Clearing line on the green

[gbower]

Hi Gary,
With all the rain today some of the greens seemed to have a mushroom type growth and I was wondering what the ruling is if these are in your line as it's not something like a leaf or sand on the green????

[Gary Hill]

Sorry. You can't remove anything fixed or growing.

[ShaneOttawa]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
Sorry. You can't remove anything fixed or growing.

Now this is something that definately needs fixing with an official Decision. Sure, a mushroom in the fairway is tough luck - a mushroom (or clump of them on the green) is totally unfair.

[Gary Hill]

If the mushrooms are a recurring problem, the Committee could make a Local Rule that mushrooms on the putting green are to be treated as ground under repair.

[ShaneOttawa]

Ahhhhh....GUR is my favourite rule. Unfortunately, the courses that properly identify such spots are few and far between. To my mind, anytime you see bare ground with a tire tread in it, you've found GUR. Golf is difficult enough without having to play from areas never intended to be hazards but that have become impossible to play out of due to apathetic maintenance.

[Gary Hill]

GUR might be your favorite Rule, but you are wrong if you think that as a golfer you can find GUR.

A bare spot, tire track, or anything else is NOT ground under repair unless the Committee says it is.

[ShaneOttawa]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
GUR might be your favorite Rule, but you are wrong if you think that as a golfer you can find GUR.

A bare spot, tire track, or anything else is NOT ground under repair unless the Committee says it is.

I understand that fully. I would also adhere to the rules as such if I had the slightest confidence that "the committee":

A)exists as an effective and active body, and

B) is regularly looking at the course to see what should be designated GUR.

Is there a public course in the city that really adheres to proper standards for having such a committee? While Eagle Creek, The Marshes, Outaouais and perhaps Emerald Links would be vigilent on this, I really doubt other local public courses are making those assessments/rulings.

As such, I'll keep using my own, fair assessment of what constitutes a mess that is being fixed (or should be). Except if I enter competition, of course.

[Gary Hill]

Every single course in the city has a Committee.

The Committee is the person in charge in the course.

Do you use "your own fair assessment" of the other Rules?

[Deep red]

Originally posted by ShaneOttawa
I understand that fully. I would also adhere to the rules as such if I had the slightest confidence that "the committee":

A)exists as an effective and active body, and

B) is regularly looking at the course to see what should be designated GUR.

Is there a public course in the city that really adheres to proper standards for having such a committee? While Eagle Creek, The Marshes, Outaouais and perhaps Emerald Links would be vigilent on this, I really doubt other local public courses are making those assessments/rulings.

As such, I'll keep using my own, fair assessment of what constitutes a mess that is being fixed (or should be). Except if I enter competition, of course.

I totally agree with this statement! There are so many courses out there that don't give a damn about what they consider minor problems with there course. Tire marks etc. It is a shame but for those of us who can not afford to play the high end and well maintained courses we are left will little choice other than to take matters into our own hands. When I do have the luxury of playing a Marshes or similar I follow the rules to a tee, there is no need to deviate from them.

[ShaneOttawa]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
Every single course in the city has a Committee.

The Committee is the person in charge in the course.

Do you use "your own fair assessment" of the other Rules?

Its one thing to have a committee. Its another thing entirely for that committee to be aware, active and effective. And I mean for the entire season, not just before the club championship or other such event.

And no, I don't.

[Gary Hill]

ShaneOttawa -

How did you decide the Rules to which you apply "your own fair assessement"?

The Par 5's are too long?
That tree shouldn't be there?
This bunker is not smooth?
The rough is too high?
These tee-markers should be up farther?
That bare spot should be GUR?
That semi-bare spot should be GUR?
That clover should be GUR?
That dandelion should be GUR?
14 clubs is not enough?
Double-bogey is enough on any hole?

None of the Rules in my book are underlined, so I find it hard to distinguish the important ones from the "use your own judgement" ones.

[spidey]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
so I find it hard to distinguish the important ones.

