Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rules'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Welcome
    • Welcome, Everyone
    • The TST Blog
  • The Clubhouse
    • Golf Talk
    • Tour Talk
    • Member Outings & Meetups
    • Golf Courses and Architecture
    • Destinations and Travel
    • Rules of Golf
  • The Practice Range
    • Instruction and Playing Tips
    • Member Swings
    • Swing Thoughts
    • Reading Room
    • Fitness and Exercise
  • The Pro Shop
    • Clubs, Grips, Shafts, Fitting
    • Balls, Carts/Bags, Apparel, Gear, Etc.
    • Member Reviews
    • Marketplace
  • The 19th Hole
    • Disc Golf, Foot Golf, Etc.
    • Sports
    • Geek Zone
    • The Grill Room
    • Announcements & Tech Support
  • Michigan Golf's Golf Course Reviews
  • Michigan Golf's Topics
  • Apple Fans's Discussions
  • Wisconsin Golf's Discussions
  • Upstate New York's Topics
  • Central Florida Golfers's Discussions
  • General Architecture Fans's Discussions
  • Oklahoma Golfers's Discussions
  • Ohio Golf's General Discussion
  • SoCal Golf's Discussions
  • Missouri Golf's Discussions
  • Mid-Atlantic Golf's Discussions
  • European Union Golf's Discussions
  • European Union Golf's Europe golf Courses
  • Mevo Owners's Discussions
  • MA Golf's Courses
  • MA Golf's General Western/Central MA Golf Discussion
  • Golf Collectables's What do you collect?


