[wsmorrison]

On private courses, I do not expect, nor would a club I am a member of allow cell phones anywhere except in your car, only proper golf attire (no short sleeve mock turtlenecks), shirts not tucked in or hats worn inside or under a roof of any kind (no cover under cover).  I believe in setting examples for our children and guests should abide by traditional gentlemanly behavior and not modern convention.

[Bill Shamleffer]

Patrick,

You are missing my differentiation between an organized competition and a game just between friends.  Even if I were to be in the F flight for a club tournament, I would follow all of those rules that I cited above per the USGA’s rules of golf.  However, if I am playing with my brothers, or my regular golfing group, I will trust the others to follow the spirit of the implications of having a lost ball without going back to the tee box.

Do you really want every single lost ball played in every single round of golf today and every other day to comply with the stroke and distance rule.  The dreadful 4.5 to 5 hour rounds across the US will become 6 hour rounds.  Nevertheless, it has not ceased to be golf.

You also missed my point that I do NOT have an issue with ANY of the rules.  However, I am also able to understand the true spirit of the rules, and again when playing with friends, I do not fear that anyone is attempting to violate a rule just to obtain an unfair advantage.  I am quite confident you too have those types of friends that you know want the true challenge of golf to be preserved, and that you know none of them will cheat you.

It is like a contract.  If I enter into a contract with a stranger, I expect that stranger to attempt to remain in complete compliance with that contract.  As opposed to say the contract between Mark McCormick and Arnold Palmer.  Although they supposedly never had a signed contract, the agreement they had likely could have meet the legal qualifications of a contract.  If one of them were to NO violate some aspect of that contract, but were to still remain in complete compliance with the spirit of their contract, I doubt either one would have felt cheated, and would not have considered the other's act to violate the agreement.

Take the golfer putting on the green with the pin in the cup, and ball hits the pin.  In 1950 – no penalty, in 1970 – a penalty.  How did golf change from 1950 to 1970 that for the 1950 golfer, the game continued to be golf, while for the 1970 golfer the game ceased to be golf.  I do have a preference for the two; however, I have no issue with whichever version is selected as the rule in place.  Bother versions can be justified or implicated.  Nevertheless either version is still golf.

If a golfer chooses to ignore the current rule, then that golfer best not plan on being involved in any tournament play.  However, if a golfer and his or her friends, when just competing among each other and without any outsiders, decide they believe the 1950 rule speeds up the game and all four enjoy the 1950 rule, to me they are still playing golf.  (I would also agree that these scores best not be posted.)

I have NEVER had anyone try to call the advice rule on me in friendly competition, and based upon your above comments, I assume you agree that there are circumstances in which you would not expect it to be called in friendly competition, but in which you would expect one has an obligation to call it in tournament play.  So I assume you are agreeing that parts of the advice rule are “arcane” for SOME circumstances.

[Richard Boult]

On private courses, I do not expect, nor would a club I am a member of allow cell phones anywhere except in your car, only proper golf attire (no short sleeve mock turtlenecks), shirts not tucked in or hats worn inside or under a roof of any kind (no cover under cover).  I believe in setting examples for our children and guests should abide by traditional gentlemanly behavior and not modern convention.

IMHO, how we behave on and off the course does more to set an example for our children and others, than the "cosmetic" conventions set forth by our private clubs. Since I'm in the minority, I'll stick with my public courses.

[JR Potts]

I've been known to lash out at myself in anger on the golf course.  I don't think that you snobs should look down on me.  

I have not however, Woody Austined a putter....yet.

[wsmorrison]

R.Boult,

It isn't a question of dress or behavior.  It should be a combination of the two.  However, I agree that behavior is most important.

[Adam Clayman]

Surely with Tiger's prowess the mock turtle tee shirt is becoming more acceptable? Technically it has a collar.

[RJ_Daley]

Geez, 5 pages of confession and introspection on everything from how long or how many wives to what ball you will only play...  This is like an AA meeting.

