Course specifying club use on a hole

[D-S]

The "Castle Hole" at Clevedon would probably require moving the tee to the bottom of the hill; changing what is a spectacular looking but pretty rubbish to play par 4 into a fairly decent par 3 but without the views.
As it is, there's a sign on each tee advising the maximum distance the player should hit, which effectively bans attempting to drive the green and putting balls into the road/houses opposite.

Last time I played there, a couple of years ago, they had a net right in front of the tee which you had to just miss or hit a draw otherwise you would go into the rubbish right of the fairway. The way the tee markers were positioned that day meant it was nigh on impossible for some of the field.
I think they should just suck it up and make it into a dull but safe par 3 rather than tricking it up.

 

[clubchamp98]

I am sure some courses have had to change after houses were built long after the course was. I think that there has been court rulings over such.

My old club had to do exactly that.
Been there 125yrs.
Houses were built alongside a par five 6th hole balls allegedly hit a car in the drive.
There were massive trees and a 250+ carry but the club were found liable.

The members all thought the car was broken into and the owner just put a golf ball in it to make a claim.
We had to revise the hole as a consequence.

 

[clubchamp98]

And a players answers with 100% integrity? What about in a solo round when no-one os there to verify.

That’s called putting in a GP card!

 

[srixon 1]

Last time I played there, a couple of years ago, they had a net right in front of the tee which you had to just miss or hit a draw otherwise you would go into the rubbish right of the fairway. The way the tee markers were positioned that day meant it was nigh on impossible for some of the field.
I think they should just suck it up and make it into a dull but safe par 3 rather than tricking it up.

Same when I played there last year. We also had to hit off a mat. I still managed to hit an iron left and my ball was up against the boundary wall.

 

[chrisd]

There is a hole at Leatherhead that says drivers are not to be used, the hole is bordered by expensive houses favoured by premiership footballers I was told.

They shortened the last hole at Torquay from a par 4 to a par3 to stop balls going into gardens.

I used to play Leatherhead on the way home from practice day at the BMW Wentworth, and indeed they banned drivers on that hole, and to be fair it was very tight

 

[IanM]

Last time I played there, a couple of years ago, they had a net right in front of the tee which you had to just miss or hit a draw otherwise you would go into the rubbish right of the fairway. The way the tee markers were positioned that day meant it was nigh on impossible for some of the field.
I think they should just suck it up and make it into a dull but safe par 3 rather than tricking it up.

I played an Open at Clevedon last year. Pretty sure they specified you had to hit an iron... off the mat, next to a net. Quite awful. It was only a shortish iron and a wedge.

It was pairs so no idea what the qualifying round status usually is.

They've messed around with the starting hole over the years too.

I think that hole as a par 3 would at least make it conventional, decently places tee and bunkering could make for a decent hole.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I used to play Leatherhead on the way home from practice day at the BMW Wentworth, and indeed they banned drivers on that hole, and to be fair it was very tight

I agree. It was a poor club choice pulling driver anyway

 

[DickInShorts]

A course up here had a rule on one hole that only irons or hybrids could be used due to an irate householder adjacent to the hole.
Only problem was I was playing a competition with pros in the field who could hit their hybrids further than my driver

I also thought it was outside the rules of golf- but now superseded by the hole being slightly re-routed

 

[Steven Rules]

There is no Rule of Golf or Local Rule that provides for limiting what club (or distance) can be used for a particular stroke, and Rule 1.3c(3) expressly prohibits imposing penalties other than in accordance with the Rules.

Therefore this situation would need to be managed via club disciplinary processes or under a Code of Conduct adopted as a Local Rule in accordance with Rule 1.2b.

The Code of Conduct avenue looks a bit dubious, though, given that Committee Procedures 5I(2)b specifically prohibits a not unrelated practice of using '...a Code of Conduct to introduce an unauthorized Local Rule, such as penalizing a player for hitting a ball over properties located out of bounds...'

 

[Colin L]

There is no Rule of Golf or Local Rule that provides for limiting what club (or distance) can be used for a particular stroke, and Rule 1.3c(3) expressly prohibits imposing penalties other than in accordance with the Rules.

Therefore this situation would need to be managed via club disciplinary processes or under a Code of Conduct adopted as a Local Rule in accordance with Rule 1.2b.

