Would you like to go back to five minutes to look for your ball?

Would you like to go back to five minutes to look for your ball?

  • Five minutes

    Votes: 12 12.0%
  • Three minutes

    Votes: 88 88.0%

  • Total voters
    100

Jimaroid

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
3,734
Location
Fife
Visit site
Has it really changed in practice though ? Who really times ? Did we eve ? No point revising it again I think, as the overall behaviour isnt affected.

100% it has changed behaviour. People are generally terrible at estimating time.

The old 5 minutes used to get abused because people would think "5 minutes is ages" (it isn't really) and they'd search for more like 7 or 8 minutes causing all sorts of mayhem.

The new 3 minutes gets people moving because people think "3 minutes is not enough time and I've played a provisional anyway" and it's job done.
 

GB72

Money List Winner
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
14,760
Location
Rutland
Visit site
In reality, most people playing their home course know before they start hunting whether a ball is lost or not. In my case, I hit a provisional, have a quick look but if it is not in plain sight then I give up. Life is too short to spend it trecking though knee high grass and brambles. The only ones I know if steadfastly hunt for a ball are those who either did not hit a provisional or those who hit a bad provisional. No need to increase the time, the less the better.
 

phillarrow

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 27, 2022
Messages
496
Visit site
Another thing to think about is who you play with and the format. All of my comps are drawn and nearly all medal stroke play except for a few fun days. The search times and effect on increasing the number of provisional balls in play has made a notable improvement.

If we're talking about the kinds of player that's stuck in the rut of Stableford amongst a group of regular partners the search times have much less meaning. Losing a ball and picking up on a hole is much less penal.

This is a really good point. I've only ever played social golf or Stableford, so I reckon I've never spent more than about 90 seconds looking for a ball. However, if I was playing medal, I'd want the whole 3 minutes. But I still think 3 is enough. As others have said, if you've not found it after 3, you're unlikely to find it after 5...or want to play it if you do find it!
 

sunshine

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
5,386
Visit site
Depends on the course and the time of year. Sometimes it's frustrating when you've only missed the fairway by a few yards in a "safe" place, and you can't find the ball because it's sitting under a leaf. Majority of the time, 3 mins is plenty.

Most frustrating has to be spending 3 mins looking for your ball, then 3 mins looking for your provisional :LOL:
 

LincolnShep

Head Pro
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
1,041
Visit site
Definitely not. If you haven't found it in three minutes, you probably don't want it!

All golf GPS devices should come with a single button to start a three minute timer.
 

PhilTheFragger

Provider of Entertainment for the Golfing Gods 🙄
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
15,368
Location
Aylesbury Bucks
Visit site
If you aren’t going to find it in 3, you probably won’t find it in 5.

Helps speed up play, although some might argue it stops some groups letting others through, coz it’s only 3 minutes
 

Rlburnside

Challenge Tour Pro
Joined
Jan 16, 2014
Messages
3,434
Visit site
It’s only relevant if people actually police it. How many start a timer when looking for a ball? I normally call time but I’ve seen others continue to look well past three minutes to the point where someone else in the group calls it.

3 mins is more like 5, 5 mins is probably closer to 8-10 especially if there’s a card going and a gap between the following group

Good point I must admit I rarely time looking for a ball even in comps but I would guess it’s around the 3 mins, but I suppose that’s not the point. Only noticed a few players timing when looking.

Don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone look for a ball 8-10 mins, 3 mins is fine with me.
 

Crazyface

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
7,245
Location
Cheshire
Visit site
Less rough? ? Isn’t it supposed to be a challenge. We would end up like those American resort courses with 500 yard wide fairways (slightly exaggerated but you get my point)

I think 3 mins is enough and as Jim says it has improved general behaviour/awareness of time - certainly with the players I’ve had a game with. More time spent looking at GPS and laser devices now.

I also don’t think the pros should have ball spotters at the likes of the open - it’s not in the spirit of the challenge. Remove the ball spotters and they will have to play courses much differently.

