Failure To Include an Unknown Penalty

[mcanadiens]

It's definitely not an improvement.

Gives guys the chance to be like the mafia on the witness stand. You know, plead the fifth.

"I don't know nothing about no penalty." - Sorry. I just watched a show on Santo Trafficante and the actor was hilarious.

 

[Ty_Webb]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Suppose someone drops in a wrong place (not a serious breach), and doesn't think anything of it at all. They breached the rules, unknowingly, and you say "think about every drop you took." They say "Yeah I did, I'm good." That doesn't invalidate the exception. It's still an unknown penalty.

That person who drops in the wrong place is losing out because they didn't know the rules. They are incentivized to learn the rules because they caught a penalty for playing from the wrong place (assuming they were caught). They can't have gained an advantage for playing from that wrong place, or they'd have got the DQ penalty anyway (serious breach). Thus, they have paid at least something for their mistake. I'm not too concerned about that person.

You mentioned people who hit it in a water hazard and just don't count the penalty stroke. That's the person I'm trying to hoover up. If they say yes they took a drop for hitting it in the water, then I would ask them if they included the penalty stroke. If they said they had, then I'm good. If they said they hadn't, then I would make sure they added it. They've learned something and no one loses anything. 

I get that you're upset that this incentivizes people to not know the rules. I agree with you. It doesn't mean that we just have to fall back and say "well f*#& it there's nothing we can do". There are things we can do. Like this.

From my perspective, I never thought of the penalty for signing for a wrong score as being to incentivize people to learn the rules. You sign your scorecard and hand it in, what you're doing is saying to everyone else in the event "here is my score, I am confirming that it is correct and you can rely on it". If someone else sees your score, finds out that they are 1 back with 1 hole to go, they may change the way they play that hole from if you had written down the correct score. The DQ penalty was to fix that. The 2 strokes was also kind of to fix that. Now you're no longer having to make that promise. As I think about it, I think that with the old rules, you had an incentive to ask about a potential penalty when you finished your round. If you didn't and it came up you'd get DQ'd or another 2 strokes. Now, you have no such incentive because why bring it up? That's I guess why I think there is value in asking people if anything came up about which they are not sure. I like to think that most people will do the right thing in that situation.

What really annoys me about this change is it seems like it's there purely because the perception is that Lexi Thompson got 4 penalty strokes for moving her ball an inch. I have never marked a ball and picked it up without knowing where I had to put it to put it back where I picked it up from. The fact that she wasn't able to do that and that has apparently resulted in this rule change makes my blood boil.

[iacas]

44 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

That person who drops in the wrong place is losing out because they didn't know the rules.

Maybe the wrong place they dropped is a better lie, and they only "lose out" if they're found out.

44 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

They are incentivized to learn the rules because they caught a penalty for playing from the wrong place (assuming they were caught).

And they'd be further incentivized if they got four shots instead of two.

44 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

They can't have gained an advantage for playing from that wrong place, or they'd have got the DQ penalty anyway (serious breach).

Sure they could have. Say they dropped in the fairway instead of in the first cut. Or maybe they dropped in a thinner lie in the rough instead of a juicy thick spot within the drop area. Neither of those are a serious breach and thus not a DQ-able offense.

Statements like that make me unsure how well you know the topic material.

---

You keep going off on these weird tangents. I feel like I keep talking past you, and you likely feel the same.

The points I've tried to make, and which nobody has persuaded me otherwise, is that the rules change incentivizes ignorance, feigned or authentic. It encourages players to remain mum about a possible rules infraction because when they inquire, they can no longer use the exception and claim it was "unknown."

Let's say you're a kid with an allowance. You like candy bars, and they change the laws to say that if you're caught stealing a candy bar, but profess not to know that it was "wrong," you only pay the price of the candy bar.

If you're really into candy bars, enough that it over-rides your morality or whatever, what are you gonna do? You're gonna steal candy bars! You might steal 10 candy bars, and even if you get caught nine times, at nine different stores, you've come out ahead.

It's the added penalty - often you have to pay a fine, something goes on your record, your parents are called down to the police station… etc. that makes stealing unattractive.

Now, that situation really only parallels the intentional cheater, but those exist, too, and this rule is great for them. After all, they've already incurred a penalty - this rules change lets them try to get away with it with no risk at all. Worst case, they get the penalty they incurred.

44 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

I get that you're upset that this incentivizes people to not know the rules. I agree with you. It doesn't mean that we just have to fall back and say "well f*#& it there's nothing we can do". There are things we can do. Like this.

I don't care about people you're trying to "hoover up." It's not going to work like you seem to think, because someone saying "I'm certain I didn't break any rules" doesn't invalidate the exception. You could immediately say "what about that drop in the wrong place on #4?" and if they say "I didn't know that was a penalty" they still get to use that exception.

