Welcome!

Welcome to our community forums, full of great people, ideas and excitement. Please register if you would like to take part.

This is extra text with a test link..

Register Now

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What's the DUMBEST Rule in golf?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by 4wedges View Post

    Good answer. It seems that some people want the game to be completely fair, but IMO the game is not meant to be completely fair. One of the beautiful aspects of the game is the rub of the green; the bad bounces and the bad luck, and the ability to over come those bad bounces and the bad luck.
    I got truly "into" golf during a stretch where I played a lot of matches with a guy that most people would classify as one of those "rules nazis".

    I used to complain about bad luck and bad breaks and unfairness and he'd always come back talking about the rub of the green, and how it goes both ways (like that shot into the trees that bounces out).

    It took me a couple of years before I came around and got the point(s).

    1) Golf is a game played by the rules, and the rules are what they are, so follow them. And when they change, follow the new ones. It's the only way to make the game the same for everyone.

    2) Rub of the green is integral to the game. The game was never meant to be entirely fair, part of the challenge is how you deal with the bad breaks. For divots, you need to learn how to hit out of them, as well as just sucking up the bad luck. It's a little bit like hitting your ball right behind the only big tree on the side of a fairway.
    "Confusion" will be my epitaph
    ...Iggy

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Ignatius Reilly View Post
      [...] The game was never meant to be entirely fair, part of the challenge is how you deal with the bad breaks. [...].
      While mine don't always end this way, it is kinda like Miguel Ángel Jiménez Amazing Off the Wall Shot 2010 British Open:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIKGf0Xl_CA

      .


      _______
      NQRfPT

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Ignatius Reilly View Post

        I got truly "into" golf during a stretch where I played a lot of matches with a guy that most people would classify as one of those "rules nazis".

        I used to complain about bad luck and bad breaks and unfairness and he'd always come back talking about the rub of the green, and how it goes both ways (like that shot into the trees that bounces out).

        It took me a couple of years before I came around and got the point(s).

        1) Golf is a game played by the rules, and the rules are what they are, so follow them. And when they change, follow the new ones. It's the only way to make the game the same for everyone.

        2) Rub of the green is integral to the game. The game was never meant to be entirely fair, part of the challenge is how you deal with the bad breaks. For divots, you need to learn how to hit out of them, as well as just sucking up the bad luck. It's a little bit like hitting your ball right behind the only big tree on the side of a fairway.
        So play it as it lies and rub of the green are only valid except when they aren't. If you really want to use those arguments (and not you specifically but in general) then hey, you land in casual water? Tough luck. You're stance is on a sprinkler head? Suck it up buttercup. Your ball is embedded. Hack it out. I honestly don't really care about hitting out of divots as I can't remember the last time I was in one but I also can't remember the last time I took a drop for a sprinkler head or my ball being behind a garbage can. My point is one cannot use the argument play it as it lies when there are a ton of exceptions to that rule. I used to hear all the rulies argue against fixing spike marks on greens and that it was also the rub of the green and that it would lead to undue delays as everyone would be fixing them ad naseum. Well guess what? It's going to be allowed very shortly. Seriously, it's ok to not agree with a rule, even if you still follow it.
        MEMBER OF THE 2012 AND 2015 RYDER CUP CHAMPS!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Jeffc View Post

          So play it as it lies and rub of the green are only valid except when they aren't. If you really want to use those arguments (and not you specifically but in general) then hey, you land in casual water? Tough luck. You're stance is on a sprinkler head? Suck it up buttercup. Your ball is embedded. Hack it out. I honestly don't really care about hitting out of divots as I can't remember the last time I was in one but I also can't remember the last time I took a drop for a sprinkler head or my ball being behind a garbage can. My point is one cannot use the argument play it as it lies when there are a ton of exceptions to that rule. I used to hear all the rulies argue against fixing spike marks on greens and that it was also the rub of the green and that it would lead to undue delays as everyone would be fixing them ad naseum. Well guess what? It's going to be allowed very shortly. Seriously, it's ok to not agree with a rule, even if you still follow it.
          Maybe there are too many exceptions to the rule then.
          You're right, it's okay to not agree with a rule. Absolutely. Just as it okay to agree with the rules and disagree with those who don't like a specific rule. There are so many rules in golf, I don't pretend to know anywhere close to all of them, when in doubt I simply play it as it lies.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Jeffc View Post

