|
Post by cephyn on Jun 4, 2019 13:41:46 GMT -5
I have stated in a previous thread, that the 100ft rule would be OK if all the greens were flat and level, but they are not. I had some harsh words said against me, which I thought were unjust. But I would like to put my point across again as to why this ruling can be unfair in certain circumstances. Two players hit their shots to a very large green where the 100ft ruling may come into play. Now working on the assumption that 1 inch of elevation = 1ft in length is the example I'll use below. 1st players ball stops 95 feet from the pin, which is 10 inches above their feet, effectively giving the player a 105ft putt. 2nd players ball stops 105 feet from the pin, which is 10 inches below their feet, effectively giving the player a 95ft putt. In the 1st example, through no fault of the player, he can't reach the pin because the game will not allow him to hit the ball hard enough. But because he's 95ft away from the pin, the rule states, he has to putt. In the 2nd example, although the player is 105 feet away has a greater chance of reaching the pin because his putt is downhill. But because of the ruling this player can also chip, pitch or flop if they wish to. This is why the elevation should be taken into account, because in the 1st example this player would have the option to chip, pitch or flop, whereas in the 2nd example the player would have to putt. I can't explain it any simpler than this, and to be honest the example above would rarely occur, but when it does we have to make it fair. Again, no one misunderstand your complaint. You don't have to keep explaining it. Here's some problems 1) 1 inch does not equal 1 foot for all green speeds. 2) Calculations quickly become very complicated for all green speeds 3) 100ft rule is easy to communicate and understand to the thousands of people who play TGCT and don't frequent the forums. 4) Why are you 100 feet away? Did you leave yourself a 100+ foot putt on purpose, or did you make a mistake? If you made a mistake - here is your punishment, an impossible (or nearly) putt. We understand the complaint, but it happens so rarely it's not worth coming up with complex calculations to solve all the edge cases. 100 feet is clean cut, simple, and solves the problem 99% of the time.
|
|
|
Post by GW_Hope on Jun 4, 2019 13:55:41 GMT -5
You have to also realize that it gets increasingly more easy to chip and flop as you move down from master clubs.
|
|
|
Post by AFCTUJacko on Jun 4, 2019 14:06:41 GMT -5
Go play the US Open course and tell me it wouldn't be advantageous to chip from absolutely everywhere if you had the option
|
|
|
Post by pc17 on Jun 4, 2019 14:30:25 GMT -5
I have stated in a previous thread, that the 100ft rule would be OK if all the greens were flat and level, but they are not. I had some harsh words said against me, which I thought were unjust. But I would like to put my point across again as to why this ruling can be unfair in certain circumstances. Two players hit their shots to a very large green where the 100ft ruling may come into play. Now working on the assumption that 1 inch of elevation = 1ft in length is the example I'll use below. 1st players ball stops 95 feet from the pin, which is 10 inches above their feet, effectively giving the player a 105ft putt. 2nd players ball stops 105 feet from the pin, which is 10 inches below their feet, effectively giving the player a 95ft putt. In the 1st example, through no fault of the player, he can't reach the pin because the game will not allow him to hit the ball hard enough. But because he's 95ft away from the pin, the rule states, he has to putt. In the 2nd example, although the player is 105 feet away has a greater chance of reaching the pin because his putt is downhill. But because of the ruling this player can also chip, pitch or flop if they wish to. This is why the elevation should be taken into account, because in the 1st example this player would have the option to chip, pitch or flop, whereas in the 2nd example the player would have to putt. I can't explain it any simpler than this, and to be honest the example above would rarely occur, but when it does we have to make it fair. Again, no one misunderstand your complaint. You don't have to keep explaining it. Here's some problems 1) 1 inch does not equal 1 foot for all green speeds. 2) Calculations quickly become very complicated for all green speeds 3) 100ft rule is easy to communicate and understand to the thousands of people who play TGCT and don't frequent the forums. 4) Why are you 100 feet away? Did you leave yourself a 100+ foot putt on purpose, or did you make a mistake? If you made a mistake - here is your punishment, an impossible (or nearly) putt. We understand the complaint, but it happens so rarely it's not worth coming up with complex calculations to solve all the edge cases. 100 feet is clean cut, simple, and solves the problem 99% of the time. I totally agree with your comments Kevin, but I wouldn't say that adding or subtracting a few feet was complicated, but it would make fairer than it is now. But yes it would be complicated if you were taking green speed into account, that's why I've never mentioned it, and I certainly wouldn't leave myself more than 100ft from the pin on purpose just so I could flop to the pin. At the end of the day, this game is supposed to simulate golf as IRL, and IRL a professional golfer would use a putter on a green every time, but in my lifetime I've seen many pro's use other means when they want to. So maybe we should abolish this 100ft ruling, and leave it up to the discretion of the player, seeing as chipping, pitching and flopping is harder to execute in this game. I know I would never use any other method than putting on a green unless I was in a hopeless position.
