Truly Unfair Rules

[BC MIST]

In the Harrington thread I made reference to some rules of golf where the player does everything right, but still gets penalized.

The challenge then, to those interested, is to search your understanding of the rules or your experience on the course, and come up with examples of situations where you would act correctly, but would still get penalized. There are actually quite a few.

[Ruskie]

That'll be an interesting thread

Ok, I'll take a stab at it: my pet peeve, the ball being moved (e.g. by the wind) after the player addresses it.

Here's another: ball in a flooded bunker with no possible relief in the bunker. Get your scuba gear, or take a stroke and drop outside the bunker.

[BC MIST]

That'll be an interesting thread

Ok, I'll take a stab at it: my pet peeve, the ball being moved (e.g. by the wind) after the player addresses it.

Here's another: ball in a flooded bunker with no possible relief in the bunker. Get your scuba gear, or take a stroke and drop outside the bunker.

Two good examples, for sure. Although in the first, knowing that it is windy, the player would be wise to not ground the club, but there is always the chance that the wind will move the ball and make contact with the putter face.

To your examples, here are two more.

1. You are off the putting green 20 feet from the flagstick and I am also off the green, 50 feet away. I am away, but you play at the same time that I do and the balls collide. Yours goes into the hole while mine rolls off the green into a hazard.
Ruling? Both balls are played as they lie, in spite of my having the honour.

2. I agree to attend the flagstick for you and after you putt I watch the cart girl drive up. Your ball strikes the flag stick. Ruling? You get penalized 2 strokes.

[Ruskie]

Two good examples, for sure. Although in the first, knowing that it is windy, the player would be wise to not ground the club, but there is always the chance that the wind will move the ball and make contact with the putter face.

Agreed. However, I think it is only fair to allow the player to set up for the stroke in the normal way on the green. Other rules make exception for this: e.g. you can't bend the bushes and branches out of the way, but you're allowed to do this in order to take your normal stance.

[jeffc]

my pet peeve...pros have people that look for their balls. It would seem if the rules were fair for all, that this would not be possible - just you, your caddy and fellow competitors and their caddies. I don't have marshalls sitting out in the rough, fescue, along the forest looking for my balls when I hit them there.

[Chambokl]

2. I agree to attend the flagstick for you and after you putt I watch the cart girl drive up. Your ball strikes the flag stick. Ruling? You get penalized 2 strokes.

This is my favorite because it is SO ridiculous...

[BC MIST]

my pet peeve...pros have people that look for their balls. It would seem if the rules were fair for all, that this would not be possible - just you, your caddy and fellow competitors and their caddies. I don't have marshalls sitting out in the rough, fescue, along the forest looking for my balls when I hit them there.

To eliminate your pet peeve, hit the ball down the middle.

I understand, but we are looking for rules where the player does everything right, but still gets penalized.

[Sakuraba]

Perfect drive down the middle of a damp fairway, ball plugs and is lost.

Seagull flies down, picks up your ball on the green and drops it in a water hazard, a la that famous video.

[Kilroy]

Filled divots (sand or turf pelt) should be ground under repair. Technically it IS ground under repair, but is not treated as such. This "penalizes" a player unduly.

[Kilroy]

Seagull flies down, picks up your ball on the green and drops it in a water hazard, a la that famous video.

Ball moved by an outside agency. Not a penalty, just funny to watch.

[Shivas Irons]

I watch the cart girl drive up.

I hope you at least attempted to makle eye contact

[Shivas Irons]

Filled divots (sand or turf pelt) should be ground under repair. Technically it IS ground under repair, but is not treated as such. This "penalizes" a player unduly.

I think this is one that almost everyone agrees on.
Nothing worse than piping a drive straight down the middle of the fairway only to have it come to rest in a divot, filled or otherwise.

[bNeill]

Perfect drive down the middle of a damp fairway, ball plugs and is lost.

Seagull flies down, picks up your ball on the green and drops it in a water hazard, a la that famous video.

I'm not an expert by any means but the latter, and even the former (if you watch it plug) aren't penalized I think.

[BC MIST]

I think this is one that almost everyone agrees on.
Nothing worse than piping a drive straight down the middle of the fairway only to have it come to rest in a divot, filled or otherwise.

Almost would be correct. If I duck hook a drive that hits a tree and bounces back to the middle of the fairway into a perfect lie, I smile and gladly accept a good break, but if I hit a good drive into a divot, I don't have to accept a bad break??? Are we being a wee bit spoiled here?