Well, I can help... you know... the important rules:

1) If the starter says it's a mulligan... it's a mulligan.
2) If the marshall says you should play a different set of tees... you get the benefit of the better slope and rating....
3) If you don't hit it past the ladies' tees.... you know...
4) If a guy offers you a beer if you can hit that mouthy laggard in the group ahead... wale away....
5) If you're inside a guy and you concede his putt, yours is automagically conceded...
6) If you miss the ball, it was a practice stroke... right???
7) If your ball curls more than 90* around the hole, it should have been in, so it's good.
8) If you get a bad bounce, you should at least be entitled to a good lie.... or was that only at the 19th?
9) Grounding your club in the bunker is a penalty only if you're not currently trying to overhaul the shaft design...
10) ...and of course, any ball that should be found right where it should have come to rest cannot be lost, so therefore drop a substitute ball and continue play before the danged marshall catches up with you again....

...pass the Duff, urp.

[Deep red]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
ShaneOttawa -

How did you decide the Rules to which you apply "your own fair assessement"?

The Par 5's are too long?
That tree shouldn't be there?
This bunker is not smooth?
The rough is too high?
These tee-markers should be up farther?
That bare spot should be GUR?
That semi-bare spot should be GUR?
That clover should be GUR?
That dandelion should be GUR?
14 clubs is not enough?
Double-bogey is enough on any hole?

None of the Rules in my book are underlined, so I find it hard to distinguish the important ones from the "use your own judgement" ones.

To funny The basic point is that if the course is not able or willing to maintain a reasonable playing area than the rule pertaining to the lie of the ball in the fairway are brought into question. In sanctioned tournaments or at the pro level they do not have such issues for obvious reasons. There are not six inch cart holes crossing the fairways. There are no grass less areas on the putting greens. Commonsense must be used. I know the rules are the rules but............there are reasons why the PGA or the like don't play at courses like Pineview.

[Big_duck]

Originally posted by Deep red ............there are reasons why the PGA or the like don't play at courses like Pineview. [/B]

Ever play a British Open Course?

[ShaneOttawa]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
ShaneOttawa -

How did you decide the Rules to which you apply "your own fair assessement"?

The Par 5's are too long?
That tree shouldn't be there?
This bunker is not smooth?
The rough is too high?
These tee-markers should be up farther?
That bare spot should be GUR?
That semi-bare spot should be GUR?
That clover should be GUR?
That dandelion should be GUR?
14 clubs is not enough?
Double-bogey is enough on any hole?

None of the Rules in my book are underlined, so I find it hard to distinguish the important ones from the "use your own judgement" ones.

*Sigh*...I thought my point was clear, but the badgering about my position continues. To be bluntly clear:

- GUR isn't properly applied by the vast majority of public courses. In cases where its obvious that something akin to a construction site hasn't been marked as such, and when I'm playing a non-competitive round, I will take my own counsel on what constitutes GUR because all too often, its abundantly clear that the "committee", which you claim is doing its job at every course, indeed isn't, if it exists at all.

- Everything else on your list above constitutes an absurdity to make your point. Nicely played, although in football the penalty for piling on is 15 yards.

[ShaneOttawa]

Originally posted by Big_duck
Ever play a British Open Course?

I sincerely doubt that many British Open courses have three inch deep truck tire ruts in the middle of the fairway, piles of rocky dirt from recent excavation for irrigation pipes, or a three foot-round hole in the middle of the fairway that isn't a bunker or a gopher hole or anything other than a man-made hole.

And of course, no spray paint or other GUR markings anywhere in sight.

[Gary Hill]

Originally posted by ShaneOttawa

- GUR isn't properly applied by the vast majority of public courses.

You are missing MY point:

You are under the mistaken impression that a bare spot IS ground under repair or SHOULD BE ground under repair.

That is NOT what the Rules of Golf say.

Did Tiger get relief in a recent Masters Tournament when his ball landed on a COMPLETELY BARE area in the middle of the fairway where the spectators cross? NO.

[ShaneOttawa]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
You are missing MY point:

You are under the mistaken impression that a bare spot IS ground under repair or SHOULD BE ground under repair.

That is NOT what the Rules of Golf say.

