Big Oak Buzzing About Golf's Inability To Stem The Tide Of Embarrassing Rules Imbroglios

/

I file this Golfweek.com on informal samplling of big-wigs at Augusta National who are tired of all the talk centering on golf's inability to get this whole replay, rules, scorecard phone-in ruling nonsense figured out.  the Masters should not be distracted by such nonsense (or worse, if the forecast holds, issues arising here).

It's time for an emergency meeting of the Five Families. These wars need to happen once every ten years or so.

Leave the guns and the cannolis outside the meeting and get this figured out!

The piece.

For some context on what the greats are saying, here is Beth Ann Nichols on what Jack Nicklaus and Phil Mickelson had to say about the situation.

Phil On Lexi Situation: "I think it should be reversed"

/

Phil Mickelson's comments today on the Lexi Thompson situation make too much sense. Well, maybe not reversing it, but the sentiment is sound in suggesting what a black eye this is for golf.

From The Masters Press Building:

Q.  Curious to get your reaction to what happened to Lexi, and viewers calling in.

    PHIL MICKELSON:  So rather than address that specific instance, what I would say is this:  I know a number of guys on TOUR that are loose with how they mark the ball and have not been called on it.  I mean, they will move the ball two, three inches in front of their mark, and this is an intentional way to get it out of any type of impression and so forth and I think that kind of stuff needs to stop.

    But I think it should be handled within the TOUR.  I think that the TOUR should go to those players and say, look, we've noticed you've been a little lax in how precise you've been in marking the ball.  We'd like you to be a little bit better at it ‑‑ and see if that doesn't just kind of fix the thing.

    Because we've all marked the ball imprecisely, especially when you're standing on the side of the ball like she was and not directly behind the ball, in line with the hole, where it's easy to draw a line.

    And I think that that should have been handled within the LPGA saying, hey, look, you're a little lax in how you're marking the ball.  You need to be careful.  Here's a warning and let's go from there.

    But to have a tournament be decided like that, with all the scenarios going around, as far as viewers calling in, as far as it being a one‑foot putt with really no advantage, just a little bit of loose marking, if you will, something that happens all the time, intentionally and unintentionally, I just think that's ‑‑ I think it should be reversed.  I think that she should be given the trophy.

Poll And Quick Wrap: Lexi's Infraction At The ANA

/

Anyone for expediting the Rules of Golf simplification?

I see both sides on this one. Why was Lexi Thompson picking up her ball and twisting her hand? Most likely for alignment purposes but there is always the possibility it was in a spike dent she didn't like. This was not addressed after the round anywhere I can see.

But like the Dustin Johnson situation last year at Oakmont, the evidence seen by someone at home (not apparently known to the rules staff according to this Nichols Golfweek column), was just not strong enough to fit the crime. But I suspect Rules of Golf experts don't agree even as we are likely to not face this situation in 2019.

The infraction, which again needed HD and slow motion to see, and the ensuing mid-round informing of a leader during the final round of a major:

Thompson lost the tournament on the first sudden-death hole to Soyeon Ryu, a fine player who has been trending toward a major win for some time. Sadly though, this one will be remembered for the four-stroke penalty.

From Beth Ann Nichols' Golfweek excellent report from Mission Hills:

LPGA rules official Sue Witters later said she was 100-percent certain that Thompson did not do it intentionally.

“It was a hard thing to do. To be honest, it made me sick.”

The LPGA said she breached USGA Rule 20-7c and Rule 16-1b. She incurred an additional penalty for incorrect scorecards under Rule 6-6d.

Ah the dreaded intent word.

As Missy Jones explains, the rules re-write will address this.

When you need to estimate or measure a spot, point, line, area or distance under a Rule, your reasonable judgment will not be second-guessed based on later evidence (such as video review) if you did all that could reasonably be expected under the circumstances to estimate or measure accurately.

The LPGA's statement:

Your thoughts?

Was the LPGA correct in assessing a penalty to Lexi Thompson for not replacing her ball correctly?
 
pollcode.com free polls
 

Thomas Tizzy: Maybe We Should Let Pros Repair Spikes Marks?

/

I've been crafting a few thoughts for an eventual post on the proposed rule change for spike mark tapping. But after belatedly seeing Justin Thomas lose his cool in Mexico over a blemish by creating more damage to the green, maybe this explains the rule change: allow players to tap so they don't dent the green to let us all know their putt took a bad bounce. After all, it's a time-honored tradition that will not be missed with the rule change!  

Tag a mate that can't putt 😂 #golfgods #definitelythedivot #fuckbogeys #golfmeme #golf #putting

A post shared by Golf Gods (@golf_gods) on Mar 11, 2017 at 4:49pm PST

 

Interestingly, Thomas was one of the players to voice concern over the proposed change.

 

 

Golf Architecture Should Not Get In The Way Of A Stroke-And-Distance (OB) Fix

/

Thanks to everyone for voting in the rules poll! We a clear winner: stroke and distance still needs to be remedied:

Cara Robinson and I discussed the poll at the end of my Morning Drive segment today and some other positives and negatives from the Rules unveiling.

