Recreational "Tour" with Modified Rules, Good or Bad?

[isukgolf]

I know you weren't calling me out but in general I don't care what people call the "golf" they play when they aren't following the rules, but they should be aware there is a difference between the game they play and the one that follows the ROG. Baseball players in college that use aluminum bats usually see a decline in their batting stats until they adjust to wood bats.  We also know that college players have to adjust to the added distance of the 3 point line.   Of course they are still playing basketball and baseball but their dependence on shorter 3 point lines and equipment that doesn't conform to MLB rules is only going to hinder their development if they intend to make the jump to the next level. Find a golfer that uses non-conforming equipment, typically takes 2 - 3 foot "gimme's" and mulligans and have them compete in a match play tournament against someone with the same "reported" handicap and see how they do.  At my club you can pretty easily tell those that always putt out from those that play gimmes.  A 2 foot putt in with a tough hole placement isn't that easy to make if you're not used to making them.

Thanks ... that is actually a good explanation.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

For those who say that the league the OP describes is playing golf - how can it really be golf when the most basic of golf's fundamental principles (playing the ball as it lies) is being tossed out the window?  I played the game for 15 years before I really started to try and learn the rules, but even during that time I never deliberately ignored the rules, I simply didn't know them very well.  I always thought I was playing by the rules, but as I gained experience I found that the word of mouth rules I'd picked up along the way were mostly inaccurate or incomplete.  I gradually moved closer and closer to playing the game correctly, but one principle that I never fudged on was playing the ball as it lies.

This is the starched collar rhetoric that gets us golfers labeled as elitist. Not saying you are, just the way it sounds.

Golf is played with a golf ball, golf club on a golf course.  The rules regulate and define play.

When my 80 year old neighbor, who improves his lie and pick up 5 foot putts tells me he plays golf every Wednesday, do I tell him "no-you dont play golf"? Do I tell him he is only playing a "golf like game"?

Everyone on the course is playing golf, they just are not all playing by the rules.

When I go shoot hoop and play 1 on 1 with my kid in the driveway am I playing basket ball?

My comment was directed to the OP's league, not to your neighbor.  I play in a small 9 hole senior league that only plays a 2 man scramble format.  I wouldn't think of telling those 70 to mid 80ish retired farmers that they aren't playing golf.  But they aren't trying to recruit beginning players into a league where they are going to be deliberately defying the principles which the game of golf is founded on and has been played under for most of the last 350 years.  Answer me this:  Why is the game so much more difficult now than it was 50 years ago?  100 years ago?  The answer is that it isn't.

It's actually easier now with courses which are better maintained, with equipment specifically designed to make the game easier.  There is less reason to muck around with the rules and the principles behind those rules than there was at just about any time in the last 100 odd years.  People are just too lazy to bother with anything that might present some difficulty or take any effort.

I see this in the same vein as the push toward eliminating anything competitive from junior "sports".  Trying to play games where nobody wins and nobody loses is just pointless (see preseason football and exhibition baseball - purely played for practice), and so is playing "golf" simplified to the point of being fundamentally unrecognizable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Braivo

It is no longer a competitive sport when you don't play by the rules. Even my kids establish rules before they play made-up games in the backyard. As soon as one kid stops playing by the rules the game begins to disintegrate, they don't adjust the rules to accommodate the one who thinks they are unfair.

This is absolutely true. Golf is hard (h/t LSW). Maybe it won't grow over time, but does it have to grow? What is wrong with golf staying exactly the size it is right now? Golf has a thriving tour with lucrative TV contracts, there are beautiful courses all over the world in nearly every country. It doesn't need to be diluted to encourage growth, golf is a game that is passed from generation to generation. Most of us golf because our fathers taught us, and we will teach our children. There are plenty of junior golf programs available to aid with this, including the "family tee" I have seen sprout up on many courses. Those that didn't learn as children can rest assured that there are plenty of us veterans out there more than eager to teach you. Just ask.

As we teach these young kids the game, they instinctively want to follow the rules. My daughter went out with me last week for her first round. When she was struggling and I encouraged her to improve her lie or toss the ball out of a bunker she resisted, saying she wanted to do things "the right way".

There is a certain pride that comes with doing things well and doing them right. When we compromise those for the sake of "fun" we actually diminish the true joy that comes from succeeding at a difficult task. Many people may not want to work hard and reap the rewards, but I do, that is where I find a true connection to my human nature.

