The Rules Don't Make Sense

[BC MIST]

In the thread on the worst match play defeat possible, there were a couple of suggestions that (a) rules can be interpreted, and that (b) the rules do not make sense.

Are there any members willing to describe situations or rulings that they feel fall into either one of these categories?

Perhaps there are situations, even hypothetical ones, where the rules do NOT cover what happened.

[Sphere Hunter]

The OB rule. Why should a 300 yard drive that is 1 inch OB be worse than a whiff?

The Divot rule. If it's filled with sand, it is under repair. If the divot is made by the group ahead of you on the course, they had no chance of being in it.

The spike mark rule. If the mark is created halfway through a tournament, the second half of the field is at a disadvantage. Un-level playing field.

The Grounding your club in a Hazard rule. If you are nowhere near your lie, what does it matter?

Incorrect score card. We are human, we make mistakes. If a guy plays his entire round on television, makes the mistake of trusting what his competitor wrote down, and signs a incorrect card is this really worthy of DQ? Maybe he's woozy from the heat? Maybe he has a medical condition? Maybe he has ADD? This rule was meant to stop temptation and stop people from cheating. I know there has to be accountability but DQ???

Building a stance. Using a towel to stop your pants from getting filthy (especially in a televised round) should not be a penalty. IMO, this is abuse of a rule intended to stop someone from cheating.

That's my big problem with so many rules. They appear to be created to stop certain abuses. Because they are vague, they end up being used/abused in a way other than what was probably intended by the makers.

[Big Johnny69]

The OB rule. Why should a 300 yard drive that is 1 inch OB be worse than a whiff?

The Divot rule. If it's filled with sand, it is under repair. If the divot is made by the group ahead of you on the course, they had no chance of being in it.

The spike mark rule. If the mark is created halfway through a tournament, the second half of the field is at a disadvantage. Un-level playing field.

The Grounding your club in a Hazard rule. If you are nowhere near your lie, what does it matter?

Incorrect score card. We are human, we make mistakes. If a guy plays his entire round on television, makes the mistake of trusting what his competitor wrote down, and signs a incorrect card is this really worthy of DQ? Maybe he's woozy from the heat? Maybe he has a medical condition? Maybe he has ADD? This rule was meant to stop temptation and stop people from cheating. I know there has to be accountability but DQ???

Building a stance. Using a towel to stop your pants from getting filthy (especially in a televised round) should not be a penalty. IMO, this is abuse of a rule intended to stop someone from cheating.

That's my big problem with so many rules. They appear to be created to stop certain abuses. Because they are vague, they end up being used/abused in a way other than what was probably intended by the makers.

Here, here, well said. Want to start a petition to try and get some of those rules you mentioned changed????

[jonf]

No! Changing any rules would obviously ruin the integrity and tradition of the game. Humbug!










please note slight tone of sarcasm

[jvincent]

My issue with the rules is that they are overly complicated because they try to be "fair".

What I mean by this is that there are some conditions where you get relief and others where you don't and there is a reasonable complex set of scenarios that need to be applied to determine which scenarios result in penalties and which do not.

Could the rules be simplified? You bet, but the scoring would be much different than it is today.

[BC MIST]

The OB rule. Why should a 300 yard drive that is 1 inch OB be worse than a whiff?

The Divot rule. If it's filled with sand, it is under repair. If the divot is made by the group ahead of you on the course, they had no chance of being in it.

The spike mark rule. If the mark is created halfway through a tournament, the second half of the field is at a disadvantage. Un-level playing field.

The Grounding your club in a Hazard rule. If you are nowhere near your lie, what does it matter?

Incorrect score card. We are human, we make mistakes. If a guy plays his entire round on television, makes the mistake of trusting what his competitor wrote down, and signs a incorrect card is this really worthy of DQ? Maybe he's woozy from the heat? Maybe he has a medical condition? Maybe he has ADD? This rule was meant to stop temptation and stop people from cheating. I know there has to be accountability but DQ???

Building a stance. Using a towel to stop your pants from getting filthy (especially in a televised round) should not be a penalty. IMO, this is abuse of a rule intended to stop someone from cheating.

That's my big problem with so many rules. They appear to be created to stop certain abuses. Because they are vague, they end up being used/abused in a way other than what was probably intended by the makers.

It is not my task to defend any of the rules you question, however, there is my take on your selections.
OB: For you a whiff would be worse than OB because none of us would ever let you forget it. There is no penalty for a whiff and yet a whiff is worse than OB. Therefore, a ball that is lost or a ball that goes into a hazard, or hits you should not be penalized because these similarly bad shots are not as bad a whiff?