So what is the OB issue?

I'm guessing it starts with the difficulty of determining "point of entry" when treating OB like we currently treat a lateral hazard. Though in thinking about holes bordered by a boundary, it seems like the option to  re-tee for a ball that went OB or will not be able to be dropped in a playable location would address most situations.

The bigger philosophic issue, according to the USGA's Thomas Pagel during his Morning Drive appearance, involves design impact. Ryan Lavner reports:

One of the biggest hang-ups is differentiating the penalties for a lost ball and a shot that was hit out of bounds. Any option that requires an estimation of the spot where the ball was lost could lead to significant debate about players, and it’s not yet clear how many penalty strokes should be assessed, one or two.

Meanwhile, the Rules maintain that out of bounds is a strategic part of the challenge of playing some holes and that it could be “undermined” if players can hit toward those areas with less concern, such as if they were marked with red stakes.

“We’ve looked at every angle,” Pagel said. “But of all the alternatives we’ve considered, we haven’t found one that is workable for all levels.”

From an architect's perspective, Out-of-Bounds is not as intriguing of a ploy as many think. Because we all know it's not an ideal risk-reward hazard. Ultimately, the risk on OB-lined holes nearly always outweighs reward and we take the safest route.

My hunch is that safety is another part of the issue: would changing the rules make a hole lined with OB to protect homes or a road become less safe?

I also wonder if those involved in the rules discussions keep thinking of elite players playing the Road hole at St. Andrews. If they hit one into the Old Course hotel, where do they tee? If we change this rule after centuries of the Old Course boundaries having played a key role in defending the course, what will happen? (Though I'm fairly certain defined OB is much less than a century old there as players famously used to play off of The Links road to the 18th green).

Scoring wise, a change in stroke and distance would almost assurely lead to a few lower scores in major events by elite players. But I can't think of a scenario on the Old Course where, at psychologically, modified stroke and distance significantly lessens the impact of those boundaries.

I can, however, think of many ways that the golf ball flying way longer than it did 20 years ago lessens the impact, safety and resistance to scoring of the Old Course's hazards.

One Rule Change (Almost) All Agree On: The Caddie Lineup

/

While I'm still reading through many of the new Rules of Golf language and many responses, I'm certain nearly everyone is ecstatic to see the new rule preventing caddies from lining up players.

Not only was it inconsistent with rules attempting to unify the professional and amateur game, but also contradicted efforts to speed up the game.

Caddies lining up players also undermined respect for LPGA Tour players, who were most likely to take advantage of this rules book gap. With that in mind, Randall Mell at GolfChannel.com explores what this means for the LPGA Tour and while most were positive, there was one player not pleased.

Brittany Lincicome, however, didn’t seem pleased.

“I disagree!” Lincicome tweeted. “Lining up players has nothing to do with pace of play. I get 40 [seconds], I should be able to do what I want!”

Lincicome tweeted a pair of angry emojis after her comment.

The story goes on to explore some of the dynamics of why female tour players rely on caddies to line them up. Now that the rule will be changed, this freed up the opinions of Jerry Foltz and Karen Stupples are the most forthright that I've read.

“I think women in general are more likely to delegate stuff to other people,” Stupples said. “I think it’s about reassurance more than anything else. I think that’s just conditioning. When you have someone behind you saying, `You’re good,’ that’s just confirmation.”

That is why the practice had to go.

New Changes To The Rules: DMD's For All (Maybe)

/

The proposed Rules of Golf language related to distance measuring devices becoming permissible contains a  key provision worth noting.

Here's what is said:

(3) Distance-Measuring Devices  

  • ·      DMDs allowed: You may use DMDs to measure distance, except when prohibited by Local Rule (this reverses the default position in the current Rules).

This default reversal certainly makes sense given that many believe the game would be much better (and faster) with rangefinders in widespread use. Others will be glad to sell you an expensive device.

I'm happy for all of those who have been clamoring to use their devices. But having watched enough amateur and college golf in person, elite players really only get a speed bump from the devices when they hit a ball so far out of play that they can't get a yardage off of a book.

Otherwise, DMD's merely are used to confirm yardages computed the old fashioned way, especially when the course played is well-designed. Even remotely decent architecture and setup means the yardage to the flagstick is less meaningful.

The retention of the Local Rule language is where this gets fascinating.

Does anyone believe that the folks at Augusta National will want the leader of the Masters to walk up to the 12th tee and, after acknowledging the crowd patrons, pulls out a rangefinder?

Will the PGA Tour really embrace the sight of a player arriving at TPC Sawgrass' 17th tee only to pull out his rangefinder? Worse, what happens when a player can't get the yardage because of competition behind the flagstick? So instead of hearing a great tactical conversation on Sunday of The Players, we hear the leader asking his caddy if he can get a reading?

I suspect the USGA, R&A and PGA of America will allow them at their events given the rule change and their desire to look like they are not impeding something the kids want. But I'm having trouble seeing the other families signing on where they are more conscious of the "look" presented by DMD's.

