I played in a senior open this year and had to inform the guy about mentioning playing a provisional ball he was about to play.
New Local Rules
- Thread starter nickjdavis
- Start date
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
I get that, I really do, but we shouldn’t oppose a rule coming in on the basis that golfers have a lack knowledge, if that was the case the authorities would never change anything.
backwoodsman
Tour Winner
Ok, for those who still seem not to get my drift, I'll have one more go at why the new LR makes things "easier" or "takes the skill away" . And of course i am generalising.
I knock tee shot 220 yards but it goes OOB.Under tbe new LR i have a couple of options (if one counts a provisional ball and going back to play another as essentially the same thing).
Option one - drop a ball under new LR, lets say, 160 yards off from the pin. Nice(ish) lie on fairway. You then get to play 4th shot.
Option two - play a ball from the tee, 3rd shot, some 380 yards from the pin. And hope it ends up in a nice lie somewhere as good, or possibly better than where i would have dropped under option one. You then get to play 4th shot.
In my mind, both practically & psychologically, option one is way easier. For me, there will ever only be one choice.
After a tee shot is lost or has gone OOB, prior to playing the 4th shot, one option gives a guaranteed good (ish) outcome as to where the ball will be, with no skill or ability involved. The other has an uncertain outcome and is entirely dependent on skill & execution of ability. To me, only one of those fits the description of golf.
And that's me done on this one
I knock tee shot 220 yards but it goes OOB.Under tbe new LR i have a couple of options (if one counts a provisional ball and going back to play another as essentially the same thing).
Option one - drop a ball under new LR, lets say, 160 yards off from the pin. Nice(ish) lie on fairway. You then get to play 4th shot.
Option two - play a ball from the tee, 3rd shot, some 380 yards from the pin. And hope it ends up in a nice lie somewhere as good, or possibly better than where i would have dropped under option one. You then get to play 4th shot.
In my mind, both practically & psychologically, option one is way easier. For me, there will ever only be one choice.
After a tee shot is lost or has gone OOB, prior to playing the 4th shot, one option gives a guaranteed good (ish) outcome as to where the ball will be, with no skill or ability involved. The other has an uncertain outcome and is entirely dependent on skill & execution of ability. To me, only one of those fits the description of golf.
And that's me done on this one
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
My own views are simple if I am playing in a competition it's all about me v the course v others and I think that not losing a ball or not knocking one OB is part of the challenge of the game.
In a friendly knockout or in friendly swindle games I would be happy to have the rule.
The clubs views are that they do not care what happens in friendly games or swindles etc so there is no need for the LR for casual play. The general feeling from everybody on the committee was they do not want it for competitions. If players play a provisional in the first place there will not be that much difference in terms of pace of play.
You've explained yourself very well and I doubt if anyone can dispute what you're saying but it seems to me you'd much rather see someone rack up an 8 or a 9 rather than them getting punishment enough that they have lost two strokes, you wish them punished further.
Aren't a lot of the modernising of the rules about getting play moving, speeding up the game, ye if someone just happens to go ob or loses a ball, he still gets his punishment and everyone can then move on with the whole.
I can't recall ever in 45 years+ watching/playing taking any enjoyment in someone racking up big scores, let them take their penalty and move along, what's the big deal, afterall, it's fairly unlikely they are going to be taking sweepie money out your pocket are they.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
One other point is that the pro game wants to play under the same rules as amateurs, hence I cannot see this ever being a Rule of Golf rather than a LR.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Of course you’re done, you’ve come up with a scenario that fits how you see the issue.
You’re playing a Par 4 and you’re left 240yds to the green, your 2nd shot in to the green you hook it in to a gorse bush 10yds from the side of the green, you find your ball but the bush is too deep to come out 2 club lengths, you’re left with 2 options, back to were you played your 2nd shot (240yds away) or you can back on a straight line keeping the position were your ball ended up and the flag in line, the second option leaves you a 30yd shot to the green.
Both options have different levels of skill and ability and both only come with 1 shot penalty.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Playing a provisional is not always known, have you never played were guys have hit decent shots and believed the ball is in bounds or not lost, only to walk up and find out that’s not the case.
chrisd
Major Champion
Maybe the point is that in a comp the player may well finish the hole only one or two shots above par where currently the player may, under todays rules, put themself out of a competition win after maybe having to play a poorly hit provisional (or 3 off the tee) which is likely to be a significantly harder proposition, likely to rack up a high number, than a drop on the fairway with only 1 extra shot to add, so the new rule, if introduced, is likely to be hugely more beneficial.
I don't think anyone is disputing the maybe's, but that's golf, how many times have you hit the ball in to the trees and it's bounced out in to the fairway or not as it happens, you just accept that's the way it is.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Is that any different to the new bunker rule though Chris? Player has a great card going and lands in a greenside bunker, they’re useless at bunkers could take 4 or 5 attempts to get out, now they can take a drop outside the bunker with a 2 shot penalty and chip on to the green, thus avoiding or risking a massive score.
chrisd
Major Champion
But you're talking about "rub of the green" assisting the player and we're talking about changing the rules to do it
chrisd
Major Champion
Maybe not Paul, but the point I was reading was regarding the oob rule. Personally I'd not offer this alternative either
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Unfortunately one was introduced as a RoG and one available as a local rule.
I see it more as a way to speed up the game rather than an easy get out option.
Then everyone will be playing to the same rules, as some point, sooner or later, it will suit everyone, just like the bounce back in to the fairway. As stated, I also believe it's about trying to speed the game up, take your punishment, and carry on.
To me this is classic stuck in the mud archaic dinosaurs not liking change, a problem the game has had for...well forever really.
chrisd
Major Champion
Yes, it's about stopping players from taking the long walk back because they didn't play a provisional, or maybe didnt realise that their ball wouldn't be found, especially with the reduced search time. The question being asked is the fairness of a lost or oob ball only costing one more shot penalty than playing 3 off the tee from maybe 250 yards back with the added risk of going oob or losing another ball
chrisd
Major Champion
Or for some, not dumbing down the game and making it much easier rather than just curing the pace if play issues
Is it dumbing down the game, you are still getting penalised, you are still likely to walk off with a double.
duncan mackie
Money List Winner
I wonder if there were these discussions when the original provisional ball rules were introduced.
Fundamentally the same issue of known v unknown - could, might etc apply
I fully appreciate that many members of this group don't accept stableford scoring as real golf, so it's hardly surprising that the discussions are as they are.
The reality is that this, and other rule changes, are fundamentally designed to avoid extending the suffering - not only of the player involved, the players in his/her group but everyone playing behind them on the course.
Whether 3 off the tee is really enough is enough territory or not can be debated ad infinitum, but the crux of handicap golf is that handicaps adjust to the players performances under the circumstances played ie ultimately it doesn't even matter if the rule does enable a particular player and his style to gain an edge - it would be very short term.
Fundamentally the same issue of known v unknown - could, might etc apply
I fully appreciate that many members of this group don't accept stableford scoring as real golf, so it's hardly surprising that the discussions are as they are.
The reality is that this, and other rule changes, are fundamentally designed to avoid extending the suffering - not only of the player involved, the players in his/her group but everyone playing behind them on the course.
Whether 3 off the tee is really enough is enough territory or not can be debated ad infinitum, but the crux of handicap golf is that handicaps adjust to the players performances under the circumstances played ie ultimately it doesn't even matter if the rule does enable a particular player and his style to gain an edge - it would be very short term.