|
|
|
Post by cephyn on Jun 4, 2019 14:38:53 GMT -5
Again, no one misunderstand your complaint. You don't have to keep explaining it. Here's some problems 1) 1 inch does not equal 1 foot for all green speeds. 2) Calculations quickly become very complicated for all green speeds 3) 100ft rule is easy to communicate and understand to the thousands of people who play TGCT and don't frequent the forums. 4) Why are you 100 feet away? Did you leave yourself a 100+ foot putt on purpose, or did you make a mistake? If you made a mistake - here is your punishment, an impossible (or nearly) putt. We understand the complaint, but it happens so rarely it's not worth coming up with complex calculations to solve all the edge cases. 100 feet is clean cut, simple, and solves the problem 99% of the time. I totally agree with your comments Kevin, but I wouldn't say that adding or subtracting a few feet was complicated, but it would make fairer than it is now. But yes it would be complicated if you were taking green speed into account, that's why I've never mentioned it, and I certainly wouldn't leave myself more than 100ft from the pin on purpose just so I could flop to the pin. At the end of the day, this game is supposed to simulate golf as IRL, and IRL a professional golfer would use a putter on a green every time, but in my lifetime I've seen many pro's use other means when they want to. So maybe we should abolish this 100ft ruling, and leave it up to the discretion of the player, seeing as chipping, pitching and flopping is harder to execute in this game. I know I would never use any other method than putting on a green unless I was in a hopeless position.Except, in many many cases - it's not harder. As I and others have said in this thread. Outside of 30ish feet, I'd chip every time.
|
|
|
Post by cephyn on Jun 4, 2019 14:43:12 GMT -5
tgctours.com/Tournament/holebyhole?tournamentPlayerId=626738Two weeks ago, round 2 - 55% GIR. And yet I shot a 60. Because I had 3 chip-ins and the rest of the missed greens, I could chip to get close instead of having long putts. Chipping is easier than long putts. Trust me, I often think I should be playing for chips. But that's not really what this game is about, is it? Allowing chipping from anywhere on the green would plunge scores. It would be insane. Putting is the hardest part of this game.
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jun 4, 2019 15:09:45 GMT -5
Looking at the poll, it seems the chip from anywhere debate is dead really.
The poll is flawed as it doesn’t tease out the full variety of options - still a bit surprised by the closeness of the other two options. But must say I’m starting to be swayed by the “keep it simple stupid” argument.
|
|
|
Post by B.Smooth13 on Jun 4, 2019 15:30:33 GMT -5
Looking at the poll, it seems the chip from anywhere debate is dead really. The poll is flawed as it doesn’t tease out the full variety of options - still a bit surprised by the closeness of the other two options. But must say I’m starting to be swayed by the “keep it simple stupid” argument. Appreciate the effort with the poll, but basically the reasons why I didn’t make one outside of a small, focused discussion are shown here. Wasn’t meant as an “I’m mad and I demand change” thing, just a reasonable discussion on the merits, without insinuations about any “dumb” shots or anything emotionally charged like that. Not sure such a thing is possible here anymore, hence my hesitation in doing something like this poll, which will never have any effect on an actual rule since things get out of the scope of the intended discussion so quickly at times - anyway, just leave it as is, I’d be fine with that. We can just move on.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jun 4, 2019 16:09:07 GMT -5
Dont put yourself 100 feet away, i think you should have to putt everything on the green unless your line is blocked by the rough and if you cant reach the hole because you cant hit the putt hard enough then thats your fault and your course management should of been better Hate this line of argument. Firstly it comes across as a bit superior, I mean, if we all accept that you're amazing and we're not as good as you, can we go back to having a conversation about a rule for everyone?? There are multiple times where you're going for a par 5 green in 2, and I don't care how good you are, certainly for an average player, it's VERY hard to accurately know where it's going to land, in the context of green contours and how much roll out etc you'll get. Similar things can happen on par 4s, and luck can often get involved. Hey, you know what, we're talking about irregular occurrences here. It's doesn't happen ANYBODY a lot. So if it's zero for you, coz you're amazing, and rarely for the players with "terrible" course management, maybe we can still look for a fairer rule for everyone. Personally, I favour taking it down slightly to 80-90ft. I know that might still leave a similar situation sometimes, but 100ft feels right on the cusp to me.
