Drop zones in ridiculously generous places

[salfordlad]

Always worth remembering GUR does not mean you have to drop out of them. With this long dry summer there are a few where I would play out of the bunker rather than take a drop on to areas of worn out grass.

Indeed. A simple "all bunkers GUR" at some clubs can occasionally create significant unintended consequences because the club hasn't considered precisely what that means for relief options from certain positions in certain bunkers. I have seen situations where there is no scope for relief to proceed within the Rules, or where relief is in a position much worse than trying to play from a foot of water. Gotta love the volunteer Committees that don't have a rules-savvy brain among them.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Length has far more influence on scoring than bunkering. And bunkers being GUR doesn't entirely eliminate their effect or reduce the difficulty presented.

I'm at a parkland course with big greens, big bunkers on fairways and in front of the greens. All greens gur means a free hit, you just hit without worries. You miss the bunker, great. You go in the bunker, so what? It's golf without pressure or thought.

It absolutely eliminates their effect in the sense that being in one is not a punishment. It stops your ball but that's all.

 

[salfordlad]

Length has far more influence on scoring than bunkering. And bunkers being GUR doesn't entirely eliminate their effect or reduce the difficulty presented.

I see courses/tee sets where these observations hold, but I also see courses (generally longer ones) where bunkers all GUR makes a significant difference to the difficulty of play around the greens. I think another reasonable generalisation is the majority of folk play less well from bunkers near greens than playing from more regular ground, and make a far worse job of playing from fairway bunkers than playing from close to fairway bunkers.

 

[clubchamp98]

This is patently not true for people that struggle with bunkers. Which is the majority of women at our club, and about 20% of seniors.

So the 17 th road hole on St Andrews would be harder making it 10 yds longer but not having the bunker in play.
That’s just not logic

 

[D-S]

Sadly not the only error in that document.

So which version of this ruling should a club follow? The version on the EG website, updated this month and sent out to all clubs this month or another one?

 

[clubchamp98]

So which version of this ruling should a club follow? The version on the EG website, updated this month and sent out to all clubs this month or another one?

As players were told to play off what’s on the app.
So should the club imo.
Very poor situation if the info is wrong, but not surprising.

 

[wjemather]

So which version of this ruling should a club follow? The version on the EG website, updated this month and sent out to all clubs this month or another one?

The detail document, also on the EG website and (re)issued at the same time as the summary you posted above...



(NB: this document also contains at least one error!)

 

[jim8flog]

And of course it doesn't mean that the whole bunker is flooded, only that there isn't anywhere that legitimate relief is not available.
A lot of courses/clubs deem them out of play just because there is some water in them.

I agree with that . I have had a few 'discussions' with comp organisers about that issue.

 

[jim8flog]

I'm at a parkland course with big greens, big bunkers on fairways and in front of the greens. All greens gur means a free hit, you just hit without worries. You miss the bunker, great. You go in the bunker, so what? It's golf without pressure or thought.

It absolutely eliminates their effect in the sense that being in one is not a punishment. It stops your ball but that's all.

That brought up ideas for several silly comments

 

[D-S]

The detail document, also on the EG website and issued at the same time as the summary you posted above...

View attachment 59849

So summary document (5 pages long) is wrong and the detail (6 pages long) right? That will truly help clubs follow the rules.
We will be asking EG for clarification.

 

[IanMcC]

Length has far more influence on scoring than bunkering.

You are usually very knowledgeable regarding topics on here, but you are surely wrong here.
Lets take an average type of mid teen handicapper.
On a long par 4 he will be 3 shots to the green. Even if you increase the hole by 50 yards, he will still be 3 shots to the green.
On a par 3 he will usually still reach in regulation even with yards added.
On a par 5 he will be 3 or 4 shots to the green, which probably wont change much by adding yardage.
If this player is particularly poor extracting themselves from a greenside bunker, however, the simple act of going into that bunker could add 3 or 4 strokes to the player's tally. And that could happen a few times in the round.
I do realise that course length is the dominant factor when it comes to Rating a course, but I would argue that, for many players, severe bunkering has just as big an influence on a players scorecard if they are poor bunker players.

You will probably just tell me I'm wrong again, though.

 

[D-S]

You are usually very knowledgeable regarding topics on here, but you are surely wrong here.
Lets take an average type of mid teen handicapper.
On a long par 4 he will be 3 shots to the green. Even if you increase the hole by 50 yards, he will still be 3 shots to the green.
On a par 3 he will usually still reach in regulation even with yards added.
On a par 5 he will be 3 or 4 shots to the green, which probably wont change much by adding yardage.
If this player is particularly poor extracting themselves from a greenside bunker, however, the simple act of going into that bunker could add 3 or 4 strokes to the player's tally. And that could happen a few times in the round.
I do realise that course length is the dominant factor when it comes to Rating a course, but I would argue that, for many players, severe bunkering has just as big an influence on a players scorecard if they are poor bunker players.

