It's time, Pro's (and others) should get relief from divots...

[smashdn]

On 3/7/2021 at 9:39 PM, tgoodspe1991 said:

Just finished watching today's coverage and was pretty bummed for Westwood to see his awesome drive on 18 end up in a divot... to me, it pretty clearly affected how average his second shot was.

 

With recent rule changes, golfers can tap down spike marks on greens and fix any blemish they choose. As we're seeing on TV, Pro's can apparently get free 2-club relief from just about anywhere (/s). Yet, if you hit a great drive in the fairway that ends up in a divot, you're screwed. Why?! It seems pretty dumb. 

 

Divots aren't the natural condition of the golf course, they are a "used" condition from groups ahead of you. If you're allowed to tap down spike marks and other blemishes on a putting surface that's in "used" condition caused by those same groups ahead of you, then why not allow players to take quick relief from a fairway divot? Also, if it's a rainy tournament and playing "lift, clean, and place", you're going to be able to move your ball from that divot anyway, so just make the divot rule universal. 

 

Maybe it's just me, but I think it's time for a change.

 

 

I think what you are seeing is the difference in the "Rules of Golf" and the "rules of golf as applied to TV golf."

 

There are scads of examples where these guys are able to play loose and fast with the true rules of the game.  That isn't an indictment, they are afforded these luxury so I don't begrudge them for taking advantage of it.  TV cables and towers, fans moving boulders, etc.  The old dead guys wailing away at crude balls on grass mown by sheep and rabbits I don't think intended for the ball to be picked up so often.

 

Lift, clean and place shouldn't be allowed either imo.  Most of these "stretches" of the rules are the results of the proliferation of stroke play.  In match play you are literally playing the course as your opponent is.  The divot you hit into was there when your opponent played as well.  The mud you hit was there when your opponent hit.  I do agree that spike marks should be tamped down, but you don't get to move your ball onto a different line because of them.

 

A big part of golf (again my opinion) is being mentally strong enough to overcome stuff when it doesn't go your way.  Hitting into a divot is rub of the green.  Little mud on the ball the same.  Display a little intestinal fortitude and overcome it.

 

There have been what i call inherent golf tests or challenges that have been lost in the professional game.  Estimating yardage is one that is going away.  Dealing with tough lies and conditions to an extent.  Less than perfectly manicured turf (unless your name is Phil).  A little unpredicatability is a good thing.  It is part of the whims you must endure when you don't execute.  And divots are the whims that occur even when you think you have executed perfectly.

 

There is good fortune and bad fortune.  Sometimes you get lucky when you go off-line but more often than not you don't.  Sometimes you get unlucky when you area on-line but more often you don't.  Accept it.

[Go Cougs]

11 hours ago, OrangeGravy said:

Go Cougs! 

 

[tgoodspe1991]

3 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

 

I think what you are seeing is the difference in the "Rules of Golf" and the "rules of golf as applied to TV golf."

 

There are scads of examples where these guys are able to play loose and fast with the true rules of the game.  That isn't an indictment, they are afforded these luxury so I don't begrudge them for taking advantage of it.  TV cables and towers, fans moving boulders, etc.  The old dead guys wailing away at crude balls on grass mown by sheep and rabbits I don't think intended for the ball to be picked up so often.

 

Lift, clean and place shouldn't be allowed either imo.  Most of these "stretches" of the rules are the results of the proliferation of stroke play.  In match play you are literally playing the course as your opponent is.  The divot you hit into was there when your opponent played as well.  The mud you hit was there when your opponent hit.  I do agree that spike marks should be tamped down, but you don't get to move your ball onto a different line because of them.

 

A big part of golf (again my opinion) is being mentally strong enough to overcome stuff when it doesn't go your way.  Hitting into a divot is rub of the green.  Little mud on the ball the same.  Display a little intestinal fortitude and overcome it.

 

There have been what i call inherent golf tests or challenges that have been lost in the professional game.  Estimating yardage is one that is going away.  Dealing with tough lies and conditions to an extent.  Less than perfectly manicured turf (unless your name is Phil).  A little unpredicatability is a good thing.  It is part of the whims you must endure when you don't execute.  And divots are the whims that occur even when you think you have executed perfectly.

 

There is good fortune and bad fortune.  Sometimes you get lucky when you go off-line but more often than not you don't.  Sometimes you get unlucky when you area on-line but more often you don't.  Accept it.