44 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

As I think about it, I think that with the old rules, you had an incentive to ask about a potential penalty when you finished your round. If you didn't and it came up you'd get DQ'd or another 2 strokes. Now, you have no such incentive because why bring it up?

Yes… I've mentioned this one more than a few times. Yet another way ignorance is encouraged.

44 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

What really annoys me about this change is it seems like it's there purely because the perception is that Lexi Thompson got 4 penalty strokes for moving her ball an inch. I have never marked a ball and picked it up without knowing where I had to put it to put it back where I picked it up from. The fact that she wasn't able to do that and that has apparently resulted in this rule change makes my blood boil.

Yep.

Victim culture.

[iacas]

BTW, it stands to be said that though this discussion is lengthy, and though I'm passionate about it as well, I realize that this type of situation is unlikely to occur often. This is a bit of a "rules geek" conversation.

I know all that, and admit it freely.

But, this is one of the two changes to the Rules in 2019 that I hate the most. So that's why I talk about it.

[Ty_Webb]

36 minutes ago, iacas said:

But, this is one of the two changes to the Rules in 2019 that I hate the most.

Understood. But what are places like this for if not to discuss the esoteric stuff? Out of curiosity what’s the other?

[Asheville]

Just now, Ty_Webb said:

Understood. But what are places like this for if not to discuss the esoteric stuff? Out of curiosity what’s the other?

The flagstick! 😄

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, Asheville said:

The flagstick! 😄

Yep.

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, NM Golf said:

Well you can bet she won't to learn the rules now, starting next year she can just feign ignorance and everything will be okay. Although in this case I believe she would still have been DQed, correct?

Because the ball was OB, she was DQed, and would have been had the facts come to light after she had signed her scorecard.

But let's imagine her mom kicked her ball from a nestled lie in the roots of a tree in amongst a clump of thick trees 20 feet toward the fairway where she had a pretty clear shot. The player is made aware of the kicking - but not that it may be a penalty - and plays the ball as it lies without thinking that there was anything wrong.

Bam, two strokes ONLY, despite the fact that she knew that her ball at rest had been moved and the Rules state that you're responsible for knowing the Rules and attesting to the correct score.

This year, that would still be two plus the additional two for not including the penalty strokes. Next year, just the two strokes. 😞

 

[phan52]

My biggest pet peeve at my club is players participating in competition and not knowing the rules. I am constantly correcting the players in my group but I also know that no one is policing a lot of the groups in the competition. In the vast majority of cases they are certainly not trying to gain an advantage but that is beside the point. I play by the rules and so should they.

When I was Golf Chairman I would direct the pro staff to make sure that someone in each foursome had a a rudimentary knowledge of the rules because they know the serious players from the causal golfers and they should never put four casual golfers together in a competition. That isn't done anymore and all I can do is shake my head when I scan the tee times and see four knuckleheads in a foursome. 

[Jcomninaki]

I do not think the phrasing of the answers are fair to the topic. They rival, “do you still beat your wife?”.   I believe the changes are beneficial for players who are new or less experienced. Too often Rule Nazi’s run players away from the game.  Let them love the game first and they will grow to support everything else that goes with it. 

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Jcomninaki said:

I do not think the phrasing of the answers are fair to the topic. They rival, “do you still beat your wife?”.   I believe the changes are beneficial for players who are new or less experienced. Too often Rule Nazi’s run players away from the game.  Let them love the game first and they will grow to support everything else that goes with it. 

I don't think new players really ever get that involved in rules situations. New players are just out hitting a ball around. They're not playing in all that many competitions.

Rules Nazis? Do you mean people who play by the Rules? Again, one of my favorite quotes:

[woodzie264]

On 10/16/2018 at 10:53 PM, Vinsk said:

I have to agree with @iacas here. What I actually think should happen is that all players in a tournament should have to sign an agreement prior to play that includes the rules and that they understand and agree to abide by them. If they are in question of any rule, they have the right to call an official for clarification. Failure to do so will result in the appropriate penalty for said breach. With this information posted we can kiss any chance of back stopping to stop.

For comparison only, we physicians are required to complete CME (Continuing Medical Education) constantly along with Board Certification exam every 10 years. I don't see it being too much to ask that in order to maintain ones PGA card a player must take a rules exam annually as a requirement. Claiming ignorance as an excuse to not be penalized seems completely unjust. 

Exactly - I hate the 10yr recert.  Good point, Vinsk 

[Puttin4Dough]

This rule reminds me of football and basketball where players get away with not playing by the rules.  There are times when football or basketball players might not know the rules and/or the refs don't call a foul, and likewise a player is not expected to call a foul on themselves.  And in those games nobody changes the score after the game...the refs just apologize for bad calls.  

Other rules should be changed to match the tour.  One would be the lost ball penalty because it can't be found despite knowing the ball is not out of play.  This rarely happens on tour with spotters. Plus, I also don't think tour players should get advice from their caddie to line-up putts.  That's an advantage the average golfer doesn't have, or allow some form of green reading DMD to help everyone else..

