Shivas's cheater line

« **Reply #800 on:** June 06, 2007, 10:44:44 AM »

As long as he's screaming I'll be OK...

« **Reply #801 on:** June 06, 2007, 11:32:38 AM »

Quote from: Shivas Schmidt on June 06, 2007, 09:34:50 AM

Sorry, guys, I've been busy lately...

.................................................

Bryan: I read that colorful back-and-forth between you and Pat, and I'm just wondering when you're ever going to actually deal with the substance of the issue, rather than merely reiterating that "the USGA says it's OK".

I thought I was dealing with the substance of the issue. Perhaps after 31 pages I may have lost track of what THE ISSUES are.

The question is why? What is the reasoning, if any? Does that reasoning make sense? Does it conflict with other reasoning in factually similar or functionally equivalent situations? How are those situations reconciled? THESE are the issues, not what the USGA says. Nobody is in the dark as to the USGA position, so reiterating it over and over again is basically a pointless waste of time and effort.

Sorry Shivas, I can't get into the heads of the USGA rules mavens to tell you why, or what their reasoning was, or whether it made sense to them, or how they reconciled the situations. I am in no position to defend or explain their actions.

As I've kept reiterating, the rule, decisions and FAQs are what they are. There is NO ISSUE that the current use of lines for putting alignment is illegal or therefore cheating under the current rules, decisions, and FAQs.

If your ISSUE is that the USGA has improperly interpreted their own rules and issued decisions and FAQs that in your opinion are illogical or in conflict with the spirit of golf, then your ISSUE is with them. Why don't you pursue it with them, instead of wasting your time and effort here trying to convert us non-believers?

« **Reply #802 on:** June 06, 2007, 11:36:55 AM »

Shivas,

You are holding them up as sacrosanct...which is fine, just don't tell me you're not because your latest argument is that the ball should not be touched at all.

Next...whether I take the time to place the ball down so I see only white, or place it down so the line a drew on it helps me aim my putt simply is not even considered by these Principles...it's just not. Telling me I can take an inch but not two doesn't solve the problem.

You have found a loophole in the wording of this rule and the rules and decisions that relate to it, but the ambiguity of the language (and it is ambiguous) doesn't leave open the issue of worrying about player intent in on-the-course rules disputes. That is the main reason I don't think your way can fly...it would be too easy for me to think you are doing something to assist in alignment...

« **Reply #803 on:** June 06, 2007, 11:43:46 AM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on June 06, 2007, 08:33:13 AM

Quote from: Bryan Izatt on June 06, 2007, 03:16:29 AM
Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on June 05, 2007, 01:34:17 PM
Quote from: Bryan Izatt on June 05, 2007, 12:35:42 PM
Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on June 05, 2007, 11:31:23 AM
Quote from: Bryan Izatt on June 05, 2007, 01:59:59 AM

....................................

If you want to be more anal and parse this down to a hand drawn line then that is permitted under the FAQ for rule 6-5 which I will quote for you again:

"Rule 6-5

Lines or Arrows Used to mark Golf Ball

That's not what Rule 6-5 states.

Having a little trouble with comprehension, aren't you. The quoted text is from the FAQ on rule 6-5. It is not the rule. I never said it was. But it is the published FAQ. Why are you trying to deflect?

Not at all, you were the one who conveniently blended 6-5 into the FAQ, I merely pointed out exactly what Rule 6-5 stated, since you were trying to mislead readers into thinking the that language in the FAQ was incorporated in Rule 6-5

Who's misleading who here? How do you know what my intent was? The quote I used is a direct lift from the FAQ in question, including the heading text "Rule 6-5". Perhaps you should read the FAQ so you can see that the words "Rule 6-5" are there. The USGA associated this FAQ to Rule 6-5, not me. I didn't conveniently blend it in. I did not try to mislead readers into thinking that the language in the FAQ was incorporated into the Rule. Why are you trying to mislead the readers?
.................................

Quote

« **Reply #804 on:** June 06, 2007, 11:49:25 AM »

Shiv,

If you are including me in that camp, I don't use it...I couldn't figure it out. Jamie might, I'm not sure. Chris Brauner said he does not.

I would suggest that we are more interested in this thread because it hits closer to home. I'll probably play 40 rounds of golf all year this year...25 or 30 of them will be in official competition. I'm interested in the rules, not just their application, but the logic behind them as well...