 

I'm sorry, but you can't say that part of golf is being "mentally strong enough to overcome stuff" when you also say you should be allowed to tamp down spike marks on greens. If you shouldn't get relief for something like a divot, then why should you be able to essentially relieve yourself from putting over spike marks? Play the course as you find it and, in your words, "display a little intestinal fortitude and overcome it." 

 

Why is giving yourself preferred lies and conditions on the green okay, but the idea of relieving yourself from someone else's divot absurd? Both "imperfections" in the conditions were created by the groups in front of you, but you're saying it's okay to get relief from one but not the other. 

[davep043]

14 minutes ago, tgoodspe1991 said:

 

I'm sorry, but you can't say that part of golf is being "mentally strong enough to overcome stuff" when you also say you should be allowed to tamp down spike marks on greens. If you shouldn't get relief for something like a divot, then why should you be able to essentially relieve yourself from putting over spike marks? Play the course as you find it and, in your words, "display a little intestinal fortitude and overcome it." 

 

Why is giving yourself preferred lies and conditions on the green okay, but the idea of relieving yourself from someone else's divot absurd? Both "imperfections" in the conditions were created by the groups in front of you, but you're saying it's okay to get relief from one but not the other. 

There's a difference.  The putting green is a special place, an area specifically prepared for putting, for rolling the ball along the ground.  A wrong putting green is a place that you are NOT permitted to play from.  You are permitted to lift and clean your ball on the putting green.  You are not penalized for accidentally moving your ball on the putting green.  You get line of play relief for abnormal course conditions when your ball lies on the putting green.  There are LOTS of rules that are different on the putting green, repair of damage is just one of them..  

In the general area, play it as it lies.  Its just not that special a place.

[tgoodspe1991]

36 minutes ago, davep043 said:

There's a difference.  The putting green is a special place, an area specifically prepared for putting, for rolling the ball along the ground.  A wrong putting green is a place that you are NOT permitted to play from.  You are permitted to lift and clean your ball on the putting green.  You are not penalized for accidentally moving your ball on the putting green.  You get line of play relief for abnormal course conditions when your ball lies on the putting green.  There are LOTS of rules that are different on the putting green, repair of damage is just one of them..  

In the general area, play it as it lies.  Its just not that special a place.

 

Most of those rules on the "special place" putting green are modern and recent rules that were put into the game. You used to get penalized if you accidentally moved your ball on the putting green, you used to be stymied by other players and they didn't have to mark it, you used to not be able to tap down spike marks, etc. I could go on about rules that were added to make the putting green this so called "special place". 

 

It didn't start out that way. So why are we so apprehensive to make rules for other areas of the course?

Edited March 22, 2021 by tgoodspe1991

[davep043]

1 hour ago, tgoodspe1991 said:

 

Most of those rules on the "special place" putting green are modern and recent rules that were put into the game. You used to get penalized if you accidentally moved your ball on the putting green, you used to be stymied by other players and they didn't have to mark it, you used to not be able to tap down spike marks, etc. I could go on about rules that were added to make the putting green this so called "special place". 

 

It didn't start out that way. So why are we so apprehensive to make rules for other areas of the course?

You're right, the first major changes to the rules on putting greens came about 60 years ago, which really IS pretty recent in golf terms.  In my mind, those changes have generally occurred because of advancements of various kinds have improved the conditions of putting greens, so the golfers have appropriately expected smoother rolls. 

But fairway conditions really haven't changed enough that a player should expect a perfect lie if he happens to hit a fairway.  Play it as it lies is still good enough.  Perhaps conditions will continue to evolve, perhaps we'll end up with LCP any time we're in the General Area, but that time isn't here yet.

I do have a solution for those who really want a perfect lie.  Go play the Old Course in the winter.  You're required to play from a small bit of carpet, nothing but perfect lies all day long!  For all 5 hours of daylight.

 

[smashdn]

17 hours ago, tgoodspe1991 said:

 

I'm sorry, but you can't say that part of golf is being "mentally strong enough to overcome stuff" when you also say you should be allowed to tamp down spike marks on greens. If you shouldn't get relief for something like a divot, then why should you be able to essentially relieve yourself from putting over spike marks? Play the course as you find it and, in your words, "display a little intestinal fortitude and overcome it." 

 

Why is giving yourself preferred lies and conditions on the green okay, but the idea of relieving yourself from someone else's divot absurd? Both "imperfections" in the conditions were created by the groups in front of you, but you're saying it's okay to get relief from one but not the other. 