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Product Groups

  • TST Supporter Options
  • TST Sponsor Options

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Handicap Index

Found 42 results

  1. I think the USGA/R&A got this one completely wrong, and it's one of the two rules changes for 2019 that I absolutely hate. One of the great things about golf is that it's a self-policed game. At every level of the sport, we're supposed to call penalties on ourselves and know the rules. Rule 6-1 - the first rule in "The Player" - is "The player and his caddie are responsible for knowing the Rules." In the 2019 Rules, that says "Players are responsible for applying the Rules to themselves:" Except that they're not, really, because there's absolutely no further penalty to be had if they fail to play by and apply the Rules to themselves. In 2019, all you have to do is claim ignorance of a rule, and if nobody catches you, you get away free and clear. Worst case scenario* - you're caught and the strokes you actually incur (but no additional strokes) are added to your score. Outside of not wanting to get a reputation as a cheater, there's no longer any incentive to apply the Rules of golf to yourself in 2019 and beyond. Only a few short years ago, as you may know, failure to include a penalty stroke meant you posted a score for a hole lower than what you shot, and you were DQed. That rule still exists… so long as you don't claim that you didn't know you broke the rule. Only recently, the rule was changed to add two strokes additionally to each penalty you incurred. The rule got softer. It went from a DQ to an additional penalty. Fine - there's still incentive to know the Rules. Had Lexi brain farted and put her ball down nearly an inch from where it was a second prior, and added the two-stroke penalty to her score, she'd have likely won that major and been hailed as Bobby Jones was in 1925: At the 1925 U.S. Open, Bobby Jones moved his ball slightly while setting up for a shot. No one saw it, but Jones was adamant that the ball had moved and assessed himself a one-stroke penalty, costing him the win, as he went on to lose in a playoff. Praised for his classy move, Jones quipped, “You might as well praise me for not robbing banks.” No, nowadays, we have Lexi Thompson playing the role of the victim, and the press willingly going along with it. Lexi did breach the rules. Did it suck that she gained no apparent advantage (though why did she move the ball so much? to avoid a spike mark or something we couldn't see?)? Yes. But the Rules, except for a few instances, don't care about the "potential" advantage. Normally playing a ball from further away is a disadvantage, but when Tiger Woods dropped two yards back it was, to him in that moment, an advantage. The Rules can't (and thus rarely do) determine whether an "advantage" is gained - one man's advantage is another man's disadvantage. If you drop on a sideslope instead of a flat lie where you're supposed to drop, is that an advantage or a disadvantage? The Rules can't - and thus almost never do - decide. They simply say "you dropped and then played from a wrong place in breach of the Rules. That's a penalty." The full (relevant) portion of the Rules is: (3) Wrong Score for a Hole. If the player returns a scorecard with a wrong score for any hole: Returned Score Higher Than Actual Score. The higher returned score for the hole stands. Returned Score Lower Than Actual Score or No Score Returned. The player isdisqualified. Exception – Failure to Include Unknown Penalty: If one or more of the player’s hole scores are lower than the actual scores because he or she excluded one or more penalty strokes that the player did not know about before returning the scorecard: The player is not disqualified. Instead, if the mistake is found before the close of the competition, theCommittee will revise the player’s score for that hole or holes by adding the penalty stroke(s) that should have been included in the score for that hole or holes under the Rules. This exception does not apply: When the excluded penalty is disqualification, or When the player was told that a penalty might apply or was uncertain whether a penalty applied and did not raise this with the Committee before returning thescorecard. The exception is the big thing here, the big change from even 2017. It says that, if you claim that you didn't know that hitting it OB was stroke and distance and you fail to include the "stroke part," no problem. It says that if you claim not to know that you couldn't hit a practice shot while playing a round after you flub an approach, no sweat. It says that if you drop a ball in a wrong place when dropping on the wrong side of a cart path and gaining a much better lie, or two club lengths from the edge of a yellow penalty area, or two yards back like Tiger did at the Masters… or