I've been saying this for years. Smashing the ball 300+ meters and then having someone else find it. No one can see where a ball has gone after 250 ish yards maybe less in unfavorable conditions.
 

phillarrow

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 27, 2022
Messages
496
Visit site
I also don’t think the pros should have ball spotters at the likes of the open - it’s not in the spirit of the challenge. Remove the ball spotters and they will have to play courses much differently.

I agree entirely with this in respect of the skills aspect - those who hit it wildly off line should be penalised in some way in the professional game - but the problem with introducing it would be the pace of play. They are already ridiculously slow in the pro game, taking away ball spotters would lead to it being even worse.

Personally, I would say that at this level of the game, there should be far more out of bounds on more holes, and bring it closer to the fairways, so that wayward shots really are punished. That would hopefully lead to a reduction in length for many holes and help protect the integrity of some of the best courses in the world, without the need for ever-increasing hole length.
 

Boomy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2020
Messages
1,022
Visit site
I agree entirely with this in respect of the skills aspect - those who hit it wildly off line should be penalised in some way in the professional game - but the problem with introducing it would be the pace of play. They are already ridiculously slow in the pro game, taking away ball spotters would lead to it being even worse.


Yeah, I agree in principal but I also think that if the spotters were taken away they would put more emphasis on keeping the ball in play rather than all out distance without much consequence. It would also encourage them to hit a provisional ball if any doubt, and the search time would be the same as for us (as it is) Keeping the ball in play more, and playing off short grass may actually speed things up in the long run? In my mind the use of spotters is borderline cheating, its not the golfer against the course, it is the golfer and the spotter against the course - yes they have a caddie but they only advise from the side, a spotter fully shows where the ball is, 2 people involved in the execution and conclusions of the shot (I hope that makes sense, I know what I'm trying to say but struggling to put it into words) It would bring distances back a bit, put a premium on accuracy and navigating around a course and stop the ridiculous American 35 under par winning scores (maybe)
 

Banchory Buddha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2021
Messages
2,138
Visit site
It’s only relevant if people actually police it. How many start a timer when looking for a ball? I normally call time but I’ve seen others continue to look well past three minutes to the point where someone else in the group calls it.

3 mins is more like 5, 5 mins is probably closer to 8-10 especially if there’s a card going and a gap between the following group
I've now started this, most folks at my club are good and have shortened their searches, but there's a couple last year that were taking forever, so now the phone goes on in the pocket and once the beeps go that's it.
 

SwingsitlikeHogan

Major Champion
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
33,046
Visit site
Stick with 3mins. I think we are more aware and I am quite comfortable mentioning that we only have 3mins to find it and that the clock has been ticking. 3mins feels like a lot less time than 5mins - and so I think we are more aware and ready to give it up.

I've not noticed play being less bish-bash-bosh given less time to find a ball in the goo...certainly it hasn't come into my thinking, though I can't see inside the minds of others for whom this thinking may apply. And I haven't heard any complaints that 3mins being not long enough or calls to go back to 5.
 

Larry long dog

Active member
Joined
Jun 1, 2021
Messages
194
Visit site
Haven’t read the comments thus far but opted for 5 minutes.

I’ve found now if I hit it somewhere that requires a search, I’ll wait until all my playing partners are with me whereas before I might have just started searching initially on my own. I wouldn’t say it’s sped up play as such, but I can see that less groups are waved through as most sensible folk hit a provisional and 3 minutes searching doesn’t generally warrant a call through.

Not sure if I’ve contradicted myself there ?
 

Sand Trapped

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2022
Messages
30
Visit site
Agree with the majority of comments here - hit your provisional, walk ahead of the group to get a start on the search and ''just'' take the 3 minutes. Also, do help out a partner in need - four eyes are better than two!
 

HomerJSimpson

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
72,336
Location
Bracknell - Berkshire
Visit site
I've now started this, most folks at my club are good and have shortened their searches, but there's a couple last year that were taking forever, so now the phone goes on in the pocket and once the beeps go that's it.

I have also started to do it in competitions and let my PP's know before we tee off. I've not had any problems although some peoples perception of three minutes is way out. In roll ups we'll usually take a cursory glance for a minute or so and move on
 
D

Deleted member 23344

Guest
I agree with all those who say that, if you haven’t found it in three minutes, it’s probably proper lost.
 
Top