« **Reply #805 on:** June 06, 2007, 12:30:01 PM »

Shivas,

You're going to have to decide if we're discussing the Rules of Golf or the Tuft's Principles of Golf. It seems that the Rules have evolved over the years with the basic Principles in mind but recognizing the need to deal (and be prepared to deal) in very specific on-course situations. A guy cannot lay down a club to help line up a full swing shot in a cavalier manner. A guy can however make a fair accusation of the manner in which I place my ball on the green...that's the rub...

By the way, where do the rules give an inch?

Also...I was not suggesting the rules disreagrded player intent in that statement. I was saying player intent is not presently at issue and under your regime it would be...BIG TIME...and that's a negative for everyone.

« **Reply #806 on:** June 06, 2007, 12:31:04 PM »

Quote from: JES II on June 06, 2007, 11:49:25 AM

Shiv,

If you are including me in that camp, I don't use it...I couldn't figure it out. Jamie might, I'm not sure. Chris Brauner said he does not.

I would suggest that we are more interested in this thread because it hits closer to home. I'll probably play 40 rounds of golf all year this year...25 or 30 of them will be in official competition. I'm interested in the rules, not just their application, but the logic behind them as well...

I do line up the ball with the ProV1X markings, or a line. I've used this method for quite a long time. Before the companies got clever and started placing the marks on the balls, I used to just use the Titleist logo. 99.9% of the time, I never remark the ball to adjust it once I've placed it down. When I get over the putt and see it a little different, I just move the clubhead a bit. The ball doesn't have to be lined up perfectly for me to go ahead and putt it.

Before this thread, I've never given the practice of aligning the ball on the green a second thought, and after 31 pages, I still don't.

It's just part of my routine, and I don't think it's wrong at all. I also don't think I've ever been thought of as a slow player either. Although I do think it is an easier way to align myself, if the rule was changed to ban this method, it really wouldn't be a big deal to me.

« **Reply #807 on:** June 06, 2007, 12:39:04 PM »

That's actually an interesting addition to this Jamie...once you realize your line is not exactly where your final read would want it...but you do not adjust your ball...is it no longer "a mark placed to indicate a line for putting"? Shivas? Pat?

« **Reply #808 on:** June 06, 2007, 01:21:33 PM »

Added without comment, a Sayers/Gibson putter,1900.

« **Reply #809 on:** June 06, 2007, 01:29:02 PM »

Quote from: AHughes on June 06, 2007, 01:21:33 PM

Added without comment, a Sayers/Gibson putter,1900.

Shivas still won't give in. You need to find a picture of a feathery with an arrow on it.

Wait...look...those seams are extremely easy to align with the hole. Although during the age of the Golden Principles, you couldn't touch your ball anyway...nevermind.

« **Reply #810 on:** June 06, 2007, 01:33:57 PM »

Jamie, I don't actually want Shiv to give up--this is fairly interesting.
But I was struck by the desire to align properly or squarely even that long ago, and the use of aids to do so.

« **Reply #811 on:** June 06, 2007, 01:37:18 PM »

Quote from: AHughes on June 06, 2007, 01:33:57 PM

Jamie, I don't actually want Shiv to give up--this is fairly interesting.
But I was struck by the desire to align properly or squarely even that long ago, and the use of aids to do so.

It is interesting indeed. That is a great photo of the old club. They were on to something even way back when.

« **Reply #812 on:** June 06, 2007, 02:30:07 PM »

I still agree with Shivas 100%.

-Ted

« **Reply #813 on:** June 06, 2007, 02:56:43 PM »

Ted,

What exactly is it that you agree with 100%? Is it his position that once the ball is played it cannot be lifted or touched until it is holed out?

« **Reply #814 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:09:52 PM »

Quote from: JES II on June 06, 2007, 02:56:43 PM

What exactly is it that you agree with 100%?

When replacing a ball on the putting green, a player may not

a. glance at the ball and then at a line for putting

b. glance at a line for putting and then at the ball

b. fiddle with or otherwise jigger the ball

« **Reply #815 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:15:02 PM »

From webster's online dictionary

Quote

Main Entry: jigger[/i]

Function: verb

intransitive verb : to jerk up and down

transitive verb : to alter or rearrange especially by manipulating <jigger an election district>

Now that's strange...I guess Shivas has been jiggering his jigger for 32 pages now...with some help from Patrick...

