Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Jay Mickle on March 05, 2017, 10:39:03 AM
-
I know that bunkers are hazards and come with consequences, but why so much greater than for pros or those who compete in tournaments where there is bunker etiquette is adhered to.
Pros do not have to hit out of foot prints, a poorly raked bunker, multiple different types of sand even on the same course, etc. The etiquette of golf insofar as maintaining bunkers and repairing ball marks has degraded much over time. Why should the everyday golfer who even struggles from a good lie in a bunker be required to play from a lie not intended by the architect but created by a prior player? We do allow ball marks to be repaired.
A couple of recent rounds at Tobacco Road got me thinking, The Road has a local rule the permits a player to lift a ball in any waste area, smooth the area and replace the ball. No more castigation of the idiot who is responsible for the bad lie. No more slowing the pace of play by calling all of your playing partners to come ad look at your impossible lie.No more complaints about the rakes with no teeth. No more excuses at the 19th hole. The average golfer who struggles with any sand shot would have a fighting chance, the better golfer would have the lie his favorite PGA pro has on TV.
I fully realize that TR is by virtue of its vast waste areas where carts use the waste areas as part of the cart path system are a special case, but it does provide food for thought. Such a rule would not only level the playing field but likely speed up pace of play.
-
Jay, I agree.
I play on courses in which bunker maintenance is approximately zero. And if that is the case, why have them?
Do you any of you know courses that have removed bunkers to reduce maintenace costs, speed up play and reduce the game's intimidation factor for the beginner?
-
A course not that far from me suffers from native deer roaming around the neighbourhood, jumping fences etc. As a result there are lots of hoof prints in the bunkers. The course has dealt with this by introducing a local rule that permits the player to place his ball in the sand if it would otherwise be lying in a hoof print. Seems a sensible measure.
Atb
-
What. The actual.
-
No more castigation of the idiot who is responsible for the bad lie.
That would be the guy who hit it there in the first place.
You.
-
With some apologies for my snarkiness, it's a bit straining for me to read this well-beaten rhetoric.
With the latest proposed rules revisions, the governing bodies have made it clear that Bunkers remain a special case in terms of golf and their rules and place are integral to the game.
Consider:
1. The vast majority of golf courses are located in areas where naturally exposed sand does not occur. As such, to codify the existence of a bunker and define it (more on this later) shows that these areas shall not be treated as other areas.
2. The Bunker is the second most-defined area in golf (after the hole, and more deeply defined than teeing ground and putting green). The Rules of Golf read with a reluctance as to the maintenance and setup of a golf course. Yet, the bunker is specifically a hollowed-out area where the ground is replaced with sand or the like. That is a borderline construction parameter.
3. The proposed 2019 revisions eliminate the word "Hazard" from the rule book, and also more clearly define the areas that are presently treated as hazards as areas where a ball is likely to be lost. This pertains to Bunkers in the sense that the rhetorical hazard that is the Bunker is much clearly. Presently, Bunkers are not Hazards as the rules go. These are two different areas with two different sets of privileges bestowed upon the player as far as play goes. The proposed revisions, thankfully, further segregate these areas by allowing the player to either find and play the ball in the"Penalty Area" as though from the "General Area" or drop under rules similar to those found for both types of "Hazards." This has the far reaching consequence of potentially softening the potential Lost Ball penalty (again, see the proposed definition for Penalty Area) and also further separates Bunkers from other parts of the golf course.
4. With the three items above, it is therefore obvious that bunkers are both strictly defined areas that are considered different from other parts of the golf course.
To codify Bunkers as an area where the player may improve the lie to their desire would not only codify boorish and irresponsible golfer behavior, but also further serve to segregate the better player from the worse. The pace of play argument is a canard because play will be delayed just as much by the golfer improving the lie (if not more).
Give me the ability to improve my lie in the sand at a place like Tobacco Road and I lose all fear of the golf course. I ignore this so-called local rule when I play there.
-
First year Chambers Bay opened. I was in a 6 inch deep footprint in the sand. This could not have been the intent of "play it as it lies".
-
First year Chambers Bay opened. I was in a 6 inch deep footprint in the sand. This could not have been the intent of "play it as it lies".
There's always the option of declaring the ball unplayable. One could make this argument for any assortment of bushes, trees, and other foliage found throughout the golf course.