Did Tiger get relief in a recent Masters Tournament when his ball landed on a COMPLETELY BARE area in the middle of the fairway where the spectators cross? NO.

I'm not sure where I said that every bare spot should be GUR, although, yes, I flippantly made a point about bare ground with tire ruts.

I will point out that spectator crosswalks are typically placed in areas where balls aren't likely to land. Those crosswalks are also at known locations on the course, and Tiger could have avoided the crosswalk just as someone would avoid going into a fairway bunker.

But of course, you've raised apples when we're talking oranges.

Dug up or otherwise overly-disturbed-by-maintenance-staff patches of ground can appear anywhere on the courses played by us mortals, including the green.

And of course, on the courses we mortals play, the liklihood that such dug up ground is being properly labelled as GUR is practically nil.

Hence my occassional self-declaration that the pile of dirt from the unfinished irrigation ditch or the deep truck tire rut is GUR.

And if you respond to this post, I really hope you focus on what I've said rather than what you misinterpret me to have said.

[ShaneOttawa]

Originally posted by Gary Hill
You are missing MY point:

You are under the mistaken impression that a bare spot IS ground under repair or SHOULD BE ground under repair.

That is NOT what the Rules of Golf say.

Did Tiger get relief in a recent Masters Tournament when his ball landed on a COMPLETELY BARE area in the middle of the fairway where the spectators cross? NO.

At no point in the previous posts did you raise the defination of GUR. That's a debate/set of facts I'd have liked to see. Instead, you asserted that courses do a good job of ID'ing GUR and ascribed to me a bunch of abusurd rules violations.

[Gary Hill]

Ground Under Repair
“Ground under repair’’ is any part of the course so marked by order of the Committee or so declared by its authorized representative. It includes material piled for removal and a hole made by a greenkeeper, even if not so marked.
All ground and any grass, bush, tree or other growing thing within the ground under repair is part of the ground under repair. The margin of ground under repair extends vertically downwards, but not upwards. Stakes and lines defining ground under repair are in such ground such stakes are obstructions. A ball is in ground under repair when it lies in or any part of it touches the ground under repair.
Note 1: Grass cuttings and other material left on the course which have been abandoned and are not intended to be removed are not ground under repair unless so marked.
Note 2: The Committee may make a Local Rule prohibiting play from ground under repair or an environmentally-sensitive area which has been defined as ground under repair.

Originally posted by ShaneOttawa
Hence my occassional self-declaration that the pile of dirt from the unfinished irrigation ditch or the deep truck tire rut is GUR.

Please show me in the Rules of Golf where "the deep truck tire rut is GUR"

Originally posted by ShaneOttawa
you asserted that courses do a good job of ID'ing GUR

Please quote where I said anthing about the quality of the job being done by course regarding identifying ground under repair.

Originally posted by ShaneOttawa
ascribed to me a bunch of abusurd rules violations.

Please quote the absurd Rules violations that I have ascribed to you.

Originally posted by ShaneOttawa
I'll keep using my own, fair assessment of what constitutes a mess that is being fixed (or should be).

Please show me the Rule that allows you to make you own fair assessement of what constitutes a mess that should be fixed.

[Curious George]

Does it really matter? When we play, we sometimes modify the rules (ie: winter rules in Canada is a must in May, as far as I'm concerned).

If I were playing in a tournament/competition/whatever, I'd adhere to the rules, but playing with friends, there's no way I'm going to follow some of golf's ridiculous rules.

Who cares, I'm with friends, and we all play for fun. Remember when sports were fun?

[Gary Hill]

Curious George -

Yes. It really matters. To golfers.

When you are playing with friends, nobody cares what you do, except that you CANNOT call it Golf.

If you want to play to play "flog" and kick the ball around or walk up and drop it in the hole, NOBODY CARES, least of all me.

If you think the Rules of Golf are ridiculous, then maybe you should stick to "flog" and leave the Rules discussions to golfers.

BTW - You don't modify the Rules for abnormal conditions, the Committee does.

[faldo]

Geez Gary, throughout this thread there has been an almost-snarky tone to your responses.

THANKS, I appreciate it big time.