« **Reply #816 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:16:21 PM »

Quote from: Michael Moore on June 06, 2007, 03:09:52 PM

Quote from: JES II on June 06, 2007, 02:56:43 PM
What exactly is it that you agree with 100%?

When replacing a ball on the putting green, a player may not

a. glance at the ball and then at a line for putting

b. glance at a line for putting and then at the ball

b. fiddle with or otherwise jigger the ball

Great...now I'm going to have to call a penalty on my playing partner if his eye twitches. That'll be a fun round of golf.

Is this a "real" response or just kidding?

« **Reply #817 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:27:17 PM »

Slonis -

That was a spoof. Shivas' noble yet ultimately bizarre attempt to rewrite this rule (the allowance for "all white" is way out there) helps show that this rule is unwritable, much less enforcable, and is merely an unintended consquence of ball in hand + ball is round + ball is manufactured with a line on it.

« **Reply #818 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:29:39 PM »

Quote from: Michael Moore on June 06, 2007, 03:27:17 PM

Slonis -

That was a spoof. Shivas' noble yet ultimately bizarre attempt to rewrite this rule (the allowance for "all white" is way out there) helps show that this rule is unwritable, much less enforcable, and is merely an unintended consquence of ball in hand + ball is round + ball is manufactured with a line on it.

Michael,

I thought it was a goof, but I wasn't sure if you, like a few others, had followed him over the edge.

« **Reply #819 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:32:06 PM »

Quote from: JES II on June 06, 2007, 02:56:43 PM

Ted,

What exactly is it that you agree with 100%? Is it his position that once the ball is played it cannot be lifted or touched until it is holed out?

I agree with his basic arguement which I understand to be:
that using a line drawn on the ball to line up a putt is fundamentally "wrong" with regards to the spirit of the game.

-Ted

« **Reply #820 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:33:56 PM »

Thanks Ted,

I don't even think I disagree with that...just one thing...any chance you'd like to provide documentation of this "fundamental spirit of the game"?

Just kidding, Shivas can't even do that...

« **Reply #821 on:** June 06, 2007, 03:44:28 PM »

**"These two Great Principles…maintain the sanctity of how the golf ball's lie (unaltered by the player) is the only TRUE CONNECTION with the golf course, the ground, and ultimately Nature itself unaltered by the player (you play the course as you find it--eg don't alter it during play)**

You only play the course as you find it until you reach the putting green. Once on the putting green, the rules permit you to alter the "course as you find it" during play. You can fix ball marks that were already there, brush away sand, etc. You can improve your intended line of play by doing these things. It's not the same as the rest of the course.

« **Reply #822 on:** June 06, 2007, 04:27:23 PM »

Quote from: Shivas Schmidt on June 06, 2007, 03:38:21 PM

Wrong. Just haven't hit the books yet. And it's fundamental skill...

Don't sweat it Colonel, I won't be holding my breath.

by the way, read Ted's post...with 'fundamental sprit' I was referrencing his last seven or eight words, not your lost bet...

« **Reply #823 on:** June 06, 2007, 04:31:26 PM »

I think Michael's summary of your mission here was spot on, and I thought my response about you jiggering (jerking up and down) your jigger was witty...that thud was deafening...

« **Reply #824 on:** June 06, 2007, 07:42:02 PM »

Shivas:

Your reply in post #1057 is an attempt on your part to use a post of mine to JESII to justify your suggestion that what you call a "cheater line" should be a violation of the Rules of Golf.

My post to JESII that you used in post #1057 was in answer to JES II's question about why a golf ball "in play" is not considered to be "Equipment" in the definition of "Equipment" in the Rules of Golf, and is considered to be "Equipment" when it is not "In Play".

That is a long way from your issue here about a "cheater line".

News:

JESII

Bryan Izatt

JESII

Bryan Izatt

JESII

JESII

JSlonis

JESII

Andy Hughes

JSlonis

Andy Hughes

JSlonis

Ted Kramer

JESII

Michael Moore

JESII

JSlonis

Michael Moore

JSlonis

Ted Kramer

JESII

JSlonis

JESII

JESII

TEPaul