-
First year Chambers Bay opened. I was in a 6 inch deep footprint in the sand. This could not have been the intent of "play it as it lies".
Why not? Isn't the origin of bunkers burrows created by sheep to get shelter from the wind? Is that much different than a footprint?
-
I believe a great deal of "everyday players" would just take it upon themselves to move the ball out of the footprint. Am I wrong in thinking that those who truly play the ball down are in the minority? I know my 73 year old father would definitely take it out of the footprint, he rolls the ball in the middle of the fairway :)
-
This thread is important as it points out the slippery slope between golfers who don't show proper etiquette followed by the an unsustainable level of grooming that clearly benefits the better golfer which then becomes the only acceptable solution. It appears the notion "rub of the green" is an antiquated one.
-
Joe
I wouldn't care if there was a footprint in the sand reaching to China...if I was allowed to take a penalty drop just as is the case for water. I think that many folks would come to accept crap sandy conditons if this were the case. But to just leave a 20 handicap guy flaying in a shit hole bunker because it satisfies some throwback horse's neck idea of the importance of sand is daft. I don't enjoy watching guys hack from rough...why would I want to see it from sand? Make pros play from shit hole bunkers if needs be, but why not offer a penalty drop for folks that pay for a good time? That way bunkers can be nasty and shitty and everyting sadistic bastards want to see :D No worries, take the penalty of one doesn't think e can pull the shot off...just like anywhere else on the course.
Ciao
-
Joe
I wouldn't care if there was a footprint in the sand reaching to China...if I was allowed to take a penalty drop just as is the case for water. I think that many folks would come to accept crap sandy conditons if this were the case. But to just leave a 20 handicap guy flaying in a shit hole bunker because it satisfies some throwback horse's neck idea of the importance of sand is daft. I don't enjoy watching guys hack from rough...why would I want to see it from sand? Make pros play from shit hole bunkers if needs be, but why not offer a penalty drop for folks that pay for a good time? That way bunkers can be nasty and shitty and everyting sadistic bastards want to see :D No worries, take the penalty of one doesn't think e can pull the shot off...just like anywhere else on the course.
Ciao
Sean,
Unplayable lie penalty-one stroke. two of the three options drop within bunker. An unplayable lie can be declared anywhere on the course, except in a water hazard.
-
The 20 handicapper flays around in perfectly manicured bunkers just as much as he does in gnarly pits of dirt pockmarked with footprints. That's one of the many reasons why he's a 20 handicapper and not, say, a 16 or a 12 or an 8. He also can't putt very well, and often flubs his chips, and on many occasions slices one off the tee into the woods. Those are other reasons why he is a 20. So we either ban him outright from our golf courses or we cut down all the trees, install 8 inch cups, have greens that funnel in from the edges, fill in all the bunkers and level the sod over them, cast a spell that prevents wind from ever blowing, and drain off any hint of water anywhere on the golf course -- or we with some measure of good grace accept the weaknesss of the human condition and the nature and endless vagaries of the game.
Peter
-
Joe
I wouldn't care if there was a footprint in the sand reaching to China...if I was allowed to take a penalty drop just as is the case for water. I think that many folks would come to accept crap sandy conditons if this were the case. But to just leave a 20 handicap guy flaying in a shit hole bunker because it satisfies some throwback horse's neck idea of the importance of sand is daft. I don't enjoy watching guys hack from rough...why would I want to see it from sand? Make pros play from shit hole bunkers if needs be, but why not offer a penalty drop for folks that pay for a good time? That way bunkers can be nasty and shitty and everyting sadistic bastards want to see :D No worries, take the penalty of one doesn't think e can pull the shot off...just like anywhere else on the course.
Ciao
Sean,
Unplayable lie penalty-one stroke. two of the three options drop within bunker. An unplayable lie can be declared anywhere on the course, except in a water hazard.
Peter
Not quite the same thing as dropping from water...is it? It seems odd to me that a penalty drop leaves one in the bunker (wtf is up that?) or loss of distance. Never understood why this is the case. I have never seen anyone take the loss of distance option, presumbly because they don't want to walk back. I have seen tons of guys pick up after a few lost cause tries from bunkers. Let a guy drop within 2 club lengths and now we have a better case for much rougher bunkers. If we don't allow a penalty drop 2 clubs outside of sand, we will continue to get super manicured and expensive bunkers. It makes zero sense to me.
