Proposed new rules of golf

[hckymeyer]

It looks like the USGA has finally made a step in the right direction and will be somewhat simplifying the rules of golf as well as making some changes.  The proposal that was released today will now go through a 6 month review period where folks an chime in on the changes.  After August of this year the rule book will be rewritten and then beginning Jan 1, 2019 the new rules would go in to effect.

 

Here is the PGA.com article on the changes.

 

From golfchannel.com here are a few of the proposed changes...

 

• Instead of dropping a ball at shoulder height, players can release the ball at any height above one inch. The area in which players are allowed relief is also expanded; rather than one or two club-lengths, there is now a defined relief area of 20 inches (cart paths, ground under repair, etc.) to 80 inches (unplayable lie, penalty area drops).

• Caddies cannot stand behind a player and help with alignment while the player takes a stance – a move that is most common in the LPGA, including with world No. 1 Lydia Ko.

• A player won't be penalized if his ball accidently deflects off him. That's what happened to Jeff Maggert in the 2003 Masters. Leading by two entering the final round, he received a two-shot penalty after his shot hit the lip of the bunker and rebounded off his body. He made triple bogey and finished fifth. Five years later, the penalty for an accidental deflection was reduced from two shots to one. Now, it is eliminated altogether, a nod to the unpredictability of the act and the inherent disadvantage if it occurred.

• The search time for lost balls is three minutes, not five.

• Players can move loose impediments in a bunker. There still is a penalty if a player (a) touches the sand to test the surface, or ( touches the sand when making a backswing – the penalty that cost Anna Nordqvist a chance to win last year's U.S. Women's Open.

• Damaged clubs can be used in competition, even if the equipment was damaged in a fit of rage. Previously, only those clubs that were damaged in the “normal course of play” could still be used, so if, for instance, a player slammed his putter in disgust and bent the shaft, he would have no choice but to putt with a wedge or fairway wood for the remainder of the round.

• Players are entitled to free relief from an embedded lie anywhere (save for the bunker), unless limited to the fairway by a local rule.

• Rangefinders can be used to measure distances, except when prohibited by a local rule. It was not immediately known whether the pro tours would enforce that local rule, with players and caddies still responsible for calculating their own yardages.  

• Committees are encouraged to mark more hazards with red stakes, not yellow, to allow lateral relief.

• In an attempt to improve pace of play at the recreational level, the governing bodies are encouraging ready golf; allowing putts to be holed with the flagstick in; and recommending an alternative form of stroke play with a double-par maximum score.

You can see the full golf channel article HERE and also the full list of proposed rules HERE.

So what do you think?  Step in the right direction or waste of time?  Personally there are a few that I really like, and a few that you can tell were just built in for the pro tours.  

[JBones]

Definitely a step I the right direction. I still think touching sand in your backswing is bulltish, we all don't get to play in perfectly raked bunkers, like the Tour players.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[hckymeyer]

I've been reading through the articles and I really do think they got a lot right.  There seems to be a definite focus on pace of play and simplifying the rules while being slightly less penal.  I really like allowing the use of rangefinders, moving an embedded ball and the promotion of more red stakes.

 

I think they could have done more though.  I really wish they had addressed finding your ball in a divot in closely mowed areas and the stroke + distance penalty.  Overall though I'm pretty happy with the proposed changes, I'm curious if it actually has any impact on pace of play though.

[hckymeyer]

Definitely a step I the right direction. I still think touching sand in your backswing is bulltish, we all don't get to play in perfectly raked bunkers, like the Tour players.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

Completely agree, or when you're ball lands in a footprint because some asshat didn't feel like raking the bunker!

[JudgeSmails]

I like pretty much all of them....I think they are proposing being able to repair spike marks on the green as well

[JudgeSmails]

• Caddies cannot stand behind a player and help with alignment while the player takes a stance – a move that is most common in the LPGA, including with world No. 1 Lydia Ko

 

Lydia Ko does this EVERY shot, putts included......I've always thought it should be the players job to line themselves up

[PlaidJacket]

If I read correctly... the rules committees will no longer accept Video after the fact of a "potential" rules violation. The new proposed rule is 1.3a(2). This proposal was listed under heading: Reasonable Judgment in Estimating and Measuring. I assume that wouldn't apply to placing a towel on the ground (Craig Stadler) when taking a shot.

