Are there too many rules in golf?

[harry hooker]

Sometimes there are additional rules that must be followed: [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/content/type/61/id/122878/] [/URL]

love this

[iacas]

Ending up in the one in the middle after hammering a drive is called a #@!!%!!!@#$!!!, and no one in non-competitive round play will play out of one like that anyway. But if your club is playing winter rules with lift and clean you get to move out of it anyway.

I play out of them in non-competitive rounds. Often hit some of my better shots as I'm forced to give it a little more mental effort.

A divot hole that has healed isn't usually a problem. I play out of those. There's grass in them. It's when they're fresh like these in the picture.

Please define when a divot hole stops being a divot hole. How sufficiently "filled in" does it have to be to cease being one? What if the divot is more of a scuffing? How scuffed should it be before it qualifies as a divot hole?

What about little depressions in the ground. Maybe someone's old footprint on some soft turf. Or just a slightly bare patch of ground in the rough. Or fairway. Those are no good either, right?

Another pet peeve of mine is people who do not rake the bunker when they're done.

They also should have something for a casual round. Say you have a situation like at a local dog track where there are some old pine trees. You manage to hit your ball onto the left side of the fairway and there are tree roots.

So move the ball. Who really cares in a casual round? If you're playing against someone, and make up your own rules and play a game very closely resembling golf, cool. Have fun.

Just don't do it in a tournament. And consider what you post for your handicap for that hole.

[Golf Grouch]

To me, the problem isn't quantity, it's quality .  Other sports may have more rules, but they are usually logical and can be inferred on grounds of fairness.  That can't be said for most golf rules.

[mvmac]

That can't be said for most golf rules.

Most rules in golf are not logical and unfair?

[saevel25]

To me, the problem isn't quantity, it's quality.  Other sports may have more rules, but they are usually logical and can be inferred on grounds of fairness.  That can't be said for most golf rules.

Examples?

I found the rules of golf to be the most straight forward fair rules in any sport. Its also the only sport that has made an effort to invest a lot of time and energy into creating a system that allows players of different abilities to compete on an even playing field, the handicap system.

[Shindig]

To me, the problem isn't quantity, it's quality .  Other sports may have more rules, but they are usually logical and can be inferred on grounds of fairness.  That can't be said for most golf rules.

See, I have trouble with this. I understand the logic behind most rules of golf. By contrast, I can't understand the logic or fairness of some things in many team sports. But those arguments do lead to great moments in television history sometimes: [SPOILER=DS9 explains the Infield Fly Rule] [VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cLOBHEON20[/VIDEO] [/SPOILER]

[Golf Grouch]

Examples?

I found the rules of golf to be the most straight forward fair rules in any sport. Its also the only sport that has made an effort to invest a lot of time and energy into creating a system that allows players of different abilities to compete on an even playing field, the handicap system.

How about that there's no relief from divots and sand-filled divots?  What is the logic and fairness behind this rule?  If a sand-filled divot isn't ground under repair, then I don't know what those words mean. Imagine if I'm playing in the group behind Rory McIlroy and he hits a good drive to the middle of the fairway and then hits a PW to the green, creating a deep divot. If I hit the identical drive and land in the same spot, I'm denied the same playing conditions he had. If a cart tire created the rut, I would get relief, but because the hole in the ground was made by a golfer, then I can't. How does that make sense? Golfers get relief from unusual conditions and those conditions should include divots.

[David in FL]

How about that there's no relief from divots and sand-filled divots?  What is the logic and fairness behind this rule? If a sand-filled divot isn't ground under repair, then I don't know what those words mean. Imagine if I'm playing in the group behind Rory McIlroy and he hits a good drive to the middle of the fairway and then hits a PW to the green, creating a deep divot. If I hit the identical drive and land in the same spot, I'm denied the same playing conditions he had. If a cart tire created the rut, I would get relief, but because the hole in the ground was made by a golfer, then I can't. How does that make sense? Golfers get relief from unusual conditions and those conditions should include divots.

Well there you go. That's your problem. ;-) Rather than rehashing something we've talked about many, many times on this forum, I'll simply recommend that you use the search function to find the many threads surrounding the subject of playing out of divots. :beer:

[rkim291968]

Sometimes there are additional rules that must be followed:

Seen it in another post but always funny.   BTW, Rule 5 is going to need subsections, detail definition of "enemy," and "action" must be included.

[saevel25]

If a cart tire created the rut, I would get relief, but because the hole in the ground was made by a golfer, then I can't. How does that make sense? Golfers get relief from unusual conditions and those conditions should include divots.

Actually you wouldn't. It would be up to the course or committee to deem ruts, ground under repair.