Ciao
-
Is this perhaps not so much an issue of rules or an observation that there is too much of these "waste areas" whatever they may be.
Maybe I'm old but these vast areas of artificial sand seem to be a recent phenom and we are a bit confused as to how do deal with them.
Obviously places like PV and Cypress and pinehurst had large expenses of sand that we re intentionally kept sandy and devoid of grass. Meanwhile in the rest of the world it was in the lap of the gods- in winter when it rained the rough was green and rough and in summer it was dry and sandy. You took your chances depending on the season. But even at its driest, on the uk links or Australian sand belt, it was never just sand- it was sandy rough with whispy grasses and gumnuts and snakes and all sorts of nasty shit.
Play the ball as it lies
-
It's a poor workman who blames his tools, and it's an ill-disposed golfer who blames his bad shots on others. If you don't like your lie in a bunker, don't hit it in the bunker.
-
Tim
That is a rather nasty response.No one is blaming tools or a bad shot on others but a lie in a footprint is the fault of another.
I recall a number of years ago that at the Memorial Jack Nicklaus had the bunker's raked with wide tined rakes that created furrows. There was outrage by the tour pros and the rakes were not used again.
My suggestion is not for a change to the rules of golf rather just a local rule probably more suited to resort courses and municipal courses where I expect the greatest offense in terms of bunker maintenance is to be seen. Also where such lies create the greatest problems and slow up play. I'm sure that the private courses everyone will leave the bunkers in a condition from which they would like to play.
-
This "local rule " of which you speak. is it authorized by the Rules? When does fairness reach a point of no return. Many players improve their lies in the fairway by "rolling the ball over". They think that is fair. Line drawing is a difficult process. I have not spent enough time with the revisions to have drawn a conclusion. But we need to be careful not to lose the essential challenge and appeal of the game, much of which derives from facing the irregular and ever changing characteristics of the natural environment unfettered by uniform playing fields. There has always been a tension between those who want the game to be "fair" and those who are willing to accept some bad fortune in order to preserve some degree of the natural origins of the game. I know where my sensibilities lie.
-
I tuned into the coverage of the Tour event from Mexico and immediately saw DJ apparently get the opportunity to grab his ball out of a greenside bunker where it appeared to lay in a big footprint. He was then allowed to have his caddie rake the bunker to perfection and he then placed his ball gently on the smooth sand. He still didn't get up and down but I was taken aback by the relief granted. Did anybody else see this?
-
I tuned into the coverage of the Tour event from Mexico and immediately saw DJ apparently get the opportunity to grab his ball out of a greenside bunker where it appeared to lay in a big footprint. He was then allowed to have his caddie rake the bunker to perfection and he then placed his ball gently on the smooth sand. He still didn't get up and down but I was taken aback by the relief granted. Did anybody else see this?
He was able to mark his ball because Rory's ball came to rest within inches of his ball. He marked to allow Rory to play. He was then able to recreate his lie after Rory's shot.
-
This "local rule " of which you speak. is it authorized by the Rules? When does fairness reach a point of no return. Many players improve their lies in the fairway by "rolling the ball over". They think that is fair. Line drawing is a difficult process. I have not spent enough time with the revisions to have drawn a conclusion. But we need to be careful not to lose the essential challenge and appeal of the game, much of which derives from facing the irregular and ever changing characteristics of the natural environment unfettered by uniform playing fields. There has always been a tension between those who want the game to be "fair" and those who are willing to accept some bad fortune in order to preserve some degree of the natural origins of the game. I know where my sensibilities lie.
SL
Fairness has nothing to do with my argument. Its about simplicity and consistency of rules. The rules of golf are unnecessarily cumbersome to the point where a large percentage of players don't bother trying to adhere to the rules and a large percentage of golfers break the rules unintentionally. I know all the rules mavens say its user error (basically...golfers are stupid and/or lazy...very similar to the argument of don't hit it there...which is idiotic). Rules exist to make the game more playable in a consistent and easy to understand manner. Its very few golfers who actually think the rules of golf serve these ends very well. The proof is in the pudding when people routinely chuck the rules aside.
I actually think the guys who wrote up a new set of rules (Ran's brother?) were onto something.
Ciao
-
The rules of golf are simple. What's idiotic is thinking or saying otherwise.
Most spectator sports are far more complex than golf, and are also easily understood by those watching (not even participating!).