I've never been a fan of people calling in or what not and then a player is accessed a penalty after the fact.

[PlaidJacket]

Did you guys also take the survey? I did and it's interesting also.

[Kenny B]

I like pretty much all of them....I think they are proposing being able to repair spike marks on the green as well

Michael Breed was saying this morning that he wasn't sure he liked this.  Because the most traffic on a green is around the hole, he seemed to think that a player could tamp down a "channel" to the hole.  He's reserving judgement.  Personally, I think that would be obvious and could be called.

[downlowkey]

Definitely a step I the right direction. I still think touching sand in your backswing is bulltish, we all don't get to play in perfectly raked bunkers, like the Tour players.

Bunkers are meant to be hazards (less than ideal). Absent this rule you'd inevitably have guys dragging the bounce through the sand to create a depression behind the ball and nothing in place to prohibit such acts. When golf was invented bunkers were natural features of consternation and rakes to tend them didn't exist.

Remember when Jack experimented with the wide furrow rake job for the Memorial and the best bunker players in the world were whining about how much more difficult it was to navigate? Jack's argument, perfectly manicured bunkers have become the bailout and a departure from their operative function in course design. If less than ideal lies in bunkers are hindering your enjoyment of the game, put more focus on avoiding them.

Essentially you're arguing that you shouldn't have to adjust your ideal bunker extraction technique in a situation intended to be less than ideal, because the conditions are less than ideal. While I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this one, I will concede that almost everyone could do a better job leaving bunkers in the same condition initially encountered. I always do extra raking for the karmic advantage.

[JBones]

Bunkers are meant to be hazards (less than ideal). Absent this rule you'd inevitably have guys dragging the bounce through the sand to create a depression behind the ball and nothing in place to prohibit such acts. When golf was invented bunkers were natural features of consternation and rakes to tend them didn't exist.

Remember when Jack experimented with the wide furrow rake job for the Memorial and the best bunker players in the world were whining about how much more difficult it was to navigate? Jack's argument, perfectly manicured bunkers have become the bailout and a departure from their operative function in course design". If less than ideal lies in bunkers are hindering your enjoyment of the game, put more focus on avoiding them.

Essentially you're arguing that you shouldn't have to adjust your ideal bunker extraction technique in a situation intended to be less than ideal, because the conditions are less than ideal. While I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this one, I will concede that almost everyone could do a better job leaving bunkers in the same condition initially encountered. I always do extra raking for the karmic advantage.

My argument is that I shouldn't have to play out sideways or backwards from the middle of a bunker, because my ball is 2" in front of a 4" high pile of sand that is unavoidable in the backswing. This could be due to poor etiquette, an animal, whatever. I'm fine with wide rake lines, super soft sand that gives you a fried egg 90% of the time, hell Im even fine with bunkers as hard as cart paths, just don't penalize me for touching a single grain of said sand. Do you realize how hard it is to drag your club through sand on the backswing, when you are hovering to avoid grounding? It's dang near impossible in a smooth bunker.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[downlowkey]

I could also argue that the ability to repair virtually any imperfection in your intended line on the green has the potential to entirely negate the general pace of play impetus from which many of these proposed changes originated.

[JudgeSmails]

I could also argue that the ability to repair virtually any imperfection in your intended line on the green has the potential to entirely negate the general pace of play impetus from which many of these proposed changes originated.

That could be an unfortunate side effect....I could see some of the tour pros spending 5 minutes tamping down everything in sight

[JudgeSmails]

also didn't see anything about fairway divots, always thought they should be considered 'ground under repair', because in reality, they are

[PlaidJacket]

I kind of like the bunker/sand revisions. I was also reminded by Downlow about Nicklaus's comments on bunkers. Doesn't he still corn-row them at the Memorial? Love it. LOL

The bunkers at my course are "iffy" at best most times. In fact last summer I believe it was we made a rule in our games where you could place the ball in a bunker so you'd at least have a chance to make a shot. We got so angry from people not raking, foot prints etc etc. We just decided amongst ourselves to not make a guy play from a foot print. The Pros don't have too do they? Hell no they don't. They usually have perfect lies in the bunker.

