News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Andrew Buck

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #25 on: August 22, 2016, 07:53:06 PM »
The fewer rules, the better.  This results in fewer disputes on how to interpret them.
 
Play the ball where you find it - everywhere.  Don't touch your ball anywhere, including on the green, unless your opponent asks you to mark it. You're not "entitled" to anything with regards to a lie or playing conditions.  A bad break is exactly that. (Poker players love to tell "bad beat" stories - golfers should have that same opportunity)
 
Keep current hazard, ground under repair, and unplayable lie rules as they are.  Play OB as a hazard.
 
If the ball moves without you touching it or trying to hit it, replace it where it was - no penalty.
 
No consulting yardage books, notes, or range finders. If a course has yardage markers, use them.

 
The more rules added for special circumstances, the worse things get.  Keep rules simple.
 
We seem to have strayed s long way from the origins of the game as players feel more and more "entitled".
 
It's just a game. Learn to hit out of the dog crap – or take an unplayable.

Agree with most, but I don't want the game to slow to a screeching halt as people pace every 50 yard shot or to every sprinkler head. 

Peter Pallotta

Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #26 on: August 22, 2016, 07:58:50 PM »
Sean and Dave D capture it very well for me, though Sean's first two clearly have more to do with matters of personal pique than with anything resembling "the rules". The best of all is "Don't touch the ball, anywhere". I'd add:

Cut the amount of time you have to look for a lost ball as close to zero as possible. In other words: if you can't hit when it's your turn to hit, your ball is lost; drop another one right where you're standing and hit your third.

Has any golfer in the history of recreational golf ever hit one so badly that he immediately suspected it was lost and then, after 5 minutes of searching, found anything other than someone else's used topflite?

We don't play with hand crafted featheries anymore; if you can afford to play golf you can afford to lose a ball instead of bugging your playing companions and annoying everyone behind you by wandering aimlessly through the rough for a $2 golf ball you'll never find.  And if you can afford to play a ProV1 then you can certainly afford to lose a ProV1.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2016, 11:35:32 PM by Peter Pallotta »

Mike Wagner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #27 on: August 22, 2016, 08:40:28 PM »
OB should be treated the same as a ball in a lateral hazard. That would speed up the game if nothing else.


Rob -


After reading all the responses so far, I think I'm with you here.  I'm not with you as far as speed.  Slow people are just slow - I don't like that argument, but I'm liking the rule.


How about something like taking the red, white, and yellow stakes and replacing them with orange ;) - it's all the same ... and you have 2 or 3 options .. period.

Mike Wagner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #28 on: August 22, 2016, 08:42:59 PM »
I thought the double hit is two - one for the stroke and a penalty for the hit. I recall reading that a triple hit would only count as two strokes - it is still only a one stroke penalty.


Will - point noted.  I'm sure there the three times in history the triple hit was argued it was quite a scene:  "I hit it twice ... no, it hit your club 3 times ... no it was definitely twice!"  Get rid of it all .. 1 stroke!

Mike Wagner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #29 on: August 22, 2016, 08:45:53 PM »
Allow a golfer to play a provisional ball (if one has been played) in the case of an unplayable lie.  For example, let's say a golfer hits a ball into some thick native grasses or forest or something.  He then hits a provisional as a lost ball is very possible.  Then he happens to find the ball in the crap, but the ball is unplayable with no drop options two club lengths to the side or inline behind.  Under the current rules he is not allowed to play the provisional, he must go all the way back to the tee to play again.  I feel the golfer should be allowed to play the provisional having been sufficiently punished (he is now hitting his 4th shot), and to help pace of play.  Furthermore, it helps with the question of "MUST a golfer look for a ball that could be in a bad position?"  This is a definite gray area.  If my first shot is in the crap with a provisional out in the fairway, am I required to look for my first?  When it is clear that I probably don't want to find my ball?  With this rules change there is no disincentive to look for the ball.


Love this as a local rule.  Tournament play is a different story.  Nerves are a big part here ... the provisional allows more of a free swing in the moment.  Tough call ... I'd love to see it for every day play, but USGA events and the tour, tough one.