 

Within The Rules The Green is a fundamentally different area.  There are only a couple of "areas" defined within the rules.  The teeing ground, penalty areas (formerly hazards), through the green and the green.  The green is different is one reason.  One reason the divot thing doesn't work is "fairway" is not defined in The Rules.  Do you get relief from a divot made in the rough?  Also, rough is not defined.  GUR is well defined and should be marked by the super or tournament director before play starts and communicated ahead of competition.  Treating a divot made during the course of the round doesn't follow those prescriptions.

 

I can be swayed to not allow spike mark to be tamped down.  I can be talked into not being allowed to pick up the ball until it is holed out.  I don't think you'll see the stymie making a comeback however so you would need to address what do you do with a ball in your line.

 

I am all for more playing the ball down, as it lies and handling it less.  Tamping spike marks doesn't put the ball in the golfer's hand but relief from divots do.  That is how I view the difference between the two as well.

 

Playing partners should keep the guy "tamping a trough to the hole" in check.  They have an obligation to protect themselves and the rest of the field.

 

 

[smashdn]

On 3/22/2021 at 3:25 PM, tgoodspe1991 said:

It didn't start out that way. So why are we so apprehensive to make rules for other areas of the course?

 

What other area currently defined in the rules do you want to make different rules for?

 

The teeing ground has special rules.  Hazards have (had?) special rules.

 

The general population is reluctant to try golf due to too many rules in their eyes.  Less rules seems like a better attitude to have.

Edited March 24, 2021 by smashdn
golf not gold

[nsxguy]

11 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

What other area currently defined in the rules do you want to make different rules for?

 

The teeing ground has special rules.  Hazards have (had?) special rules.

 

The general population is reluctant to try gold due to too many rules in their eyes.  Less rules seems like a better attitude to have.

 

[Hawkeye77]

11 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

 

The general population is reluctant to try gold due to too many rules in their eyes.  Less rules seems like a better attitude to have.

 

There are a lot of reasons people don't take up golf, and good for them, it's not for everyone and it is a hard game, but some idea that there are complicated rules isn't stopping most people from buying clubs.  In my experience new golfers from tots to adults are probably more interested in learning the actual rules than the "general population" that's been playing forever.

 

I guess everyone has their own experiences, but in decades of golfing with all sorts of people the basic rules anyone needs to know to play aren't at all complicated and I doubt most ever knew there were such things as "Decisions".  Now taking the little time necessary to know those basic rules and actually playing by them, well those gulfs just seem to get progressively wider for many, lol. Always been that way, probably always will be.

 

Play with new golfers that care about learning the rules?  Set a good example!

[smashdn]

11 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

I guess everyone has their own experiences, but in decades of golfing with all sorts of people the basic rules anyone needs to know to play aren't at all complicated and I doubt most ever knew there were such things as "Decisions".  Now taking the little time necessary to know those basic rules and actually playing by them, well those gulfs just seem to get progressively wider for many, lol. Always been that way, probably always will be.

 

Play with new golfers that care about learning the rules?  Set a good example!

 

Not the basic rules, The Rules.  Basic rules, hit ball in hole way over there while starting from here.  The Rules, well there is a book printed for that and then another with interpretations.

 

I suppose this is a different argument but it seems to me the difference in playing on a golf course (or topgolf) and calling it golf, or actually playing a round of Golf or a Golf match.  By rule, if you agree to waive a rule, you have broken a rule.

 

I think treating more defined areas of the course in the same manner is helpful and simplifies things.  Grounding your club in a hazard (or whatever the heck they call them now) was a move to simplify.  Anytime you can avoid needing to re-tee is a good move as it speeds up play.  Once the ball is in play don't touch it.  That simplifies things.

 

Defining a "divot" and "fairway" and the degree to which a divot has healed or not is not simplifying The Rules nor is it applicable to 98% percent of golfers.  Roll it if you want in a casual game.  Learn to play that shot if you fancy yourself a competitive golfer.

[Hawkeye77]

3 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

Not the basic rules, The Rules.  Basic rules, hit ball in hole way over there while starting from here.  The Rules, well there is a book printed for that and then another with interpretations.

 

I suppose this is a different argument but it seems to me the difference in playing on a golf course (or topgolf) and calling it golf, or actually playing a round of Golf or a Golf match.  By rule, if you agree to waive a rule, you have broken a rule.