That's what this game (passion?) is all about.... our self-enforcement of the game!!!!

Another George

[em69]

Gary...

Can I still call it hockey if I play with 9 guys on the ice instead of 12?
What about playing the game on an outdoor rink with 20 guys on an odd shaped rink?
Can I still call it football if we are playing with only 7 guys on a shortened filed?
Can I still call baseball if we haven't specifically measured out the base locations and the pitching mound?

Amateurs modify the rules of all sports, it's a fact of life. Sometimes it is even a must in order to play.

Who are you to say that we CANNOT call it golf. You do care that people do not follow all rules in the game...get over it.

I enjoy the game of golf and I refuse to call it anything else.

[ShaneOttawa]

Please excuse the formatting of this post, Gary's questions to me are in quotes.


"Please show me in the Rules of Golf where "the deep truck tire rut is GUR"

I never claimed that it was there. But on ill-maintained courses where the mythical "committee" is obviously not doing anything to properly designate GUR, such conditions (and others I described) are absurd.


"Please quote where I said anthing about the quality of the job being done by course regarding identifying ground under repair."

No, but your posts that each course has a committee that looks after such things, and your lack of a response to my assertions that such committees either don't exist or aren't active/effective, certainly creates the reasonable inference that you think GUR "enforcement" is being properly conducted at local public courses.


"Please quote the absurd Rules violations that I have ascribed to you."

*Sigh* - you posted the list, it appears a couple of times above, but here you go:

"ShaneOttawa -

How did you decide the Rules to which you apply "your own fair assessement"?

The Par 5's are too long?
That tree shouldn't be there?
This bunker is not smooth?
The rough is too high?
These tee-markers should be up farther?
That bare spot should be GUR?
That semi-bare spot should be GUR?
That clover should be GUR?
That dandelion should be GUR?
14 clubs is not enough?
Double-bogey is enough on any hole?"


Please show me the Rule that allows you to make you own fair assessement of what constitutes a mess that should be fixed. [/B][/QUOTE]

I never claimed it does. I've left the wild assertions to you.

[ShaneOttawa]

Ok, so here's the key, troubling excerpt from the GUR rule that Gary helpfully posted:

“Ground under repair’’ is any part of the course so marked by order of the Committee or so declared by its authorized representative. It includes..."

And there's my problem with the rule - it depends on the course management or committee or whatever to bother properly implement this rule. It seems enough effort for some courses to merely move the pins and the tee markers around, never mind properly designating the dug up portions of the course.

Here's a hypothetical parallel...

The government decrees that cars must be inspected monthly to ensure each has a functioning radio. Only cars inspected by the government each month would be allowed on the road. Inspection stations are set up throughout the country, where staff inspect incoming cars and give those with functioning radios are granted the right to drive for another month.

In some small towns hundreds of miles in the middle of nowhere, however, the inspection stations are set up but never staffed because of $$ issues. Indeed, in some of these places, the inspection stations don't even really exist.

Are people in those small towns supposed to stop driving because the authorities can't get it together to enable the local townsfolk to obey the rules?

Or does it make more sense for the citizens in these under-served towns to take it upon themselves to turn on their radio once a month to make sure it works, and continue driving if it does.

Technically, they'd be breaking the law. But because of haphazard administration, they really have no other choice - unless of course they want to abandon their cars and live lives that are inequitable with those who live in places where they can take the time and $$ to have inspection stations.

[Curious George]

I for one feel I didn't get a fair response, but I appreciate the fact that you, Gary, are taking the time to answer my questions according to your perspective. Perhaps you think I was attacking "real golfers", but I wasn't: I was saying "lighten up everyone who isn't golfing competition level golf, but seeking rules clarification."

We're all allowed to choose what we do and how. SO LONG AS I DONT COMPARE MY SCORE TO YOURS, it doesn't matter. I golf for myself: I always have. For some people, its a competition; for me, its a wonderful game that makes you play against yourself (mind and body).

And yes, I do enjoy GOLF with my friends, that's why were friends. Further, if you were teamed with us at a course, by chance, and started dictating to me how I should play, even though I'm out having fun, and its not a competition, I'd politely ask you to leave.