anything else… that doesn't matter at all! You're all good! That part above about how players are responsible for knowing and applying the Rules? They didn't actually mean that. There's no long any incentive, outside of perhaps not wanting to be seen as a serial cheater, to know the Rules of Golf. Not the ones that can penalize you, anyway. Sure, there are still incentives to know when you get free drops away from cart paths and things like that, but players are now actively incentivized to not only play ignorant, but to actually BE ignorant to the Rules of Golf. If they're not caught, they get away with it. If they are caught, why, they only get the penalty they actually incurred. Nothing more. You're obligated to pay taxes. If you fail to pay, and you're caught three years later… you don't just pay what you originally owed. You owe what you originally owed, plus interest, plus additional penalties. I get that the USGA/R&A are trying to treat players as honest, but in going to this length they've gone much too far. They're actually rewarding the dishonest players. They're rewarding the ignorant players. This saddens me greatly. 😢 P.S. Yes, the poll choices are highly biased. Tough. It's my poll, and I don't think there's an argument to be made. 😄
  2. Had a question about the new caddy rule and lining up a player. I understand it for the most part but if I am standing in front of my player for example on a putting green and the hole is between us once they take there stance would I be able to direct them verbally since I am not standing behind the player. Also could I direct them from some other position like from the side. I guess does this rule just prohibit giving alignment advice from behind the player? Was just a bit confused on this. Thanks for help on this and here is the rule. 2019 Rule: Under Rule 10.2b(4): The current prohibition will be extended so that, once the player begins taking a stance for the stroke, and until the stroke is made, the player’s caddie must not deliberately stand on or close to an extension of the line of play behind the ball for any reason. There will be no penalty if the caddie accidentally stands on or close to an extension of the line of play behind the ball, rather than in trying to help in lining up. Reasons for Change: Although a player may get advice from a caddie on the shot to be played, the line of play and similar matters, the ability to line up one’s feet and body accurately to a target line is a fundamental skill of the game for which the player alone should be responsible. Allowing a caddie to stand behind a player taking a stance so as to direct the player how to line up undermines the player’s need to use his or her own alignment skills and judgment. We believe that an appropriate line is drawn between allowing advice from a caddie and prohibiting the caddie from being involved in directing the player in the act of taking a stance to play the ball.
  3. Here is the video: Here are some photos from the video: I thought watching live (well, watching the first time, recorded on my DVR later in the evening) that he had improved his lie. You can certainly see more of the ball after he soles his club than before. But I'm leaning toward "inconclusive." This type of activity reportedly occurs frequently on the PGA Tour and people look the other way all the time.
  4. http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules-hub/rules-modernization.html http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules-hub/rules-modernization/text/an-overview-of-the-rules-modernization-initiative.html Now that the finalized 2019 rules are out, we'll use this topic to take over for the previous one, which was here: Here are the major changes: Ball at Rest Ball in Motion Taking Relief Areas of the Course Equipment Playing a Ball When to Play During a Round Player Behavior
  5. Ugh: I posted this in the other topic, but… if you don't know the rules, shut the heck up. The ball is holed as soon as it goes in the hole and beneath the level of the lip and comes to rest. They don't rip the flagstick out because it's a hack, amateur thing to do that risks pulling the whole cup out and damaging the cup, the lip, the hole, or whatever. Ugh. The other incident was today, too: C'mon guys. If you don't know the answer, don't talk.
  6. Phil Mickelson has found himself in breach of the Rules of Golf once again. At least he didn't lie about it and insult his fans afterward. Just a brain fart this time around. Unfortunately that clip also includes the announcers bumbling through stuff. Of course you can violate a rule without a ball in play. Of course you can violate a rule on the tee box. C'mon guys. These rules aren't that difficult, and… if you don't know, don't give your opinion.
  7. My shoulder isn't 100% and it's going to rain, but f*** it I'm going golfing tomorrow.