When you find the ball, you hit it again. If you can't find it, or if you can't hit, you always have the option to go back from where you struck the last shot and try again. Add a stroke to your score for the privilege.
HOW COULD THIS POSSIBLY BE SIMPLER?
Sean Arble,
What you are suggesting is that the position of the ball somehow grants a right as to the lie and your ability to play that ball. I've never encountered a footprint deep enough where I couldn't extract the ball and I regularly play on a modern course built on an extremely soft sand. Most would consider my attitude, and my ability to extract the ball, a skill; one that separates me from other golfers. What you rules populists fail to realize is that you are legislating yourselves on to another level of play simply by taking the learning of a skill away from those more skillful than you. Who the hell cares if you make an 8 in lieu of your customary 6? Aren't you all playing Match Play anyway?
If you're all constantly improving your lies, how do you ever get the experience of recovering from a bad break? Isn't that one of the appeals of golf?
I'm also not entirely sure the local rule wouldn't back fire and provide the means for a push for more stringent bunker maintenance. Truthfully, there is nothing more "fair" than playing the ball down, especially if it is known that the bunkers are not maintained for consistency or lie. Codifying the rules breaking is liable to push maintenance to the point where it is simply unnecessary to improve the lie.
-
Sean - I would shorten one of your key sentences, ie "Rules exist to make the game". If I make a mistake in a game of chess, I can't make it right on my next move by putting the pawn back to where it was before. Pawns aren't allowed to move backwards; that's one of the rules of chess. Those rules don't make the game any easier, and in fact they often make the game harder, especially for the beginner who is prone to making a lot of mistakes, including very serious ones. But without the rules, you wouldn't have a *game* at all.
Peter
-
The rules of golf are simple. What's idiotic is thinking or saying otherwise.
Most spectator sports are far more complex than golf, and are also easily understood by those watching (not even participating!).
When you find the ball, you hit it again. If you can't find it, or if you can't hit, you always have the option to go back from where you struck the last shot and try again. Add a stroke to your score for the privilege.
HOW COULD THIS POSSIBLY BE SIMPLER?
Sean Arble,
What you are suggesting is that the position of the ball somehow grants a right as to the lie and your ability to play that ball. I've never encountered a footprint deep enough where I couldn't extract the ball and I regularly play on a modern course built on an extremely soft sand. Most would consider my attitude, and my ability to extract the ball, a skill; one that separates me from other golfers. What you rules populists fail to realize is that you are legislating yourselves on to another level of play simply by taking the learning of a skill away from those more skillful than you. Who the hell cares if you make an 8 in lieu of your customary 6? Aren't you all playing Match Play anyway?
If you're all constantly improving your lies, how do you ever get the experience of recovering from a bad break? Isn't that one of the appeals of golf?
I'm also not entirely sure the local rule wouldn't back fire and provide the means for a push for more stringent bunker maintenance. Truthfully, there is nothing more "fair" than playing the ball down, especially if it is known that the bunkers are not maintained for consistency or lie. Codifying the rules breaking is liable to push maintenance to the point where it is simply unnecessary to improve the lie.
Kyle
Your opinion about the simplicity of the rules is your opinion, but I believe there is far more than enough evidence to suggest otherwise. I will bet you $100 that the vast majority of people on this board have come across multiple situations while playing that they either handled wrongly or didn't know what the correct rule was. I watch experts on tv take more time than to make breakfast with rulings. I watch pros get rules wrong and get accused of getting rules wrong. I can't understand why people dig their heels in about a 2 club length penalty drop from sand yet think its a good idea for water. Totally bizarre and indicative of unnecessary complexity.
Explain sprinkler heads and moveable objects. Why aren't they cases of tough? Again, it isn't fairness I seek, its consistency and simplicity. If we aren't taking free drops or penalty drops...ok...its the same throughout the course. If we are, taking free drops and penalty drops, okay, its the same throughout the course.
Pietro
I go along with everything you said. However, I would point out that a great many people do play by rules, just not the same set as issued by the USGA because they are so complicated, terribly written and verbose. One would need a porter to carry the Decisions and be willing to argue til death to properly follow the USGA rules. Watch kids play sports, they get much of the rules right and make up the rest. They sure look like they are playing games to me.