Divot: One of the basic tenets of the game is to play the course as you find it. By allowing movement of the ball for a divot, sand filled or not, means that every lie that in not perfect is in a "divot," Too many "interpretations" and too much abuse would occur. 99.99% of every fairway yields a good lie. Suck it up!! In 2006 my ball landed in 3 divots and on those 3 holes I was 1 under. What's the problem? Play it back, hit down on the ball. Easy shot.

Spike mark: Was the pun, "un-level playing field," intended? But if the spike mark was created yesterday, then tapping it down not OK. Now, any mark on the green is a "spike" mark, is going to be tapped down and how much longer will it take to play? If every golfer in every group improves their line of play by tapping something down, phantom or not, too long and unfair.

Grounding club: If allowed now I can take a few practice swings, find out the texture of the sand and how much sand there may be under the surface making my shot much easier. Or, I can smoothen out the little mound of sand that lies just behind my ball, and the abuses go on.

Incorrect score card: One of the things that is so great about golf is that the rules by which we ALL play, casual golfers or the best in the world, were not written JUST for televised golf, but for everyone. The player is responsible for seeing that his H by H score is correct and that is reasonable. The reasons you have for not doing this are really excuses. However, disqualification is too harsh, IMO. An additional 2 shot penalty would be fair.

Building a stance; It is pouring rain, the 6" rough is slippery but it is OK to put a towel down, so now I can't slip, lessening the skill necessary to make the shot. Hmmm. It's not about soiling my white pants, if anyone wears white any more.

Yes, some rules are there to prevent abuses. What is wrong with that? It's a tough game. The thing that puzzles me to no end is why, when golfers hit bad shots, they expect not to be penalized. When a player hits a drive on to a fairway, why does he expect a perfect lie? Perhaps this is just a North American phenomenon? Having said that, let's simplify the rules this way. For every mistake you make, OB, lost ball, hits your bag, golf bag that is, ball moves, and so on, the penalty is STROKE & DISTANCE. No exceptions. Go back where you hit it from. None of this 5 options nonsense for a lateral water hazard.

[mpare]

The situation that SH described and your example illustrate an important point. The Rules of Golf are not free from interpretation. The many Decisions on the Rules are proof of that. Problems arise when the intent of the particular rule is lost in favour of a strict application of the "apparent" rule. Very few golfers accept, correctly in my mind, that Craig Stadler was building a stance contrary to the spirit and intent of the rule, when he kneeled on that towel to prevent his pants from being soiled.

As for the other examples that SH gave, I agree with him that some of these Rules should be changed. However, until the caretakers of those rules do so, then the rest of us will do our best to comply with them, while at the same time hoping for change.

Building a stance; It is pouring rain, the 6" rough is slippery but it is OK to put a towel down, so now I can't slip, lessening the skill necessary to make the shot. Hmmm. It's not about soiling my white pants, if anyone wears white any more. ...

[Sphere Hunter]

For every mistake you make, OB, lost ball, hits your bag, golf bag that is, ball moves, and so on, the penalty is STROKE & DISTANCE. No exceptions. Go back where you hit it from. None of this 5 options nonsense for a lateral water hazard.

This is simple but I think it will add about 5 hours to my games and about 30 strokes to my score. Maybe we should leave it the way it is, albeit unfair in many situations.

In the future, as the rules get more and more complex and the stakes get higher, I expect we'll see professional golfers playing, with their caddy on one side, and a personal rules lawyer ready to interpret on the other. It is definitely getting harder to do the right thing when it comes to rules.

It's easy to see why every rule was conceived. The problem I have, as I said before is they way they can sometimes be used through such literal interpretation, like the building a stance rule against the Walrus. Had he just rolled up his pants, he would have been fine. He ends up being caught on a technicality. Of course the ultimate question is, did this help him or change his potential score in some way. I don't think so. Easy to argue until the end of time about that.

[Sphere Hunter]

Divot: One of the basic tenets of the game is to play the course as you find it. By allowing movement of the ball for a divot, sand filled or not, means that every lie that in not perfect is in a "divot," Too many "interpretations" and too much abuse would occur. 99.99% of every fairway yields a good lie. Suck it up!! In 2006 my ball landed in 3 divots and on those 3 holes I was 1 under. What's the problem? Play it back, hit down on the ball. Easy shot.

My problem is that the I end up in divots that are on another fairway due to my wildness. These divot holes are pointing in the wrong direction and, as a result, are hard to get out of. You have a huge "shooting from a divot" advantage here since you are in the correct fairway all the time.

Getting back to the subject though, I know your right. I actually enjoy the challenge of playing out of one. I just don't see it as being equitable since, on any given day, one player may have several of these lies while the other has none. If it's a match, the difference could be decided by this bad luck. I know, I know, it's all part of the game.