25/16

Rut Made by Tractor

Q.Is a rut made by a tractor considered a hole made by a greenkeeper and thus ground under repair? If not, should the Committee declare such a rut to be ground under repair?

A.Such a rut is not a hole made by a greenkeeper. The Committee would be justified in declaring a deep rut to be ground under repair, but not a shallow indentation made by greenkeeping equipment.

So if you are taking relief from ruts because you assume you should, don't. Make sure they are marked ground under repair first. If you are in competition then get confirmation from the committee who is running the tournament.

[Missouri Swede]

To me, the problem isn't quantity, it's quality.  Other sports may have more rules, but they are usually logical and can be inferred on grounds of fairness.  That can't be said for most golf rules.

The principle is that "like situations shall be treated alike."  From The Principles behind the Rules of Golf , "the approach is not whether 'this particular situation is unfair to me,' but rather whether 'others in a similar situation and I in mine are treated alike under the Rules.'"

If a cart tire created the rut, I would get relief,

Not from what I see in Decision 25/16: http://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-decisions.html#!decision-25

25/16

Rut Made by Tractor

Q. Is a rut made by a tractor considered a hole made by a greenkeeper and thus ground under repair? If not, should the Committee declare such a rut to be ground under repair?

A. Such a rut is not a hole made by a greenkeeper. The Committee would be justified in declaring a deep rut to be ground under repair, but not a shallow indentation made by greenkeeping equipment.

Edit:  Matt beat me to the "submit" button.  So, "what he said."

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

Examples?

I found the rules of golf to be the most straight forward fair rules in any sport. Its also the only sport that has made an effort to invest a lot of time and energy into creating a system that allows players of different abilities to compete on an even playing field, the handicap system.

How about that there's no relief from divots and sand-filled divots?  What is the logic and fairness behind this rule?  If a sand-filled divot isn't ground under repair, then I don't know what those words mean. Imagine if I'm playing in the group behind Rory McIlroy and he hits a good drive to the middle of the fairway and then hits a PW to the green, creating a deep divot. If I hit the identical drive and land in the same spot, I'm denied the same playing conditions he had. If a cart tire created the rut, I would get relief, but because the hole in the ground was made by a golfer, then I can't. How does that make sense? Golfers get relief from unusual conditions and those conditions should include divots.

I guess that you don't know what they mean then.  Ground under repair is an area of the course which the committee has marked as abnormal ground.  I have yet to see a divot hole so marked.  They don't really qualifiy because there is nothing abnormal about them - quite the opposite.  If I was to make a list of the conditions or features most commonly found on a golf course, divots would be right under grass in order of ubiquitousness.

You have already been told about the rut.  Ground under repair must be marked or in some way designated as such by the committee.  The player doesn't have the authority to play any defect he finds as ground under repair just because he perceives it as unfair.

[wadesworld]

An interesting aside, while I was looking for the 13 original rules, I stumbled onto this website:

http://www.ruleshistory.com/

In it are discussions of the many different sets of rules that the game has had, including variations between different clubs at any one time, and changes to those rules over the last 270 years.  There seem to be lots of interesting variations.  In St. Andrews at one time, if a player hit his ball into the water, he had to throw the ball 6 yards behind the water before the next shot.  After reading some of the variations between clubs, its really not so bad that we have only two sets of rules now, and the R&A; and USGA do try to coordinate them as much as possible.

There is only one set of rules now.  The USGA and R&A; rules are identical, save for the differences in spelling between "British English" and "American English."

[wadesworld]

How about that there's no relief from divots and sand-filled divots?  What is the logic and fairness behind this rule?  If a sand-filled divot isn't ground under repair, then I don't know what those words mean. Imagine if I'm playing in the group behind Rory McIlroy and he hits a good drive to the middle of the fairway and then hits a PW to the green, creating a deep divot. If I hit the identical drive and land in the same spot, I'm denied the same playing conditions he had. If a cart tire created the rut, I would get relief, but because the hole in the ground was made by a golfer, then I can't. How does that make sense? Golfers get relief from unusual conditions and those conditions should include divots.

What's a divot?  Does it have to be deep? How deep? What if it's a divot that's been replaced?  Do you get relief from that?  What if it was replaced a week ago?  Do you still get relief? Do you have to have an agronomist follow you around and tell you when the grass is re-established?

What if Rory only shaved off an inch of the grass but didn't take a divot?  After all, you still didn't get the same lie he did, so shouldn't you be entitled to relief?  Heck, what if his club passing through the grass caused the grain to lay differently than it was when he played the shot.  Different situation, so not fair, right?