The Code of Conduct avenue looks a bit dubious, though, given that Committee Procedures 5I(2)b specifically prohibits a not unrelated practice of using '...a Code of Conduct to introduce an unauthorized Local Rule, such as penalizing a player for hitting a ball over properties located out of bounds...'

Yep. Been through all of that! We had to deal with a problem hole adjacent to properties as have several other clubs in the area which can be a very costly business. We got approval from Scottish Golf in terms of qualifying scores to limit the distance off the tee and, on my advice, introduced a Club rule as there is not Rule of Golf that can help and also worded the club rule with the distance allowed defined, not the club to be used. It is also clear that there has to be intent. As Dick alludes above, the distances different golfers can hit a driver, say, is far too variable to be of any used. The distance on our problem hole is limited to "not beyond the left hand fairway bunker", a distance off the yellow tees of 212 yards. For many of us, that distance with a driver is nowadays a challenge beyond our dreams rather than a restriction . With some reshaping of the hole through the placement of the bunkers, planting trees, shifting and realigning a boundary it is quite a bit safer although not foolproof.

When the Code of Conduct possibility was introduced, I thought, great, now we can impose a golfing penalty; then I reached the bit Steven has quoted. .......

And to anyone who still believes the "golf club was here long before the houses" argument, it is not only meaningless in law but morally untenable. One of the scariest examples of errant shots was a ball landing in a pram in someone's garden. Mercifully, the baby wasn't in it at the time.

 

[Steven Rules]

We got approval from Scottish Golf in terms of qualifying scores to limit the distance off the tee and, on my advice, introduced a Club rule

From a practical standpoint, how - or how often - does the club deal with transgressions of that club rule? Or is it more there for moral guidance?

At our place, we decided to nestle the tees closer to the trees along the boundary so players were forced to hit away from the boundary somewhat rather than parallel to it, and also move the tees forward to turn a par 5 into a par 4. These measures significantly reduced the probem by totally changing the landing zone for a slice off the original tees.

 

[Colin L]

From a practical standpoint, how - or how often - does the club deal with transgressions of that club rule? Or is it more there for moral guidance?

At our place, we decided to nestle the tees closer to the trees along the boundary so players were forced to hit away from the boundary somewhat rather than parallel to it, and also move the tees forward to turn a par 5 into a par 4. These measures significantly reduced the probem by totally changing the landing zone for a slice off the original tees.

I'm not involved enough nowadays to know the number or frequency but transgressions by members have certainly been dealt with and over time some visitors invited not to come back. I'd like to boast that all those I play with are totally compliant but we all fall into the category I mentioned of no longer being to hit a ball far enough to transgress. Compliance is unavoidable.

 

[Swango1980]

Is the 142 yards to the middle of the green? And if so, does that mean a player cannot use a club to reach a back pin position, or cannot use a club on days tees are positioned a bit further back? On such days, if anyone gets a hole in one, do they have to buy the whole bar drinks, before being banned for breaching the rule?

 

[sunshine]

Think its the 9th at Finchley - par 5, sharp dogleg left - where there are signs prohibiting hitting over the houses that line the left hand side. Another rule that surely can't be enforced?

This is the only place I've seen it. It's a bit absurd because nobody is going to deliberately hook it OOB.

 

[KenL]

My old club had to do exactly that.
Been there 125yrs.
Houses were built alongside a par five 6th hole balls allegedly hit a car in the drive.
There were massive trees and a 250+ carry but the club were found liable.

The members all thought the car was broken into and the owner just put a golf ball in it to make a claim.
We had to revise the hole as a consequence.

You had to revise a hole because of one alleged incident? That's just bonkers.

 

[Colin L]

You had to revise a hole because of one alleged incident? That's just bonkers.

Perhaps it was a proven incident which cost a lot of money?

 

[clubchamp98]

You had to revise a hole because of one alleged incident? That's just bonkers.

There were three tower blocks .
Demolished them and built a housing estate.
A taxi driver claimed a golf ball went through his windscreen and claimed from the club.

We had two judges as members and both advised the club to just pay up and revise the hole.

You would have needed to hit a shot like Rory on the 15th at Agusta 250+ yds around 50ft trees.
Members didn’t belive it.
We moved the tee nearer the fence so players were hitting away from the houses.
Crap but easier than a law suit.