Shivas's cheater line

[Jim Franklin]

"Jim, Jim, Jimbo, Jimmy crack corn and I don't care...

Tom, thanks for making me laugh. In all honesty, I do not know what the big deal is. I do not think the line on your ball helps enough to warrant a 14+ page thread. I agree with Shivas that it is unclear, but I agree with you that the spirit of the rule does not mean the line on the ball, but any mark ON the green. It is just not as clear as it could be and a good attorney could actually make a decent case against the "cheater line".

[SL_Solow]

I don't think it is unclear at all.  That is not Shivas' issue as I perceive the dialogue.  What Shivas is asking is "why did the USGA make the distinction between a mark on the green and a mark on the ball"?  It is the rationale he is after.  His suggestion is that a line on the ball is no less helpful than a line on the green  They both reduce the skill needed to aim the putter.  Of course, if you take his argument to its logical extension, an aiming line on the putter itself also reduces the skill needed to aim the face so I suppose that the first clibmaker who added a line perpendicular to the putter face was the prime mover for this argument.  (Tom Paul, welcome to the famed "slippery slope" argument all of us law school grads were trained to make as an almost knee jerk reaction to situations like this).  More seriously, if one is looking for a rationale, it is likely to be one of degree and not kind.  An intermediate mark on the green is likely to be viewed as more helpful than a mark on a ball, which in turn is more helpful than a mark on a club.  Marking the course leaves it changed for others and numerous marks could impair the course.  The practical difficulties of policing "cheater lines" when manufacturer's logos can be used for similar purposes also militates against a rule. So the USGA took a stand on marking the line itself, not the equipment. Its not a perfect answer.  If the objective is to eliminate alignment assistance, then balls would be blank except for identification marks (?) and putters would be plain on top.  Whither the 2 ball and other alignment assisting putters under that regime?

[TEPaul]

"I've asked at least a dozen times (plus two more since I first posed this question to you) what the reasoning behind Decision 20-3a/2 and the USGA position that the cheater line is legal, despite Rule 8-2b, despite rule 14-3, despite Decision 14-2/4, despite the tee definition, despite the fundamental skill of aligning yourself from an address position, despite the fact that they banned croquet-style putting ....

The question is "why?"  What is the reasoning?  The only reasoning on this topic from the USGA is in Decision 14-2/4 and it actually argues against the cheater line.  So what's the principle in that golf bible that they all keep under their pillows at night that is soooooo powerful that it overrules all this other stuff?"

David:

And I've answered you a number of times and I've given you the reasons why the Rules interpret this situation as they do. Apparently you either don't want to hear the reasons why or you are just being ridiculously intransigent for whatever reason.

Furthermore, you've now taken to referring to Tufts "Principles Behind the Rules of Golf" as some on-going oracle kept under select Rules people's pillows that answers any Rules situation extant with some carefully crafted "principle" that directly addresses any and every situation that may happen on a golf course.

Tuft's book does nothing of the kind. It's a very small book that addresses the basic and fundamental principles behind the Rules of the game. His listed "Principles" include what he refers to as the "Two Great Principles" and he lists ten others he calls "The Working Principles". There is a short chapter in the book on "advice" but nothing to be found about a line to indicate the line for putting.

So Tuft's book is not going to be much help in this discussion.

What will be of help is an explanation of why the Rules makers today and the Rules makers who wrote and interpreted these Rules we are discussing in this situation you call a "cheater line" on a golf ball made and make the interpretations they do regarding that identification line on a golf ball when used to align a golf ball to indicate the line of putting.

And I've explained that to you a number of times---eg--

They do not feel an "indentification" line on a golf ball (or a line created by a manufacturer's trademark constitutes a violation of Rule 14 when used in this way and in Rule 8-2b they are only referring to a line on the putting green and not a line on a golf ball, although admittedly their use of the word "anywhere" in the last sentence of Rule 8-2b is misleading to some such as yourself and it is admittedly not as clearly written as it might be or even should be.

But again, and despite that, I can absolutely guarantee you what they do mean in these Rules and Decisions we've been discussing here in this context of what you referred to as a "cheater line" on a golf ball. I mean that David---I can guarantee it and you can too if you'd just bother to ask the USGA or R&A Rules of Golf Committees or any other competent Rules official.

That's what they are there for, David, to interpret and explain the Rules of Golf. It's not for you to interpret them contrary to their interpretation, and it's certainly not for you to apply them contrary to their interpretations. Your responsibility in playing golf is to apply them as THEY interpret them. Our responsibility as Rules officials is to apply them as THEY write and interpret them.

Now go back to work---and if and when you do, God help your clients and opposing counselors.  

Furthermore, David, I know what you're really up to here, and I'm sure most others do too. It's the same thing you always try to do and imply in these types of threads. You're simply trying to make it look like you are capable of writing the Rules of Golf and interpreting them better than the USGA and R&A and those who are actually responsible for doing those things.

Maybe you're right that you are more capable of writing the language within the Rules of Golf book but the fact is you aren't doing that and you're probably not likely to be doing that any time soon.

They do that and we only need to know what they mean in those Rules and how to apply what they mean. We can do both by simply applying what they really do mean and if something is confusing just ask them for clarification. That's what they're there for.

Again, just like us, you need to do no more than that.