Ciao
-
From the wonderful web -
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/b8/8e/18/b88e188176a6d7efcca4b369ac5f50a8.jpg)
:)
atb
-
Sean,
I get the sense you don't actually like playing golf, but simply a golf-like game. Okay, fair enough. I would suggest you could save yourself a considerable amount of money by simply hitting shots on the range and nattering around a putting green for a few hours.
Let's take your consistency to the next level, shall we? Why stop at bunker maintenance? I'll stop mowing grass, and hand you a pair of scissors on the tee. If you find the grass too deep because I haven't cut it, simply shorten it to your liking.
That would be the consistency you seek, would it not? We can extend the idea to trees, shrubs, and anything else on the golf course that isn't maintained to your satisfaction. That will save a ton of money on the operations end, for sure.
The difference between a bunker and a water hazard is as old as the game itself. This has been made clear time and time again and is rather simple if you explain the idea that the ball shall be played as it lies. The complexity derives from the diversion in that principle.
Under no circumstances are you compelled to take relief, and follow the "complex" rules that govern that action. If you want a simpler game, simply play the ball down always.
-
Sean,
I get the sense you don't actually like playing golf, but simply a golf-like game. Okay, fair enough. I would suggest you could save yourself a considerable amount of money by simply hitting shots on the range and nattering around a putting green for a few hours.
Let's take your consistency to the next level, shall we? Why stop at bunker maintenance? I'll stop mowing grass, and hand you a pair of scissors on the tee. If you find the grass too deep because I haven't cut it, simply shorten it to your liking.
That would be the consistency you seek, would it not? We can extend the idea to trees, shrubs, and anything else on the golf course that isn't maintained to your satisfaction. That will save a ton of money on the operations end, for sure.
The difference between a bunker and a water hazard is as old as the game itself. This has been made clear time and time again and is rather simple if you explain the idea that the ball shall be played as it lies. The complexity derives from the diversion in that principle.
Under no circumstances are you compelled to take relief, and follow the "complex" rules that govern that action. If you want a simpler game, simply play the ball down always.
Kyle
I feel like I am reading something from the USGA. As I am advocating a completely fresh look at the rules which doesn't click with you, its best if we agree to disagree.
Ciao
-
Where does the term "rub of the green" come from? We can fix ball marks, clean balls, replace balls moved by wind, etc.
-
I'm fully with you, Jay.
Some people on this thread do not understand the essence of "Etiquette" in the Rules. It is idiotic for a player finding his ball at rest in a man-made "hazard" (whether it be a pitch mark on the green, a footprint in a bunker or a freshly made divot in the fairway) to be penalized by the absence of etiquette by his fellow competitors.
The recent USGA/R&A bombshell is dragging golf into the 21st century. For those of us who want to stay in the world of Old Tom Morris, play it as it lies, regardless. For those of us who want to enjoy the game rather than endure its inherent pain. play the ball as you like in friendly games and play by the rules only in competitions.
Rich
-
This thread is important as it points out the slippery slope between golfers who don't show proper etiquette followed by the an unsustainable level of grooming that clearly benefits the better golfer which then becomes the only acceptable solution. It appears the notion "rub of the green" is an antiquated one.
+1
A perfect lie in a hazard....hmmmm
Why not courtesy cars to take you to your muni as well?
I mean the pros get them-so why not you?
Or...how about way less hazards(bunkers) that one actually has to thoughtfully consider and avoid. and an actual consequence for entering one....
-
I recall reading that many moons ago playing the Postage Stamp 8th in The Open at Troon, Roberto De Vincenzo hit his tee shot into a greenside bunker. The ball was plugged so he deemed it unplayable, went back to the tee and promptly holed his next shot for a 2 as there was no stroke and distance penalty at the time, just a distance penalty.
Atb
-
I've always viewed footprints in bunkers or my ball coming to rest in a previous players divot in the bunker the same as if it happened in the rough. I've been in footprints, cart tracks, etc. that created a little more penalty than normal. Big deal. I play by the rules...all of them!
-
Sean,
water vs sand - why is relief different. Most times, if the ball is in a water hazard, the ball cannot be found, or likely played. It can be found and likely played in a water hazard. If relief in the area of the point of entry into the water hazard, relief of one club-length would create disparity between right-handed and left-handed golfers. Depending on the situation, one or the other would likely have to stand in the hazard to continue. Making the relief two club-lengths eliminates most of the disparity. Above, I am talking about relief from a red marked hazard.
