New Rules 2019 - Out of Bounds

[duncan mackie]

I've always taken a certain pride in knowing the rules pretty well and always read the Decisions books to enhance that knowledge.

Personally I think that with this revision the number of significant changes are too great and many of them are unnecessary.

A bit like my loss of love for modern equipment, I find myself losing respect for the rules and suspect that I won't bother reading the new rules to the same depth as I did the old.

Instead I'll join the majority of golfers in muddling along as best as I can.

It really wasn't that long ago that I felt the same way.

I've now gone the opposite way and rejoined the committee, with responsibility for rules, because I think 'I've got it'.

The key for me was to go beyond the detailed changes on a piecemeal basis as suddenly realise what was really changing - to the extent that I can reasonably predict what changes will have been implemented at a detail level before looking it. Nearly all of it makes complete sense to me, in itself, (obvious example is the synergy between IO and ACC - AGC as was) but looking at it as a series of changes definitely doesn't make sense of it.

Importantly for me, nearly all the principle changes are entirely consistent with the underlying attitude shown in many large threads on here over the years; and other changes campaigned for clearly got significant airing as the detailed explanation of why they weren't changed showed.

So, this is my take. Doesn't make it the right take but I would suggest people give things a little time. I'm pretty confident that most people who didn't have a really detailed understanding of the current rules ( could cite most of rule 20 for example....) will be able to play to the new rules significantly easier within a season - how's that for a challenge?

For those picking up on my 'nearly all of it...' earlier; I believe the flagstick rule to be miss guided in that it will end up adding to times rather than saving anything, as designed. I will be happy to be proved wrong through next year.
The rule this thread is nominally titled is a separate matter that, ultimately was handled badly in the UK but makes sense for other markets. Well intentioned, supporting important messages etc but all it has achieved on a rules front is to create emotive discussions about a non-issue. At it's worst full implementation would be less than the difference between a medal score and a stableford one ie it's not even a real competition issue.

 

[rulie]

It really wasn't that long ago that I felt the same way.

I've now gone the opposite way and rejoined the committee, with responsibility for rules, because I think 'I've got it'.

The key for me was to go beyond the detailed changes on a piecemeal basis as suddenly realise what was really changing - to the extent that I can reasonably predict what changes will have been implemented at a detail level before looking it. Nearly all of it makes complete sense to me, in itself, (obvious example is the synergy between IO and ACC - AGC as was) but looking at it as a series of changes definitely doesn't make sense of it.

Importantly for me, nearly all the principle changes are entirely consistent with the underlying attitude shown in many large threads on here over the years; and other changes campaigned for clearly got significant airing as the detailed explanation of why they weren't changed showed.

So, this is my take. Doesn't make it the right take but I would suggest people give things a little time. I'm pretty confident that most people who didn't have a really detailed understanding of the current rules ( could cite most of rule 20 for example....) will be able to play to the new rules significantly easier within a season - how's that for a challenge?

For those picking up on my 'nearly all of it...' earlier; I believe the flagstick rule to be miss guided in that it will end up adding to times rather than saving anything, as designed. I will be happy to be proved wrong through next year.
The rule this thread is nominally titled is a separate matter that, ultimately was handled badly in the UK but makes sense for other markets. Well intentioned, supporting important messages etc but all it has achieved on a rules front is to create emotive discussions about a non-issue. At it's worst full implementation would be less than the difference between a medal score and a stableford one ie it's not even a real competition issue.

Regarding "saving time" - I think that we have to remember that the Rules don't save or waste time (other than the reduction in search time) - the players do. The Rule changes only provide a means for the player to save time.

 

[Old Skier]

I think your flagstick argument is completely valid and like the LR lost ball OB rule I will implement it for my friendly roll ups and society golf but personally during comps the flag will always come out.

 

[duncan mackie]

Regarding "saving time" - I think that we have to remember that the Rules don't save or waste time (other than the reduction in search time) - the players do. The Rule changes only provide a means for the player to save time.