 

I think treating more defined areas of the course in the same manner is helpful and simplifies things.  Grounding your club in a hazard (or whatever the heck they call them now) was a move to simplify.  Anytime you can avoid needing to re-tee is a good move as it speeds up play.  Once the ball is in play don't touch it.  That simplifies things.

 

Defining a "divot" and "fairway" and the degree to which a divot has healed or not is not simplifying The Rules nor is it applicable to 98% percent of golfers.  Roll it if you want in a casual game.  Learn to play that shot if you fancy yourself a competitive golfer.

No idea what that has to do with what I posted, but okay. 

[smashdn]

19 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

No idea what that has to do with what I posted, but okay. 

 

Basic rules - what are you defining as basic?  I think basic is just "hey man, hot this ball starting here, into that hole over there in as few strokes as possible."  I played this past sunday with two guys who had never played before other than Topgolf.  That was the direction me and the other guy that does play gave them.

 

That level of need for the rules certainly doesn't hinder anyone from golfing.

 

However, you mix in the need for a handicap, understanding how and where you can take relief, marking balls on the green, touching the flagstick, penalty areas, sand, teeing ground rules, etc. then I can see where someone would find that very intimidating.  I didn't mess with a handicap for the longest time because you needed to be a member of a club to have one.  It wasn't until online handicapping come along that I got one.  Not having a handicap kept me out of flighted scrambles and some other events that courses put on.

 

So my point is, yes, there are rules and aspects of the rules that are intimidating and likely keeping some people away from some parts of the game, namely competitions.  Which to my other point, without the competition and playing by The Rules, you are just hitting a golf ball on a golf course, not really Golf.  Absolutely nothing wrong with that but it is not a "game of golf" at that point.

[Hawkeye77]

30 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

Basic rules - what are you defining as basic?  I think basic is just "hey man, hot this ball starting here, into that hole over there in as few strokes as possible."  I played this past sunday with two guys who had never played before other than Topgolf.  That was the direction me and the other guy that does play gave them.

 

That level of need for the rules certainly doesn't hinder anyone from golfing.

 

However, you mix in the need for a handicap, understanding how and where you can take relief, marking balls on the green, touching the flagstick, penalty areas, sand, teeing ground rules, etc. then I can see where someone would find that very intimidating.  I didn't mess with a handicap for the longest time because you needed to be a member of a club to have one.  It wasn't until online handicapping come along that I got one.  Not having a handicap kept me out of flighted scrambles and some other events that courses put on.

 

So my point is, yes, there are rules and aspects of the rules that are intimidating and likely keeping some people away from some parts of the game, namely competitions.  Which to my other point, without the competition and playing by The Rules, you are just hitting a golf ball on a golf course, not really Golf.  Absolutely nothing wrong with that but it is not a "game of golf" at that point.

Your idea of basic is a gross oversimplification. 
 

There’s nothing intimidating about learning how to mark a ball, where to put your tee in the ground, penalty areas and so on. You learn it, then you know it. 10 year olds know these things. 

[nsxguy]

43 minutes ago, smashdn said:

So my point is, yes, there are rules and aspects of the rules that are intimidating and likely keeping some people away from some parts of the game, namely competitions.  Which to my other point, without the competition and playing by The Rules, you are just hitting a golf ball on a golf course, not really Golf.  Absolutely nothing wrong with that but it is not a "game of golf" at that point.

 

Don't really want to derail this thread but now you're moving the goal posts a bit.

 

As Hawkeye said there are lots of reasons why people don't try playing golf. The Rules are WAY down the list.

 

Your original stance was "The general population is reluctant to try golf due to too many rules in their eyes"  NOW it's keeping them away from competitions.

 

Did you misspeak the first time ?

 

If the former, knowledge of the Rules is way down the list from keeping people away from golf. If the latter, sure, I'd agree that some people keep to their casual golf and stay away from competitions for lack of understanding the Rules.

[Hawkeye77]

Yep, and to the new “target” - if you are already good enough at golf and care about and want to explore competition then it’s on you to take the time to know the rules better, if that’s an issue. Competition implies playing by the ROG. I’d suggest more people are intimidated by real competition more than rules concerns (plenty playing comps may not know the rules better than those that don’t) but if rules are the issue, learn them. Probably no more than a couple dozen actual rules/etiquette norms  people need to understand (most simple) to cover 99% of their playing situations in their lifetimes. 