Good and bad bounces/breaks are a natural part of the game as are imperfect greens and fairways, rough and bunkers. A rule deeming a divot hole as GUR means that every less than perfect lie is an old "divot." Never going to happen.

[BC MIST]

Perfect drive down the middle of a damp fairway, ball plugs and is lost.

You get relief from an embedded ball, through the green, in our area. If the ball makes a pitch mark in the fairway and that pitch mark is filled with water, the you get relief from casual water. This is different from the embedded ball relief because you get one CL from the nearest point of relief for CW.

However, while it may be "known or virtually certain" that the ball is embedded in the fairway, there must be evidence that it's also in casual water, before free relief would be granted. (I think) Otherwise, I believe that the ball is lost. Gerry. Where are you?

[BC MIST]

Another "Unfair" one, at times.

You have a 30' putt and I mark my ball that will probably be in your way as it is closer to the hole. As you stroke your putt, I replace my ball and the balls collide and yours rolls off the green. You have to play yours as it lies and I get to replace mine, even though you did everything right and had no control over my actions.

Of course, yours could have rolled into the hole.

[gbower]

You get relief from an embedded ball, through the green, in our area. If the ball makes a pitch mark in the fairway and that pitch mark is filled with water, the you get relief from casual water. This is different from the embedded ball relief because you get one CL from the nearest point of relief for CW.

However, while it may be "known or virtually certain" that the ball is embedded in the fairway, there must be evidence that it's also in casual water, before free relief would be granted. (I think) Otherwise, I believe that the ball is lost. Gerry. Where are you?

Just got off the golf course and no chance of an embedded ball in the concrete down here but you are correct if the ball is embedded in the fairway that you must find it or you have a lost ball. I does seem unfair but that's the way it is. It's just like you know your ball went into the long rough but you're unable to find it. I've helped a couple of players look in the fairway and remember one being very ticked off at having to go back to the tee. If there is casual water and it is known or virtually certain it's landed in there then there is relief and it doesn't have to be in the fairway. I've seen that happen a few times on the left of #1 at Loch March during the Citizen tournament and everyone saw it splash and the ball wasn't recoverable.
I happened to hit a couple of trees today and fortunately they came back into a playable location but should have been long gone. I guess I should have played as if they were lost in the woods that I wasn't going to trek into. One of the biggest pet peeves I have is when players don't rake a bunker and one of the leagues I'm playing in actually plays and unofficial rule in the bunkers where they tell you to move the ball out of the footprint. Fortunately I haven't had that problem yet. The pros have all the bunkers perfectly manicured and we often have crap to play out off.

[jeffc]

Almost would be correct. If I duck hook a drive that hits a tree and bounces back to the middle of the fairway into a perfect lie, I smile and gladly accept a good break, but if I hit a good drive into a divot, I don't have to accept a bad break??? Are we being a wee bit spoiled here?

Good and bad bounces/breaks are a natural part of the game as are imperfect greens and fairways, rough and bunkers. A rule deeming a divot hole as GUR means that every less than perfect lie is an old "divot." Never going to happen.

Hey, I aim for those trees!

[Kilroy]

I don't have a problem with a bad bounce affecting a good shot, or vice-versa.

[jeffc]

Just got off the golf course and no chance of an embedded ball in the concrete down here but you are correct if the ball is embedded in the fairway that you must find it or you have a lost ball. I does seem unfair but that's the way it is. It's just like you know your ball went into the long rough but you're unable to find it. I've helped a couple of players look in the fairway and remember one being very ticked off at having to go back to the tee. If there is casual water and it is known or virtually certain it's landed in there then there is relief and it doesn't have to be in the fairway. I've seen that happen a few times on the left of #1 at Loch March during the Citizen tournament and everyone saw it splash and the ball wasn't recoverable.

again, no way that would happen on the PGA Tour with all those spotters....

[sensfan63]

my pet peeve...pros have people that look for their balls. It would seem if the rules were fair for all, that this would not be possible - just you, your caddy and fellow competitors and their caddies. I don't have marshalls sitting out in the rough, fescue, along the forest looking for my balls when I hit them there.

You are not competing against them, so what does it matter?

[Shivas Irons]

Almost would be correct. If I duck hook a drive that hits a tree and bounces back to the middle of the fairway into a perfect lie, I smile and gladly accept a good break, but if I hit a good drive into a divot, I don't have to accept a bad break??? Are we being a wee bit spoiled here?