Further, unplayable lies are allowable in bunkers and through the green but not in water hazards. I believe the difference is that water hazards are sometimes dry. Since the penalty scenarios presume you are in the hazard, being able to take an unplayable lie
90% of the way across the water hazard, when it is dry in summer, or when the tide is lower, again creates a disparity.
Regarding sprinkler heads, etc. the rules have a continuity from the beginnings of golf, when there were virtually no man-made objects on the course. As these were added and when golfers encountered them disputes inevitably arose as one side of the match had a different opinion than the other side.
Many people think that reading Richard Tuft's "The Principles Behind the Rules of Golf" creates a better understanding of the issues. I have a spare copy if you are interested.
-
This thread is important as it points out the slippery slope between golfers who don't show proper etiquette followed by the an unsustainable level of grooming that clearly benefits the better golfer which then becomes the only acceptable solution. It appears the notion "rub of the green" is an antiquated one.
+1
A perfect lie in a hazard....hmmmm
Why not courtesy cars to take you to your muni as well?
I mean the pros get them-so why not you?
Or...how about way less hazards(bunkers) that one actually has to thoughtfully consider and avoid. and an actual consequence for entering one....
I think the very last line gets to the heart of the issue. When the idea of "play it as it lies" came about hundreds of years ago, hazards (including bunkers) were relatively rare. It was easier to avoid them, so it made sense to punish the player with a potentially less than great lie. However, modern courses have so many bunkers that it is nearly impossible to avoid them for all 18 holes. In my mind, the prevalence of bunkers has led to the desire for fairness in this area.
Do more bunkers necessarily mean you should be guaranteed a good lie? No, but when there are over 100 of them on many courses it becomes an awfully penal course if you're hitting out of footprints. Ideally, there would be fewer bunkers and they could truly be hazards. It may not be correct for a player to expect a good lie in the trap every time, but it shouldn't be a surprise why players think this way with how golf courses are presented today.
-
This thread is important as it points out the slippery slope between golfers who don't show proper etiquette followed by the an unsustainable level of grooming that clearly benefits the better golfer which then becomes the only acceptable solution. It appears the notion "rub of the green" is an antiquated one.
+1
A perfect lie in a hazard....hmmmm
Why not courtesy cars to take you to your muni as well?
I mean the pros get them-so why not you?
Or...how about way less hazards(bunkers) that one actually has to thoughtfully consider and avoid. and an actual consequence for entering one....
I think the very last line gets to the heart of the issue. When the idea of "play it as it lies" came about hundreds of years ago, hazards (including bunkers) were relatively rare. It was easier to avoid them, so it made sense to punish the player with a potentially less than great lie. However, modern courses have so many bunkers that it is nearly impossible to avoid them for all 18 holes. In my mind, the prevalence of bunkers has led to the desire for fairness in this area.
Do more bunkers necessarily mean you should be guaranteed a good lie? No, but when there are over 100 of them on many courses it becomes an awfully penal course if you're hitting out of footprints. Ideally, there would be fewer bunkers and they could truly be hazards. It may not be correct for a player to expect a good lie in the trap every time, but it shouldn't be a surprise why players think this way with how golf courses are presented today.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,64236.0.html
No more calls, please...we have a winner!
-
Peter
Thanks...I mostly understand the rules...I just don't think they are as simple or consistent as they could and should be. There are too many situational rules when many things could be lumped together. As I say, I am taking about a completely fresh look at the rules and looking at dropping much of the old baggage. A simplified rule(s) for bunkers VS water VS OOB would itself go along way to eliminating many rule infractions which at heart aren't in and of themselves important. They are only deemed important because of the baggage. Its similar to the concept of decriminalizing certain crimes and therefore reducing the number of criminals who therefore require state intervention at added tax payer expense without obtaining any real results or bettering society.
I guess I am of the opinion that if a huge percentage of golfers don't follow the rules and/or don't know the rules well enough to follow them them, then the rules are doing a very good job. I actually think its an incredibly small percentage of golfers who don't screw up the rules every single year...and a good percentage of these folks get the help of on course experts. Golf is fundementally different from other sports in that they have refs to enforce and interpet the rules. Most golfers must enforce and interpret rules without the help of refs so they need to be simple and consistent.
Ciao
-
What's next, are we going to change the rule about moving a ball in a divot? Play it as it lies.