I would say that lucrative TV contracts have nothing to do with the local courses pulling a profit. We have private courses all over that are opening their doors to the public just so they can remain open.

Golf is expensive and time consuming and if the sport does'nt get new participants more courses will fold.

Just in Myrtle beach alone you can make more money as condos than as a course (or so I was told by an owner years ago who was ready to sell)

Private courses are having to make such moves because of the simple fact that people no longer want to pay a large up front fee that tends to tie them to a single course or a single recreational choice when there are other options open to them.  Dumbing down the game will do absolutely nothing to stem that trend, nor will bringing in that type of player, because they aren't the type who is looking at a country club or golf club membership.

[turtleback]

Private courses are having to make such moves because of the simple fact that people no longer want to pay a large up front fee that tends to tie them to a single course or a single recreational choice when there are other options open to them.  Dumbing down the game will do absolutely nothing to stem that trend, nor will bringing in that type of player, because they aren't the type who is looking at a country club or golf club membership.

You make a really good point I had not really thought of in this way.  Maybe the trouble some private clubs are having is because one of the results of the Tiger-boom was the increase in upscale daily-fee courses.  I remember reading articles about daily fee courses trying to give golfers the private club experience.  Maybe part of the problem is that they were so successful that golfers who might have joined a private club now enjoy a similar level of cosseting without that big up front payment and commitment you describe.

[NJpatbee]

If a group of people want to play golf not according to the USGA and R&A; rules I really do not care.  It is a way to get non-serious golfers out and enjoy the day and perhaps make some friends and perhaps fill some empty tee times on courses and sell some additional equipment.

But it is not what I want to do.  I am a relatively high handicap golfer but I enjoy tracking my performance against the established rules of golf.  For most avid golfers I would think that playing with modified rules to make the game easier would not be appealing (not that I would mind changing the definition of "hazard") but just as in bowling I want to know what my handicap is and how my performance is.  I get satisfaction breaking 90 legitimately but breaking 80 with fudged rules has no appeal.

Now when I play with my 10 year old grandson (he started at age 8) I try to teach him the rules but will allow exceptions to avoid frustration as he learns the game.  For example, last year he would have to attempt to get out of a sand trap but I would give him a free lift if he stayed in the bunker. He knew it was against the rules but accepted the fact that he was learning and having fun.  This year he has to get the ball out of the hazard by himself and understands that he is closer to playing the actual game by the rules - he usually gets the ball out of the bunker on the first try and is thrilled by it.  The same goes for his grandfather - I'll take a bogey on a tight par 4 over a par with a free drop from behind a tree.  And actually, my grandson would never allow it!

[iacas]

I think we can agree and assume that player A hitting every fairway will be hitting it straight and then for will most definitely shooting for birdie or par on almost every hole. Where as player B misses every fairway, we can only assume that the 2nd shot will likely be just as erratic, leaving that player scrambling after every shot. Now player B is also not getting the same look at the green that player A will be, which will also affect the score.

This format favors worse players if handicaps are used. They get more benefit than the better players. The handicaps would, if the system is continually used, readjust to be "fair" over time. [quote name="Elmer" url="/t/83342/recreational-tour-with-modified-rules-good-or-bad/60#post_1175566"]Most of my "player A" friends are always awkward playing from anywhere but a fairway![/quote] Then they're not player A. [quote name="Elmer" url="/t/83342/recreational-tour-with-modified-rules-good-or-bad/60#post_1175566"]This is the starched collar rhetoric that gets us golfers labeled as elitist. Not saying you are, just the way it sounds.[/quote] You know, I hate that kind of response. I truly do not care what some random league somewhere does, but to respond like that is just… something. There's NO elitism in saying "I prefer to play by the RoG." NONE. Reverse elitism sucks too. You're not better for golf than those who like the RoG in their own games. Everyone brings their own stuff to the table. I'd type more but I'm on my phone. [quote name="Elmer" url="/t/83342/recreational-tour-with-modified-rules-good-or-bad/60#post_1175566"]Do I tell him "no-you dont play golf"? Do I tell him he is only playing a "golf like game"?[/quote] We had a thread about that. Nobody is saying it like you want to take it. Simple as that.