    1. nevets88


      Go for it!

  8. Hello everyone, I apologize if I'm posting in an inappropriate location as this is my first post, but I have a question regarding the Rules. I understand a person cannot place an object on the "line of the putt" at any point to help aid in a putt, but I was wondering if it's a rule violation to place a marker behind the hole while aligning the ball markings. It's easier to line the markings up with a smaller item sometimes than with the entire hole, and it would be placed directly behind the hole just while aligning the arrows on the ball. Rule 8-2b states one cannot place a mark on the "line of the putt," but "line of the putt" is defined as not extending past the hole, meaning that placing a mark behind the hole wouldn't violate this rule, as long as the mark was removed before the stroke was made. Thanks!
  9. http://golfweek.com/2018/02/07/the-forecaddie-pga-tour-takes-stand-with-bunker-liner-rule/ I'm glad, mostly, but without spending too much time looking into this… the bunker liner is man-made, and an obstruction, and the Rules of Golf grant you relief for obstructions for your stance, too. Isn't this a Rule 24 issue? Again, only two minutes of thought here, but I don't consider a bunker liner an abnormal ground condition.
  10. I've never been a fan of the "intent" stuff in the Rules of Golf. There are a few, like the Hideki situation, where they just muddy the waters and let a player who is less than honest skate. I looked for the word "intent" in the 2019 proposed rules PDF and found only four instances: 1. 3.2 - Match Play 2. 5.5a - Practice during play 3. 14.4 - Dropping, etc. 4. Definition of "Replace." Good! One of the places intent has mattered was the definition of a stroke. That definition still includes "intent" without using the word: Obviously other versions of the word "intent" can appear, like "intended." I searched for "inten" as well and came up with 23 pages in addition to the four above. Some non-notable ones included using equipment in an abnormal or "unintended" way, the area of the "intended" stance or swing (this version, re: the stance or swing, accounted for many of these), when the player intends or doesn't intend to stay in his stance to make a swing, etc. One of those searches even turned up "maintenance." Heck, the only notable - and barely at that - time the letters "inten" appear other than the four times above are in the definition of Line of Play - the definition is the line on which the player intends for the ball to go. This could affect whether they improve or mark their line of play. These tend to be pretty obvious, though. Otherwise it appears the word has been removed - thankfully - from a lot of rules, like the 1-2 one, and for the better. What do you guys think?
  11. https://www.golfdigest.com/story/this-latest-usga-equipment-decision-might-bring-artificial-intelligence-closer-to-competition The title is "This latest USGA equipment decision might bring artificial intelligence closer to competition" Arccos (and eventually, GAME GOLF) has a "virtual caddy" system that can tell you what club to hit and where to hit it. I don't think the USGA is saying that's allowed. If I read the Golf Digest story, it reads to me that the ability to tell you the yardage is allowed (it's the same as a GPS app)… but the article is written very confusingly. I don't understand how the recommendation "off the tee" is legal (but for an approach shot, it's not?) because "those recommendations can be made before a round begins." What about on the second tee? The round has already begun. It then goes on to say: But that's what the caddy does: offer club selection information/advice. It later adds: Okay… so that means it can't say "you're hitting your clubs shorter today, so instead of a 7-iron here, hit a 6-iron." Fine. That's easy enough. So… Is the "ruling" basically saying the Virtual Caddie, before you begin your round, can make a recommendation for what you should hit off each of the 18 tees before your round? I.e. it can't use information "live" from that round, and it's basically published "before" your round and doesn't change. If so, big whoop. Who cares about that? That's not a "virtual caddy." That's just a tiny bit of pre-planning, and for all you know the course is playing softer or firmer or the wind is in a different direction that day. Am I reading that right? Or did I miss something? The headline and the writeup are not very well done, IMO.
  12. Yesterday on the first green I found a swarm of yellow jackets stinging (and attempting to lift) a large millipede. The more the millipede twisted around and fought back, the more yellow jackets arrived to help.. dozens of yellow jackets came swirling in one after the other, like fighter planes in an old movie. My ball was 2 feet from the cup, and the insects were swarming just on the opposite side. In other words, they were not technically in the line of my putt, but they were still swarming around me in my stance. What do the rules say about this situation? I know that on the green you do not take a drop, but rather place the ball. Where would I place the ball in this case? Am I entitled to any relief? How is this handled? For those of you who don't know what Yellow Jackets are, they are highly aggressive, meat-eating wasps that live in nests (i.e., they are not solitary wasps). When I was 16 I stepped into a nest and was stung dozens of times; later when I painted houses in college I was stung dozens of times more.. so please do not question my toughness - getting stung by these little bastards is NOT a pleasant experience. FWIW I read the rule about insect nests in the bunker, I don't think that applies on the green, because the green is not a hazard.
