstick, alternate forms of play, are all pretty straightforward rules.  Lets use that time to work on more challenging application and leave the easy stuff for independent study.

Plus we can use online resources to read us the rules and leave precious classroom time for a better learning experience.

Share this post


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

So I just sat through the 3 1/2 day seminar.  Not sure why but I have that kind of time on my hands.  The presentations were mediocre at best.   Basically just read the rules to us one by one.  A few video enhancements here and there but not at all what I expected.  This course is stuck in the past.  It could really use an update to more modern teaching techniques such as case studies, group activities and try to teach critical thinking skills rather than try to memorize and regurgitate.

I am a good student and an exceptional test taker, at least in my other endeavors, but I bombed this test.  78% if you must know.  Could not get my brain around the logic of the test questions and how they want us to think through application of the rules.  I don't think any professional educators were involved in the design of the course or the test!

Mostly this was a therapeutic post as I was disappointed in my test but did any one else have experiences with this class?

I've enjoyed the classes every year.  This year will be my 8th in a row.

There is sooooo much to cover.  I think a lot of your suggestions, are excellent, but would make it difficult to cover everything required in 3 days with a test on the 4th.

Curious what class you went to?  Instructors can make a difference.

78 the first try is excellent.  I believe the average first time score is in the 60's or less. As a matter of fact, I think the USGA encourages first timers to consider taking the "easier" exam at the end of class instead. Too many first timers get discouraged with a low test score.

Someone once told me 75 is considered an acceptable score to be considered for helping out at local tournaments.  I do know a  score of 92 or better is required by the USGA to be able to officiate at one of their national championships.

Edit: And in case you are wondering I studied my A$$ off in preparation for the class my first year and you still beat me by  2. :-)

Share this post


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

One other thing concerning "challenging discussions".  Remember the class is open to anyone, so the syllabus has to keep beginners in mind.  Once you score 85 or better you can sign up for one of the  classes restricted to those who have scored 85 or higher within the last 6 years.  In these classes more time is devoted to in depth and "nuance" discussion.

Share this post


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

Interesting to see everyone's  take on the class.  I agree there is a lot to cover and it is challenging to cover. Dormie.....I studied like a mad man also and just expected to do more.

Not likely to repeat the class unless I get someone else to pay for it.  At $350 and coming out with that score I was just a little disappointed.  Also not likely to repeat it unless someone else is paying the bill.

Share this post


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

One other thing concerning "challenging discussions".  Remember the class is open to anyone, so the syllabus has to keep beginners in mind.  Once you score 85 or better you can sign up for one of the  classes restricted to those who have scored 85 or higher within the last 6 years.  In these classes more time is devoted to in depth and "nuance" discussion.

John, have you attended an 85+ workshop? I'd thought about it but my colleagues who have said that they thought the slide show was the same and were not especially impressed.

cm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

One other thing concerning "challenging discussions".  Remember the class is open to anyone, so the syllabus has to keep beginners in mind.  Once you score 85 or better you can sign up for one of the  classes restricted to those who have scored 85 or higher within the last 6 years.  In these classes more time is devoted to in depth and "nuance" discussion.

John, have you attended an 85+ workshop? I'd thought about it but my colleagues who have said that they thought the slide show was the same and were not especially impressed.

cm

I've never felt that it was worth traveling to take it.  They never hold them anywhere near here, and it costs enough just to pay the course fee.  Two regular workshops I attended were in the Denver Metro area so I could commute from home.

Share this post


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

John, have you attended an 85+ workshop? I'd thought about it but my colleagues who have said that they thought the slide show was the same and were not especially impressed.

cm

No, the location and or timing has never worked out.  I think they do only one 85+ class out of the 17 or so they do every year.

I have not talked to anyone who has gone, I'd try one if  David Staebler were teaching for the USGA and I could work it out.

Share this post


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

Interesting to see everyone's  take on the class.  I agree there is a lot to cover and it is challenging to cover. Dormie.....I studied like a mad man also and just expected to do more.

Not likely to repeat the class unless I get someone else to pay for it.  At $350 and coming out with that score I was just a little disappointed.  Also not likely to repeat it unless someone else is paying the bill.

Understood.  The test is just hard.  The first year I went, Mike Davis from the USGA and Larry Startzel with the PGA taught the class.  You won't find many better than Davis.  Anyway after the test, my head feeling like jello, I went up to thank Mike and awkwardly asked him how bad a 76 was....because it seemed pretty lousy to me.  He smiled and said you know more about the rules of golf than 95 percent of the people playing.  The test has to be hard because, as he explained it, it's their "Gold Standard".  It's what they use to determine who has the rules knowledge to work their national championships.  It just so happens, guys like you and me can also take it.

I think it's great the USGA/PGA offers the class and test for anyone who wants to take it. I believe things are more restrictive on how the R&A; does their top end training.

I will say the test has gotten easier on how they write the questions.  For example, highlighting the word competitor or opponent, so you clearly understand what the format is.  Although the test is still somewhat an exercise in reading ability and comprehension, it's much better than it use to be.

The USGA and local PGA affiliates put on 1 day seminars that are much less daunting and would still me very beneficial for anyone wanting to increase their rules knowledge.

Share this post


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

The USGA and local PGA affiliates put on 1 day seminars that are much less daunting and would still me very beneficial for anyone wanting to increase their rules knowledge.

I know that usually the Denver Golf Expo has a rules seminar that you can take too.  My first rules class was there, some 20 years ago.

Share this post


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

Just got back from the Workshop in Louisville.

One interesting thing I learned was that the USGA does not use Note 2 under R7-2 in their championships.  In other words players may practice putting on the green last played after holing out.  Never have seen anyone do this in the US Open.  I doubt many know they can.  The USGA instructor said the only person he has seen do it is Tom Watson at a couple of USGA Senior Opens.  Said Tom's fellow-competitors went chasing after a Referee almost immediately. :-)

The exam had a lot of "interesting" questions. :-)

Share this post


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

Just got back from the Workshop in Louisville.

One interesting thing I learned was that the USGA does not use Note 2 under R7-2 in their championships.  In other words players may practice putting on the green last played after holing out.  Never have seen anyone do this in the US Open.  I doubt many know they can.  The USGA instructor said the only person he has seen do it is Tom Watson at a couple of USGA Senior Opens.  Said Tom's fellow-competitors went chasing after a Referee almost immediately.

The exam had a lot of "interesting" questions.

One of the stipulations is that in doing so, you don't unduly delay play.  Usually there is someone in the fairway waiting to hit, so by practicing, they would be delaying play for the group behind them.  I have seen it done though.

Share this post


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

One of the stipulations is that in doing so, you don't unduly delay play.  Usually there is someone in the fairway waiting to hit, so by practicing, they would be delaying play for the group behind them.  I have seen it done though.

Good point, a player could  get carried away.  I think there is leeway for a  quick "try that short putt again".   It's always done in match play and often there is someone waiting in the fairway.  I agree the reason for Note 2 is probably for pace of play.

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...