Rules...is there reasoned argument?....

[Herbie]

For one set of rules for Tour pro's or competition where golf is monitored, and another simplified set for club golfers?

When you look at the R&A rules in their entirety, with its rulings and ammendments etc, not to mention all the sub text to rules, it becomes quite a tome, yet the R&A publish mini rule books as a quick guide, that does not cover all eventuality on the course. If no one raises the question how will anyone be able to quote rule 14.b for example? References are made to rules not fully covered in these booklets, but if no one thinks it is required, no one will ask at the clubhouse and errors could occur.

The pro's and big comps have the benefit of trained refs who know the rules backwards and make decisions on the spot, its covered by TV, Crowds and stewards so nothing is missed, but not so at the local medal comp each month, where its down to the knowledge of players and their limited example rule books.

If we all play by the rules, why then are the rules publications limited, instead of full detail?

What do you think?

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Basically I think this goes beyond the whole integral philosophy of the game. Play the ball as it lies, play the course as you find it and if you can't do either do what's fair.

Where do you draw the line. What rules should become "pro only". I agree that the rules are difficult and that they are open to misinterpretation but that is what a handicap/competition secretary is there for. If you have a decision on the course, proceed within the rules as you think appropriate and refer it back. I can't see doing away with any rules makes the game any different. I agree that the R&A need to look at the amateur game and make the rules easier to understand but I seriously can't see anyway a pro/amateur split could evolve. You don't have different rules in cricket (have you ever seen the full laws of that game and their decisions?) for pros and amateurs and yet clubs are asked to provide umpires across the land every weekend who clearly don't know the full range of laws. It goes back to doing what is considered fair and sticking with that.

 

[backwoodsman]

The R&A booklet does have the full rules in it - and is easily portable. So it's not hard to have the full thing with you - and there no real excuse not to. I keep one in my bag - and for some reason have 2 more in my "reading bucket" at home.

What I think is the nub of your point, is that the interpretation of the rules are complex and then you need something like the "decisions" book. Now, since that is big enough to beat to death a small cow, I think your point does have some validity.

Whenever there's a rules question on here, I try to look up the correct answer (nerdy I know, but how else do you get to grips..). What one finds is that it can take time to track down the correct answer - especially when two rules may appear to be in conflict or you're not sure which takes precedent. And time ain't what you have to spare half way round a compy.

 

[RGDave]

Hmm.

I reckon the rules could be condensed into about 5 pages for amateurs and not create complications for pro tournaments and/or difficulties for anyone "umpiring".

99% of rules seem common sense to me, and hopefully anyone who has played for a while. All the "way-out" stuff that hardly ever occurs is not really necessary for club games. If we all played by the simple basics and made drops/stroke and distance and hazards "universal" in their approach, it could be made easier.

I carry a book, it comes out very rarely.

 

[Imurg]

I respect the Rules of this great game and wouldn't want to change them.
But having said that - they are complicated and by doing the wrong thing you can quite easily be DQ'd in competition. And this can lead to slow play.

Name dropping again, I know, but David Howell told me that on tour a player will call a referee for the slightest thing if he is not 110% sure of the proceedure. When you're playing for money and points, a DQ here or there for a wrong drop or whatever could be the difference between a card for next year and the dole queue. Even when players know what to do they will often wait for confirmation before continuing. This can manifest itself in our game. Because some rules/rulings are so complex it takes time to get things right. People want to do the right thing but complicated rulings can't possibly help.

So a simplification of the rules would be in order - but how you do that and keep the meaning of the ruling intact is anyones guess.

 

[bobmac]

Herb, a slight detour if i may.
Moving from rules of the game to etiquette of the game.
How many people don't follow the guidence on what should be done.
Someone complained to me about slow play a few weeks ago at my gaff. A 2 ball being held up by a 4 four ball who in turn were being held up, so no gaps in the groups ahead.
Should the 4 ball call through the 2 ball even though they hadn't lost ground on the players in front?
What are your thoughts?

