Is this the worst rule in golf?

[Steve Wilson]

As a parting shot for the night--another snipped of the Reilly column.

10. ... Having to hit out of a divot in the middle of a fairway is the "worst rule in golf [13-1]," says Tiger Woods.

Now I don't care who said it, what do you think of it as a rule.  I've played on courses where divots were the best ground available--at least they were level.

I'm not looking for nominees for the "worst rule award", but I am curious about reactions to a situation that to me is clearly part of the game.  I wonder what the proffered solution would be--a free drop or the ever popular lift, clean and tee it up.

[Neal_Meagher]

Lift, clean and tee it up again?

Come on now.  You are right, it is clearly a part of the game and one of the few true rub of the greens that still exist (i.e. styme is gone also).

Mr. Woods is far more accomplished than this guy, but even I find the challenge of gouging one out of a divot quite exciting.  Often, because it does make one bear down and THINK, it turns out to be my best shot of the day.

Let Tiger go after the C.O.R. bad guys.  I vote for rub of the green.

Oh yeah, it also reminds me of, once upon a time a decade ago, working with a SoCal club with a head pro of the uber-American style ilk. He was quite disgusted by a small little bump that had crept into the middle of the fairway during construction.  He was flabberghasted that somebody could stripe one down the middle and NOT have a FLAT lie.

I wonder if he just watched the Open last week?

[Dennis_Harwood]

I think Tiger and Reilly have it wrong-- There is no Rule that says you have to hit it out of the divot, there simply isn't a Rule that lets you pick the ball up and place it on the lie you would like when its in a divot(actually there is such a Rule--Its Rule 28 and for a one stroke penalty, Tiger, you can take relief from the divot)--

Its kind of like life-- You do what you are "supposed" to do and of course you will suffer no adversities--And if you do suffer any you should not have to face the challenge to work around the adversities, rather someone else should help me out(conversely when I hit a terrible drive in the rough and draw a good lie, why that's just a break I deserve)

[ForkaB]

When I was young and foolish I did things which were young and foolish, such as write to the USGA about rules I thought were inequitable.  The lack of relief from an unrepaired divot mark in the fairway was one of them.  The other was the lack of relief from an unraked bunker.

My argument then (and now, come to think of it) is that a player should not be penalized for the breach of etiquette of another player.  Yes, I know that this is probably yet another "slippery slope" but regardlesss of what Richard Tufts may or may have not said, I do not think that this is equitable/right.  Why should the player who does not conform to the spirit of the game (i.e. the divot non-replacer, the bunker non-raker) have an advantage over the player who comes after him or her adn probably does?

Go ahead, "luddites"--stone me!

[Chris Kane]

It sounds fine in theory to allow a free drop from fairway divots, but in practise the rule would be impossible to operate.  What constitutes a fairway divot?  What about a divot that is 3/4 grown over?  Whats the difference between a tiny gap in the turf coverage, and a hole created by a shot?

Allowing a free drop would see golfers claiming relief whenever they get a bad lie.  Surely there are more pressing issues in golf than a silly rule change like this?

[Robert_Walker]

First we complain about slow play, then we demand relief from poorly raked hazards and divot holes, and then we complain more about slow play.

[TEPaul]

I'm not certain I'd call Rchard Tufts a luddite but I'm sure others would. His book "Principles Behind the Rules of Golf" is an interesting little treatise, though, certainly when it comes to explaining the "priniciples" of the basic rules.

In the back of his book he lists the "Two Great Principles" and below them another fifteen "working principles".

The "Two Great Principles" are;

1. You play the course as you find it.
2. Put your ball in play at the start of the hole, play only your own ball and do not touch it until you lift it from the hole.

[Jeff Fortson]

Rule 13-1.

Hmmm.  The more I think about it, the more I disagree with Tiger.  I don't care how perfectly down the middle you hit your tee shot, if it goes in a divot, TOO BAD!

This Rule, more than any other, was driven into my skull time after time as a kid.  I won't touch a ball unless the rules allow for it.  I am too afraid.