|
|
|
Post by cephyn on Jun 4, 2019 16:15:53 GMT -5
Dont put yourself 100 feet away, i think you should have to putt everything on the green unless your line is blocked by the rough and if you cant reach the hole because you cant hit the putt hard enough then thats your fault and your course management should of been better Hate this line of argument. Firstly it comes across as a bit superior, I mean, if we all accept that you're amazing and we're not as good as you, can we go back to having a conversation about a rule for everyone?? There are multiple times where you're going for a par 5 green in 2, and I don't care how good you are, certainly for an average player, it's VERY hard to accurately know where it's going to land, in the context of green contours and how much roll out etc you'll get. Similar things can happen on par 4s, and luck can often get involved. Hey, you know what, we're talking about irregular occurrences here. It's doesn't happen ANYBODY a lot. So if it's zero for you, coz you're amazing, and rarely for the players with "terrible" course management, maybe we can still look for a fairer rule for everyone. Personally, I favour taking it down slightly to 80-90ft. I know that might still leave a similar situation sometimes, but 100ft feels right on the cusp to me. Learning this mistake - going for the green in 2 when it is TOO RISKY TO DO SO, is exactly how you get better. Just as if you went for a par 4 in one and hit the bunker that was there exactly for suckers like you and me. That's the mistake you have to learn how do deal with. And there's a punishment to make sure you learn it. If it looks like you're probably going to have a 100ft+ putt after going for the green, if that's the risk you're taking, then you have to recognize it, accept it and deal with it. That's the course management you have to learn. The rule is fair. It applies equally to everyone at all times. It could not be more fair. We're all aware of the rule. If you think you're going to be 100 feet away, then lay up. Sometimes bad things do happen - that's golf. That's the game. And to be clear, when there's a big green on a par 5 and I know I'm probably going to be left with a very long putt - and I'm talking 50 feet or more - I lay up.
|
|
|
Post by B.Smooth13 on Jun 4, 2019 16:32:43 GMT -5
To the “if you’ll be too far away then layup” bit - I get that argument, and it’s not something I disagree with in 95-99% of circumstances. Guess this is a niche situation I’m talking about, which by its nature isn’t something that would have mass appeal.
Fwiw, I’m happily taking a 60ft putt (or maybe a touch longer) that HB putting power allows me to get to the hole over some side hill chip I have to use more than LW on that has to be bounced off a side slope but also stop before rolling down a slope behind the hole. That’s why I don’t see it as an advantage in these certain circumstances, because for my game those chips - not flops, which is an important distinction - which I’d have to use to get to the proper tier would still be punishment over the ability to attempt some crazy long putt, but at least the putt would be POSSIBLE to reach the hole/proper tier.
I’m doing a bad job at illustrating my point I think/maybe, but again, as the pain in the ass that spawned this thread (my bad, all), I’d rather keep it as is than make a radical change.
|
|
|
Post by ijs1543 on Jun 4, 2019 17:04:09 GMT -5
Dont put yourself 100 feet away, i think you should have to putt everything on the green unless your line is blocked by the rough and if you cant reach the hole because you cant hit the putt hard enough then thats your fault and your course management should of been better Hate this line of argument. Firstly it comes across as a bit superior, I mean, if we all accept that you're amazing and we're not as good as you, can we go back to having a conversation about a rule for everyone?? There are multiple times where you're going for a par 5 green in 2, and I don't care how good you are, certainly for an average player, it's VERY hard to accurately know where it's going to land, in the context of green contours and how much roll out etc you'll get. Similar things can happen on par 4s, and luck can often get involved. Hey, you know what, we're talking about irregular occurrences here. It's doesn't happen ANYBODY a lot. So if it's zero for you, coz you're amazing, and rarely for the players with "terrible" course management, maybe we can still look for a fairer rule for everyone. Personally, I favour taking it down slightly to 80-90ft. I know that might still leave a similar situation sometimes, but 100ft feels right on the cusp to me. Superior lol have you seen how i play this game? so your happy to go to 90 feet but have a huge problem with me saying its bad course management to leave yourself over 100 feet well its bad course management to leave yourself 90 feet and then you want to be able to chip after your mistake lol, maybe when you get a bad kick from the fairway and end up in the rough you could ask if you can kick it back in the fairway aswell because you where unlucky.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jun 4, 2019 17:14:08 GMT -5
Hate this line of argument. Firstly it comes across as a bit superior, I mean, if we all accept that you're amazing and we're not as good as you, can we go back to having a conversation about a rule for everyone?? There are multiple times where you're going for a par 5 green in 2, and I don't care how good you are, certainly for an average player, it's VERY hard to accurately know where it's going to land, in the context of green contours and how much roll out etc you'll get. Similar things can happen on par 4s, and luck can often get involved. Hey, you know what, we're talking about irregular occurrences here. It's doesn't happen ANYBODY a lot. So if it's zero for you, coz you're amazing, and rarely for the players with "terrible" course management, maybe we can still look for a fairer rule for everyone. Personally, I favour taking it down slightly to 80-90ft. I know that might still leave a similar situation sometimes, but 100ft feels right on the cusp to me. Superior lol have you seen how i play this game? so your happy to go to 90 feet but have a huge problem with me saying its bad course management to leave yourself over 100 feet well its bad course management to leave yourself 90 feet and then you want to be able to chip after your mistake lol, maybe when you get a bad kick from the fairway and end up in the rough you could ask if you can kick it back in the fairway aswell because you where unlucky.
the other people who have used that line of argument have made it clear they are "amazing" players, if that's not true of you, fair enough, which is why i said "comes across" as supeior. I then proceeded to explain why it's not a good line of argument anyway.