Otherwise, anyone in the world can play with me. Slow players, chatty guys, high-handicappers, mulliganers...even Hitler, if he shuts his mouth in my backswing...because I always have fun playing golf, and have even more fun with people who have fun playing golf...

And yes, I enjoy it, and no, I don't give a about what "real" golfers think. People who are TOO SERIOUS should step back and realize what golf is: ITS A GAME. ITS A GAME. ITS A GAME.

That said, I adhere to rules of games at all levels of REAL COMPETITION. I play competitive level pool/billiards, but when I'm in a bar, the last thing I'm going to do is call a foul. No way. But I still call it pool (not loop) at the bar, nor would I say to someone else "Good game of loop". Its insulting. No "real" sportsman would ever say that. Maybe "real" golfers should learn that distinction.

[Gary Hill]

ShaneOttawa -

You are confusing "properly implementing this Rule" with YOUR INTERPRETATION of properly implementing this Rule.

Ground Under Repair is a means by which the Committee MAY mark an area of the course as temporarily unfit for the proper play of the game.

Your analogy is not applicable. Nowhere do the Rules mandate that a golf course must be immaculate in condition and free from blemishes, bare spots, spike marks, divots, etc.

Trees, bunkers, water, rough, wind, bushes, bare spots, divot holes, etc. are all part of integral parts of getting your ball from the teeing ground into the hole.

Of course, special considerations are made for unnatural intervention in this process of playing the game by such things as paved carts paths (immovable obstructions) and construction of watering systems (ground under repair).

Somehow, you have taken this "ground under repair" consideration to mean "anything that prevents me from having what I consider to be a perfect lie."

Just because the Committee has not marked every area on the course that you consider to be a blemish as "ground under repair" does not mean that the Committee is remiss in their duties.

What it means is that the Committee DOES NOT consider it to be ground under repair.

The Rules already provide a procedure (Rule 3-3) by which a doubtful area on the course may addressed during the play of a hole. If the Committee has, in fact, missed a spot which THEY consider to be ground under repair, your score will be adjusted accordingly.

[jeffc]

Gary wrote:

Just because the Committee has not marked every area on the course that you consider to be a blemish as "ground under repair" does not mean that the Committee is remiss in their duties.

What it means is that the Committee DOES NOT consider it to be ground under repair.

***

OR

It could mean that the Committee has not done their job and marked an area as GUR. Do you in fact know what every committee on every course everywhere is in fact thinking?

While I know that Gary vehimently follows the rules and provides an invaluable service in answering questions here, I have to disagree on the above statement. I golf around Ottawa and lots of other places a lot and rarely see GUR markings. I'd be willing to bet the lack of GUR markings for the everyday golfer is more a factor of time and $ and less a factor of a committee not deeming something as GUR.

[Gary Hill]

Curious George -

There is no such thing as "real golf", "legal golf", "competition golf", "tounament golf", or a "REAL COMPETITION".

There is only golf and something other than golf played on a golf course (which I shall hereafter refer to as "flog").

If you want to go to a golf course for a fun day of "flog" with your buddies, fine. Great. Nobody else cares.
If you don't want to take the Rules of Golf seriously or you think the Rules of Golf are rediculous, then by all means stick to "flog".
99% of all activities on a golf course are conducted in this manner.

It is not my mission to force "floggers" to get serious about playing by the Rules of Golf. However, I do have a problem with people who pretend they are playing "Golf" with some subset of rules played under their own terms and conditions.

I fully understand that "golf" is used a generic term meaning anything done at a golf course but, for the purposes of this Rules forum only, there must be a distinction made between "golf" and "flog".

If you want to play "Golf", then you are required to play by the Rules. Anything else is "flog".

If you post a question here about the Rules, then I am referring only to "Golf" and "Golfers".

BTW -
You cannot play "Golf" and deem unmarked tree lines to be lateral water hazards.
You cannot play "Golf" and take a drop for a lost ball.
You cannot play "Golf" and decide by group consensus what is an abnormal ground condition.