Drop from a lateral, find ball ahead

[sui generis]

44 minutes ago, Halebopp said:

 

I got this question for the first time this summer when a player was taking relief from a Red Penalty Area. I have to say I was slightly surprised by the question as it was in mens' bronze-medal match in our national match play championships.

 

Most agree 2019 was an important improvement in the Rules, yet the word "except" still pops up over and over and over.

 

Further, while we now treat some things the same way both on and off the course, but not so with others. Think red or yellow stakes vs white stakes and immovable obstructions/objects. I contend that no significant harm would come if similar relief were accorded everywhere. 

 

With regard to relief, in R16 we care where the player's feet are but not in R17. In R16 the location of the ball is only part of the puzzle, whereas in R17 it's the whole puzzle.

 

And, why oh why, must we confuse them with one club-length vs two club-lengths?

 

There's more! 😉

[Mr. Bean]

8 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

Most agree 2019 was an important improvement in the Rules, yet the word "except" still pops up over and over and over.

 

Further, while we now treat some things the same way both on and off the course, but not so with others. Think red or yellow stakes vs white stakes and immovable obstructions/objects. I contend that no significant harm would come if similar relief were accorded everywhere. 

 

With regard to relief, in R16 we care where the player's feet are but not in R17. In R16 the location of the ball is only part of the puzzle, whereas in R17 it's the whole puzzle.

 

And, why oh why, must we confuse them with one club-length vs two club-lengths?

 

There's more! 😉

 

Oh thee highest spirits of all to be, let me give You my humble view!

 

R16 deals with conditions that are not to be on a course, so to say. Meaning, a player must not suffer from conditions he is not responsible for.

 

R17 deals with conditions deliberately planned onto the course and with the player is well aware of even before he makes his shot, so should he (or she) fail to avoid the trouble caused by that condition it is his (her) own fault.

 

I beg Your forgiveness for daring to expose my own and thus very humble opinion on the issue at hand. 😉

[sui generis]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Oh thee highest spirits of all to be, let me give You my humble view!

 

R16 deals with conditions that are not to be on a course, so to say. Meaning, a player must not suffer from conditions he is not responsible for.

 

R17 deals with conditions deliberately planned onto the course and with the player is well aware of even before he makes his shot, so should he (or she) fail to avoid the trouble caused by that condition it is his (her) own fault.

 

I beg Your forgiveness for daring to expose my own and thus very humble opinion on the issue at hand. 😉

 

Sure, but let's endeavor to reduce the differences in relief procedures. Let's not care about where a player's feet are in one case but not another.

[rogolf]

1 hour ago, sui generis said:

 

Sure, but let's endeavor to reduce the differences in relief procedures. Let's not care about where a player's feet are in one case but not another.

Sui, maybe start another thread?  It's a bit off topic here, imo anyway. 🙂

[Augster]

If you all hear and/or see the ball hit a tree, and don’t see it after that, there’s no way to be KVC it’s in the PA. Not a PA with this much room around it for a ball to go. 
 

If it’s rolling/bouncing, sure, call it KVC. But once the ball hits a tree, no way a player can say it’s in the PA 95% of the time. 

[Axiom]

On 12/7/2020 at 9:58 AM, Mr. Bean said:

In plain English:

- If you were less than 95% sure that the ball was in the Penalty Area the new ball was dropped and played from a wrong place. In Match Play loss of hole and in Stroke Play 2 penalty strokes (in this particular case) and the dropped ball is the ball in play.

 

 

 

And in the stroke play scenario, w/o KVC, there is a serious breach and if not corrected, DQ.

Edited December 9, 2020 by Axiom

[Mr. Bean]

20 minutes ago, Axiom said:

And in the stroke play scenario, w/o KVC, there is a serious breach and if not corrected, DQ.

 

Indeed, potentially a serious breach but not automatically, it depends on the situation. In this particular case it seems very likely.

[Halebopp]

21 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

Most agree 2019 was an important improvement in the Rules, yet the word "except" still pops up over and over and over.

 

Further, while we now treat some things the same way both on and off the course, but not so with others. Think red or yellow stakes vs white stakes and immovable obstructions/objects. I contend that no significant harm would come if similar relief were accorded everywhere. 

 

With regard to relief, in R16 we care where the player's feet are but not in R17. In R16 the location of the ball is only part of the puzzle, whereas in R17 it's the whole puzzle.

 

And, why oh why, must we confuse them with one club-length vs two club-lengths?

 

There's more! 😉

 

Based on another thread, it seems like there are plenty of people on WRX who think the rules section is full of looneys who think the rules are perfect and will die on the hill defending them. Unfortunately none of them probably see your comment (or the others like it).