Edited March 24, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[smashdn]

28 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Don't really want to derail this thread but now you're moving the goal posts a bit.

 

As Hawkeye said there are lots of reasons why people don't try playing golf. The Rules are WAY down the list.

 

Your original stance was "The general population is reluctant to try golf due to too many rules in their eyes"  NOW it's keeping them away from competitions.

 

I didn't qualify my statement with what rank among the reasons the rules were.  I only said they were a reason.  I agree it is down the list certainly.  But it is still a barrier to entry to some.  I have heard people tell me "too many rules."  These are people who haven't tried golf yet.  I took up golf not what I would consider late in life, but I was in my late teens in college before I played.  I remember being intimidated playing with someone who had played the game and played competitively (though was a peer in age) when he started pointing out the rules to me, and my breaches.  It didn't stop me from enjoying the game my way however as I was determined to play it.

 

I don't think I am moving the target.  Merely pointing to an example of how it effected me and served as a barrier, not to full on entry into golf but into some aspects of it.  I can't personally speak to other's feelings, only my own.

 

As far as basic rules versus rules.  There are no such things as basic rules.  There are only The Rules.  We can individually define the basic rules to what they mean to us.  For me, explaining to the guys who had never played on Sunday, we told them to hit the ball from the tee towards the hole.  For someone who knows nothing of the rules or terms what you and I may think is a gross over-simplification was very appropriate.  We at one point had to explain you can't use a tee on every shot.  Very basic things that we take for granted.

 

I don't disagree that The Rules are not hard to learn and that once you learn them you know them (until they change hazards to penalty areas).  But they are intimidating to some.  And they are a barrier to some.  And in the context of divots, it would add another layer of rules and decisions and interpretations that is un-needed and seems very counter to the direction that the USGA and R&A are currently taking.  Personally, I also think that relief from divots is also counter to the intent of the game.

 

 

[nsxguy]

46 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

I didn't qualify my statement with what rank among the reasons the rules were.  I only said they were a reason.  I agree it is down the list certainly.  But it is still a barrier to entry to some.  I have heard people tell me "too many rules."  These are people who haven't tried golf yet. 

 

As far as basic rules versus rules.  There are no such things as basic rules.  There are only The Rules.  We can individually define the basic rules to what they mean to us.  For me, explaining to the guys who had never played on Sunday, we told them to hit the ball from the tee towards the hole.  For someone who knows nothing of the rules or terms what you and I may think is a gross over-simplification was very appropriate.  We at one point had to explain you can't use a tee on every shot.  Very basic things that we take for granted.

 

I don't disagree that The Rules are not hard to learn and that once you learn them you know them (until they change hazards to penalty areas).  But they are intimidating to some.  And they are a barrier to some.  And in the context of divots, it would add another layer of rules and decisions and interpretations that is un-needed and seems very counter to the direction that the USGA and R&A are currently taking.  Personally, I also think that relief from divots is also counter to the intent of the game.

 

 

 

I don't think I'm being overly pedantic given your statement of "The general population is reluctant to try golf due to too many rules in their eyes".

 

Your statement, and now you admit same, clearly implies someone wanting to take up, or even just try, the game. Newbies and why they don't give golf a shot.

 

Frankly, I've never heard someone claim the Rules were the, or even a, reason.

 

Don't have the time, inconvenient, too expensive, family commitments, etc. but never because of the Rules.

 

As for the rest, teaching someone how to play isn't the part I was talking about but your basic rules aren't rules, it's how to play. "See ball, hit ball until it's in the hole". That's good enough for a rank beginner.

 

But I'd disagree about the Rules not being hard to learn. The BASIC Rules, sure, if you care. But get just a little bit into them and you have LOTS of very experienced players stumbling over them.

 

A LOT of very experienced players and sometimes pretty good players can't figure out where to hit from when they hit one into the water penalty area. And that's a pretty easy rule to learn.

 

[smashdn]

1 minute ago, nsxguy said:

 

I don't think I'm being overly pedantic given your statement of "The general population is reluctant to try golf due to too many rules in their eyes".

 

Your statement, and now you admit same, clearly implies someone wanting to take up, or even just try, the game. Newbies and why they don't give golf a shot.

 

Frankly, I've never heard someone claim the Rules were the, or even a, reason.

 

Don't have the time, inconvenient, too expensive, family commitments, etc. but never because of the Rules.

 

As for the rest, teaching someone how to play isn't the part I was talking about but your basic rules aren't rules, it's how to play. "See ball, hit ball until it's in the hole". That's good enough for a rank beginner.