 

[CrapHacker]

Herb, a slight detour if i may.
Moving from rules of the game to etiquette of the game.
How many people don't follow the guidence on what should be done.
Someone complained to me about slow play a few weeks ago at my gaff. A 2 ball being held up by a 4 four ball who in turn were being held up, so no gaps in the groups ahead.
Should the 4 ball call through the 2 ball even though they hadn't lost ground on the players in front?
What are your thoughts?

If they haven't lost ground, how could they ?

Ok, none of us like a slow round. but if the course is busy, either put up with it, or don't go out there.

Sometimes we just have to appreciate the scenary, and enjoy the extra time we have to be out there relaxing. It's not always a game to rush.

 

[Imurg]

It doesn't matter if they've lost ground or not :-


Play at Good Pace and Keep Up
It is a group’s responsibility to keep up with the group in front. If it loses a clear hole and it is delaying the group behind, it should invite the group behind to play through, irrespective of the number of players in that group.

Where a group has not lost a clear hole, but it is apparent that the group behind can play faster, it should invite the
faster moving group to play through.

This is the "letting through" principle that always gets overlooked. There is no reason to not let a group through just because you havn't lost a hole on the group ahead.

 

[USER1999]

I think for us hackers, if the rule is clear enough, it is fine. I think if we need to delve into the 'decisions on' book, then that is too complicated to impose during the round, and it is better to make a decision between your playing partners, and just do what the other two think is fair. We aren't pro's, we aren't making a living out of it, we aren't blatantly trying to cheat, it really isn't that important, let's just get on with it.

 

[bobmac]

It doesn't matter if they've lost ground or not :-

Where a group has not lost a clear hole, but it is apparent that the group behind can play faster, it should invite the
faster moving group to play through.

I wonder how many people would call through in this situation or would it be a case of
'look pal, it's choca all the way in front of us. You're not going to get anywhere'
Do you think it would make any difference at your club if there were several copies of this advice on every table in your clubhouse?

 

[Herbie]

Herb, a slight detour if i may.
Moving from rules of the game to etiquette of the game.
How many people don't follow the guidence on what should be done.
Someone complained to me about slow play a few weeks ago at my gaff. A 2 ball being held up by a 4 four ball who in turn were being held up, so no gaps in the groups ahead.
Should the 4 ball call through the 2 ball even though they hadn't lost ground on the players in front?
What are your thoughts?

You are on the ball with the idea behind my question, its a problem of interpretation at club level. If the golfer only has limited knowledge about the rules and etiquette, are they likely to ask the right questions?

If someone with basic knowledge does not have detailed knowledge, how will they know to ask the club sec for clarification if they feel they have covered it themselves?

As far as your question goes, it is a problem that often occurs, I would just accept this instance even though the guidance of 'play through' is fairly clear, it often needs common sense application.

Some very worthy comments on here so far dont you think?

 

[rgs]

Why have a two club length rule for a penalty drop and a one club length for a free drop. Why not make both drops the same either one or two club lengths.

 

[viscount17]

Why have a two club length rule for a penalty drop and a one club length for a free drop. Why not make both drops the same either one or two club lengths.

especially when two club lengths can put you in a better position than one.

my stance on the rules is that if you need a decisions book that big you haven't written the rules properly. let's face it we really don't need that many rules and the decisions are the results of persons unknown trying to gain an edge.

 

[EchtLoon]

Herb, a slight detour if i may.
Moving from rules of the game to etiquette of the game.
How many people don't follow the guidence on what should be done.
Someone complained to me about slow play a few weeks ago at my gaff. A 2 ball being held up by a 4 four ball who in turn were being held up, so no gaps in the groups ahead.
Should the 4 ball call through the 2 ball even though they hadn't lost ground on the players in front?
What are your thoughts?

If they haven't lost ground, how could they ?