 

One of the things they could've done away with are yellow penalty areas. If you've managed to hit the ball over the PA shouldn't that be enough even if the ball rolls back into the PA? But I don't want to sidetrack this thread any further.

[jholz]

Not to take the thread further away from the topic, but I think I'm with @sui generis. Simplicity and consistency are the hallmarks of an effective code of rules. In general, the golf rules have their heads so far up their asses that they can't see the forest for the trees. Just one man's humble opinion. 

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, Halebopp said:

One of the things they could've done away with are yellow penalty areas. If you've managed to hit the ball over the PA shouldn't that be enough even if the ball rolls back into the PA? But I don't want to sidetrack this thread any further.

 

Yes, the Rule would be simpler but the cases on the course would be harder to deal with. With yellow stakes you do not have to decide whether the ball actually crossed the margin on the other side as you need to hit your next stroke from the far side of the PA anyway. In the case of red stakes there will be occasional problems deciding that and the difference may be huge.

[sui generis]

10 minutes ago, jholz said:

Not to take the thread further away from the topic, but I think I'm with @sui generis. Simplicity and consistency are the hallmarks of an effective code of rules. In general, the golf rules have their heads so far up their asses that they can't see the forest for the trees. Just one man's humble opinion. 

 

I'm acquainted with several current and former members of the USGA Rules Committee. I can assure you that they are clear-eyed and smarter than anyone on the Rules. They share the Rules with the R&A. Though I don't know any of the R&A ladies and gentlemen, I can only imagine that they, too, are experts.

 

Look at 2019, that was a ground breaking revision. Those committee members went way out on a limb to simplify the Rules for us. I hope they feel emboldened to make some further simplifications for the next revision. 

 

They listen. Tell 'em here: rules@usga.org

[jholz]

8 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

I'm acquainted with several current and former members of the USGA Rules Committee. I can assure you that they are clear-eyed and smarter than anyone on the Rules. They share the Rules with the R&A. Though I don't know any of the R&A ladies and gentlemen, I can only imagine that they, too, are experts.

 

Look at 2019, that was a ground breaking revision. Those committee members went way out on a limb to simplify the Rules for us. I hope they feel emboldened to make some further simplifications for the next revision. 

 

They listen. Tell 'em here: rules@usga.org

 

Yeah man, I feel you. You are absolutely right.

 

I wasn't trying to disparage any individual or body, but rather the rules themselves. Very smart and capable people can make terrible decisions, of course. And the rules are bound by so much tradition, convention, and insularity that they can make decisions that make perfect sense within the confines of the ruling body, but absolutely no sense to anyone outside of it. It is the nature of legislating. 

[Mr. Bean]

16 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Yeah man, I feel you. You are absolutely right.

 

I wasn't trying to disparage any individual or body, but rather the rules themselves. Very smart and capable people can make terrible decisions, of course. And the rules are bound by so much tradition, convention, and insularity that they can make decisions that make perfect sense within the confines of the ruling body, but absolutely no sense to anyone outside of it. It is the nature of legislating. 

 

From my personal experience I can tell you that there was a time I had serious problems in understanding some of the Rules and the chains of events they were applied to. Having studied the Rules for quite a few years now it is my opinion that the Rules are a clever collection of things wisely bound together and by no means an impossible conundrum a normal person could not learn, digest and master.

 

Naturally, if one just reads bits and pieces here and there it is impossible to form a solid picture of the Rules. It sure takes time to learn the Rules, no doubt about it.

[jholz]

12 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

From my personal experience I can tell you that there was a time I had serious problems in understanding some of the Rules and the chains of events they were applied to. Having studied the Rules for quite a few years now it is my opinion that the Rules are a clever collection of things wisely bound together and by no means an impossible conundrum a normal person could not learn, digest and master.

 

Naturally, if one just reads bits and pieces here and there it is impossible to form a solid picture of the Rules. It sure takes time to learn the Rules, no doubt about it.

 

Yeah man, just like with sui, I totally acknowledge your perspective and agree in basic principle. For those who really want to put in the time and effort, there is a logic and elegance within the rules.

 

I would hazard that seeing that logic and elegance in the rules of golf is analogous to appreciating a Mark Rothko painting. If you know something about art, Rothko's work can be transcendent. If you are a regular joe on the street, it looks like something a 3rd grader would produce in art class.  

 

And that's the problem - in a nutshell. 

[Mr. Bean]

18 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Yeah man, just like with sui, I totally acknowledge your perspective and agree in basic principle. For those who really want to put in the time and effort, there is a logic and elegance within the rules.

 

I would hazard that seeing that logic and elegance in the rules of golf is analogous to appreciating a Mark Rothko painting. If you know something about art, Rothko's work can be transcendent. If you are a regular joe on the street, it looks like something a 3rd grader would produce in art class.  