Oh, is it my turn.  Hi my name is Dick and I'm a golf snob.  

I recently went out to play my home course alone.  Probably the only time I went out without specific plans to meet and play with one of my pals all summer.  I got there and it was busy.  They assistant pro at the desk said I could go off the back 9 with three other guys that were together, who were only playing 9.  They were all about 20-25, all had on backwards ball caps, all 3 in individual carts, all had a pack of smokes in the dash.  Two were wearing sandals (not apparently even the golf spiked sandals).  Two had some kind of 'statement' tee shirts.

I told the starter that I wouldn't play anyway, just go down to the practice short game green and hit some sand shots and pitches.  

I dont know what irritated me more, that 3 guys would take individual carts to play 9 holes on a course layout your granny could handle on a walker, or their demeanor and attire.   And, I am not even that big of a stickler for tee shirts VS collared or slightly grubby style.  But, I think I can spot a total grunge when I see one.  Yuck.

[Dale_McCallon]

I told a guy today that he needed to get rid of his ball retriever.

[wsmorrison]

I am not above taking my shoes off and wading into the brook to retrieve a ball.  As hot and humid as its been around here, I find it very refreshing.  Is that better than using a ball retriever?

[Dale_McCallon]

Wayne,

I can't imagine that it has been any hotter in Philly than here in KY.  The idea of going bare foot for a ball is tempting (watch out for snapping turtles).  But for some reason the long poled ball retriever just gets under my skin.

[Richard Choi]

Man, I look at all those triple digit temperatures and shudder. You should all come on up to Seattle and play Chambers Bay.

It is 75 degrees and sunny right now...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wayne Morrisson,

Many have forgotten that GOLF is a "Gentleman's" game,

Unfortunately,

Many more have forgotten what a "Gentleman" is.

[wsmorrison]

Tom Paul will probably scold me on our road trip tomorrow, but I couldn't agree with you more, Pat.

When are you making your pilgrimage to Philadelphia?  I hope it is in a couple of weeks; most courses in the area are being aerated next week.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

You are missing my differentiation between an organized competition and a game just between friends.  Even if I were to be in the F flight for a club tournament, I would follow all of those rules that I cited above per the USGA’s rules of golf.  However, if I am playing with my brothers, or my regular golfing group, I will trust the others to follow the spirit of the implications of having a lost ball without going back to the tee box.

Bill, perhaps your lack of familiarity with the rules is part of the misunderstanding.

The rules clearly allow a player to hit a provisional ball should there be the possibility of a lost ball.  The player is then allowed five (5) minutes to conduct their search.

And, it's not a question of following the spirit.
Someone may be well intentioned with respect to where they think the ball is lost, but in reality, 100 yards off, thus altering the proper play of the hole and potentially skewing the outcome.[/color]

Do you really want every single lost ball played in every single round of golf today and every other day to comply with the stroke and distance rule.  

Absolutely.[/color]

The dreadful 4.5 to 5 hour rounds across the US will become 6 hour rounds.  

That's nonsense.
And, the dreadful 4.5 to 5 hour rounds you reference are a product of the culture of the players that's evolved over the last 4 or 5 decades and has NOTHING to do with enforcement of the rules.[/color]


Nevertheless, it has not ceased to be golf.

That's YOUR interpretation, one that I disagree with.
Once one set of golfers chooses to ignore rules they don't like, it opens up Pandora's Box, and the rest is history.

Golf depends upon and demands integrity, in the play of the game and in adherence to it's principles/rules[/color]

You also missed my point that I do NOT have an issue with ANY of the rules.  However, I am also able to understand the true spirit of the rules, and again when playing with friends, I do not fear that anyone is attempting to violate a rule just to obtain an unfair advantage.  I am quite confident you too have those types of friends that you know want the true challenge of golf to be preserved, and that you know none of them will cheat you.

And, we insure that that doesn't happen by PLAYING BY THE RULES.