  13. http://www.golf.com/tour-news/2017/06/01/rules-arent-made-be-broken Quotes in red are from the article… No. 1. Video should be used in rules disputes almost never. No. 2. Magnified video should never be used at all. No. 3. The rules officials at the PGA Tour/USGA/LPGA should be ashamed of themselves for hijacking these events. No. 4. Penalties should not be assigned after players sign their scorecards. No. 5. TV viewers at home (and who are these people anyhow?) should not be permitted to influence the outcome of a golf tournament, as it is unfair to the players who get more TV time, and also because it's weird. … Here's an easy solution to the various problems outlined here: Play by the rules. Had Thompson marked her ball correctly in the first place, there would never have been an issue. Really, it's a world-gone-soft that turned Thompson into a victim here. The rule that governs marking a ball on a green could not be more straightforward: Mark, and return the ball to where it was. She didn't do that. … Like Woods, I used to think that the use of videotape, and the whole call-in thing, was strange. But 20 years ago, Davis Love III helped me understand, with impeccable logic, why it makes sense: A player should want his or her scorecard to be as accurate as possible, and more scrutiny will only help make a player achieve that goal. Love's worldview shows an elemental understanding of the game that defines his life. In other sports—in football, in basketball, in baseball, in hockey—trying to get away with something is part of the game. Golf is the complete opposite. Also, what kind of champion would you have if broadcast TV showed a winner hoisting a trophy, and YouTube showed, for example, that same golfer carrying 15 clubs? Indeed, what's so hard about playing by the rules? They're not "unfair" because everyone is subject to the same RULES. No, not everyone is subject to the exact same conditions, but that's never been the case, and attempting to do that is a foolhardy endeavor that will always fail. But everyone can - and should - play under the same RULES of the game. "My side" of the debate is often characterized as saying "the rules are the rules, period, end of story," but that can be said in two different ways. Did Lexi deserve a penalty? Absolutely, per the rules, she did. The Rules don't leave leeway to say "well, but it probably didn't really help her, maybe, so can't we just this one time not penalize her…?" They're written and applied, and that's the way it must be for the rules as they are. That statement does not mean that everyone (or that I) support every rule written and back it 100%. There are a few rules with which I have some quibbles, though understanding where the rules come from and the underlying principles tends to minimize anyone's beef with too many of the Rules.
  14. Rule 7-1b prohibits a competitor from practicing on a "competition course" prior to a round or play-off of a stroke play event. Great, and I have no problems with this -- if I'm a later tee time, it isn't fair that I might be able to get to the course at the same time as someone in the first group, wander over to the 18th green during his or her round, and see how that bunker that fronts the green is playing today. I keep the rules book italics above because competitor and course are definitions in the Rules. In fact, rule 33-2 tells the committee to define accurately the course. That's also great and I have no problems here either. If the golf complex we're playing has one eighteen-hole course, the interaction is fairly straight-forward: get there and you may use the range and other designated practice areas. There's probably limited benefit (at most) to four hours on the range before a round compared to a normal warm-up range session, so the early tee times aren't disadvantaged here. But when they have multiple courses in the complex, this is less clear to me. My home course (18 holes, regulation) shares a parking lot and a name with a nine-hole par-3 course that measures under 1000 yards. Is this a decision for the committee to make, whether competitors may play the par-3 course prior to their round? My reading of this says that the committee should define (under rule 33-2) the course, so they could prohibit it. Alternately, since we aren't using those holes, would they not be part of the course? Or because they're in the complex, are they always? That ends the question I'm actually worried about in the short-term. I love my club (and I haven't asked my club committee what the rules on this are -- this isn't the result of a dispute or anything), but I live a bit further away than I used to. Time was I could easily plan my day to get there an hour before my tee time. Now with traffic, if I have a later tee time, I'm more likely to get there 3 hours early to avoid risking a traffic delay that could cost me warm up time or even my spot. And it makes me wonder what I'm going to do with the difference. Thinking about this has caused me to come up with two other related questions though. There's another complex near me that has two 18-hole regulation courses. If we had a tournament there, how would the other course be treated? If I had a noon tee time at course A, would I be within the rules to make a 6am tee time at course B and play it day-of? What if that complex, rather than using an established 18 hole course, finds a route around the complex using eighteen holes, some from A some from B? Would playing on one of the 18 excluded holes be permitted, even though most days they'd be part of the same course as some of what I'd be playing? My instinct is that this has the same answer as the previous question, but I'm not sure what that is. Thanks in advance for any help on these interactions. Finding help for this on Google was surprisingly tough (or perhaps I'm just not good at it) -- I mostly found standard explanations of the main rule. The Tufts book explained why the rule exists, but that didn't help me figure out what the ruling should be.
  15. bkuehn1952