 

And that's the problem - in a nutshell. 

 

I am rather sure that the Rules would be simpler if that was possible.

[rogolf]

I realize that this is off topic of the original post so please forgive me, but if you want simple -

The first known Rules of Golf were drawn up in 1744 in Edinburgh for the world's first 'open' golf competition at Leith by the Gentlemen Golfers of Edinburgh, who would go on to become The Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers.

THE FIRST SET OF RULES OF GOLF

Articles & Laws in Playing at Golf.

1. You must Tee your Ball within a Club's length of the Hole.

2. Your Tee must be upon the Ground.

3. You are not to change the Ball which you Strike off the Tee.

4. You are not to remove Stones, Bones or any Break Club, for the sake of playing your Ball, except upon the fair Green and that only within a Club's length of your Ball.

5. If your Ball comes among watter, or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and teeing it, you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

6. If your Balls be found any where touching one another, You are to lift the first Ball, till you play the last.

7. At Holling, you are to play your Ball honestly for the Hole, and not to play upon your Adversary's Ball, not lying in your way to the Hole.

8. If you should lose your Ball, by it's being taken up, or any other way, you are to go back to the Spot, where you struck last, & drop another Ball, And allow your adversary a Stroke for the misfortune.

9. No man at Holling his Ball, is to be allowed, to mark his way to the Hole with his Club, or anything else.

10. If a Ball be stopp'd by any Person, Horse, Dog or anything else, The Ball so stop'd must be play'd where it lyes.

11. If you draw your Club in Order to Strike, & proceed so far in the Stroke as to be counted a Stroke.

12. He whose Ball lyes farthest from the Hole is obliged to play first.

13. Neither Trench, Ditch or ****, made for the preservation of the Links, nor the Scholar's Holes, or the Soldier's Lines, Shall be accounted a Hazard; But the Ball is to be taken out teed /and play'd with any Iron Club.

[sui generis]

24 minutes ago, rogolf said:

I realize that this is off topic of the original post so please forgive me, but if you want simple -

The first known Rules of Golf were drawn up in 1744 in Edinburgh for the world's first 'open' golf competition at Leith by the Gentlemen Golfers of Edinburgh, who would go on to become The Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers.

 

THE FIRST SET OF RULES OF GOLF

 

Articles & Laws in Playing at Golf.

 

1. You must Tee your Ball within a Club's length of the Hole.

 

2. Your Tee must be upon the Ground.

 

3. You are not to change the Ball which you Strike off the Tee.

 

4. You are not to remove Stones, Bones or any Break Club, for the sake of playing your Ball, except upon the fair Green and that only within a Club's length of your Ball.

 

5. If your Ball comes among watter, or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and teeing it, you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

 

6. If your Balls be found any where touching one another, You are to lift the first Ball, till you play the last.

 

7. At Holling, you are to play your Ball honestly for the Hole, and not to play upon your Adversary's Ball, not lying in your way to the Hole.

 

8. If you should lose your Ball, by it's being taken up, or any other way, you are to go back to the Spot, where you struck last, & drop another Ball, And allow your adversary a Stroke for the misfortune.

 

9. No man at Holling his Ball, is to be allowed, to mark his way to the Hole with his Club, or anything else.

 

10. If a Ball be stopp'd by any Person, Horse, Dog or anything else, The Ball so stop'd must be play'd where it lyes.

 

11. If you draw your Club in Order to Strike, & proceed so far in the Stroke as to be counted a Stroke.

 

12. He whose Ball lyes farthest from the Hole is obliged to play first.

 

13. Neither Trench, Ditch or ****, made for the preservation of the Links, nor the Scholar's Holes, or the Soldier's Lines, Shall be accounted a Hazard; But the Ball is to be taken out teed /and play'd with any Iron Club.

 

 

I think it's fair to say that no one today would like to play by many of those Rules.

[rogolf]

1 hour ago, sui generis said:

 

I think it's fair to say that no one today would like to play by many of those Rules.

But they are simple! 🙂

Of course, they have been updated over the years, and not all updates were as simple.   Everyone has their opinions on the Rules, but, as you know, I'm quite comfortable leaving this to the ruling bodies and feel they are doing their job well.

Now let's stick to the original topic..... or start a new one.  We owe that much to the original poster.

Edited December 10, 2020 by rogolf

[LeoLeo99]

On 12/9/2020 at 5:18 PM, Mr. Bean said:

 

From my personal experience I can tell you that there was a time I had serious problems in understanding some of the Rules and the chains of events they were applied to. Having studied the Rules for quite a few years now it is my opinion that the Rules are a clever collection of things wisely bound together and by no means an impossible conundrum a normal person could not learn, digest and master.

