szaino

You have a valid point which I agree with. Learn the rules and play by them. As I get older though, it becomes apparent that the rules are way too complicated for the average golfer to spend the time reading about and studying. No sport should require this amount of effort. What I mention above is the absolute truth. The average or majority of the golfers do not understand the basic rules which they come across every single time they play. The most common of these include relief from hazards and relief from obstructions. These are usually done incorrectly. And I am not talking about beginners, I am talking about people who have been playing golf for 30 years and have no clue what a yellow stake v red stake means or how to determine nearest point of relief.

I agree, that would only make things more complicated. Rules are broken by virtually everyone for 3 reasons: 1) Ignorance of the rules - ie the average golfer doesn't understand the drop procedures for water hazards and lateral water hazards. Tiger Woods even had a problem with his drop options and almost got DQ'd from the Masters. 2) Cheating- they know the rule but break them in order to gain an advantage. 3) Don't care because the rule is stupid- ie when I play by myself, I never pull the pin when putting, it is just a complete waste of time and there is no competitive advantage. Most rules are broken due to ignorance of the rules and that is because the rules are already way too complicated. Players think they are doing the correct thing but in fact may not be. This is just a constantly moving line based upon how knowledgeable a particular player is about the rules. I have had numerous occasions when another player asks me a question about a situation that just happened after the fact and when I explain the rule and they realize that they violated a rule (not on purpose), it becomes awkward because even though it is a friendly round it usually involves a match of some sorts for money ... that's when I feel like an ahole because I wasn't even going to bring it up, but now, when asked, I will explain the rule. Now my friend feels bad. The fact that this happens all the time on the course upsets me because the rules of a sport shouldn't be so GD complicated.

Sorry for the non-technical wording in my example. My point was that when he decided not to look for his ball and just play the provisional, that as a practical matter he was "treating" his original ball as lost. So in this particular example, when the pro putted his provisional, the original ball was "deemed" lost.

Agree, and I have given the example of the "pro with the shank" which under the current rules provides the same relief and situation as if a provisional were allowed for an unplayable. I was addressing the last example by David in FL, where the original ball had a "perfect lie". At my level, if i thought that I could at least hack the ball out somewhere near the green or maybe even on the green I would do it. Who would benefit from the this rule change are the beginners and high handicap golfers. If a player hit the shot of the day with the provisional, you bet they would discard the original ball and go right to the green. And I am all for this because this would make the game more enjoyable for beginners and help expand and develop the game as well as speed up play which is what it's all about. After all, it is a game and we set the rules any way we like.

Just to add that, a competitor is under no requirement to look for another players ball. However, like my last post said and what is highlighted above, you can look for a ball and if found the player must identify it. In head to head match play I have seen this, but in medal play, when someone doesn't want to look for a ball, I have found that players will oblige immediately.

I understand your point, but I think that you are wrong in assuming that a golfer would automatically take the provisional and a 4. This might vary with the level of play for a particular golfer. In your example, I wouldn't take the provisional when I have a clean shot at making a 3 and no worse than a 4.

Agree 100%. If I were playing a match against a player I might just take a quick peek for his ball without trying to appear too "obtuse."

What can't he do? He shanked his first shot into deep fescue. He announced a provisional and hit it to 1 ft. As we walked off the tee I asked him if he was going to look for the first ball and he said no.

Sorry, I will rephrase that post: In my example, the pro shanked his tee shot on a 220 yd par 3 into a strip of tall fescue and then played a provisional for a lost ball. He hit the provisional to 1ft of the pin. As we walked off the tee he "deemed" the original ball lost without even looking for it (which he is allowed to do). The original in all likelihood would have been found. So he did in fact, under the current rules, have a choice between 2 known balls. The provisional at 1 ft for a tap in 4, or an unplayable with the only option to go back to the tee and re hit. My point being that this situation which exists under the current rules would be the same as allowing a provisional for a unplayable.

Sorry man but I have no idea what you are trying to say.

In my example he did have the choice between 2 known balls. The provisional at 1 ft for a tap in 4, or an unplayable with the only option to go back to the tee and re hit. This is exactly the same situation.

That was a step back in the discussion, but thanks for posting.

This is still not a good example. If the player hit it stiff, he has some potential as a player. And he would still decide what to do based upon the lie of the original ball. If the original ball is playable, he has the chance to make a 3 and worse case maybe a 4. So there is an incentive to still play the original ball.

I agree 100%. Ball hit poorly deep into the woods, declare provisional, stuff it to 2 feet to the pin. Never have to look for your ball. This is the same situation that the naysayers are using as an argument against the rule change... but it already exists. I actually had the above happen in a USGA tournament. Out of the blue, a pro that I was playing with shanked a hybrid on a 220 yd par 3. It went right into a small line of trees between 2 fairways in heavy fescue. He put down a provisional and stuffed it to 1 ft. We walked off the tee and he declared the 1st ball lost without ever going over to look for it. Odds are we would have found it. Hence my question to give me an example where the change would provide a benefit that doesn't already exist. I am open to situations but can't really think of one.

You lost me on your example. Are you saying he played a provisional for an unplayable and stuffed it? Which relief option would he have taken if the original lie was that bad? It sounds like a re hit from the tee. So he hit the shot, a couple of minutes earlier than he would have. I think that's the purpose of the rule change.