- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tiger may not have been 2 yards back like he said
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:32 am to Ford Frenzy
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:32 am to Ford Frenzy
quote:
if you can find Weave's explanation to our questions, link me
"It's not reasonable to drop in a man made alteration to the playing surface." this addresses the situation where you were not in a divot on the original shot.
if it were in a divot on the original shot, i am not sure.
2
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:34 am to lsugolf1105
Curtis Strange is on Tigers side and says he's a victim all the tiger haters are going full retard
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:35 am to Ford Frenzy
quote:
yea I don't know why Golfer is filling this up with the result of the drop
Because if I think I'm dropping as close to where I last played, I'm not breaking any rules.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:36 am to Golfer
But if you intend to guide your ball away from a divot, then your intention is violating the rule. Regardless of whether it lands in the divot or not.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:37 am to Golfer
quote:
Because if I think I'm dropping as close to where I last played, I'm not breaking any rules.
ok. so you think you should intend to drop in the divot. right?
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:47 am to lsugolf1105
quote:Ok, thank you I was legitimately curious
"It's not reasonable to drop in a man made alteration to the playing surface." this addresses the situation where you were not in a divot on the original shot.
if it were in a divot on the original shot, i am not sure.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:50 am to bamafan425
I gave an example earlier.
Rory McIlroy lands in a divot on his tee shot. On his approach shot (hitting out of a divot), he lands it in the water. He determines his best option is to drop as close as possible to his original shot. He drops the ball (correct form as stated by golf rules), and it lands 8 inches to the right of the divot. He goes on to stick it close and save par.
After the round, he is talking to a reporter about the pivotal par save he had. "Well I got unlucky on my tee shot when it landed in a big divot. I knew I could stick it close from that distance so I decided to drop there. I didn't wanna land in the divot again and end up in the water. So I tried to drop it as close as possible to the right of the divot."
In my opinion, even though he said as close as possible TO the divot. He should have been trying to land IN the divot because that is as close as possible to his original shot. His intention was to gain a competitive advantage by dropping his ball as close as possible OUTSIDE the divot, giving him a better lie to make the shot. He would have violated the rule.
Thoughts?
Rory McIlroy lands in a divot on his tee shot. On his approach shot (hitting out of a divot), he lands it in the water. He determines his best option is to drop as close as possible to his original shot. He drops the ball (correct form as stated by golf rules), and it lands 8 inches to the right of the divot. He goes on to stick it close and save par.
After the round, he is talking to a reporter about the pivotal par save he had. "Well I got unlucky on my tee shot when it landed in a big divot. I knew I could stick it close from that distance so I decided to drop there. I didn't wanna land in the divot again and end up in the water. So I tried to drop it as close as possible to the right of the divot."
In my opinion, even though he said as close as possible TO the divot. He should have been trying to land IN the divot because that is as close as possible to his original shot. His intention was to gain a competitive advantage by dropping his ball as close as possible OUTSIDE the divot, giving him a better lie to make the shot. He would have violated the rule.
Thoughts?
This post was edited on 4/15/13 at 11:52 am
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:52 am to Ford Frenzy
My explanation is the same for if your ball is in a divot on your original shot as well. It is reasonable to drop outside of the divot and not directly over it because you are dropping no closer to the hole, and are within reason.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:55 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
My explanation is the same for if your ball is in a divot on your original shot as well. It is reasonable to drop outside of the divot and not directly over it because you are dropping no closer to the hole, and are within reason.
ok but the rule doesn't specifically state this. is this your opinion or have you heard this from the usga. really curious.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:56 am to bamafan425
Y'all are misconstruing intent. He is perfectly within reason to drop where he does in that example. I said two things earlier:
1. The rule has grey area intentionally, giving a little leeway so that players aren't screwing themselves by dropping in their recent divot. Y'all are getting waaaayyy to deep into this and it's covering up the basic shallow idea.
2. Tiger did not drop within reason to his original location, because he was following another subsection of the rule. Rory's drop would be within reason.
1. The rule has grey area intentionally, giving a little leeway so that players aren't screwing themselves by dropping in their recent divot. Y'all are getting waaaayyy to deep into this and it's covering up the basic shallow idea.