And if the goal is to conform to tour rules, people should be walking vs. riding in carts.  

[iacas]

36 minutes ago, Puttin4Dough said:

This rule reminds me of football and basketball where players get away with not playing by the rules.  There are times when football or basketball players might not know the rules and/or the refs don't call a foul, and likewise a player is not expected to call a foul on themselves.  And in those games nobody changes the score after the game...the refs just apologize for bad calls.

Okay, but that's not a good thing, IMO. Golf is not played with referees or umpires.

The rest of the post is off topic, so, my reply is in a spoiler, though really this should move to the topic here:

Spoiler

36 minutes ago, Puttin4Dough said:

One would be the lost ball penalty because it can't be found despite knowing the ball is not out of play.  This rarely happens on tour with spotters.

• Why change a Rule based on 0.001% of golfers?
• Does the new (2019) Local Rule for a ball OB/lost not suffice, here?

36 minutes ago, Puttin4Dough said:

Plus, I also don't think tour players should get advice from their caddie to line-up putts.

In 2019 the caddie can't align a player, but the caddie is part of their team, and I'm not even sure how you'd legislate against a caddie helping the player here.

36 minutes ago, Puttin4Dough said:

That's an advantage the average golfer doesn't have

Not necessarily. The average golfer also drives around in a cart.

36 minutes ago, Puttin4Dough said:

And if the goal is to conform to tour rules, people should be walking vs. riding in carts.  

Huh? That's not the goal.

[Puttin4Dough]

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

Okay, but that's not a good thing, IMO. Golf is not played with referees or umpires.

The rest of the post is off topic, so, my reply is in a spoiler, though really this should move to the topic here:

  Reveal hidden contents

• Why change a Rule based on 0.001% of golfers?
• Does the new (2019) Local Rule for a ball OB/lost not suffice, here?

In 2019 the caddie can't align a player, but the caddie is part of their team, and I'm not even sure how you'd legislate against a caddie helping the player here.

Not necessarily. The average golfer also drives around in a cart.

Huh? That's not the goal.

Really not off-topic.  I'm pointing out that tour players have access to spotters and personal caddie's which could be viewed as an unfair advantage compared to the average golfer.  I take a 2 stroke lost ball while the spotter finds their ball.  i miss a slight break on a green that they don't.  And caddies are like having a golf instructor during every round.  Thus, the allowance for unintentional rule mishaps for the average golfer equal out some of the advantages tour players enjoy.

 

[iacas]

Just now, Puttin4Dough said:

Really not off-topic. I'm pointing out that tour players have access to spotters and personal caddie's which could be viewed as an unfair advantage compared to the average golfer.

The topic is "Failure to Include and Unknown Penalty," so yes, it is off topic.

[Puttin4Dough]

36 minutes ago, iacas said:

The topic is "Failure to Include and Unknown Penalty," so yes, it is off topic.

There's a reason the USGA adopted the rule...it's because the rules can become wildly obscure.  Plus, there are know-nothings who can affect another players score with incorrect interpretations.  

While you might think folks will cheat for their own advantage....I've played with folks in competitions that literally make up the rules to cheat another player to their advantage.  Case in point.  I played in a tourney where my ball landed near a prickly bush.  I was told I had to play it despite getting impaled by thorns.  I told the OP that wrapping a towel around my thigh was legal,  he said it was not.  He knew better, but he was testing me to see if I knew the rules.  It goes both ways.

[Double Mocha Man]

45 minutes ago, Puttin4Dough said:

Really not off-topic.  I'm pointing out that tour players have access to spotters and personal caddie's which could be viewed as an unfair advantage compared to the average golfer.  I take a 2 stroke lost ball while the spotter finds their ball.  i miss a slight break on a green that they don't.  And caddies are like having a golf instructor during every round.  Thus, the allowance for unintentional rule mishaps for the average golfer equal out some of the advantages tour players enjoy.

 

Puttin4Dough... you are onto something!  For years, in casual rounds, not recording scores for GHIN, with my foursome doing the same, I have played by what I call "Gallery Rules".  Tour pros have trainers, caddies, spotters, nutritionists, spectators, spectators who kick their ball back in bounds, rules officials, TV cameras and marshals to help locate their slightly wayward ball that we, as common folk, usually lose.  

You know the scenario... you rip a drive down the left side, but not even into the trees.  And it disappears from the face of the earth.  Doesn't happen to the pros.  I say they have enough advantages that I should get some of them, too.

Hence, "Gallery Rules".  If my ball is lost where it should have been in plain sight, I drop another ball (unsponsored, with no freebies) where I fairly decide it would have been found. No penalty.  

Now, when I play in a tournament I don't do this, though I do hire 100-200 spectators to follow me.