[LobWedge]

People seem to forget that those who write, interpret, and maintain the rules of golf, also play the game.

mpare is correct about the rules not being free from interpretation, but it is up to each course's committee to make those interpretations within the spirit and meaning of the rules, when a rule is called into question, and not the individual golfer (this is why there's also a "second ball" rule for stroke play). The rules are meant to be kept as simple, and black and white as possible, solely because of the variability of the courses that golf is played upon, and the changing environmental conditions that it's played under. That, as mpare says, is why we have a companion book of decisions. In it's simplest form, a golf course is like a snowflake or fingerprint, with no two courses (or holes for that matter) being exactly alike, and that reason alone is what demands the simplicity of the rules, so that they can be applied the most widely over the most variable of conditions. Otherwise the rulebook would be hundreds, if not thousands of pages long, and rounds would take forever to complete.

[Kilroy]

Snooker anyone?

[LobWedge]

My problem is that the I end up in divots that are on another fairway due to my wildness. These divot holes are pointing in the wrong direction and, as a result, are hard to get out of. You have a huge "shooting from a divot" advantage here since you are in the correct fairway all the time.

Getting back to the subject though, I know your right. I actually enjoy the challenge of playing out of one. I just don't see it as being equitable since, on any given day, one player may have several of these lies while the other has none. If it's a match, the difference could be decided by this bad luck. I know, I know, it's all part of the game.

It has nothing to do with equity. You said it yourself, it's just bad luck. Remember, if you end up in a divot, it's because you hit it there, not someone else.

[Sphere Hunter]

It has nothing to do with equity. You said it yourself, it's just bad luck. Remember, if you end up in a divot, it's because you hit it there, not someone else.

What I meant was that It seems to me that the rules of golf are made in an attempt to make it fair and reasonably equitable for all who play. This rule, or lack of a rule, makes it a matter of luck to some degree. My point was that so many of the rules were written to promote fairness and playing on a even playing field and this is mostly a matter of luck. I'm not saying the rule should be changed, I'm just not sure it makes total sense and is in keeping with many of the other rules of golf. I suppose it would be the same luck when a wind gusty comes along it the middle of an iron shot over water. Hey, let's have mulligan's for wind gust shots!
Happy (almost) new year to all.
SH

[Hacker]

if you end up in a divot, it's because you hit it there, not someone else.

With all due respect that is a cop out to protect the integrity of the rule IMO. If you hit the ball in the middle of the fairway and navigate all of the intended hazards you should expect a reasonable lie, I don't mean a flat and level lie, but a reasonable lie which IMO does not include divots, sand filled or otherwise.

[LobWedge]

With all due respect that is a cop out to protect the integrity of the rule IMO. If you hit the ball in the middle of the fairway and navigate all of the intended hazards you should expect a reasonable lie, I don't mean a flat and level lie, but a reasonable lie which IMO does not include divots, sand filled or otherwise.

It's not a cop out, it's a statement of fact. You play from the lie you're dealt, unless the rules provide otherwise. It doesn't get any more simple, or fair than that. There's nothing in the rules that says that the entire playing surface must be covered in the same material.

A big part of the problem is that a lot of people spend their time practicing from perfect lies. If more time was spent practicing from those that are less than perfect, situations like old or sand filled divots wouldn't be as daunting.

[BC MIST]

With all due respect that is a cop out to protect the integrity of the rule IMO. If you hit the ball in the middle of the fairway and navigate all of the intended hazards you should expect a reasonable lie, I don't mean a flat and level lie, but a reasonable lie which IMO does not include divots, sand filled or otherwise.

Some are talking about divots as if they land in a dozen of them every round. I had 3 in '06 and that was over 120 rounds. Of course there aren't many divots in the middle of the fairway.

The neat thing about playing the ball down is that very often the lie dictates the kind of shot one has to play. Part of the fun of golf is the challenge of trying of get out of predicaments that we put ourselves into. How boring it would be if every lie was perfect and every shot had to be hit straight.

Reading between the lines, I perceive that getting a low score means more than it should and not being able to fiddle with the rules, divots, spike marks, etc., prevents some for getting that score that may be important to them. If you are going to allow moving the ball out of divots, grounding the club in a hazard, tapping down spike marks, and all the other ways that some will take advantage if this kind of stuff is allowed, you may as well let everyone tee the ball up on every shot, allow the foot wedge as your 15th club and make all putts inside 6' are gimmes. I know some who play that way, anyway.

Wouldn't it be unusual if someone suggested that the rules are not tough enough on bad shots?

[Sphere Hunter]

Wouldn't it be unusual if someone suggested that the rules are not tough enough on bad shots?

NEVER!!!!

[AAA]

I still haven't seen anybody define exactly how one can tell a divot hole from any other irregularity in the surface. (eg a squirrel scrape, a hoof mark, a hole made by a piece of heavy greenkeeping equipment, another player banging his club in anger).
If a relief rule was written, it would have to be equitable in that every player must be able to know when the hole he is in is a divot hole or not.