My 80-90ft suggestion is completely unconnected to the course management point, you've misunderstood. like i said don't like the course managment point, so why would i be making suggestions based on an idea i don't like??
My own point is based off green speeds and elevations. I think just a 10-20ft reduction would get rid of a lot of the situations happening, whilst keeping the distance long and not a regular occurance, or be abused by people trying to chip-in (which i don't personally see as a huge issue anyway...)
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jun 4, 2019 17:23:53 GMT -5
Hate this line of argument. Firstly it comes across as a bit superior, I mean, if we all accept that you're amazing and we're not as good as you, can we go back to having a conversation about a rule for everyone?? There are multiple times where you're going for a par 5 green in 2, and I don't care how good you are, certainly for an average player, it's VERY hard to accurately know where it's going to land, in the context of green contours and how much roll out etc you'll get. Similar things can happen on par 4s, and luck can often get involved. Hey, you know what, we're talking about irregular occurrences here. It's doesn't happen ANYBODY a lot. So if it's zero for you, coz you're amazing, and rarely for the players with "terrible" course management, maybe we can still look for a fairer rule for everyone. Personally, I favour taking it down slightly to 80-90ft. I know that might still leave a similar situation sometimes, but 100ft feels right on the cusp to me. Learning this mistake - going for the green in 2 when it is TOO RISKY TO DO SO, is exactly how you get better. Just as if you went for a par 4 in one and hit the bunker that was there exactly for suckers like you and me. That's the mistake you have to learn how do deal with. And there's a punishment to make sure you learn it. If it looks like you're probably going to have a 100ft+ putt after going for the green, if that's the risk you're taking, then you have to recognize it, accept it and deal with it. That's the course management you have to learn. The rule is fair. It applies equally to everyone at all times. It could not be more fair. We're all aware of the rule. If you think you're going to be 100 feet away, then lay up. Sometimes bad things do happen - that's golf. That's the game. And to be clear, when there's a big green on a par 5 and I know I'm probably going to be left with a very long putt - and I'm talking 50 feet or more - I lay up.
cool. i disagree with you that it's as simple as that, or as easy to work out as that.
I'm an attacking, risk-taking player, and i'm fine with the outcome of that; i don't feel i need to learn what course management is; does phil mickleson? (we can all still improve of course!) But that's not really what's being discussed here. It's about whether the 100ft rule works in the context of green setups and the mechanics of the game.
I know what the rule is, and i obey it. i'd obey it if it was changed enitirely, i'd obey it if was lengthened or shortened. My suggestion is to shorten it slightly, as i feel 100ft is on the edge of where the issues with reaching (and losing length accuracy when that backswing reaches close to max) becomes its biggest.
100ft feels a bit arbitrary, and from my own experiences of being around this limit, and reading wht others say, i think 80ft could make a big difference, whilst still being a significant enough length still that it pretty much retains its current use...
|
|
|
Post by ijs1543 on Jun 4, 2019 17:38:41 GMT -5
Superior lol have you seen how i play this game? so your happy to go to 90 feet but have a huge problem with me saying its bad course management to leave yourself over 100 feet well its bad course management to leave yourself 90 feet and then you want to be able to chip after your mistake lol, maybe when you get a bad kick from the fairway and end up in the rough you could ask if you can kick it back in the fairway aswell because you where unlucky.
the other people who have used that line of argument have made it clear they are "amazing" players, if that's not true of you, fair enough, which is why i said "comes across" as supeior. I then proceeded to explain why it's not a good line of argument anyway.
My 80-90ft suggestion is completely unconnected to the course management point, you've misunderstood. like i said don't like the course managment point, so why would i be making suggestions based on an idea i don't like??
My own point is based off green speeds and elevations. I think just a 10-20ft reduction would get rid of a lot of the situations happening, whilst keeping the distance long and not a regular occurance, or be abused by people trying to chip-in (which i don't personally see as a huge issue anyway...)
Who are these other players that think they are superior? getting all worked up over someone saying leaving themselves a 100 feet putt is bad course management is abit much mate
|
|