 

But I'd disagree about the Rules not being hard to learn. The BASIC Rules, sure, if you care. But get just a little bit into them and you have LOTS of very experienced players stumbling over them.

 

A LOT of very experienced players and sometimes pretty good players can't figure out where to hit from when they hit one into the water penalty area. And that's a pretty easy rule to learn.

 

 

So we disagree.  Your experience and mine are different.  I can handle that.

[rangersgoalie]

Funny

on tour, it is imperative that bunkers are raked properly after a player is in one.  There is a lot of care that caddies take to take the bunker well for the players following to to have a reasonable chance at similar conditions the first player(s).  Heck, when I was playing there was the threat of a fine for a poorly raked bunker, not that I ever heard of a fine.

 

Drive it in a divot?  Well, tough break.

 

for the record, I do not believe relief doesn’t divots should happen. But I thought it was a weird thing

[Shilgy]

13 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

I didn't qualify my statement with what rank among the reasons the rules were.  I only said they were a reason.  I agree it is down the list certainly.  But it is still a barrier to entry to some.  I have heard people tell me "too many rules."  These are people who haven't tried golf yet.  I took up golf not what I would consider late in life, but I was in my late teens in college before I played.  I remember being intimidated playing with someone who had played the game and played competitively (though was a peer in age) when he started pointing out the rules to me, and my breaches.  It didn't stop me from enjoying the game my way however as I was determined to play it.

 

I don't think I am moving the target.  Merely pointing to an example of how it effected me and served as a barrier, not to full on entry into golf but into some aspects of it.  I can't personally speak to other's feelings, only my own.

 

As far as basic rules versus rules.  There are no such things as basic rules.  There are only The Rules.  We can individually define the basic rules to what they mean to us.  For me, explaining to the guys who had never played on Sunday, we told them to hit the ball from the tee towards the hole.  For someone who knows nothing of the rules or terms what you and I may think is a gross over-simplification was very appropriate.  We at one point had to explain you can't use a tee on every shot.  Very basic things that we take for granted.

 

I don't disagree that The Rules are not hard to learn and that once you learn them you know them (until they change hazards to penalty areas).  But they are intimidating to some.  And they are a barrier to some.  And in the context of divots, it would add another layer of rules and decisions and interpretations that is un-needed and seems very counter to the direction that the USGA and R&A are currently taking.  Personally, I also think that relief from divots is also counter to the intent of the game.

 

 

If there is only THE RULES why do you have an issue with tour “Boulder moving”? Loose impediments, of any size, are movable. Without galleries it may be more difficult to get it moved but it’s still the same.

[scotee]

15 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Your idea of basic is a gross oversimplification. 
 

There’s nothing intimidating about learning how to mark a ball, where to put your tee in the ground, penalty areas and so on. You learn it, then you know it. 10 year olds know these things. 

And I will contend that it would be just as easy for two ten year olds to come to a quick conclusion to agree if a ball was in a divot hole. New divot, old divot, sand filled, nearly grown out, whatever, move it. It should not require a rules official or use more than a few seconds of time. It would reward a good drive that ends up in a fairway and make golf more about skill and not chance. That to me is the fair way.

[davep043]

5 hours ago, scotee said:

And I will contend that it would be just as easy for two ten year olds to come to a quick conclusion to agree if a ball was in a divot hole. New divot, old divot, sand filled, nearly grown out, whatever, move it. It should not require a rules official or use more than a few seconds of time. It would reward a good drive that ends up in a fairway and make golf more about skill and not chance. That to me is the fair way.

Feel free to write down actual words to define it.  Accept that a brand new fresh divot hole is grounds for free relief, and accept that when totally grown back it is no longer grounds for relief.  Write a rule so that all players can tell that TODAY it changed to no relief, when yesterday it deserved relief.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

6 hours ago, scotee said:

And I will contend that it would be just as easy for two ten year olds to come to a quick conclusion to agree if a ball was in a divot hole. New divot, old divot, sand filled, nearly grown out, whatever, move it. It should not require a rules official or use more than a few seconds of time. It would reward a good drive that ends up in a fairway and make golf more about skill and not chance. That to me is the fair way.

Which areas do you want relief from?