I think that 13-1 should not be changed, edited, or removed.  Where do we draw the line on when you can get relief from a divot or not?  How can we say that something is in fact a divot?  What if a ball is barely overhanging a divot?  These types of questions could go on and on.  

I say tough shit Tiger.  Play it as it lies.

Jeff F.

[ForkaB]

Jeff adn Tom

I play as you do and believe as Tufts did--i.e. play it as you find it, don't touch it--in principle.  However, when the rules are full of exceptions to this simple principle--e.g. GUR, casual water, burrowing animals, lift and clean on the green, etc.--it bothers me less that yet another exception, which is equitable as the others, not be allowed.  The slippery slope has already slud, IMHO.

[TEPaul]

Jeff Fortson;

I agree with you about divots. Nobody likes them, it's a pain in the ass when your ball goes in them, etc, etc. I don't think even the purists of the pure should try to deny that.

That's not really the point, though, is it? The point, which a Tiger Woods, or anyone else should contemplate more globally is that everyone who plays much golf must understand that EVERYONE'S ball goes in them. Nobody I'm aware of has a monopoly on going into divots or ever did.

In that vein I'll reiterate the neat story Sandy Tatum told the other day about Tom Watson;

Tatum;

"Most every golfer I've ever known when his ball ends up in a divot complains about his bad fate and other things but when Watson's ball ends up in a divot his eyes light up and he says; "Watch this!""

[TEPaul]

Rich:

I'm not certain about it but I might surmise that when Richard Tufts (former USGA Pres and rules expert) wrote "The Principles Behind the Rules of Golf" in 1960 he probably did so because he believed that far too many "exceptions" had already found their way into the Rules of Golf.

Tufts was also one of the central characters who was part of the combined committee that unified the Rules of Golf between the USGA and the R&A in the early 1950s. I vaguely remember my father saying no way in hell would they ever pull that off but they did.

All in all golf and the rules probably needed that kind of unification but still there were numerous people who never believed it would ever happen.

In a way that task (the unification of the separate USGA and the R&A rules into one) by that combined committee was a herculean task and I view it as a perfect blueprint for the regulatory bodies today (and all the other important enitities in the world of golf) to get together and do it again!

Obviously, what they should concentrate on is the distance the ball goes and might go and what that means to the future of architecture and to the future of golf.

[TEPaul]

"Actually the worst rule in golf is the local one banning penetrating metal spikes."

redanman;

If you really believe that you should adopt the requirement that Aronimink (I believe it is) adopted which is penetrating spikes are technically only banned on the greens (and probably in the clubhouse). What you need to do is bring a pair of softspikes with you in your bag and every time you get to the green change from your spiked shoes to your soft spikes. I don't think you're in danger of slipping and losing your footing on the putting greens, do you? And when you change your shoes 18-20 times a round you'd better be damned quick about it or I'll penalize you for violating Rule 6-7!!      

[ForkaB]

Tom

That ploy only works when you are playing in tournaments that don't apply the "One Shoe" rule.

[JohnV]

The worst rule in golf is that there is no rule allowing us to shoot the guy who doesn't replace the divot or rake the bunker.

[Rick Shefchik]

Gotta disagree with Tiger here. I don't want the Rules Poobahs to take away one of my best excuses.

By the way, I love Watson's reaction to a ball in a divot hole. Truthfully, I've hit more good shots than bad out of divot holes, to the point where I consider it one of the better shots in my bag. I wouldn't say my eyes light up, but I do see it as win-win: Either I hit a cool shot that I can brag about (if I were so inclined), or I can hardly be blamed for my poor shot, given the horrible lie I had.

[Martin Del Vecchio]

What about the twist on this rule seen most dramatically at the US Open at Olympic?

At that club, divots are not replaced, but are instead filled with sand.  At least it is always reported to be sand; I have played many courses that ask you to fill divots with a provided mix of dirt and seed.

At any rate, Payne Stewart had to hit a key shot out of one such divot.  He argued that, since the grounds crew had applied this sand, it was clearly ground under repair, and he was entitled to relief.  

I think the overall response was similar to what many have said here; it's easy to declare GUR on a divot filled five minutes ago.  But what about the divot from yesterday, or last week?  When is it no longer GUR?