I accept that. My point is that the specific reason for the implementation of this rule, in this manner, is to enable time to be saved.
All of the evidence so far, including a detailed GM article and documented tour professional research, is on performance enhancement.
I'm not concerned about time on the tours they have caddies and it's neutral either way. However their practices get copied into environments where some practices will add time.
I hope I'm wrong.
Permitting it for putts in excess of 20 paces would make sense to me - not any putt.

 

[rulefan]

Off the green I would always leave the flagstick in. On the green I will always leave the flagstick in. Any minimal time saved or lost is irrelevant.

 

[Imurg]

Time wasting will begin when 2 out of a 4 ball want it in and the other 2 want it out...
Flag Hokey Kokey will be the next dance craze....

 

[rulefan]

All who want it in play. Then all who want it out play. Easy

 

[Imurg]

Until you start stepping on lines...
Not a huge issue but I can't see it speeding up play...

 

[rulefan]

But it will give you a better result with your long putts.

 

[rulie]

I accept that. My point is that the specific reason for the implementation of this rule, in this manner, is to enable time to be saved.
All of the evidence so far, including a detailed GM article and documented tour professional research, is on performance enhancement.
I'm not concerned about time on the tours they have caddies and it's neutral either way. However their practices get copied into environments where some practices will add time.
I hope I'm wrong.
Permitting it for putts in excess of 20 paces would make sense to me - not any putt.

One of the previous proposals was that leaving the flagstick in the hole was permitted until the ball was within the length of the flagstick of the hole. I liked that proposal better.

 

[Old Skier]

One of the previous proposals was that leaving the flagstick in the hole was permitted until the ball was within the length of the flagstick of the hole. I liked that proposal better.

Thank heavens that didn't happen. We would all be taking the thing out to see if we were close or not. More time wasting

 

[jim8flog]

The thing I have against it on a personal level is that you are making the hole much smaller. A slightly off centre putt should still fall in to the hole a slightly off centre putt with the flagstick in could deflect off sideways and not drop.

As previously said, I will probably leave it in for longish down hill putts where the chances of actually putting out are already slim but hitting the flagstick may stop the ball going a long way past which is the same as I do now for downhill putts from off the green.

 

[Old Colner]

I am of the thinking that most people will just carry on as they always have, putting with the flag out, it is now an option, when you have one of those monster putts you do not have to wait for somebody to tend the pin on the off chance you get the ball anywhere near the hole, ever mind in it.

There will be the ones in the next few weeks that are putting with the flags in, waiting for somebody to say something, so the can retort with their knowledge of the new rules.

 

[Hadrian]

Need help to find, actual wording on Congu web site, the out of bounds local rule, not allowable in qualifying comps.
Is this a fact as the advice to committees does not come up when clicked on, just seems to go in a loop.
Am I missing something.

 

[Old Skier]

Can't help with wording as away from the ref but CONGU have definitely said not to be used in qualifiers. No reason given.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Need help to find, actual wording on Congu web site, the out of bounds local rule, not allowable in qualifying comps.
Is this a fact as the advice to committees does not come up when clicked on, just seems to go in a loop.
Am I missing something.

See post 253 on this thread.

 

[Hadrian]

See post 253 on this thread.

Unfortunately this does not work for me, just goes around in a loop.
Which made me wonder if it was still applicable.

 

[duncan mackie]

Unfortunately this does not work for me, just goes around in a loop.
Which made me wonder if it was still applicable.

As others have said, there was an email communication to handicap secretaries a few weeks ago.

There hasn't been a subsequent one revising.

The CONGU news section and recent document have indeed become corrupted - no doubt they will sort out at some point.....

 

[rulefan]

Read through this

 

[Hadrian]

Read through this

Thanks Guys all sorted.
Happy Christmas Ho Ho Ho