I've seen good friendships ruined because of voluntary and involuntary deviations from the rules.[/color]

It is like a contract.  If I enter into a contract with a stranger, I expect that stranger to attempt to remain in complete compliance with that contract.  As opposed to say the contract between Mark McCormick and Arnold Palmer.  Although they supposedly never had a signed contract, the agreement they had likely could have meet the legal qualifications of a contract.  If one of them were to NO violate some aspect of that contract, but were to still remain in complete compliance with the spirit of their contract, I doubt either one would have felt cheated, and would not have considered the other's act to violate the agreement.


Your position is akin to:  "Ignorance is bliss" and if someone violates a rule involuntarily, shucks, it's ok, he didn't intend to cheat me.  The natural progression of that thinking is disastrous and undermines the very foundation of playing the game.[/color]

Take the golfer putting on the green with the pin in the cup, and ball hits the pin.  In 1950 – no penalty, in 1970 – a penalty.  How did golf change from 1950 to 1970 that for the 1950 golfer, the game continued to be golf, while for the 1970 golfer the game ceased to be golf.  I do have a preference for the two; however, I have no issue with whichever version is selected as the rule in place.  Bother versions can be justified or implicated.  Nevertheless either version is still golf.

Many rules have changed over time.
That doesn't invalidate or devaluate the set of rules in place at the time of a match.[/color]

If a golfer chooses to ignore the current rule, then that golfer best not plan on being involved in any tournament play.  However, if a golfer and his or her friends, when just competing among each other and without any outsiders, decide they believe the 1950 rule speeds up the game and all four enjoy the 1950 rule, to me they are still playing golf.  (I would also agree that these scores best not be posted.)

You can't have it both ways.
You can't elect to PLAY golf, compete and mutually agree to waive select rules and not be required to post your score.

If everyone did that, NO scores would be posted and the handicap system would be useless.  Think of the reprecussions of a handicap system absent integrity.[/color]

I have NEVER had anyone try to call the advice rule on me in friendly competition, and based upon your above comments, I assume you agree that there are circumstances in which you would not expect it to be called in friendly competition, but in which you would expect one has an obligation to call it in tournament play.  So I assume you are agreeing that parts of the advice rule are “arcane” for SOME circumstances.

Let me first ask you, why is it important for you to find out what club your opponent hit from a certain location ?

And, can that information then lead to an advantage ?

Especially on a golf course without yardage indicators.

I'll ask golfers what club they've hit when I'm playing a practice round for a qualifying event on a golf course I'm not familiar with, but, that's usually not a legitimate round as I'll sometimes play from spots where my tee shot didn't come to rest, or I'll hit a number of shots off of a tee to see where they end up.

Upon reflection, I can't remember a time when someone in the groups I regularly play with, asked another, what club they hit.  Perhaps we really don't care what club they hit.[/color]

[JR Potts]

Patrick,

You are missing my differentiation between an organized competition and a game just between friends.  Even if I were to be in the F flight for a club tournament, I would follow all of those rules that I cited above per the USGA’s rules of golf.  However, if I am playing with my brothers, or my regular golfing group, I will trust the others to follow the spirit of the implications of having a lost ball without going back to the tee box.

Bill, perhaps your lack of familiarity with the rules is part of the misunderstanding.

The rules clearly allow a player to hit a provisional ball should there be the possibility of a lost ball.  The player is then allowed five (5) minutes to conduct their search.

And, it's not a question of following the spirit.
Someone may be well intentioned with respect to where they think the ball is lost, but in reality, 100 yards off, thus altering the proper play of the hole and potentially skewing the outcome.[/color]

Do you really want every single lost ball played in every single round of golf today and every other day to comply with the stroke and distance rule.  

Absolutely.[/color]

The dreadful 4.5 to 5 hour rounds across the US will become 6 hour rounds.  