Remember of course, that it is only relatively recently that 'fairways' were introduced.

One of the complaints is that the guy ahead didn't have to cope with the divot hole he just left. Of course the RBs could introduce a rule allowing relief for all those situations that change between the early starters and the late starters in a tournament. Though I'm not sure what relief you would get because it has started raining or the wind has got up.

[LobWedge]

...a squirrel scrape, a hoof mark...

Where the hell do you play golf?

[mpare]

I can think of one course that would qualify, but it would be impolitic to identify it as well as being off-topic.

Where the hell do you play golf?

[AAA]

In England most courses fall into two types, links and parkland. The primary feature of parkland courses is the many mature trees. Squirrels tend to live in trees They have a habit of burying nuts anywhere and everywhere. Come the spring they dig them up.
A feature of England is the number of ancient public footpaths and bridleways (ie horse tracks) which crisscross the country. These may now cross private land but are enshrined as public rights of way. Whilst the horse riders do not tend to stray (unlike the deer which roam many parts of the countryside), they do leave prints behind.
We (and most courses nearby) suffer from all sorts of wild life (deer, badgers, rabbits, crows) visiting during the night or early morning causing chaos around the course. The bunkers are raked first thing every morning. The deer seem to arrive about 1/2 an hour after the greenkeepers have finished raking.

Chaos may be a bit strong but I hope you see my point.

[LobWedge]

In England most courses fall into two types, links and parkland. The primary feature of parkland courses is the many mature trees. Squirrels tend to live in trees They have a habit of burying nuts anywhere and everywhere. Come the spring they dig them up.
A feature of England is the number of ancient public footpaths and bridleways (ie horse tracks) which crisscross the country. These may now cross private land but are enshrined as public rights of way. Whilst the horse riders do not tend to stray (unlike the deer which roam many parts of the countryside), they do leave prints behind.
We (and most courses nearby) suffer from all sorts of wild life (deer, badgers, rabbits, crows) visiting during the night or early morning causing chaos around the course. The bunkers are raked first thing every morning. The deer seem to arrive about 1/2 an hour after the greenkeepers have finished raking.

Chaos may be a bit strong but I hope you see my point.

Tounge in cheek, my friend. While we may not see many horses on courses here, there is certainly no shortage of fluffy-tailed rodents, or venison roaming the fairways. And we Canadians can scarcely forget our "favourite" natural impediment, the ubiquitous Canada Goose, and it's billions of green and white, cigar shaped pieces of excrement. You have not lived until you have had to negotiate the minefields of our national bird. Oh happy days!!

[AAA]

Don't mention Canada Geese. They seem to be joining half of Europe and North Africa in deciding to make their home in this country. If there is a lake on the course so are they. Not one of your better exports.
And whilst I am complaining, I think we got those bly grey rodents from over there, they're frightening off our little red ones.

By the way, we usually see venison hanging in the butcher's shop or on a plate, not running around the course.
But we don't see many elk or moose (or is it meese ?)

[justsomeguy]

What I meant was that It seems to me that the rules of golf are made in an attempt to make it fair and reasonably equitable for all who play. This rule, or lack of a rule, makes it a matter of luck to some degree. My point was that so many of the rules were written to promote fairness and playing on a even playing field and this is mostly a matter of luck.
SH

Fairness is subjective and luck will always be a part of golf. I doubt that anyone will ever be able to come up with a set of rules that will be completely fair (whatever that is), and will eliminate bad luck but allow good luck (which is what many people really want). Sooner or later you would get to the point where the fundamental principle of playing the ball as it lies becomes largely a joke.

There are a few rules I don't like, but generally I think they do a pretty good job for such a complex game. Sometimes I get a result that I feel I don't deserve and that sucks - but c'est la vie. Sometimes I get lucky too.

[Sphere Hunter]

Fairness is subjective and luck will always be a part of golf. I doubt that anyone will ever be able to come up with a set of rules that will be completely fair (whatever that is), and will eliminate bad luck but allow good luck (which is what many people really want). Sooner or later you would get to the point where the fundamental principle of playing the ball as it lies becomes largely a joke.

There are a few rules I don't like, but generally I think they do a pretty good job for such a complex game. Sometimes I get a result that I feel I don't deserve and that sucks - but c'est la vie. Sometimes I get lucky too.

I totally agree with you. Without good and bad luck it would be a boring game, I think.
Nothing like hitting one into the trees and having it bounce back out into the fairway. Or, my favourite, thinning an iron shot to 3 feet.
Now, let's all hope for lots of luck in 2008.

[LobWedge]

Now, let's all hope for lots of luck in 2008.

Or, at the very least, an early spring. (please, please, please...)