Jump to content

Double Penalty for Out of Bounds


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, LICC said:

That is not correct. As your second shot went OB, you go back to your prior spot (black x), add a stroke penalty, and now you are hitting your fourth shot. Or if the local rule is in effect, you can go to the nearest spot in the fairway(black dot), take a two stroke penalty and now you are hitting 5 from that spot. 

Let's say my fourth shot taking stroke and distance (hitting from black x) ends up near the black dot, isn't that the same as taking the two stoke penalty and hitting from the black dot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Two different holes  two different outcomes.   One hole doesn't have a pond on the right and I can play my shot;  The next hole has a pond and the player receives a penalty. exacty same swing and one gets to play and one is in a pond.  One golfer is penalized while the other isn't.    Illogical and unfair.  

In your scenario, the ball can physically be played while the other can’t. That is not a rule inconsistency. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sirchunksalot said:

Let's say my fourth shot taking stroke and distance (hitting from black x) ends up near the black dot, isn't that the same as taking the two stoke penalty and hitting from the black dot?

Sure. The purpose of the local rule is just to speed up play

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, sirchunksalot said:

Let's say my fourth shot taking stroke and distance (hitting from black x) ends up near the black dot, isn't that the same as taking the two stoke penalty and hitting from the black dot?

The reason the rules were changed to allow the player to place the ball at the black dot was for pace of play and keep players from going back to the spot the hit their prior shot.  Functionally they work the same. 

  • Like 2

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15* set  to 16.5* w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 816H1 19* set at 18* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  21*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
               :titelist-small: 915H 24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :callaway-small: 54-10S   :cleveland-small: 588  58-12
Putter:  :seemore-small: mFGP2

Backups:  :bobby-grace-1: 6330, :taylormade-small:TM-180, Bellum Winmore 787

 

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LICC said:

In your scenario, the ball can physically be played while the other can’t. That is not a rule inconsistency. 

Under the current rules there isn't a rule inconsistency.  One is red stakes and the other is white stakes.  

The rules aren't unfair, illogical, or inconsistent.  You simply don't like the stroke and distance rule as the only option for an OB shot.  

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15* set  to 16.5* w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 816H1 19* set at 18* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  21*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
               :titelist-small: 915H 24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :callaway-small: 54-10S   :cleveland-small: 588  58-12
Putter:  :seemore-small: mFGP2

Backups:  :bobby-grace-1: 6330, :taylormade-small:TM-180, Bellum Winmore 787

 

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Under the current rules there isn't a rule inconsistency.  One is red stakes and the other is white stakes.  

The rules aren't unfair, illogical, or inconsistent.  You simply don't like the stroke and distance rule as the only option for an OB shot.  

The color of the stakes is per the rule. You are trying to justify an illogical rule by referencing the rule. Circular logic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LICC said:

So if you hit it into a lateral hazard pond, you wouldn't see where you need to improve, but if you hit the exact same shot OB, you would see it?

Should the ball not be at the bottom of a pond?

I would say that, in the spirit of the rules and the game, a shot OB is typically a much worse shot (further away from the intended shot) than a shot into a hazard.

As for the ball being at the bottom of the pond, I guess it depends on who you ask 😂😂

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Obsessed with the game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2021 at 8:54 AM, LICC said:

I'll start this as a new topic as I had posted in a discussion about a different rule.

The double penalty for OB is one of the worst rules in golf. OB should be treated the same as a penalty area- drop based where it entered OB and play from there with one stroke added for the drop. It is illogical to treat hitting a ball past an OB stake differently than hitting a ball into the bottom of a pond next to the fairway. The fact that penalty areas are part of the course and OB is not is not a meaningful distinction. If it is physically impossible to hit your ball, the effect is the same. The same swing and ball flight should not be penalized differently based on one impossible hit area being OB and the other impossible to hit area being the bottom of a pond. For decades this rule was only a stroke penalty, not stroke and distance, and many prominent people have stated through the years that this is a bad rule.

Just like last time we debated this topic.  A ball in a water hazard is allowed to be played since it's still on the course.  You can't logically think it's reasonable to play a ball once it's hit off the course.

  • Like 5
  • Love 1

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2021 at 11:29 AM, LeftyRM7 said:

...especially considering there is a huge gray area between the definition of the two.

What gray area?

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2021 at 3:02 PM, LICC said:

“The most penal rule in golf – the ‘stroke and distance’ penalty...

I'd argue that the DQ penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard is more penal.

  • Like 3

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2021 at 3:51 PM, JeremyD said:

If you are leaving the boundary of the course, then I have no problem with the penalty. It has even cost me in a tournament. I’m not mad the OB is there. I was mad I’ve played courses where there are internal OB stakes and I don’t agree with those. You shouldn’t be penalized  the same way. 

I disagree.  Internal OB is usually defined to protect other players from being hit (adjacent fairway, following tee box...).  There should be a harsh penalty if you're flirting with other peoples' lives.

  • Like 1

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2021 at 6:10 PM, DaveP043 said:

Why is rolling through a Stop sign different than rolling through a Yield sign?  Its an identical action, treated differently based on the shape and color of the sign.  Because the folks who have set up the rules have decided that different penalties are appropriate.  Just as golf's ruling bodies have done.  It is meaningful because it is specifically defined as being meaningful.

While I imagine we're on the same side of this debate, that's not exactly a good example.  There is not penalty simply for rolling through a yield sign.

