Why 2 stroke penalty for hitting flagstick?

[dedalus101]

I can find no rationale for there being a two stroke penalty for hitting the untended flagstick while putting from the green. My experience is that if you are putting from the green or even from just off the green the flagstick is an obstacle not an aide. A well struck putt is more likely to carom off the flagstick when it is still in the hole than lip out if it is not in the hole so why a penalty and a two stroke penalty at that for hitting the flagstick when putting from the green? It makes no rational sense.  

[saevel25]

 You are statistically more likely to make a putt with the flag stick in. 

[iacas]

In addition to what Matt said, the penalty has to be no less than the maximum advantage gained.

So let's say you hit a putt so hard it can go ten feet past the cup. Instead, it goes in for a 1. Since it's certainly possible you can two-putt from ten feet… the penalty is two strokes.

It's also consistent with other penalties.

[dedalus101]

Sorry that does not explain the rule. The only evidence I have ever seen for being "statistically" more likely to make a putt by hitting a flagstick was a Pelze study that was frankly very poorly designed since it used putts that would have gone 3 feet past, 6 feet past and 9 feet past the hole. Of course a backstop like a flagstick would help if you are banging putts that hard but for anyone who actually has speed control the flagstick is an obstacle not an aide and I have never seen any evidence to the contrary thus why the penalty?

 

[iacas]

27 minutes ago, dedalus101 said:

Sorry that does not explain the rule. The only evidence I have ever seen for being "statistically" more likely to make a putt by hitting a flagstick was a Pelze study that was frankly very poorly designed since it used putts that would have gone 3 feet past, 6 feet past and 9 feet past the hole. Of course a backstop like a flagstick would help if you are banging putts that hard but for anyone who actually has speed control the flagstick is an obstacle not an aide and I have never seen any evidence to the contrary thus why the penalty?

First, a ball going only three feet past the hole is pretty decent speed control. And the truth of the matter is that putts hit at ANY speed are more likely to go into the hole (or stay closer to the hole if they miss) when the flagstick is in there. Only one time is that untrue: when the flagstick leans so much the ball won't fit between the flagstick and the hole.

So even if you hit a putt with "1 foot past" speed, it hitting the flagstick means it's as likely or more likely to go in the hole. At that speed the percentage gap is basically 0%, but still… it's not hurting you.

Regardless, as it pertains to the Rules, it's an advantage to have the flagstick in the hole, and the rulesmakers want you to putt into a hole without a flagstick. That's basically it.

Also, did you know that you could make a flagstick 3" wide? It would be perfectly legal. There are no real limits on the width of the flagstick.

[dedalus101]

We are still not getting to the rationale. True a Putt three feet past is decent (not good ) speed control but Pelze's study was equally six feet past and 9 feet past and the point is I have never seen any other evidence that flagstick is an advantage to a good putter. My index is built almost entirely on my short game since I am not a big hitter and my 60 years of experience is that the flagstick is an advantage soley when you are chipping from relatively far off the green and sharply downhill, otherwise the odds you hit the stick and bounce off in some random direction is much higher than the odds of hitting the stick square and having it drop into the hole. And yes I do understand the flagstick can be as wide as the course wants it to be but a three inch flagstick is even more or an obstacle. Please someone show me some evidence for the penalty not just opinion.

 

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, dedalus101 said:

We are still not getting to the rationale.

Because the flagstick in the hole makes it more likely that a ball will go in or stay close than if the flagstick were not in the hole.

7 minutes ago, dedalus101 said:

True a Putt three feet past is decent (not good ) speed control but Pelze's study was equally six feet past and 9 feet past and the point is I have never seen any other evidence that flagstick is an advantage to a good putter.

A flagstick in the hole makes it more likely that a ball will go in or stay close than if the flagstick were not in the hole.

7 minutes ago, dedalus101 said:

My index is built almost entirely on my short game since I am not a big hitter and my 60 years of experience is that the flagstick is an advantage soley when you are chipping from relatively far off the green and sharply downhill, otherwise the odds you hit the stick and bounce off in some random direction is much higher than the odds of hitting the stick square and having it drop into the hole.