New Golf Rules: A Closer Look At Changes Related To Bunkers

/

I'll leave some of the proposed Rules of Golf changes to the wonks to dissect after they are unveiled, but from an architecture and course setup perspective, I'm fascinated by the change of approach to bunkers.

Here is what is outlined in the proposal:

•    Relaxed restrictions on touching the sand with your hand or club when your ball is in a bunker: You are now prohibited only from touching the sand (1) with your hand or club to test the condition of the bunker or (2) with your club in the area right behind or in front of the ball, in making a practice swing or in making the backswing for your stroke.

We all know this is a response to multiple video replay issues where the club could be seen touching the sand and the player was prosecuted for an inadvertent mistake. No one will miss those days.

•    New unplayable ball relief option: For two penalty strokes, you may take relief outside the bunker by dropping a ball back on a line from the hole through where your ball was at rest in the bunker.

I haven't a clue what this unplayable option does to improve the game other than speed things up on a golf course with quicksand bunkers, so let's ignore that one.

•    Removal of special restrictions on moving loose impediments: There is no longer a penalty if you touch or move loose impediments in a bunker.

"Play it as it lies" is a principle of importance since it was a bedrock of the original rules. Rules, Decisions and other changes in the game have dented the meaning of playing it as it lies in a sport that originally resonated because it was nature-based. So will this new language make bunkers more or less hazardous and more or less maintained.

I'm hoping more hazardous and less maintained.

We all hate rocks in bunkers and what they do to a pretty new wedge. And perhaps with a loose impediment rule the governing bodies are actually applying reverse psychology here by saying to courses you don't need to spend so much time on making bunkers perfect, rock-free sanctuaries for recovery.

Yet I can't help but think that given the freedom to fidget with the playing surface, modern players will continue to see bunkers as a sacred place where all golfers are entitled to a recovery and pristine lie at all times. Or, play it as I want it to lie.

Yuck!

We shall see...

First Look: Proposed Changes To The Rules Of Golf, What Stands Out?

/

Scheduled for a rollout on Golf Channel's Morning Drive (7 am Wednesday) along with a media teleconference at the same time, the new Rules of Golf will aim to "modernize the Rules and make them easier to understand and apply."

The expedited proposal, going out for public consideration with a January 1, 2019 implementation goal, appears determined to speed up the game and, intentionally or not, bifurcate elite tournament golf and the everyday game.

From the materials I've seen and in discussions with those briefed, here are the highlights of the many "relaxed" rules (where have I heard that term?):

--No more penalties for accidentally moving a ball on the putting green or in searching for a ball

--Golfers may putt without having the flagstick attended or removed. A speed of play, play.

--Repairing spike marks and other damage on the putting green to be allowed. Not a speed of play helper.

--More red hazard lines to include desert areas and no penalty for touching the hazard in such an area, which also includes moving loose impediments.

--In bunkers, no penalty for touching loose impediments or for touching the sand with a hand or club. Still no grounding the club next to the ball or in front of the ball. We'll call this the Anna rule.

--We trust you, we really really trust you rules. This is a video evidence situation again, allowing for "reasonable judgement" when estimating point of entry drops, etc...

--Reduced time for searching for a lost ball from five down to three minutes

--You can keep playing a damaged club during a round. No penalty for an altered club, even if you wrapped it around a tree in a childish hissy-fit.

--Use of distance measuring devices permitted at all times, except by Local Rule (this should be fun for Augusta and the PGA Tour).

--No more caddies lining up players before a shot. This was almost strictly an LPGA Tour problem.

--A new “Maximum Score” form of stroke play, where your score can be capped to a number set by the Committee. In this proposed format you can pick up and move to the next hole when your score "will be at or above the maximum."

--New presentation of how the rules are presented

--New "plain" language in the writing of the rules

So what stands out?

For my money, the positives are various headache situations in everyday tournament golf coming to an end.

The use of rangefinders will be applauded, hailed and declared the key to speeding up the game. Little difference will be seen, but at least we'll be able to put another savior to bed on the pace of play front.

The ability to repair "spike" marks in a sport almost devoid of spikes contradicts the efforts to speed up the sport and appears to be mostly for tour players.

Hey Siri: Rules Of Golf Figure To Look Different In Two Years

/

Ryan Herrington reports for GolfDigest.com on the likelihood of seeing a vastly revamped, simplified and codified Rules of Golf by January 1, 2019, a year earlier than expected.

Surprising, however, are the plans to take the visual and technological presentation of the Rules to a different level.

In aiming to make the Rules more easily understandable, the modernization project has focused on using visuals to help articulate the Rules in a more impactful way than mere words. Bodenhamer said that the use photos, images and even video to provide greater explanation has been explored and is likely to be implemented.

Davis, too, stressed a need for technology to help update and deliver the Rules in the 21st century.

“How come we can’t have an instance where someone can [take their phone and] say ‘Siri, I hit my ball into a water hazard. What are my options?’ ” Davis said.

It pains this Apple fanboy to say it, but Alexa would probably do better on the Rules of Golf test.