Ok, none of us like a slow round. but if the course is busy, either put up with it, or don't go out there.

Sometimes we just have to appreciate the scenary, and enjoy the extra time we have to be out there relaxing. It's not always a game to rush.

Sorry, totally disagree, Imurg gets it right, when a group is clearly faster - and a 2 would in nearly all circumstances be faster - then what is the issue with letting them through?

 

[EchtLoon]

Why have a two club length rule for a penalty drop and a one club length for a free drop. Why not make both drops the same either one or two club lengths.

especially when two club lengths can put you in a better position than one.

Again what is so complicated here? A penalty drop is two club lenghts, a free drop is one. Getting two club lengths to drop is fine, you've been penalised already, so give the man some leeway.

 

[CrapHacker]

Herb, a slight detour if i may.
Moving from rules of the game to etiquette of the game.
How many people don't follow the guidence on what should be done.
Someone complained to me about slow play a few weeks ago at my gaff. A 2 ball being held up by a 4 four ball who in turn were being held up, so no gaps in the groups ahead.
Should the 4 ball call through the 2 ball even though they hadn't lost ground on the players in front?
What are your thoughts?

If they haven't lost ground, how could they ?

Ok, none of us like a slow round. but if the course is busy, either put up with it, or don't go out there.

Sometimes we just have to appreciate the scenary, and enjoy the extra time we have to be out there relaxing. It's not always a game to rush.

Sorry, totally disagree, Imurg gets it right, when a group is clearly faster - and a 2 would in nearly all circumstances be faster - then what is the issue with letting them through?

Ok I accept I'm wrong, but I have to admit I don't get it. If there's nowhere for them to go, how can they be quicker ?

 

[EchtLoon]

Ok I accept I'm wrong, but I have to admit I don't get it. If there's nowhere for them to go, how can they be quicker ?

Because the next group lets them through too.

Too many players, at too many clubs, operate the 'well I can't play any faster, so you're not getting through' rule (the made up one LDO).

A tale from my years as a Castleton member in the IoM: I played almost daily with another single digit guy, we played the whites every day, and were often round in 2 hrs 30; anyway one day we got there too late to beat the early starters, and the seniors had gone out, six groups of 3 or 4 in each. We caught the last group on the third, and as soon as we had, they waved us through, and by the sixth we had been waved through every group, and not a single one took a single shot more than they had to before giving us the wave. Result was we finsihed in 2hrs 25mins that day.

Moral of the story - if members would adhere to the 'faster group' principle, then we could all enjoy our golf a lot more, playing at a speed we ourselves find appropriatte. Stubbornly clinging to your slot on the course because your own group can't get waved through, is in my eyes, the golfing equivalent of middle lane hogging.

 

[CrapHacker]

Okies, so it only works with obviously faster groups - a fourball letting through a 2 ball or 3 ball. Anyone letting a single player through ( solos do get credence nowadays don't they )

Does that go so far a to say 2 mid / high handicappers let through 2 single figure guys ?

Or women let seniors through ?

 

[USER1999]

To me, unless you have lost ground, there is no reason to play people through. It isn't selfish, it is selfish to expect to be waved through on a busy course. Why should you expect to get round on a Saturday morning in 2 1/2 hours?

Not just that, but it inevitably holds up the course as you play through, which will knock back through the field, and slow every one else up. So you get a faster round, and 200 golfers over the rest of the day get a slower one. Selfish?

 

[EchtLoon]

To me, unless you have lost ground, there is no reason to play people through. It isn't selfish, it is selfish to expect to be waved through on a busy course. Why should you expect to get round on a Saturday morning in 2 1/2 hours?

Not just that, but it inevitably holds up the course as you play through, which will knock back through the field, and slow every one else up. So you get a faster round, and 200 golfers over the rest of the day get a slower one. Selfish?

Of course it doesn't. Two ball comes up behind a waiting 4-ball, where does letting the two through hold up the rest of the course?