Your experience does not match up with reality. The flagstick in the hole makes it more likely that… well… just re-read it from above.

So again, the penalty is two strokes because a ball holed might have rolled out far enough that the player could miss the putt coming back.

[dedalus101]

ok sorry but that was not a response that was just an insistence that a flagstick makes it more likely 

that a putt will fall. That is not evidence and is contrary than my long experience. If you believe it show me some evidence because I cannot find it. 

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, dedalus101 said:

ok sorry but that was not a response that was just an insistence that a flagstick makes it more likely 

that a putt will fall. That is not evidence and is contrary than my long experience. If you believe it show me some evidence because I cannot find it. 

The Pelz study is one. Your experience is wrong. Conduct some of your own tests.

I have.

Also, lots more stuff on the forum than this.  Look around.

[dedalus101]

I appreciate the feedback but the Pelze study is seriously flawed. Anyone who putts at a speed that goes six feet past the hole much less nine feet is not a good putter. and I hate to be contrary but I have many many years of experience and have done a number of admittedly not scientific experiments and it is very clear to me that anyone with decent speed control; is much better off without a flagstick and I have never seen any evidence to the contrary.

[iacas]

You're missing the point that the rules cannot care about players only with good speed control.

I mean, c'mon. That's a pretty simple concept no?

The rules want players to putt into a hole, not bang the ball off a stick.

It's not flawed at all. Why would you study the effects of a ball hit with only perfect speed? That's pointless.

[dedalus101]

So what you are saying is that the penalty for hitting the flagstick while putting from the green is aimed at the golfers who essentially have very poor speed control. This makes very little sense to me. Those golfers are their own penalty and you really don't need to penalize them much less by two strokes. I truly believe this is a rule that may once, back in the day when greens had the consistency of today's fringe,  might have mnade some sense but today is just an anachronism and a weird one at that.

[iacas]

8 hours ago, dedalus101 said:

So what you are saying is that the penalty for hitting the flagstick while putting from the green is aimed at the golfers who essentially have very poor speed control. This makes very little sense to me. Those golfers are their own penalty and you really don't need to penalize them much less by two strokes.

You're simply not being logical.

If someone hits a putt that would have gone six feet past the hole, if it hits the flagstick and goes in or stays close, they've benefited by the flagstick being in the hole.

[Blackjack Don]

7 hours ago, iacas said:

If someone hits a putt that would have gone six feet past the hole, if it hits the flagstick and goes in or stays close, they've benefited by the flagstick being in the hole.

This. Seems logical to me that the rules sometimes have to present a punishment for someone who is trying to gain an advantage. Leaving the flag stick in for the purpose of stopping a putt that goes six or nine feet past the hole but is stopped short of that, would be pretty good for some and would punish those who do not use the stick as a backstop. 

It's not that hard to understand, to me. If the ball moves accidentally, no penalty. If someone moves the ball on purpose to gain an advantage, there is a penalty. That's the purpose of these kinds of rules, to keep things level.

PS--the stick can also keep the ball from going in, so it's better to pull it if you're playing for score. I don't when I'm playing alone for time purposes. Not the same thing.

[Rulesman]

The question is wrongly emphasizing the ball going into the hole.

The much more significant point has not really been made in the answers.

Physics tells us that the ball will finish nearer the hole if it hits the flag than if it misses.

It doesn't need empirical tests to prove it.

[Groucho Valentine]

When i have a long lag putt and I'm playing alone, I leave the stick in just for convienience. But i actually cant remember ever hitting the flag stick with a lag putt. I would think that it actually does more harm than good in terms of helping putts go in. 

[Jeremie Boop]

It's funny to me, this discussion, because it's the mirror of the "keep the pin in when putting/chipping from off the green" and people refusing to do so because "in their experience" it's better to have it out.

The pin in acts sort of like a backstop/backboard, you can be more aggressive while still having a better chance of stopping the ball near or in the hole than if it's not there. Sure, sometimes you may get some weird bounce off of it that will leave you further away, but the odds are much higher that the ball will be much closer.

[SG11118]

There are many different flagstick designs in use.  Different designs definitely behave differently.  Pretty difficult to make universal proclamations on their behavior without analyzing the various designs.