 

Naturally, if one just reads bits and pieces here and there it is impossible to form a solid picture of the Rules. It sure takes time to learn the Rules, no doubt about it.

You don't know the capability of a normal or average person.  I fall into the same trap thinking I'm average and therfore the average person can do or learn the same things i can.  My wife constantly corrects me that not everyone can do or learn what I can with ease.   That you can converse so eloquently in your non-native language proves you're far above normal or average.  The rules makers need a focus group of normal folk to get their feedback to make the rules easier to understand for normal folk. Write them on an 8th grade level.  The rules don't need to change much.  Just rewritten with flowcharts and simpler verbiage and faqs. 

[rogolf]

27 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

You don't know the capability of a normal or average person.  I fall into the same trap thinking I'm average and therfore the average person can do or learn the same things i can.  My wife constantly corrects me that not everyone can do or learn what I can with ease.   That you can converse so eloquently in your non-native language proves you're far above normal or average.  The rules makers need a focus group of normal folk to get their feedback to make the rules easier to understand for normal folk. Write them on an 8th grade level.  The rules don't need to change much.  Just rewritten with flowcharts and simpler verbiage and faqs. 

I would venture to say that the "average" golfer is more than 8th grade level, and I'm not trying to be discriminating at all.

Or, https://www.dummies.com/sports/golf/golf-rules-etiquette-for-dummies-cheat-sheet/

[LeoLeo99]

32 minutes ago, rogolf said:

I would venture to say that the "average" golfer is more than 8th grade level, and I'm not trying to be discriminating at all.

Or, https://www.dummies.com/sports/golf/golf-rules-etiquette-for-dummies-cheat-sheet/

What data do you have to conclude that?  The average American reads at an 8th grade level.  Golfers come from all walks of life.  

[rogolf]

27 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

What data do you have to conclude that?  The average American reads at an 8th grade level.  Golfers come from all walks of life.  

And what data supports that?  I had higher expectations.

[LeoLeo99]

16 minutes ago, rogolf said:

And what data supports that?  I had higher expectations.

Half of U.S. adults can’t read a book written at the 8th-grade level.

https://www.wyliecomm.com/2020/11/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/

 

 

 

[rogolf]

7 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Half of U.S. adults can’t read a book written at the 8th-grade level.

https://www.wyliecomm.com/2020/11/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/

 

 

 

2012 - 13 data?

 

[LeoLeo99]

12 minutes ago, rogolf said:

2012 - 13 data?

 

Whatever it is, I contend a normal person cannot understand the rules of golf as written. The rules are written above an 8th-grade reading level in my estimation.  Whether or not that's a problem is up for debate. 

[sui generis]

8 hours ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Whatever it is, I contend a normal person cannot understand the rules of golf as written. The rules are written above an 8th-grade reading level in my estimation.  Whether or not that's a problem is up for debate. 

 

I'd bet that the Venn diagrams of those who can't read and those who care about the Rules barely touch.

[Mr. Bean]

15 hours ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Half of U.S. adults can’t read a book written at the 8th-grade level.

https://www.wyliecomm.com/2020/11/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/

 

 

 

 

Leo, you are absolutely right. In my earlier post I was referring to a normal Finnish person. There is a difference, I should have been more specific...

[LeoLeo99]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Leo, you are absolutely right. In my earlier post I was referring to a normal Finnish person. There is a difference, I should have been more specific...

Finland has the world's largest literacy rate.  I can see why there's problems if we let a smart guy from a smart country decide who's normal.  With your math we'll conclude 85% of global people are below average. 

[Mr. Bean]

25 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Finland has the world's largest literacy rate.  I can see why there's problems if we let a smart guy from a smart country decide who's normal.  With your math we'll conclude 85% of global people are below average. 

 

So... should we require an IQ test to be passed before you can enter a golf course..? I would not mind...

[Mr. Bean]

@LeoLeo:

 

One thing that I just realized related to this particular issue. I have been refereeing in four different sports and when I think back I have taken courses to begin in all of those. In fact, when I started to read the Rules of one of those sports I had no clue whatsoever but had to take a course to understand them.

 

Lately I have studied the Rules of pool. 8-ball, 9-ball, 10-ball. At first glance those MUST have very simple Rules. Think again... Even in such a closed environment there are situations in which you cannot find an answer from the book but you need to understand the game itself.

 

Rules of Golf are by far the trickiest I have encountered, I certainly admit that. Then again, the game itself with all the equipment, course conditions, ball to be played when it is NOT moving, weather, animals, and so on is far from simple. No wonder I have had to take more than one course to give me an understanding better than the average when even in a 'simple' sports like squash it was (is) not easy enough to understand without someone explaining it to you, no matter how well I can read...