That's nonsense.
And, the dreadful 4.5 to 5 hour rounds you reference are a product of the culture of the players that's evolved over the last 4 or 5 decades and has NOTHING to do with enforcement of the rules.[/color]


Nevertheless, it has not ceased to be golf.

That's YOUR interpretation, one that I disagree with.
Once one set of golfers chooses to ignore rules they don't like, it opens up Pandora's Box, and the rest is history.

Golf depends upon and demands integrity, in the play of the game and in adherence to it's principles/rules[/color]

You also missed my point that I do NOT have an issue with ANY of the rules.  However, I am also able to understand the true spirit of the rules, and again when playing with friends, I do not fear that anyone is attempting to violate a rule just to obtain an unfair advantage.  I am quite confident you too have those types of friends that you know want the true challenge of golf to be preserved, and that you know none of them will cheat you.

And, we insure that that doesn't happen by PLAYING BY THE RULES.

I've seen good friendships ruined because of voluntary and involuntary deviations from the rules.[/color]

It is like a contract.  If I enter into a contract with a stranger, I expect that stranger to attempt to remain in complete compliance with that contract.  As opposed to say the contract between Mark McCormick and Arnold Palmer.  Although they supposedly never had a signed contract, the agreement they had likely could have meet the legal qualifications of a contract.  If one of them were to NO violate some aspect of that contract, but were to still remain in complete compliance with the spirit of their contract, I doubt either one would have felt cheated, and would not have considered the other's act to violate the agreement.


Your position is akin to:  "Ignorance is bliss" and if someone violates a rule involuntarily, shucks, it's ok, he didn't intend to cheat me.  The natural progression of that thinking is disastrous and undermines the very foundation of playing the game.[/color]

Take the golfer putting on the green with the pin in the cup, and ball hits the pin.  In 1950 – no penalty, in 1970 – a penalty.  How did golf change from 1950 to 1970 that for the 1950 golfer, the game continued to be golf, while for the 1970 golfer the game ceased to be golf.  I do have a preference for the two; however, I have no issue with whichever version is selected as the rule in place.  Bother versions can be justified or implicated.  Nevertheless either version is still golf.

Many rules have changed over time.
That doesn't invalidate or devaluate the set of rules in place at the time of a match.[/color]

If a golfer chooses to ignore the current rule, then that golfer best not plan on being involved in any tournament play.  However, if a golfer and his or her friends, when just competing among each other and without any outsiders, decide they believe the 1950 rule speeds up the game and all four enjoy the 1950 rule, to me they are still playing golf.  (I would also agree that these scores best not be posted.)

You can't have it both ways.
You can't elect to PLAY golf, compete and mutually agree to waive select rules and not be required to post your score.

If everyone did that, NO scores would be posted and the handicap system would be useless.  Think of the reprecussions of a handicap system absent integrity.[/color]

I have NEVER had anyone try to call the advice rule on me in friendly competition, and based upon your above comments, I assume you agree that there are circumstances in which you would not expect it to be called in friendly competition, but in which you would expect one has an obligation to call it in tournament play.  So I assume you are agreeing that parts of the advice rule are “arcane” for SOME circumstances.

Let me first ask you, why is it important for you to find out what club your opponent hit from a certain location ?

And, can that information then lead to an advantage ?

Especially on a golf course without yardage indicators.

I'll ask golfers what club they've hit when I'm playing a practice round for a qualifying event on a golf course I'm not familiar with, but, that's usually not a legitimate round as I'll sometimes play from spots where my tee shot didn't come to rest, or I'll hit a number of shots off of a tee to see where they end up.

Upon reflection, I can't remember a time when someone in the groups I regularly play with, asked another, what club they hit.  Perhaps we really don't care what club they hit.[/color]

Patrick, you are a Domer, correct?

With your strict interpretation of the rules (which I agree with for the most part), you have just excommunicated 99.99% of all Catholics.

[John Kirk]

Brother Patrick,

I am with you.

If you think your ball may be lost, declare a provisional ball and hit another promptly.