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2021 at 11:20 AM, stuka44 said:

After all don't forget that the size of the golf hole can't be changed because some guy in the 1890's was too lazy to go and find a bigger piece of drain pipe, even though when he picked up the 4.25 inch one he likely lamented, "boy this is awful small, I think there is a bigger piece in the shed a ways away.... aw forget it its lunch time, we'll just use this.  But I guess in the age of stats I guess a hole size that renders professionals who practice hundreds if not a thousand putts a week capable of making just 50% of their putts from 8 feet is just right.  My gosh the uproar for suggesting such a thing.  Its like Noah received the dimensions for the ark, and the size of the golf hole at the same time🤣.

 

First, it seems that the guy lived in the 1820's, not the 1890's.

https://thegolfnewsnet.com/golfnewsnetteam/2020/03/15/what-size-golf-ball-168-inches-golf-hole-425-inches-74425/

"It is believed that the standard hole size was created at Royal Musselburgh Golf Club in Scotland in 1829 when they invented the first known hole-cutter that produced a 4.25 inch hole and was based on the typical Musselburgh drainage pipe at the time. The R&A adopted that standard width in 1891. The USGA followed suit."

Second, I'm sure it couldn't have been Noah.  Well, at least not the one that built THE ark.  He lived long before the 1820's.

  • Like 1

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2021 at 8:28 PM, DaveP043 said:

Changes should have a specific reason, they should be an improvement.  Exactly why should the hole diameter be changed?  Its definitely an arbitrary choice, but why would any other arbitrary choice be a better one?

Because a bigger hole would make the game easier.  Duh...

Haha... I've never understood the argument for wanting to change the RoG just to make the game easier.  The reason this game is fun is because it's difficult.  If it was easy, it wouldn't be appealing.

  • Like 2

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, THEZIPR23 said:

 

Change the rules. He should get a mulligan. ITS NOT FAIR!!

Looks like he should have had his caddie tend the flag.

  • Like 1

:taylormade-small:M5 9° w/ UST Mamiya PFv2 6F4 @ 45"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 3wd w/ HZRDUS Green 70g, 6.5 @ 42.75"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash SZ 5wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 42.25"

:callaway-small:Epic Flash 7wd & 9wd w/ PX HZRDUS Black 85g, 6.5 @ 41.75" & 41"

:srixon-small:Z585 6-7, Z785 8-GW w/ TT AMT White S300@ 37.75" (6i)

:cleveland-small:RTX4 54/10 & 58/3 w/ DGold S400 @ 36"

:odyssey-small:SL EXO Marxman w/ Superstroke Flatso 3.0 @ 33"

On Deck:

:cleveland-small:RTX4 58/9 w/ Nippon Tour 125 Stiff @ 35.75"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, sirchunksalot said:

Please excuse me, as I am not as knowledgeable as most of the folks on here as I have not spent copious amounts of time studying the rules of golf. But I have a question to the fairness of the rule. I'm going to post a photo and go from there. Screenshot_20210430-184226.jpg.d395778a637011ccb05226b2278ea303.jpg

Mind you, this is my understanding of the rule so if I'm mistaken, my bad.

Let's say I hit my drive to the black x. My second shot is a toe hooked 3 wood to the red x which is OB. I have the option to hit again from around the original place I hit my shot (black x) with a one stroke penalty meaning I'm hitting my third. Or, I can take a two stroke penalty and hit from the black dot with a two stroke penalty. Now, let's say my third shot after going OB goes to the black dot, isn't my shot from the black dot still my fifth shot?

For this scenario, the black dot is the drop spot for the OB with the two stroke penalty. I'm still hitting my fourth shot from the black dot in both scenarios. 

 

One other point on this is that the option to drop in the fairway where the ball went out of bounds is a local rule and must be invoked prior to the start of play.   This is why it is not generally available as an option in high level competitions.  

  • Like 1

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15* set  to 16.5* w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 816H1 19* set at 18* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  21*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
               :titelist-small: 915H 24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :callaway-small: 54-10S   :cleveland-small: 588  58-12
Putter:  :seemore-small: mFGP2

Backups:  :bobby-grace-1: 6330, :taylormade-small:TM-180, Bellum Winmore 787

 

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, LICC said:

The color of the stakes is per the rule. You are trying to justify an illogical rule by referencing the rule. Circular logic. 

The color of the stakes is in the rule for consistency and to designate which rule is invoked. 

  • Like 1

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15* set  to 16.5* w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 816H1 19* set at 18* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  21*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
               :titelist-small: 915H 24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :callaway-small: 54-10S   :cleveland-small: 588  58-12
Putter:  :seemore-small: mFGP2

Backups:  :bobby-grace-1: 6330, :taylormade-small:TM-180, Bellum Winmore 787

 

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, seeking70's said:

Just like last time we debated this topic.  A ball in a water hazard is allowed to be played since it's still on the course.  You can't logically think it's reasonable to play a ball once it's hit off the course.

A ball submerged in water is not physically able to be played. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, seeking70's said:

I disagree.  Internal OB is usually defined to protect other players from being hit (adjacent fairway, following tee box...).  There should be a harsh penalty if you're flirting with other peoples' lives.

The recreational golfer who would be the most likely to hit it wayward, would not play the hole any differently if there was one penalty instead of two. And by requiring the next shot from the original spot, you risk another wayward shot to the same place instead of a lateral drip with a one stroke penalty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...