            So play it as it lies and rub of the green are only valid except when they aren't. If you really want to use those arguments (and not you specifically but in general) then hey, you land in casual water? Tough luck. You're stance is on a sprinkler head? Suck it up buttercup. Your ball is embedded. Hack it out. I honestly don't really care about hitting out of divots as I can't remember the last time I was in one but I also can't remember the last time I took a drop for a sprinkler head or my ball being behind a garbage can. My point is one cannot use the argument play it as it lies when there are a ton of exceptions to that rule. I used to hear all the rulies argue against fixing spike marks on greens and that it was also the rub of the green and that it would lead to undue delays as everyone would be fixing them ad naseum. Well guess what? It's going to be allowed very shortly. Seriously, it's ok to not agree with a rule, even if you still follow it.
            I think Benz answered your first point earlier - those are mostly unnatural problems. Something like casual water could have been left alone, with an unplayable always being an available option. One thing I've learned is that the majority of the rules have some significant thought behind them that isn't always obvious at first glance.

            And I agree with your final point, it's why I made my final point earlier: Follow the rules until they change, then follow the new rules.

            I've just realized I've come to understand something else. The serious "rulies" on this board (and we have an astonishingly high level of participants, given the size and scope of this site) often dismiss our rules complaints, and that attitude used to piss me off. Now I think I see their point of view - it's all fun and such to argue on this board, but nothing will ever come of it. There are other places and groups which can actually have an effect, and those are the places for those discussions. Otherwise, it's like complaining about the temperature or the number of daylight hours in a day.

            Of course this is a social site where we discuss all sorts of stuff, like "which golfer do dislike the most", recent movies, etc. so that's all good.
            "Confusion" will be my epitaph
            ...Iggy

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Benz View Post

              The origins of golf are in 'natural' environments, and the fundaments of the game (e.g. play the course as you find it) are rooted in them.
              This is true. However when the game started, how many players actually took a divot back in the 1800's? Could they take a divot with hickory clubs(intentionally)? From fairways that were never mowed? Or from the teeing ground(which was really close to the hole on the 'green'? Not being able to fix spike marks only becomes an issue when the greens are mowed down to 1/8"(or less)-for greens that are not mowed, there are no spike marks that prove more troublesome than the actual grass itself-or sand greens where you putt on a smoothed out path to the hole.

              And if you have to play the course as you find it in a 'natural' environment, why do you get relief from an animal hole but not a tractor rut?

              Comment


              • Ok, so....I know I can't ground a club in a bunker or other hazard, nor can I feel the surface of a green with my hand or swipe my putter against the surface...but why?

                On any fairway or in deep rough, I can take any number of practice swings to get a feel for the conditions. What is so sacrosanct about putting surfaces or hazards that I can't test the conditions in those circumstances. (Note - not advocation for rolling test balls on the green here for which the rule prohibition is obvious.)

                From a practical perspective, I can see that allowing test swings in a bunker or heavily vegetated hazard would quickly lead to sand deprived holes, and striped bushes, but other than that, why is it prohibited?

                So as long as none of such testing on a green or in a hazard would be for the purpose of relief, or improving one's lie, why is this not allowed?

                When compared to "testing" on other parts of the course, such rules seem unduly prohibitive and I don't understand the rationale for them.

                Fortunately there are no rules limiting the number of golf balls you can carry during a match!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Fore Warned View Post
                  Ok, so....I know I can't ground a club in a bunker or other hazard, nor can I feel the surface of a green with my hand or swipe my putter against the surface...but why?

                  On any fairway or in deep rough, I can take any number of practice swings to get a feel for the conditions. What is so sacrosanct about putting surfaces or hazards that I can't test the conditions in those circumstances. (Note - not advocation for rolling test balls on the green here for which the rule prohibition is obvious.)

                  From a practical perspective, I can see that allowing test swings in a bunker or heavily vegetated hazard would quickly lead to sand deprived holes, and striped bushes, but other than that, why is it prohibited?

                  So as long as none of such testing on a green or in a hazard would be for the purpose of relief, or improving one's lie, why is this not allowed?