[ForkaB]

At Dornoch, all divots are filled (by the groundstaff) and there is a local rule which allows for relief (under the GUR principle) for any "seeded divot."  It says you "must lift and place, within 6").  The "must" is to protect the turf.  The "place" is to speed up play.  It is equitable, logical and it works, and the sky doesn''t fall (too often) up there.

[JohnV]

Rich, let me understand this, I take my ball out of a sand filled area and put it on nice grass where I make a new divot and this somehow protects the grass?

What a shame that Royal Dornoch has lost its way from the true roots of golf!

Do I get to clean my ball also?  No wonder the R&A won't take the Open up there.

[ForkaB]

'tis true John, and BTW I liked your "roots" pun.......

Think about it some more and you'll come away from the dark side.

[TEPaul]

"Tom
That ploy only works when you are playing in tournaments that don't apply the "One Shoe" rule."

Rich:

Even you should bone up on the rules of golf, the local rules of golf et al. Even if you are playing in a tournament that doesn't apply the "One Shoe" rule, as you call it, you'd still run afoul of the rules of golf technically and I'd be forced to have you DQed. It's not the "one shoe" rule you inveterate shirker of knowledge and education--it's the "one pair of shoes" rule. You go out there and try to compete in a tournament using only one penetrating spike shoe and one softspike shoe (used alternately "through the green" and on the green of course) and you're just not complying properly with the rules of golf, the local rules and their necessary procedures! Not only would I have to have you DQed, I might have to have you semi-castrated like that poor Pope did to himself on the "Fred Findlay" thread. For something as egregious as violating the technicalities of the "one pair of shoes" rule (or even mistating the exact name of the rule) even when it isn't in effect you should be forced to live the rest of your life as a gelding!

[Dave_Miller]

Rule 13-1.

 
I say tough shit Tiger.  Play it as it lies.

Jeff F.

Jeff:
Eloquent, absolutely eloquent and right on the money.  play it as it lies.  Divots are a part of the game.
Best,
Dave

[A_Clay_Man]

Face of adversity is one the great aspect of this game and if you can't get up for the challenge(or don't know how) you should learn, both.

One of the Caddies at PB patented (or was trying to) a slip-on spikeless so you could where spikes everywhere but the green.

Rihc- If the protocol was changed to the way you felt, then and now, it would relieve the onus and would lead to noone leaving the course in better condition, than found. Those that violate the principles should be given a verbal curmudgening as close to or as soon after the alleged incident. Now thats peer review!

I am contemplating suggesting to a local course, whose annual is soooo low, that next year they make an issue out of every member showing a divot repair tool every time they golf and warnings if not used, or bunkers unraked, there will be an additional surcharge on every following years annual of say $100. That should get their attention and if it does'nt, it sure should pay for extra man hours. Because as it is now ballmarks etc. are pervasive and how else do you teach your young? Is that why Tigers eat their's?

[TEPaul]

"No need for 2 pairs of shoes, simply remove shoes and putt in stocking feet."

redanman;

That's a completely shocking thought and shows how little you know about golf and particularly its rules. Even contemplating putting in your stocking feet comes dangerously close to violating something in Rule 13-2 or 13-3! Off the top of my head I think this violation can be referenced in dec 13-3/159.414(iii). You too should be DQed and semi-deballed if not totally castrated!

[Jeff Fortson]

Dave Miller,

Thanks.  Eloquence is my strong suit.

everone else,

In regards to sand being put in a divot by the grounds crew.....

Doesn't the grounds crew mow the greens, fairways, and tees?  Don't they rake the traps (at some courses)?  Don't they put fertilizer and other chemicals on the grass to help or regulate growth?  Should all of that be ground under repair too?  

Heck, I got an idea....

Let's just lift, clean, and place every shot and call the game Handball.  Wait, isn't that name already taken for a game?

Jeff F.

[TEPaul]

"I have both testicles, but am missing 3 other unnamed body parts!  Does this count?"

Redanman:

That's hard to say if you won't name them. How about your head? Are you missing that? I'm not missing any body parts, not even my head--although I don't think there's much left in it anymore.