Mike Wagner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #30 on: August 22, 2016, 08:48:53 PM »
Equipment related - limit the height of the tee peg, restrict the number of clubs that can be carried to 9, restrict clubs to having no more than 50 degrees of loft, and......roll back the bloody ball (a lot).


Game related - permit dropping out of bunker with a 1 shot (maybe 2) penalty, treat both OB and appropriate areas of gunch as drop to the side under penalty of 1 shot (maybe 2).


Atb


I'm hoping this thread stays away from equipment - specifically technology.  Although I'm liking the thought of less than 14 clubs and limited loft ...

Mike Wagner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #31 on: August 22, 2016, 08:55:07 PM »
Interesting one came up today in a tournament.  My playing partner chipped on it - it was resting between the flag and the hole.  The other player said make sure it goes to the bottom.


We laughed because everyone breaks the "ball at rest" rule when it comes to a ball being "holed."  I just read the decisions, and you can literally "hear" them break that rule constantly on tour (with the mics in the cups). 


Stupid rule - change it ... if the complete ball breaks is beneath the lip, it doesn't matter if it's at rest to be "holed."

Rob Marshall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #32 on: August 22, 2016, 09:55:46 PM »
OB should be treated the same as a ball in a lateral hazard. That would speed up the game if nothing else.


Rob -


After reading all the responses so far, I think I'm with you here.  I'm not with you as far as speed.  Slow people are just slow - I don't like that argument, but I'm liking the rule.


How about something like taking the red, white, and yellow stakes and replacing them with orange ;) - it's all the same ... and you have 2 or 3 options .. period.


My thought was how many times have we seen guys walking back to the tee because they didn't play a provisional
If life gives you limes, make margaritas.” Jimmy Buffett

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #33 on: August 22, 2016, 10:17:46 PM »
I'd love to see the drop these Lochties take when an OB becomes a lateral. Here's exactly where it crossed, that's the ticket. !00 different golfers a hundred different drops. Biggest liar wins without video evidence. Another knock on honors door and nobody's home.

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #34 on: August 22, 2016, 10:22:14 PM »
Whatever happened to the concept that a shot that ends up on the course is better than  shot that ends up off the golf course, and should be rewarded somewhat better then the latter.

Will MacEwen

Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #35 on: August 22, 2016, 10:27:44 PM »
I thought the double hit is two - one for the stroke and a penalty for the hit. I recall reading that a triple hit would only count as two strokes - it is still only a one stroke penalty.


Will - point noted.  I'm sure there the three times in history the triple hit was argued it was quite a scene:  "I hit it twice ... no, it hit your club 3 times ... no it was definitely twice!"  Get rid of it all .. 1 stroke!


The point is the initial post noted that it is 2+1, when it is in fact 1+1. It's an odd rule to want to change since most of us will do it about twice in our lives, let alone to be wrong about.

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #36 on: August 22, 2016, 10:32:10 PM »
Interesting one came up today in a tournament.  My playing partner chipped on it - it was resting between the flag and the hole.  The other player said make sure it goes to the bottom.
  We laughed because everyone breaks the "ball at rest" rule when it comes to a ball being "holed."  I just read the decisions, and you can literally "hear" them break that rule constantly on tour (with the mics in the cups). 
  Stupid rule - change it ... if the complete ball breaks is beneath the lip, it doesn't matter if it's at rest to be "holed."
Mike,
You must have skipped Decision 16/5.5 which covers this exactly.
16/5.5 Player Holes Short Putt and Allegedly Removes Ball from Hole Before It Is at Rest 

Q.A player strikes a short putt into the hole and removes the ball from the hole. His opponent or a fellow-competitor claims he heard the ball bouncing in the bottom of the hole-liner at the time the player was removing the ball from the hole, and therefore the ball cannot be considered holed in view of the Definition of "Holed" which states: "A ball is holed when it is at rest within the circumference of the hole ...". What is the ruling?


A.The ball is holed. The words "at rest" are in the Definition of "Holed" to make it clear that if a ball falls below the lip and thereafter bounces out, it is not holed.