[MyrtleBeachGolf]

I would say that lucrative TV contracts have nothing to do with the local courses pulling a profit. We have private courses all over that are opening their doors to the public just so they can remain open. Golf is expensive and time consuming and if the sport does'nt get new participants more courses will fold. Just in Myrtle beach alone you can make more money as condos than as a course (or so I was told by an owner years ago who was ready to sell) I completely agree. I work hard at my golf game and I like to see when it pays off. But I understand that people pay their money to play and they and no one is going to tell them the outcome they paid for. I once played an alternating shot format with a random partner. he insisted on hitting a ball on every shot, even if every other shot counted. he said he paid to play and he was not going to be robbed of playing. Made for a long afternoon.

The statement about MB is mostly true. There have been a handful of courses here that have closed and in its place is a housing development or a condo complex. WildWing used to have 72 holes. Now it has 27 holes and a bunch of condos. On topic, the game does need to grow. The golfing populous is getting older and dying. The game is drying up. The younger generation aren't getting involved in it. It's expensive, difficult and time-consuming. Having said all that, I dislike the modified rules league idea. I like to play by the rules of golf.

[Nosevi]

On topic, the game does need to grow. The golfing populous is getting older and dying. The game is drying up. The younger generation aren't getting involved in it. It's expensive, difficult and time-consuming.

Not really the case here. The game is thriving in the Seniors sections and is thriving in the Junior sections, where it 'struggles' in comparison is in the 20-45 age bracket. But I'm not convinced that's not always been the case, people at that stage of life have less time on their hands due to young families and demanding jobs and that's always been the case.

Regarding the new rules not penalising the less skills players more than the skills players ("Where as player B misses every fairway, we can only assume that the 2nd shot will likely be just as erratic, leaving that player scrambling after every shot....." etc ) then what's the point in them? The only reason I can see for them is to make less skilled players score less poorly than they would under the full rules of golf. If that's not the point, what is the point in them?

Like others I couldn't care less if some wish to play their golf this way, particularly as I'm thousands of miles away, as long as no one suggests the actual rules of golf should be changed to lessen the need for skill at the game. But for me any score shot under these rules would be meaningless and by that measure so would any victory. Shooting a good score having improved my lie every other hole and picked up a putt or two because I couldn't get it in the hole just wouldn't mean a thing. I'm not saying it's not a fun way for less skilled golfers to play, I'm just saying it's not for me as it takes away some of the challenge of the game and for me it's all about the challenge.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Private courses are having to make such moves because of the simple fact that people no longer want to pay a large up front fee that tends to tie them to a single course or a single recreational choice when there are other options open to them.  Dumbing down the game will do absolutely nothing to stem that trend, nor will bringing in that type of player, because they aren't the type who is looking at a country club or golf club membership.

You make a really good point I had not really thought of in this way.  Maybe the trouble some private clubs are having is because one of the results of the Tiger-boom was the increase in upscale daily-fee courses.  I remember reading articles about daily fee courses trying to give golfers the private club experience.  Maybe part of the problem is that they were so successful that golfers who might have joined a private club now enjoy a similar level of cosseting without that big up front payment and commitment you describe.

As you know, this is certainly true in the Denver area.  Riverdale Dunes, Fossil Trace, Heritage, Fox Hollow just off the top of my head, and there are likely a dozen very nice ones that I've never played.

We have some others which, although they may not quite fall in that category are still very pleasant places to play.

My old home course of Foothills is such an example.  Built originally in 1972 on a stingy budget and it was quite pathetic in its infancy.  However the course and the complex has been well managed and it has matured into a superior golf experience, considering that it was mostly built to be a cash cow for the Foothills Recreation District.  It offers something for every level of player, from rank beginners on the par 3 course, a level up to the Executive 9 hole course, and 4 tee options on the nearly 7000 yard championship course.  It would seem odd to me that anyone who qualifies for resident rates (and it's not a lot more for nonresident) would join a private club, because they won't find a more varied golf experience in any private club that I know of in the Denver area.  A tour or league like the OP refers to would be unneeded because there are already opportunities for every type of player.

[Elmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elmer

Most of my "player A" friends are always awkward playing from anywhere but a fairway!

Then they're not player A.

That did not get typed the way I wanted it to.

I know a few very good golfers, scratch or 1 over handicaps. They play from fairways and they can scramble. But they dont play from the spots on the course I play on. We are almost play 2 different courses.