[golfandfishing]

This thread popped into my head yesterday when Jordan Spieth’s drive hit a cart path, bounced over some hospitality tents, rolled across a green and settled on the collar. He was facing a blind shot from a place where an exact yardage would have been difficult, with the green running away from him and water in play immediately past the hole from his angle. This was going to be a very difficult shot. They cut back to him playing his second shot and he’s been given relief (I am guessing line of sight from a TIO/the tent). His drop was on the fairway side of the cart path, with an excellent angle to the hole, water was taken completely out of play and the shot was exponentially easier and with far less risk. 
If the tour allows this type of relief then sure, go ahead and move it from divots too. At this point these guys get relief from everything that doesn’t resemble a scene from a Lee Wybranski painting. 

[DavidCrockett]

 

[Hawkeye77]

7 hours ago, scotee said:

And I will contend that it would be just as easy for two ten year olds to come to a quick conclusion to agree if a ball was in a divot hole. New divot, old divot, sand filled, nearly grown out, whatever, move it. It should not require a rules official or use more than a few seconds of time. It would reward a good drive that ends up in a fairway and make golf more about skill and not chance. That to me is the fair way.

I wasn't talking about divots.

 

I'd put money on kids embracing the challenges and the breaks of the game (at its core golf has always been about taking what you get not "entitlement" to something).  "Hey Mikey, look I'm in a divot this will be fun."  

 

Contrast that to the hand wringing and whining of adults over something that they deal with on average probably once every 100+ rounds over their lifetimes (and most of those - not all - whining about it are rolling it out anyway).

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

Which areas do you want relief from?

All of it! Just tee it up. That would be the only way we all get the lie we are entitled. 🤬

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Shilgy

[smashdn]

11 hours ago, Shilgy said:

If there is only THE RULES why do you have an issue with tour “Boulder moving”? Loose impediments, of any size, are movable. Without galleries it may be more difficult to get it moved but it’s still the same.

 

Not sure I would say I have an issue with it, only that the boulder situation was likely not the intent of the rule as it was written and envisioned to be implemented.  The fact it was actually capable of being moved was only possible because there was a gallery present to move it.  That boulder, any true boulder, is not practically movable for anyone else in other circumstances.  It is so because of the tour.  It was an example of a rule that is implemented and used due to the situations present at tour and televised events.

 

TV tower line of sight stuff is another.  Grandstands backing the greens.  Sprinkler heads or sprinkler controls in the line of play.  I am not saying they are good or bad, just they are part and parcel to the conditions found at tour events and not situations typical to most other golf environments.  They are additional opportunities (within The Rules) to put the ball in your hand and move from the lie as it was found from your previous stroke.  <That is the thing that I have issue with.  That part gets "very eagerly applied" (abused is not the right word) in situations where it doesn't always warrant it.

 

Surely you have seen on TV where a ball is hit into the deeper rough and the golfer needs to mark and lift to properly identify his ball?  The ball that was nestled down deep in the grass with a healthy tuft behind it is no replaced and sits in an improved (sometimes slightly, sometimes significantly) lie.  Those are the kind of scenarios that I don't particularly like.  Within The Rules?  I guess so.  Congruent with the "spirit of the game" being that you play your ball in the condition in which you find it?  Not always.

 

Abuse?  Maybe not.  Overly broad application of certain aspects?  I'd say yes in many cases.

[tgoodspe1991]

3 hours ago, golfandfishing said:

This thread popped into my head yesterday when Jordan Spieth’s drive hit a cart path, bounced over some hospitality tents, rolled across a green and settled on the collar. He was facing a blind shot from a place where an exact yardage would have been difficult, with the green running away from him and water in play immediately past the hole from his angle. This was going to be a very difficult shot. They cut back to him playing his second shot and he’s been given relief (I am guessing line of sight from a TIO/the tent). His drop was on the fairway side of the cart path, with an excellent angle to the hole, water was taken completely out of play and the shot was exponentially easier and with far less risk. 
If the tour allows this type of relief then sure, go ahead and move it from divots too. At this point these guys get relief from everything that doesn’t resemble a scene from a Lee Wybranski painting. 

 

I thought the same thing. 

 

Divot-rule haters say "Oh, it's way too hard to define what a fairway is and what is or is not a divot."

 

In contrast, apparently it's super easy to design a rule that allowed Jordan Spieth to get relief from another hole, cart path bounces, hospitality obstructions, line of sight issues, and more which allowed him to drop 50+ yards closer to the green and on a much better angle. 

 

But they're right... defining what is or isn't a "fairway" would be much too cumbersome.