                  When compared to "testing" on other parts of the course, such rules seem unduly prohibitive and I don't understand the rationale for them.
                  Just to keep you right, you can feel the surface of the green with your hand and swipe the surface with your putter (such as in removing loose impediments). The prohibited actions in terms of testing the green are "rolling a ball or roughening or scraping the surface"

                  Comment


                  • I think the answer to the above is simply "those are the rules".

                    They don't always have to have a pure consistency and rationale, although they often do. If you're in a hazard, you cannot ground your club. That's just one thing that makes them different. I do think it makes hazards "extra" difficult. Same with the green, it's a different place with different rules.

                    Why isn't the 3-point line a circle? Why are free throws only worth 1 point?

                    Why does the CFL have the "onside kick"?

                    Why do tennis games have 4 points, and not 3 or 5. (And where'd they get that numbering system (I particularly wonder why it goes 15-30-40 instead of 45)????)
                    "Confusion" will be my epitaph
                    ...Iggy

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Ignatius Reilly View Post
                      (And where'd they get that numbering system (I particularly wonder why it goes 15-30-40 instead of 45)????)
                      AFIK, the origins of how tennis is scored is that the intention was to use the a display that was similar to the face of a clock.

                      Perhaps '40' was used because announcing it only used two syllables rather than three for '45'.
                      Sage of the GTA...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Benz View Post

                        AFIK, the origins of how tennis is scored is that the intention was to use the a display that was similar to the face of a clock.

                        Perhaps '40' was used because announcing it only used two syllables rather than three for '45'.
                        A theory is that the scoring nomenclature came from the French game jeu de paume (a precursor to tennis which initially used the hand instead of a racket). Jeu de paume was very popular before the French revolution, with more than 1,000 courts in Paris alone. The traditional court was 90 ft (pied du roi) in total with 45 ft on each side. When the server scored, he or she moved forward 15 ft. If the server scored again, he or she would move another 15 ft. If the server scored a third time, he or she could only move 10 ft closer
                        Putting isn't golf, greens should be treated almost the same as water hazards: you land on them, then add two strokes to your score.
                        - Chi Chi Rodriguez

                        Comment


                        • I think the tennis scoring is simpler than that:

                          Because, French.
                          "Confusion" will be my epitaph
                          ...Iggy

                          Comment


                          • Probably mentioned already, but repairing spike marks.
                            Member of Cedar Brae GC

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by AjaxGolf View Post

                              Yes, but I'm willing to bet that the only footprints in the trap belonged to the golfer who put the ball there. Because the ignorant person playing in front of you doesn't rake the trap is no reason you should be punished.
                              I'll take the other side of that bet. I've seen my fair share of players (kids, those new to the game, those who just don't give a %&#*, etc.) walk right through bunkers among other things (stepping on lines, not fixing ball marks, not replacing divots, failing to rake quickly come to mind).

                              I think the fault line of play-it-where-it-lies vs rules-should-allow-relief is strongly correlated to playing on private/high-end public courses vs. public/munis. I'd bet you see a lot less of those other player-sourced causes of wanting to take relief on private/high-end public courses. Anyone want the other side of that bet?

                              I think the rules of golf are premised on that players would be respectful of the course and other players. That was probably a fair expectation for hundreds of years but probably a bit of stretch for the last decade or so,

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by emvee View Post
                                I think the fault line of play-it-where-it-lies vs rules-should-allow-relief is strongly correlated to playing on private/high-end public courses vs. public/munis. I'd bet you see a lot less of those other player-sourced causes of wanting to take relief on private/high-end public courses.
                                Played with a buddy of mine at Lambton this morning. He was having a good round, but he found bunkers on six of the first nine holes! In any case, on one hole his ball ended up in a footprint. Before I could say anything, he took his shot and got out fairly well without really thinking about taking relief. An isolated incident, but perhaps illustrates the point made above.

                                Sage of the GTA...

                                Comment

                                Advanced Search

                                Join The TGN Email List

                                Collapse

                                Recently Joined

                                Collapse

                                Topics: 161,703   Posts: 1,696,598   Members: 45,422   Active Members: 280
                                Welcome to our newest member, sharx1710.

                                Today's Birthdays

                                Collapse

                                PGA Leaderboard

                                Collapse


                                TGN Sponsors




                                TGN Sponsors

                                Working...
                                X