    I enjoy Rules discussions. One learns a few things and also experiences another’s perspective. I started playing competitive golf late in life (35 or so) but I made it a point to learn the Rules well before I ever entered a tournament. Frankly, I see no point in playing any game without a clear understanding of the Rules. Collecting double the rent on an unimproved Monopoly or “castling” in chess are details and one can play either game without knowing the rule. One is likely, however, to see more success if one is aware of all the “details”. Still, for all our efforts we all stub our toes on occasion. A discussion about Rules recently got me thinking about my top Rules snafus. I cleared a long cross hazard off the tee and got to my ball. It was just where I thought it would be, having barely cleared the hazard. Yep, “Titleist” was clearly visible. I laid up short of the next hazard because of a poor lie. Then I discovered that the “Titleist” I had hit was not my “Titleist”. That was the last time I have done that, so far. I and my other three competitors were finishing up a decidedly indifferent one day tournament. The organization that ran this particular event had a condition of competition that every foursome was to finish the round within 4 ½ hours or, if over that number, finish within 12 minutes of the prior group. As usual, every group suddenly stepped on the gas with about 3 holes left. For whatever reason, we just could not be bothered with sprinting between shots on the last holes. As we turned in our cards, the official said, “everyone in the group has been assessed a one stroke penalty.” He got ready for a tirade but we all shrugged and said, “okay.” He was momentarily stunned and then smiled. “I have never had 4 people accept a penalty so easily.” That was, however, the last time I was penalized for slow play. In the final round of our three day City Championship, I was surveying my severely downhill putt for par. As I addressed the ball, it rolled a ¼ turn. I had not touched it but back in the day, after taking one’s stance and grounding the club, any movement was on you. I announced the penalty and, fortunately, was aware enough to move the ball back to its original position prior to playing the next shot. I stopped grounding my club on the green for several decades. We were playing a tournament at my home course. I typically played the “White” tees but for this event, it was “Blue.” The driver of the cart I was sharing drove up and parked next to the “White” tees. I had honors. You can guess the rest. My pre-shot routine now includes checking the tee color. Of course, I have made both the ride and walk of shame back to the tee after losing my tee shot and neglecting to hit a provisional. Some might say I hit too many provisionals but honestly, I don’t plan to ever make that walk back again in a tournament. With the proposed changes to the Rules, I am getting ready to go back to “school.” There will undoubtedly be fresh opportunities for me to “step in it” a far as Rules breaches. Still, it won’t be because I did not continue to study and attempt to understand the Rules.
  16. http://golfweek.com/2017/05/18/for-2nd-straight-year-ncaa-womens-championship-to-begin-on-thursday/ I heard about this in the telecast and had to play it back again to make sure I had heard it correctly. The NCAA accommodated BYU (or any other school which has a policy of not competing on a particular day of the week for religious reasons). This year, that amounted to letting Alex White play her "Sunday" round on Thursday. Normally the four rounds are competed on Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday. Saturday's round was canceled due to the bad weather. The weather conditions were crazy different Thursday vs. Sunday. On Thursday, conditions were calmer, warmer, and completely dry. On Sunday, conditions were super wet, windy, and quite cold. Yet because on Thursday Alex Smith played the ball down (no lift, clean, and place), the entire field had to play the ball down on Sunday. I get the idea of being accommodating. I'm not saying this is a slippery slope, and that eventually someone's going to say "I can't compete [insert some odd claim here] because of religious reasons." But it still strikes me as a little odd. What if she had won? When they aired a brief segment about this, the woman was T8. Is there a better way to handle this sort of thing? (Note: if the "solution" had been for her to play twice on Saturday, then they could claim that's unfair as it's 36 holes in one day… plus Saturday's play was washed out and canceled. At least the current solution has her playing in the "final round" under some pressure.) That said, I can also see the case for saying "look, we're having a competition. If you want to be a part of it, you'll play Sunday. We'd rather be unfair to one person than to 120+ others by letting you compete on a different day, with better weather and no fellow competitors playing with you, etc." I'm not sure that's the side I come down on, even, but I could see that being a perfectly legitimate side, too. What do y'all think? (I put this in Rules for now, but could move it… I'm not sure what shape the discussion will take.)
  17. For the discussion of the upcoming announcement from the USGA/R&A in the wake of the Lexi Thompson rules breach and subsequent discovery and penalty.
  18. Scouring the rules and finally gave up, but this rules interpretation was shared with me this week during a 32 man net2 balls tournament. With 4 guys playing, often times someone chipping up to the green will want balls on the surface (especially close to the hole), so they have the advantage of stopping the ball nearer to the hole. Forget about the purpose, but this was the situation that led to the following comments. I asked the chipper, "do you want us to leave the balls on the surface or mark them?" We finished out the hole when he let me know that if the chipper indicates "leave your balls there" or if any partner with a ball on the surface asks if they want it marked, then by rule - all balls on the surface MUST be marked. First time I have EVER heard this, not sure where do locate that rule/interpretation or decision. Thoughts?
  19. This is for the discussion of this portion of the new Modernized Rules. When to Play During a Round Encouraging Prompt Pace of Play Maximum Score Form of Stroke Play
  20. As last happened in 1984, the USGA and R&A are reviewing the Rules of Golf, top to bottom, end to end, 1 through 34. They tend to do this every 25-35 years or so. They may make sweeping changes. They may decide they pretty much like them as they are. The only guiding principles are… the Principles as outlined in: So, what changes do you think they should make? Why?
  21. JonMA1