[Robert Dana]

The flagstick rule is interesting. I get the intent; to help quicken play. But, the rule would allow a player whose ball is on the green to keep the flagstick in while putting. For down hill putts this certainly creates an advantage. Unintended perhaps.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[MattF]

Disappointed to see stroke and distance still not addressed for amateurs.

[Kenny B]

I kind of like the bunker/sand revisions. I was also reminded by Downlow about Nicklaus's comments on bunkers. Doesn't he still corn-row them at the Memorial? Love it. LOL

The bunkers at my course are "iffy" at best most times. In fact last summer I believe it was we made a rule in our games where you could place the ball in a bunker so you'd at least have a chance to make a shot. We got so angry from people not raking, foot prints etc etc. We just decided amongst ourselves to not make a guy play from a foot print. The Pros don't have too do they? Hell no they don't. They usually have perfect lies in the bunker.

It's a local rule at my club too.  It's one of the disadvantages of playing at an affordable, not private country club.  

[Kenny B]

DANG DOUBLE POST! 

[downlowkey]

My argument is that I shouldn't have to play out sideways or backwards from the middle of a bunker, because my ball is 2" in front of a 4" high pile of sand that is unavoidable in the backswing. This could be due to poor etiquette, an animal, whatever. I'm fine with wide rake lines, super soft sand that gives you a fried egg 90% of the time, hell Im even fine with bunkers as hard as cart paths, just don't penalize me for touching a single grain of said sand. Do you realize how hard it is to drag your club through sand on the backswing, when you are hovering to avoid grounding? It's dang near impossible in a smooth bunker.

I wasn't arguing that ne'er-do-wells would use the proposed change to their advantage in situations with perfect lies. Only that it could create opportunity for players to proceed in a manner not in accordance with the spirit of the game.

How many times out of a hundred do you find your ball in the middle of a bunker 2" in front of a 4" pile of sand? If you've ever aimed for a bunker in an attempt to avoid a more penal hazard I see gaps in the logic of your fairness doctrine re: hazardous areas of the course. The only thing unavoidable about the pile of sand and resulting penalty in this hypothetical scenario is insistence on beginning your backswing in front of it.

With the exception of sitting on top of a tee, nowhere on the course are you guaranteed a lie that allows you to setup to your ball in the manner which you are most comfortable. Especially an area deemed to be a hazard. I take issue with pile of sand being there in the first place (etiquette issue) but not the overwhelming personal accountability that accompanies any ball I struck coming to rest in a hazard.

[Kenny B]

Disappointed to see stroke and distance still not addressed for amateurs.

Maybe it could be.  It all depends on how "penalty areas" are defined.  Could this include OB?

 

New rule: Committees are given the discretion to mark all penalty areas as red so that lateral relief is always allowed (but they may still mark penalty areas as yellow where they consider it appropriate).

[JBones]

I could also argue that the ability to repair virtually any imperfection in your intended line on the green has the potential to entirely negate the general pace of play impetus from which many of these proposed changes originated.

I completely agree.....and so does Justin Rose.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[downlowkey]

The flagstick rule is interesting. I get the intent; to help quicken play. But, the rule would allow a player whose ball is on the green to keep the flagstick in while putting. For down hill putts this certainly creates an advantage. Unintended perhaps.

Leaving the flagstick in the hole is a huge statistical advantage. I'd be very surprised if the governing bodies' boardroom discussions didn't scrutinize such an adoption with a snicker. The only material pace of play advantage here is a whole mess of otherwise missed putts staying in the hole. It's essentially making the hole bigger, the discussion of which would be considered insane if framed as such.

Currently, if you request your caddie/playing partner tend the flagstick, it must be removed prior to the ball being holed to avoid penalty. So is there ambiguity in this proposed change that would allow the party to lean the flagstick to your advantage without penalty? This may seem like over exaggeration but I'm in the business of predicting unintended consequences of process changes and several of these proposals are rife with ambiguity and will inevitably be a move away from the game's genteel heritage.