You will probably just tell me I'm wrong again, though.

I think this is particularly the case as ‘shortened courses’ are normally by a few 10s of yards here or there, which might make a fraction of a shot difference to the CR but all bunkers being out of play distinctly alters the challenge of a course both in terms of number of shots potentially taken but also on how a hole is played from a strategic standpoint.

I come back to the point I have made here in the past, when rating a course we spend a lot of time measuring distances to bunkers from the landing zones for the scratch and bogey players’ drives, lay ups and approaches, also whether a bunker needs to be carried, assessing the depth of all bunkers, the % of green surrounded by bunkers and their positioning. If the course is exactly the same with or without bunkers then I, and my fellow raters, have wasted a lot of time over the years.

 

[wjemather]

So summary document (5 pages long) is wrong and the detail (6 pages long) right? That will truly help clubs follow the rules.
We will be asking EG for clarification.

I've already highlighted these errors & inconsistencies through our regional advisor.

 

[rulie]

I've already highlighted these errors & inconsistencies through our regional advisor.

The question would be, who approved them for posting/distribution?

 

[wjemather]

I think this is particularly the case as ‘shortened courses’ are normally by a few 10s of yards here or there, which might make a fraction of a shot difference to the CR but all bunkers being out of play distinctly alters the challenge of a course both in terms of number of shots potentially taken but also on how a hole is played from a strategic standpoint.

I come back to the point I have made here in the past, when rating a course we spend a lot of time measuring distances to bunkers from the landing zones for the scratch and bogey players’ drives, lay ups and approaches, also whether a bunker needs to be carried, assessing the depth of all bunkers, the % of green surrounded by bunkers and their positioning. If the course is exactly the same with or without bunkers then I, and my fellow raters, have wasted a lot of time over the years.

It's important to note that bunkers being GUR doesn't remove them from the course, so this equivalence is somewhat misleading. Even as GUR, they still present an obstacle and the relief option does not necessarily afford an easier shot.

 

[D-S]

It's important to note that bunkers being GUR doesn't remove them from the course, so this equivalence is somewhat misleading. Even as GUR, they still present an obstacle and the relief option does not necessarily afford an easier shot.

With the best will in the world I would bite your hand off for any free drop outside every bunker on the Hotchkin and I don’t consider myself to be a poor bunker player. A key part of the strategy of playing that whole course is bunker avoidance both fairway and greenside. This sometimes the case on individual holes elsewhere.
Ask most amateurs whether they would achieve the same score given a free drop from every bunker or not and I think the answer is pretty obvious, the only variance would be how many shots and it’s not a fractions of a shot.

 

[wjemather]

With the best will in the world I would bite your hand off for any free drop outside every bunker on the Hotchkin and I don’t consider myself to be a poor bunker player. A key part of the strategy of playing that whole course is bunker avoidance both fairway and greenside. This sometimes the case on individual holes elsewhere.
Ask most amateurs whether they would achieve the same score given a free drop from every bunker or not and I think the answer is pretty obvious, the only variance would be how many shots and it’s not a fractions of a shot.

The Hotchkin is at the extremes of bunkering, so isn't a particularly useful example, but even so there is much more to the course than just bunkers.

The answers many (most) amateurs would give to a lot of questions about how they might score from various situations would bear little relation to their actual results. Whether playing from a greenside bunker or from a drop outside of a greenside bunker, their average scores will be very similar, regardless of what they think they might do. Add to that how few bunkers get visited in the average round of golf, and the difference in scoring is minimal.

 

[D-S]

The answers many (most) amateurs would give to a lot of questions about how they might score from various situations would bear little relation to their actual results. Whether playing from a greenside bunker or from a drop outside of a greenside bunker, their average scores will be very similar, regardless of what they think they might do. Add to that how few bunkers get visited in the average round of golf, and the difference in scoring is minimal.

Well that's good news as it'll save us a load of time in rating courses next year.

 

[wjemather]

Well that's good news as it'll save us a load of time in rating courses next year.

It's an interesting exercise to play around with the electronic rating forms to get a feel for exactly how much (or how little) the various features typically contribute to the overall ratings.

 

[clubchamp98]

Well that's good news as it'll save us a load of time in rating courses next year.

Well it’s obvious why most golfers think their course rating is wrong.!
It dosnt count bunkers ? Bonkers more like.