Ignorant

That is what I meant. But also that it is not necessarily possible to get a reading from an edge of a bunker if it is not well visible to you. All hazards with their exact locations are in the notes which alwasy gives you a better starting point, and of course faster.

Not to mention that with a laser you only get the distance between your ball and the pin. From the notes pros get to know how much green there is between the pin and the closest hazards. And that data is always accurate, unlike the one provided by GPS devices such as GolfBuddy or Garmin G-series.

As we are now in agreement with Fourputt I dare to link a video that first came to my mind having read the title of this thread. I am sure many of you have seen this but I hope you all get the same enlighted feeling looking at this and reminiscing that great movie:

What JerseyThursday proposed is that you may carry Medicus on the course and use it for training as long as you do not make a stroke at a/the ball. IMO that is correct as it is a club and not a (mere) training aid. However, one would take penalties for carrying a non-conforming club and not using it. So in the end, the player would get 4 PS but would not be DQ'd. Are we now in agreement?

But doesn't the question 'is the device capable of' provide the answer? A GX-4i without that yellow plate is not capable of measuring and providing the player any forbidden information, right?

Isn't that contraddictory? A club is a club, whether or not conforming. If it is not a (non-conforming) club there is no penalty for carrying it. So far I thought there was an agreement that this Mediscus thing is a club and a player is penalized for carrying a non-conforming club.. Dec 4-4a/7 allows a player to carry a weighted training club as one of his 14 clubs as well as use it provided it is conforming. And a weighted training club certainly is a training aid.

Rogolf, are you sure about that? I have wondered it once in a while without coming into any solid conclusion. You say that it would not be use of an artificial device?

I agree that the wording in that particular blue box is somewhat misleading. IMO it should say 'measuring conditions and providing information...'. Nobody is interested what a device is doing internally if there is no output. This is also what the RB's mean, the device has to be capable of providing the information it measures, not just being able to measure something.

My thoughts exactly, only in better English :-)

Effective distance is something else than distance. So a calculator is ok when used for adding or subtracting distances measured with a DMD.

FWIW to the OP, that would not be an official HIO as it was not holed during a stipulated round. There are numerous HIO clubs in the world and they have strict criteria to accept a member. The one I know of requires the HIO to be holed during a stipulated round.

This is something I have never seen in Europe and only read about taking place in the States. In my country tee locations are changed according to the wear of the grass/ground and the same goes with pin positions. This has no bearing on the rating of the hole, none whatsoever. Rating is done from the 'official' teepoint to the centre of the green. Playing distance may vary from day to day, and in fact it always does (at least where I have played in Europe). Also in the EGA handicap system only the distance from teeing ground to the center of the green is relevant. The total length of the course must not change more than 100 meters in order to be valid for handicap purposes. And again, pin locations are irrelevant, only the location of tee markers counts.

I doubt that very much, taking into account you would have to rake the bunker and fetch your putter while the others are already there with theirs. I resist everything that promotes slow play and this is definitively one of those things. I mean, your handicap system (USGA) specifically allows gimmies while ours (EGA) does not, so I do not see any point in being so fixed to a principle. That is your right, for sure. In our group you would have that right only in a competition...

Why? You think you could miss that or for some other particular (rational) reason? I mean, a half an inch! Seriously...

Where does this 'calculate' come from? I had no idea that a calculator would be forbidden. I add up distances I measure with my DMD in my head but would it really be a breach of Rules if I used a calculator?

What's the big fuss about that 1/2" gimme? In a competition you putt it out (you have to). In other instances, would you really want to take the time to tap it in?

Well, it does happen in competitive golf, doesn't it..?

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say with your post as the original situation is quite different from what you describe.

It seems that Vivien Saunders and many other authors have got it wrong. They say that the grain is towards setting sun. Must be bermuda grass, I guess. Pls. don't tell that to the nr 1 professional in my country playing on European Tour since 2001. He just spent a while abroad practising how the ball will break close to the hole on different types of greens. For some reason he praised the experience and the learning. P.S. Not all types of grass have real grain but some do and to a great extent.

Correct, there is no such requirement in the Rules, but as I wrote it does not really fit to the phrase if an area is marked GUR and is not under repair and is never going to be. Reg DZ's I think it would need those. Take a situation where the Nearest Point of Relief would be in the adjacent forest. Wouldn't be in anybody's interest to make the player continue from there.

In order to save time, I guess. Many people want to search for their balls even they get a free relief. However, marking that area as GUR creates a (minor) problem. A GUR is an area that will be improved (by the course staff) over time, not a piece of land that only nature and evolution will eventually fix. Thus there should be a plan to do something about that area, just marking it GUR without any plan does not really fit to the concept. Also a Droppping Zone would be a necessity.

I did not suggest that but rogolf did. I emphasized that swamps and marshy areas normally do not have those slopes.

The bolded text in your post is what preferred lies is all about and under those circumstances it IMO is justified. Unfortunately LCP and LCR are IMO misused in professional golf to give the players best possible lie instead of getting out of a bad/unfair one. In casual golf I do not see any need for Rules in the first place. If someone is happier after having moved his ball from a bad lie is that hurting someone else? Of course, that is not real golf but I have had the impression that a vast majority of casual golfers in USA play the game like that. Having said that, I am of the opinion that Rules of Golf are there only for competitive golf, be it a real competition or a mere battle between a single player and the course.

I used to collect butterflies when I was young and we used to visit some swamps for the species living in that very habitat. None of those had any specific margins, not to mention any 'grounds breaking downwards'. I would have an extremely hard time in defining the margins of those kinds of 'water hazards'. However, to be certain, I would have to see the area in question.

It is not very fruitful to discuss this specific case without having seen the area in question so maybe we should take this on a general level. So let us start, just for the general interest as well as for passing the time. Rogolf, which part of the definition of a WH does a marshy area or a swamp meet? On those areas there may be ponds, ditches, even lakes, but how do you justify the entire area to be a WH?