Good and bad bounces/breaks are a natural part of the game as are imperfect greens and fairways, rough and bunkers. A rule deeming a divot hole as GUR means that every less than perfect lie is an old "divot." Never going to happen.

Touche mon ami.

"Old divot' could certainly be open to a mile wide range of interpretation.

[mpare]

The one rule that jumps to mind is the player's responsibility for the sins of his caddie. Despite a player's best instructions, a caddie could breach a rule that results in the player gaining no advantage, but still being penalized by loss of a hole or strokes.

[Kilroy]

"Old divot' could certainly be open to a mile wide range of interpretation.

I said "filled divot". Not the same thing. A filled divot is in the process of being repaired.

[mpare]

And if that isn't ground under repair as the terms would normally be understood, I don't know what is. I'm with you, Dan. They should be treated as GUR.

I said "filled divot". Not the same thing. A filled divot is in the process of being repaired.

[BC MIST]

The one rule that jumps to mind is the player's responsibility for the sins of his caddie. Despite a player's best instructions, a caddie could breach a rule that results in the player gaining no advantage, but still being penalized by loss of a hole or strokes.

True, but for the same rules infraction gaining an advantage IS a possibility. If a rule was changed, who decides whether the advantage gained was significant enough for a penalty? For each caddie related rules infraction we would now need a predetermined measuring stick to help decide whether or not a penalty is warranted. The rules currently have one - do it in any way and penalty applied. Adding subjectivity would make the Rules of Golf more complicated, not less.

[mpare]

I wasn't necessarily suggesting a rules change. I was simply pointing out that you can pay for the sins of your caddie. That could, in some cases, be unfair, though if you define "fair" as anything that is a consequence of the existing rules, then nothing will be unfair and your initial question in this thread will be meaningless.

True, but for the same rules infraction gaining an advantage IS a possibility. If a rule was changed, who decides whether the advantage gained was significant enough for a penalty? For each caddie related rules infraction we would now need a predetermined measuring stick to help decide whether or not a penalty is warranted. The rules currently have one - do it in any way and penalty applied. Adding subjectivity would make the Rules of Golf more complicated, not less.

[BC MIST]

And if that isn't ground under repair as the terms would normally be understood, I don't know what is. I'm with you, Dan. They should be treated as GUR.

Definition -"Ground Under Repair is any part of the course so marked by the Committee..."
New definition - "Ground Under Repair is any part of the course so determined by the player.

Would this not completely undermine the basic principle of golf, "The ball shall be played as it lies.." and lead to more subjectivity and more advantage gained?

In the course of 100 games, how many sand filled divots would actually affect one's play? Many golfers believe that hitting the perfect drive or even one in the fairway, should result in a perfect lie. This is a fallacy. We obviously "get what we get."

A good golf swing requires a downward angle of attack striking the ball first, whether from fairway turf, fairway bunker or sand filled divot. If you hit the ball "fat" by 1 inch, it is open to debate as to which one would have the more severe consequences.

[Kilroy]

In the Harrington thread I made reference to some rules of golf where the player does everything right, but still gets penalized.

I wasn't really suggesting a change was needed but trying to find an example of your premise for the thread. Piping a drive to the perfect landing area and finding yourself in a sea of repaired divots kinda sucks. Laying in a sand filled divot is not a "penalty", but I thought the situation worthy of note since the player did everything right.

[LobWedge]

Excellent post BC.

People seem to forget that while there may be any number of "well struck" shots, and "ideal swings" during the course of a round, the only "perfect" shots are the ones that end up at the bottom of the cup. For myself at least, golf is not so much about the shots I make from ideal conditions, it's about the quality of the shots I can produce from the less-than-ideal ones.

Definition -"Ground Under Repair is any part of the course so marked by the Committee..."
New definition - "Ground Under Repair is any part of the course so determined by the player.

Would this not completely undermine the basic principle of golf, "The ball shall be played as it lies.." and lead to more subjectivity and more advantage gained?

In the course of 100 games, how many sand filled divots would actually affect one's play? Many golfers believe that hitting the perfect drive or even one in the fairway, should result in a perfect lie. This is a fallacy. We obviously "get what we get."

A good golf swing requires a downward angle of attack striking the ball first, whether from fairway turf, fairway bunker or sand filled divot. If you hit the ball "fat" by 1 inch, it is open to debate as to which one would have the more severe consequences.