Related Decision:


- 1-2/5 Player Putts with One Hand and Catches Ball in Hole with Other Hand.

Mike Wagner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #37 on: August 22, 2016, 10:50:16 PM »
Interesting one came up today in a tournament.  My playing partner chipped on it - it was resting between the flag and the hole.  The other player said make sure it goes to the bottom.
  We laughed because everyone breaks the "ball at rest" rule when it comes to a ball being "holed."  I just read the decisions, and you can literally "hear" them break that rule constantly on tour (with the mics in the cups). 
  Stupid rule - change it ... if the complete ball breaks is beneath the lip, it doesn't matter if it's at rest to be "holed."
Mike,
You must have skipped Decision 16/5.5 which covers this exactly.
16/5.5 Player Holes Short Putt and Allegedly Removes Ball from Hole Before It Is at Rest 

Q.A player strikes a short putt into the hole and removes the ball from the hole. His opponent or a fellow-competitor claims he heard the ball bouncing in the bottom of the hole-liner at the time the player was removing the ball from the hole, and therefore the ball cannot be considered holed in view of the Definition of "Holed" which states: "A ball is holed when it is at rest within the circumference of the hole ...". What is the ruling?


A.The ball is holed. The words "at rest" are in the Definition of "Holed" to make it clear that if a ball falls below the lip and thereafter bounces out, it is not holed.

Related Decision:


- 1-2/5 Player Putts with One Hand and Catches Ball in Hole with Other Hand.


Pete -
I did skip that - thanks for pointing it out.  Now I for sure didn't break any rules today ;)

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #38 on: August 22, 2016, 11:54:15 PM »
These are always interesting discussions. So many folks think golf should be fair.

For me, as much as I dislike lift clean and cheat, I wish the local rule was "lift, clean and replace."

We do it on putting greens, why not elsewhere?

And... I never understand what makes high-loft wedges so bad. The usual argument is that they aren't traditional.

But I have a bunch of wedges (125 or so) dating back to hickory and there are several from 1930 to 1960 that have 58, 59 and 60 degrees of loft.
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #39 on: August 23, 2016, 01:36:28 AM »
Sean and Dave D capture it very well for me, though Sean's first two clearly have more to do with matters of personal pique than with anything resembling "the rules". The best of all is "Don't touch the ball, anywhere". I'd add:

Cut the amount of time you have to look for a lost ball as close to zero as possible. In other words: if you can't hit when it's your turn to hit, your ball is lost; drop another one right where you're standing and hit your third.

Has any golfer in the history of recreational golf ever hit one so badly that he immediately suspected it was lost and then, after 5 minutes of searching, found anything other than someone else's used topflite?

We don't play with hand crafted featheries anymore; if you can afford to play golf you can afford to lose a ball instead of bugging your playing companions and annoying everyone behind you by wandering aimlessly through the rough for a $2 golf ball you'll never find.  And if you can afford to play a ProV1 then you can certainly afford to lose a ProV1.

Pietro

Actually, the 8/15-50 rule is something I would like for the pros more than anything else....I think it would be more entertaining to watch. 

Lost ball...I don't mind 5 minutes (especially these days with rough the way it is), but if somebody is waiting it should be a rule that the next group should be called through....this has become a lost art.  I bet there would be far less searching  8)

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Ed Tilley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #40 on: August 23, 2016, 07:27:14 AM »
Make ball finding technology legal and mandate manufacturers to put chips in balls to facilitate. Honestly, in this day and age why am I traipsing up and down in the rough looking for a ball. This would dramatically speed up play. Of course it will never happen.

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #41 on: August 23, 2016, 07:41:09 AM »

Actually, the 8/15-50 rule is something I would like for the pros more than anything else....I think it would be more entertaining to watch. 


Agreed.


I also reckon it would make the game easier for the majority of high handicappers as well, no bad thing, as a 15* tee club ought to be easier for them to hit and shots should go straighter than with a lower lofted current driver and most high handicappers are not very good at playing shots with clubs with more than 50* so only having 50* could well improve their scoring.


