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.