On the next hole, if Rory pipes one down the fairway and you slice one into the trees but it hits a tree and ends up 10 yards ahead of Rory in the fairway, shouldn't you be required to go throw it back in the woods?  After all, you didn't hit it in the fairway, so why should you be entitled to the same lie as Rory?

As others have said, you're not entitled to fairness in all situations. If you and Rory find yourselves in identical situations (i.e. in a divot hole, in a water hazard, out-of-bounds, etc) your situations will be resolved in equity.

[saevel25]

27/6

Player Unable to Find His Ball Because Another Player Played It

Q.A and B hit their tee shots into the same general area. A found a ball and played it. B went forward to look for his ball and could not find it. After a few minutes, B started back to the tee to put another ball into play. On the way, he found A's ball and knew then that A had played his (B's) ball in error. What is the ruling?

A.In match play, A lost the hole (Rule 15-3a).

In stroke play, A incurred a penalty of two strokes for playing a wrong ball and must then play his own ball (Rule 15-3b). A's ball was not lost even if A and B had been searching for more than five minutes because A had not "begun to search for it (his ball)"; the searching had been for B's ball - see Definition of "Lost Ball."

On the other hand, B began to search for his ball as soon as he went forward to look for it. If less than five minutes had elapsed before B found A's ball, B should have placed a ball on the spot from which A had wrongly played his (B's) ball and continued play, without penalty - see last paragraph of Rule 15-3b. However, if five minutes had expired, B's original ball was lost and he was obliged to put another ball into play under penalty of stroke and distance (Rule 27-1).

Enough about Divots, here is one of those unexpected rules that is really a bad break.

Player A & B tee off

Player A hits Player's B Ball, Player B thinks he lost his ball.

Player B goes back to the tee box, hits another shot

Player B finds Player A's ball and realizes Player A hit the wrong ball.

If 5 minutes has elapsed before Player B finds Player A's ball then he still takes the lost ball rule and must play the ball hit under stroke and distance.

I get it, 5 minutes has elapsed. Still, Player A did hit the wrong ball. This one I think Player B has a serious gripe with how this could play out.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

27/6

Player Unable to Find His Ball Because Another Player Played It

Q.A and B hit their tee shots into the same general area. A found a ball and played it. B went forward to look for his ball and could not find it. After a few minutes, B started back to the tee to put another ball into play. On the way, he found A's ball and knew then that A had played his (B's) ball in error. What is the ruling?

A.In match play, A lost the hole (Rule 15-3a).

In stroke play, A incurred a penalty of two strokes for playing a wrong ball and must then play his own ball (Rule 15-3b). A's ball was not lost even if A and B had been searching for more than five minutes because A had not "begun to search for it (his ball)"; the searching had been for B's ball - see Definition of "Lost Ball."

On the other hand, B began to search for his ball as soon as he went forward to look for it. If less than five minutes had elapsed before B found A's ball, B should have placed a ball on the spot from which A had wrongly played his (B's) ball and continued play, without penalty - see last paragraph of Rule 15-3b. However, if five minutes had expired, B's original ball was lost and he was obliged to put another ball into play under penalty of stroke and distance (Rule 27-1).

Enough about Divots, here is one of those unexpected rules that is really a bad break.

Player A & B tee off

Player A hits Player's B Ball, Player B thinks he lost his ball.

Player B goes back to the tee box, hits another shot

Player B finds Player A's ball and realizes Player A hit the wrong ball.

If 5 minutes has elapsed before Player B finds Player A's ball then he still takes the lost ball rule and must play the ball hit under stroke and distance.

I get it, 5 minutes has elapsed. Still, Player A did hit the wrong ball. This one I think Player B has a serious gripe with how this could play out.

Kinda have to agree.  I don't see the equity in this one.  Assuming that A and B both arrived at the same time and A immediately played his shot, B should not be penalized because of A's mistake.  How was he supposed to find a ball which was not there solely because of another player's failure to properly identify his ball?

[DrvFrShow]

I hit my second shot about 210 yds on a par 5 that went a little errant... and landed in the general area between the third green and the men's tee of the 4th hole. I was playing a yellow Bridgestone. There was just low cut rough in the area. I watched in panic and yelled as some guy hit my ball onto the 3rd green holed out with his foursome and went onto the 4th hole, teed off while I was waiting for the rest of my foursome to get caught up to that area. I get to hit another ball under S&D; and duffed the shot. When I went to that area I found his ball, a yellow Pinnacle in the general area but in a much poorer position for the 3rd green and for the 5th hole (mine). That just wasn't fair.

[Mugs050]

I think what everyone forgets is golf is suffering right now in part to how difficult a game it is and how long the rounds take. Some rules should be tweaked to attract more people to the sport...