2. Tiger did not drop within reason to his original location, because he was following another subsection of the rule. Rory's drop would be within reason.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 11:59 am to lsugolf1105
quote:
ok but the rule doesn't specifically state this. is this your opinion or have you heard this from the usga. really curious.
I have encountered this multiple times, and have seen the same ruling multiple times by tournament officials.
An "improper drop" occurred during the Louisiana State Amateur, which is put on by people much more knowledgable than me on the rules. They usually call up to the USGA for official rulings. No one at our level will get a ruling from a USGA official unless its one of their events. Though I have played in a few of their events, I've never seen them have to make this ruling.
This post was edited on 4/15/13 at 11:59 am
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:00 pm to unbeWEAVEable
quote:all you're doing is making me think less and less of professional golf. So, you're saying that the USGA and PGA intentionally allow players to cheat, but they don't call it cheating?
unbeWEAVEable
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:00 pm to hashtag
quote:
all you're doing is making me think less and less of professional golf. So, you're saying that the USGA and PGA intentionally allow players to cheat, but they don't call it cheating?
That isn't cheating...
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:01 pm to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
The rule has grey area intentionally, giving a little leeway so that players aren't screwing themselves by dropping in their recent divot. Y'all are getting waaaayyy to deep into this and it's covering up the basic shallow idea.
not sure that is why there is grey area. i think it is in the case when you don't remember exactly where you originally hit from.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:01 pm to hashtag
quote:
i just can't believe that you think that they would create a generic rule that could be applied to a generic scenario. That makes no sense to me. They created this rule with a specific intent. And, that intent has nothing to do with what happened this weekend. If they wanted to create a rule that gave the committee the blanket authority to overrule the DQ rules, they would have done so. We'll never agree on this. You obviously think that these committees are infallible. I think there actions bring into question the integrity of all of professional golf.
Don't put words into my mouth. I never said tehy are infallible. Not at all. And I never said the USGA created the rule for generic purposes. I do say that the way they have it worded is generic enough that other situations outside of their original intent (which includes this weekend) fall under the rule and can be applied. I mean, the rule specifically says the Committee can waive a DQ if it feels it's warranted. Clearly Augusta officials felt it was, and thus Tiger was allowed to remain, and completely within the letter of the law. That's all I'm saying.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:01 pm to hashtag
My feeling is that whatever Fred Ridley decided is good with me.
People calling for him to be DQ'd or WD himself are ridiculous
People calling for him to be DQ'd or WD himself are ridiculous
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:01 pm to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
1. The rule has grey area intentionally, giving a little leeway so that players aren't screwing themselves by dropping in their recent divot. Y'all are getting waaaayyy to deep into this and it's covering up the basic shallow idea.
That sounds very unfair. You played your first shot out of a divot. So you get to drop and intentionally miss the divot? I'll believe you, but that just seems like it's not in the spirit of the rule.
I don't see how it is screwing yourself to drop in a divot you were already in?
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:06 pm to hashtag
quote:
all you're doing is making me think less and less of professional golf. So, you're saying that the USGA and PGA intentionally allow players to cheat, but they don't call it cheating?
I'm starting to not care what you think, cause you aren't listening to a word in saying.
It's not cheating. It is defined in the rules. I'm sorry it's not as cut and dry as you would like, but it's like that for a reason. Call the USGA and stop arguing with people on a message board if you aren't going to listen.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:07 pm to Golfer
quote:take longer than 40 seconds to hit a golf shot? No gray area, must be penalized.
That isn't cheating...
Purposefully drop your ball away from a divot even though the rule states "as close as possible"? Perfectly fine.
Posted on 4/15/13 at 12:08 pm to lsugolf1105
That's in addition to...these aren't excluding each other, they are complimentary to each other.
The "grey area" encompasses everything that can't be specifically defined.
Let me say again, it's not "grey area", its leeway. Leeway is in the rules. It's not cheating. It's there for a reason.
The "grey area" encompasses everything that can't be specifically defined.
Let me say again, it's not "grey area", its leeway. Leeway is in the rules. It's not cheating. It's there for a reason.
This post was edited on 4/15/13 at 12:09 pm
Page 20 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News