For the pro's and lower handicappers 8/15-50 should make things a bit harder. Less distance and more spin on the ball from the tee with 15*, less clubs in the bag so bigger yardsge gaps between clubs so more 1/2 and 3/4 shots ought to be needed and with only 50* max loft some of the shots that are currently being played won't be so easy to execute.


Atb






Kyle Harris

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #42 on: August 23, 2016, 08:31:36 AM »
Stop trying to legislate the high-handicapper into competence.

The only thing that makes a high-handicapper better is practice. How dare we expect that the result of your ability is commensurate to the amount of practice and time you put into honing your craft?

The OB Rule is just fine as-is, as well as the lost ball rule.

Bad players whine about a lie in a divot, good players turn to their opponent and say "watch this!"
http://kylewharris.com

Constantly blamed by 8-handicaps for their 7 missed 12-footers each round.

Thank you for changing the font of your posts. It makes them easier to scroll past.

Joe Hellrung

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #43 on: August 23, 2016, 08:52:05 AM »




Bad players whine about a lie in a divot, good players turn to their opponent and say "watch this!"


Harumph!

Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #44 on: August 23, 2016, 09:46:15 AM »
1.  Allow a player to hit a provisional when a ball might be in a water hazard. I realize there will be situations when such a provisional would provide the player an advantage because the player will know the result of the subsequent shot before making a decision on whether or not to play from a hazard but that advantage is relatively slim and will be rare and will avoid forcing players to retreat to the tee.

2.  Make the rule for balls moving on the green crystal clear.  These issues have grown more common as green speeds have gotten out of control.  It now is difficult to play strictly by the rules on a windy day when courses are prepared for tournaments.  Windy days should be prime tournament days.  I would only impose a penalty if the player touches the ball and it moves. 

Other than that - play the ball as it lies and the course as you find it. 

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #45 on: August 23, 2016, 12:39:32 PM »
1.  Allow a player to hit a provisional when a ball might be in a water hazard. I realize there will be situations when such a provisional would provide the player an advantage because the player will know the result of the subsequent shot before making a decision on whether or not to play from a hazard but that advantage is relatively slim and will be rare and will avoid forcing players to retreat to the tee.

Jason,
I suggested that they consider modifying the provisionable ball rule to allow it for water hazards IF the player states that he will not play the original ball if it is found in the hazard. The provisional ball could be played at any relief location. Too soon to know how it was received.

Gib Carpenter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #46 on: August 23, 2016, 03:03:48 PM »
I'd change rule on marking and placing the ball on the green (or fairway under LCP) so that after cleaning the ball the player be required to replace not only in the same spot but in as close to the same orientation (the ball that is) as practicable.

This would eliminate the endless marking, re-marking, triple re-marking, etc. brought on by the popularity of the "cheater line" when putting. Would significantly speed up the game while satisfying the purists who (rightly IMO) dislike what is a de facto alignment aid on the greens.

GCA/AOK

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #47 on: August 23, 2016, 03:09:45 PM »
In tournaments where technology and personnel make it possible, stop having players be responsible for scoring. Like nearly every other sport on the planet, scoring should be done by a neutral third party.

Bob Montle

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #48 on: August 23, 2016, 03:23:51 PM »
8 clubs max
Ciao

Oh that brings back memories I had forgotten for decades!
Fifty years ago I had two bags.
On even numbered days I carried 2,4,6,8 irons, PW, 2W and 4W
On odd numbered days I carried 3,5,7,9 irons, SW,  3W and 5W

And golf was more fun then!
"If you're the swearing type, golf will give you plenty to swear about.  If you're the type to get down on yourself, you'll have ample opportunities to get depressed.  If you like to stop and smell the roses, here's your chance.  Golf never judges; it just brings out who you are."

Ken Fry

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rules - What would you change?
« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2016, 03:44:34 PM »
College coaches should not be deemed amateurs.  I know this is way out in left field but it always bothers me when I see a college coach competing in amateur events.  These are people who get paid to coach GOLF.  They are compensated for their golf knowledge and coaching ability.  Where's the gray area?

OK.  You guys can go back to the rules of actually playing golf...

Ken