    What is Real Golf to You?

    A recent topic addressed the idea of modifying golf in an attempt to make the game more enjoyable. There’s nothing new to the idea of simplifying or modifying rules in games. Rules are changed in Monopoly and Scrabble. Poker can become a completely different game by making various cards wild. When playing pickup games of football or basketball, our rules were nothing like those of official high school, NCAA, or the pro ranks. Even these levels of the same game have variance in the rules. So it’s not that weird for the rules to change for casual golf or a practice round. Even golf leagues break the rules of golf to make the play faster, easier and more enjoyable in an attempt to get more to participate. In these circumstances, golf is whatever those playing together can agree upon…. or not. I’ve been criticized for not taking an illegal drop on the green side of a hazard, for not repositioning the ball to get a better lie, and for not taking a mulligan or breakfast ball. “You’re just making the game harder than it has to be” I’ve been told. Modifying the rules for casual golf is not an issue. But some want to actually amend the rule book because they feel some rules are just too hard. My favorite example… “I couldn't find the ball even though I saw it stay in the fairway from the tee box. I shouldn't have to suffer a stroke and distance penalty”. Again, it’s fine to take a drop in a casual game. I’ll do it all day long on a busy course. But that one act automatically turns an official round into a practice round. The rules of golf and the handicap system are standards. Choose to play by the rules and you know exactly where you stand compared to others who do the same. Use the handicap system and it not only gives a poor player a fair chance to beat a better one, it also forces the better player to bring his or her best game to the competition. What other sport does that? Then there’s what constitutes a regulation course and the variations that exist from one course design to another. In addition, each course offers more variation in differing sets of tees. The best part about this system is that the difficulty of each is accounted for. I don’t fully understand the rating system, but it seems relatively logical, even if a bit convoluted. Playing from 6500 yards is more difficult than playing from 5800. The change in the rating and slope of each set of tees reflects that. More importantly, each players may find either option more enjoyable than the other on a given day. The rules, handicap system and course rating system are pretty damned good as is. What’s even better is that no one is sticking a gun to my head making me follow the rules or keep score. If anything, more pressure is applied to break the rules in favor of faster play. I find it ironic that I tend to play more by the rules when playing a solo round, considering I can’t apply those rounds to an official handicap index. While specific rule-breaking during a practice round may hone some skills, scoring lower as a result does not make me a better player. For me, leaving the flag in on short putts makes that part of the game easier. It’s psychological more than anything else, but I stopped doing it on all but the busiest days. Why? Because I want to get better at that skill in the event I start playing official competitions. The same goes with abiding by any of the rules. I hope to get to the point where this desire to improve starts to subside a little. I want to have more days where my enjoyment on the course is less dependent on the score. But I’m not there yet. I still want to get considerably better. To me, the only way that happens is to include rounds where I play 100% by the rules and from a set of tees or a course rating that challenges the limits of my distance and ability.
  22. Okay, I get what you and @Fourputt are saying if that agrees with what he intended. But in your example you get to drag your grandkids there anyway knowing it will grow on them or at least they won't hate it. People have to make a choice / effort to find golf unless their family is already involved. Relying on that family effect alone won't bolster involvement in the game. Even if undeserved, perceptions can matter. The rules as presented to a new or prospective golfer may compound / add to a common outsider perception of golf as boring / stuffy and whether a casual tv viewer intrigued by the game itself decides to give it a try. Non-golfers crossing into the game have an impact on how well the industry does as a whole.
  23. http://www.golf.com/instruction/8-stupidest-golf-rules 18-2 (Ball at Rest Moved) is the first one. I'm voting no on this one, and my reasoning is easy to find, but boils down to this: if a player causes a ball to move, he should be penalized, and the rule is as forgiving as it has ever been. No relief for sand filled divots. I've been clear on this one too: there's no definition that can be applied by all, so no, play it as it lies. This almost never happens, anyway. You can't legislate too much of what is ultimately just "luck." (Good or bad.) BTW it should say no relief for sand-filled divot holes. Penalizing a player for hitting a flagstick on the ground. Uhm, just move the flagstick. We penalize players for intentionally deflecting their ball, and this is basically that. Plus, nobody hits the flagstick before their ball gets to the hole - it's always after, thus helping you keep the ball closer to the hole. Dropping the ball. Of the rules, I might be most easily convinced to place in all situations. But still, dropping is fine, and occurs probably 99% of the time without any incident. Stroke and Distance for Lost Balls. Sorry, no. You have no idea where your ball might be. It might be unplayable, wedged in a tree, 50 yards behind where you think it's lost, etc. Sprinkler head in your putting line. You can make local rules to get around this, so I'm not even going to entertain this one. Plus, where do you draw the line? What if you're in a divot hole 30 yards off the green and there's a sprinkler head on your line - do you get to claim you're going to putt the ball and thus drop out of the divot hole to get away from the sprinkler head? What about 50 yards? 100? Five minutes to search for a lost ball. Wow, I thought I'd be voting for none of the rules being stupid, but I'll go along with this one. Two minutes. Maybe three. No moving a ball out of a footprint in a bunker. Stupid. And I don't mean the rule. So I voted 1-2, even though the five minutes isn't really a "stupid" rule, just one that I'd be fine supporting. What's your tally, and what's your take on the "8 Stupid Rules"?
  24. iacas

    Rangefinders on the PGA Tour

    So I heard a bit on why the PGA Tour (and web.com, Champions, etc.) do not allow rangefinders. Tim Finchrm doesn't like them. They're not worried about slow play. They think it would have almost no effect. They do think that's what caddies are supposed to do, know yardages, but it's almost entirely Tim. They also expect that if the new rules specifically allow rangefinders as they expect that they'll just adopt that and not use a Local Rule or a Condition of Competition to rule them out (which if the rules change the way they think may not even be "allowed") to disallow them.
  25. http://simplegolfrules.com/CodeOne/ - based on the current (as of 2011?) Rules of Golf http://simplegolfrules.com/CodeTwo/ - described by the authors as "dramatically different." Too far? Just right? Essential and foundational principles undermined?

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...