Also, playing without delay and with purpose results in fewer errant shots.

[John Kirk]

Man, I look at all those triple digit temperatures and shudder. You should all come on up to Seattle and play Chambers Bay.

It is 75 degrees and sunny right now...

Geez, what a snob.

[John Kavanaugh]

It is simple.  If I have two canidates for a position and they are exactly equal with the exception that one has been married to the same woman for 25 years and the other has been divorced I will go with the devout husband just because it is a symbol of commitment and loyalty.  I do not hold it against any man who has been divorced but I admire the man who has not more.

And what if the continuation of the bad marriage has been ruinous/devastating to/for the children ?

Harming and impairing their function for life ?

Then, how do you view the parties ?[/color]

Patrick,

I was always taught that no matter how rough things get to post a score.  I can not imagine a marriage that survives inside the boundries of lawful spousal abuse that is worse for the children then no marriage at all.  I am sure if a man tells himself often enough that he left his wife for the sake of the children somebody is eventually going to believe him...just not me.

[John Kavanaugh]

Bob,

I never ask a man what he does for a living or about his wife.  I choose my friends based on how much I enjoy their company not how much I respect their decisions.

Can you really be friends with someone whose company you enjoy, but, whom you don't respect as an individual ?

Or, do we recognize, but overlook the negatives and enjoy whatever we can extract from the positives.

Like you, I'm also interested in what "ARCANE" rules are being refered to.  Did you ever get an answer ?

P.S.  Agree about "Trading Up"
        I saw the same thing and asked myself, "What was he
        thinking ?"

The words friend and respect do not make a good bowl of soup.  The combination of respect and employee brings home the bacon.  Friends are too hard to come by to judge harshly and employees come and go like a smooth stroke with the exception that you can't buy a good stroke.

[Jim Nugent]

I used to go out a lot as a single, and I was sure I would be the best player.  

Now, with the experience of taking part in this DG for two years, I pat myself on the shoulder believing I know more about golf course architecture than the ignorant masses of golfing enthusiasts.  

[Tim Pitner]

Wayne Morrisson,

Many have forgotten that GOLF is a "Gentleman's" game,

No, it is not.  Whether you choose to admit it, Pat, the phrase "gentleman's game" has definite classist and sexist overtones.  Golf is a game for everyone.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tim Pitner,

Defining Golf as a "Gentleman's" game is neither classist nor sexist.  Let's just chalk it up to your not getting it.

Shivas & Jaka B,

I'll attribute your lack of understanding of the potential forces that lead to divorce as either inexperience in the field, naivete' or both.  Perpetuating a bad marriage can be the act that most damages ALL of the parties involved.

Ryan Potts,

There's no such thing as "STRICT" interpretation of the rules of golf.  You either adhere to them or you don't.

And, when the rules are broken at leisure, the game ceases to be "golf"

[Richard Choi]

There's sure a lot of Ian MacCallisters 'round here...

"Golf is not supposed to fun! It is a Scottish game for heavens sakes."

[Patrick_Mucci]

Shivas,

I assure you that I can support my position with case specific facts, but, I choose not to.

The notion that all humans aren't flawed beyond their ability to correct those flaws is a flawed premise.

As in medicine, some conditions can't be corrected, no matter how Herculian the effort.

There are many circumstances when a divorce is in the best interest of the majority, if not all of the involved parties.

Where children are involved, the parents should expend the maximum effort to resolve their differences in everyone's best/collective interest.

Where no children are involved, the couple should seek to resolve their differences, understanding that they have to do so in the context of their individual best interests.

A solution that benefits one party while damaging the other is NO solution.  There has to be a mutually beneficial solution, and if none can be achieved, each party has to do what's in their best interest.

[John Keenan]

Isn't divorce legal? What rule does ending a bad marriage break?   It may well break a commitment two people made to each other  

I have been happily married for 32 years to the total love of my life. My only wife.

Last this item so  far OT is should be ended.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()