Taking left handed stance to get relief

[iacas]

That's what I said. I understood the ruling 30 posts ago, but I hate the rule, and I kept making it known. I still got piled on. Like I said, go into almost any thread on here, and you will find an argument or people bashing each other.

You see what you want to see, @Bird E3 . As @Fourputt says this is a Rules forum, so discussions are centered around the Rules of Golf. On this topic it's clear.

You see what you want to see, and if I take a few seconds, I'll see a ton of advice and positive discussion given here. I'll see people helping each other understand the Rules of Golf, the golf swing, and where to play when they visit a new area. I'll see people discussing things because they have a common interest and passion for the game of golf.

If you feel "bashed" or feel that this was an "argument," then perhaps you're not cut out to participate online. People who are passionate about golf disagree on many topics. You surely can't expect everyone who has one thing in common (golf) to agree on everything else, not even specific golf things (like whether the example in this thread was "cheating" or whatever you want to call it).

The thing is, when a question is asked on a RULES forum, the answer is given according to the rules.  We can't help it if you don't like it, that's how it is.  There is no argument from anyone but you when you are simply disagreeing with facts. I will sometimes try to explain the logic or fundamental principle behind a contested rule, but I don't see that as arguing, only as attempting to show that there is logic and reason behind what appears to you to be an unreasonable rule or procedure.  If you continue to argue, then you might as well beat your head against the wall, because there won't be an answer that makes you happy.  You are certainly entitled to your opinion, right or wrong, but when you ask a rules question, you'll get a rules answer.

Pretty much.

Swap out your pair of glasses, @Bird E3 . I don't know what color they are, but they're not flattering.

[turtleback]

The rules of golf are probably one of the least ambiguous for sports. There really isn't many loopholes. Basically a loophole to me is a being able to wrongly interpret the intent of a rule, because that rule was not specific enough, to allow for an advantage.

There are some cases were the rules can be inventively applied.

Example being you can deem any ball that has not entered a water hazard as unplayable and drop were you last hit your ball with a one stroke penalty. So if you blast your ball off a green and into a bunker you can deem it unplayable and replay that putt with penalty. Might be more beneficial if you know you suck a bunker shots.

An even better example is if you are on a crazy US Open green 3 feet away, you putt the ball and it hits a slope and rolls off the green into a hairy bunker.  What better time to elect to replay your shot with stroke and distance?  Just don't miss the putt the same way the second time.

That's what I said. I understood the ruling 30 posts ago, but I hate the rule, and I kept making it known. I still got piled on. Like I said, go into almost any thread on here, and you will find an argument or people bashing each other.

The difference being that when Rim found himself in a hole he stopped digging.  People sometimes respond to a post before reading the other replies and it can seem to be piling on when it is just a matter of replying as you read.

But in YOUR case you didn't stop digging when you found yourself in a hole, you doubled down.

[Golfingdad]

An even better example is if you are on a crazy US Open green 3 feet away, you putt the ball and it hits a slope and rolls off the green into a hairy bunker.  What better time to elect to replay your shot with stroke and distance?  Just don't miss the putt the same way the second time.

My very first thought here is "Hey, great idea!"

But then my second thought is "huh, weird that there isn't a caveat in the S&D; portion of the rules that explains that you can't re-play from closer to the hole even in that situation."

The difference being that when Rim found himself in a hole he stopped digging.  People sometimes respond to a post before reading the other replies and it can seem to be piling on when it is just a matter of replying as you read.

But in YOUR case you didn't stop digging when you found yourself in a hole, you doubled down.

Also, remember that outside of a "My Swing" thread or a "My Journey to breaking 80" or whatever thread, these are very public discussions and should not be treated personally.  Just because one person asked the question, doesn't mean that every response is directly to him, even when its a quote.  The responses are for everybody.  So what may feel like "piling on" to OP, looks like extra information from various sources to others who are learning more about the topic.

If 4 people respond to my comment above, even if the answers all appear the same, I might get a little bit more information from each just because of different explanations or from knowing their different backgrounds.  The same is true of any other person reading it.  We're all here to learn.

Bottom line:  Don't take things personally and give people the benefit of the doubt (they're not piling on, they're giving unique insight, or they just didn't read the other responses before they posted, it happens) - I find that works wonders.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtleback

An even better example is if you are on a crazy US Open green 3 feet away, you putt the ball and it hits a slope and rolls off the green into a hairy bunker.  What better time to elect to replay your shot with stroke and distance?  Just don't miss the putt the same way the second time.

My very first thought here is "Hey, great idea!"

But then my second thought is "huh, weird that there isn't a caveat in the S&D; portion of the rules that explains that you can't re-play from closer to the hole even in that situation."

Surprisingly, there is a logical reason for that too.  You are not playing from closer to the hole than what you achieved from making a stroke.  The only difference is that you reached that proximity 2 strokes earlier rather than with your most recent stroke.  The only act in this vein that the rules abhor is advancing the ball without the benefit of a stroke.  Since you didn't do that, it's all good.

[ColinL]

My very first thought here is "Hey, great idea!"

But then my second thought is "huh, weird that there isn't a caveat in the S&D; portion of the rules that explains that you can't re-play from closer to the hole even in that situation."

If your ball rebounds off a tree or something and ends up behind you, the place where you played your previous shot is nearer the hole than where the ball came to rest.  As Fourputt has pointed out, you aren't any nearer the hole than where you have already  reached.

[Perfect Slicer]

This is beating a dead horse, but I think some are hung up on the 'fake out' left handed stance scenario. Forget that, and take a right handed stance playing away from the hole. Same rule applies, same relief, same result, now you end up playing a right handed shot towards the hole. If this was the original scenario, would anyone have a problem with it? I don't see how, and the result is exactly the same.