[StrokerAce]

couple of questions for clarification...

 

"A player may remove loose impediments in the sand and touch the sand with his/her club, although the player cannot deliberately touch the sand to test its condition. Practice swings would still be prohibited."

 

I assume this means that you still CANNOT ground your club in the bunker behind the ball?

 

"There would be no limitations to how high from the ground the ball must be dropped, as long as it moves through the air from some height above the ground."

 

Does this mean that you can drop the ball from either as high as you can possibly reach (say it is on a slope and you want the ball to run down) or as low as you can go without it touching the ground?

 

"The new rule would allow the use of distance-measuring devices, with an option for a Committee to implement a local rule prohibiting them."

 

Would this slow play down if everyone gets out their "distance measuring device (aka rangefinder)" ?

 

"Through the green, the player would have the option to remove the flagstick or have it attended; there would be no penalty for hitting an unattended flagstick on the green."

 

Does this mean while you're ball is off the green or when it is both off or on?

[StrokerAce]

these are all just proposals at this point.... what are the chances they get accepted?

 

can the USGA accept some and the R&A not accept some?

[Liberty Ball Markers]

Always give & take. There could also be putts that bounce off the stick, but would have hit the back of the cup and fallen.

 

I also agree with several above - bunkers are a hazard, not an easy bail-out.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[downlowkey]

I completely agree.....and so does Justin Rose.

I can also envision a dilemma with players on the clock with this proposed change. Shot timing is supposed to begin when you reach your ball, but you could meander around the green forever, feeling out the slope with your feet, under the auspices of repairing surface line imperfections (your unalienable right) and officials potentially wouldn't be able to start the clock until the player steps in to mark their ball. Again, I realize this may all seem like tugging at strings but all loose strings will inevitably snag.

 

I understand the need to address pace of play but some of these proposals seem kinda glib and dangerous to the gentlemanly roots of the game. But I've always interpreted the rules as policy in place to aid the player. For example, the rule on offering advice. It sounds like it was written to keep one player from assisting another but I've always believed it was originally written to protect a gentleman from the unsolicited advice of a boorish playing partner (i.e. "your right elbow keeps flying out"). If it all gets to be too much, I can assess the schmuck a penalty likely to shut him up for the remainder of the round. However, I also recognize that in my age group my personal views on the game reside in the minority.

[downlowkey]

couple of questions for clarification...

 

"A player may remove loose impediments in the sand and touch the sand with his/her club, although the player cannot deliberately touch the sand to test its condition. Practice swings would still be prohibited."

 

I assume this means that you still CANNOT ground your club in the bunker behind the ball?

 

There would be no limitations to how high from the ground the ball must be dropped, as long as it moves through the air from some height above the ground."[/size][/font]

 

Does this mean that you can drop the ball from either as high as you can possibly reach (say it is on a slope and you want the ball to run down) or as low as you can go without it touching the ground?

We are in the same camp on the potential ambiguities the proposed changes create. But in reading the accompanying updates to "valid drop area" when taking relief, the intent of the reduced ball height drop aims to save time by increasing the chances that the initial drop remains in the adjusted smaller relief areas, precluding the need for an additional drop before finally placing the ball. However, most professionals are savvy enough to intentionally drop in a manner/sequence that ultimately results in free placement. So, as you suggested, without putting an upper limit on drop height this probably won't save any time at the top levels of the game.

[downlowkey]

Maybe it could be. It all depends on how "penalty areas" are defined. Could this include OB?

 

New rule: Committees are given the discretion to mark all penalty areas as red so that lateral relief is always allowed (but they may still mark penalty areas as yellow where they consider it appropriate).

Without local rules addressing "OB turned Lateral" (i.e. nature preservation designation), players are going to turn it into a "no penalty" situation, hitting out of someone's backyard Bermuda or worse, searching 50 yards outside natural course boundaries for 3 minutes on the chance it could be played as it lies within the newly classified lateral hazard. Whereas it would have been a quick OB re-tee. Potentially bad for neighbor diplomacy and pace of play.

[null]

I think it's more about removing stroke and distance rather than saying you can look for your ball everywhere