[TEPaul]

"I don't think it is unclear at all.  That is not Shivas' issue as I perceive the dialogue.  What Shivas is asking is "why did the USGA make the distinction between a mark on the green and a mark on the ball"?  It is the rationale he is after.  His suggestion is that a line on the ball is no less helpful than a line on the green."

SL:

I realize that and I always have on this thread.

Their rationale (the Rules makers) is that they simply do not believe that a line on a golf ball is the same thing as a line on a putting green when said line is used to indicate a line for putting. They believe a line on a golf ball when used in this way IS LESS HELPFUL than a line on a putting green used to indicate a line for putting.

How much clearer can one get as to the WHY of this or the rationale behind the way they treat identication lines or trademarks on golf balls when used to indicate the line for putting?

Obviously Shivas thinks that functionally a line on a putting green and line on a golf ball can be used in every bit the same way and with the same benefit to the golfer to artificially aid and assist in putting.  

The Rules of Golf and the Rules makers obviously simply do not agree with that at this point.

And that is the reason (the "why" of it) and the rationale behind why they feel a line on a putting green is a violation of the Rules and an "identification" line on a golf ball used to indicate the line for putting is not!

[TEPaul]

"Tom, thanks for making me laugh. In all honesty, I do not know what the big deal is. I do not think the line on your ball helps enough to warrant a 14+ page thread. I agree with Shivas that it is unclear, but I agree with you that the spirit of the rule does not mean the line on the ball, but any mark ON the green. It is just not as clear as it could be and a good attorney  could actually make a decent case against the "cheater line"."
I agree with you and and I agree with Shivas that Rule 8-2b is not very well written---in that it is not very clearly written vis-a-vis a situation like this---an "identification" line used to align a golf ball for the purpose of indicating the line for putting."

Jimbo;

I've said that all along.

But he's gone much farther than that. He's trying to claim that this Rule of Golf is interpreted and applied by Rules makers, officials and golfers contrary to the intent of this Rule.

That is simply not the case here.

Again, that this Rule and others in the Rules of Golf book are neither ideally written nor ideally clear has never been a point of contention between us.

[Ken Moum]

Their rationale (the Rules makers) is that they simply do not believe that a line on a golf ball is the same thing as a line on a putting green when said line is used to indicate a line for putting. They believe a line on a golf ball when used in this way IS LESS HELPFUL than a line on a putting green used to indicate a line for putting.

That seems to be a reasonable enough position, but for a time a prior to the 1980s, the rule actually prohibited making a mark on the green.

Then, for some reason it was changed to "place a mark anywhere."

The rulesmakers who decided in 1988 to prohibit the placing of a mark anywhere, obviously were intending to extend the prohibition beyond the putting surface itself, and the use of the word "place" instead of "make" suggests a different intent as well.

Even if the mark is nothing more than a trademark, placing it so that it shows the line to the hole does seem to me to be covered in the precise language used post-1988.

But then I used to work for a law enforcement agency and was often called upon write the English version of our regulations and laws.

Ken

[Robert_Walker]

The bottom line is that is not against the rules of golf to draw a line on your ball and align that line in any direction when replacing the ball on the green. Therefore, in golf per the USGA and RandA, it is not a "cheaterline".

[George Pazin]

Dave, I could send you the chapter, but not until tomorrow at the earliest.

It seems to mean that they might have simply made the move to "anywhere" because someone might have placed a mark just off the green or something like that, as opposed to putting it on the ball.

[CHrisB]

FAQ Rule 6-5

Lines or Arrows Used to mark Golf Ball

Q.  It is recommended placing an identification mark on my golf ball. May I use a line or an arrow that will also help me align the club face?

A.  Rules 6-5 and 12-2 state that each player should put an identification mark on his ball. Thus, the Rules do not limit the type of markings a player may put on the ball (i.e. arrows, lines, words, etc). Additionally, there is no penalty for using such lines to "line up" prior to a stroke on the putting green or any place else on the course.  

Shivas,

I don't know if you're going to get your answer or not, but it appears to me based on the above and how the rules are written that:

i) the USGA has no desire to limit the types of ID marks a player can put on his ball (or putter for that matter),

ii) a pen ID mark is considered to be part of the ball (or putter), and not a mark separate from the ball (or putter),

iii) the ball or the putter can be used to to indicate a line for putting, but marks separate from the ball (or putter) may not be placed to indicate a line for putting,

iv) a mark becomes separate from the ball when it is a placeable/removable object -- for example, a piece of tape or a sticker may not be placed on the ball (or putter) to indicate a line for putting, but a pen ID mark can.

Regardless of the particulars, it's clear that, during the stroke, the player is allowed to use (i) his body, (ii) his putter, and (iii) his ball to indicate the line for putting, but nothing else. There are even fewer restrictions on indicating the line of play before the stroke, as a caddie can point out the line or assist the player by confirming good alignment, etc. So maybe the USGA doesn't consider the ability to align oneself to be very important compared with the ability to make a stroke.

By the way--if you had to guess based on what you know so far, what would you say is the USGA's reasoning behind allowing the cheater line? I'd like to know if you really think it's a "because it's always been that way" reasoning or if you have a hunch on what their reasoning might be.

[TEPaul]

"In short, I don't think that they actually have applied any real reasoning to it or given any real thought to what was intended when they pulled the "on the putting green" words from Rule 8-2 or when they banned croquet style putting or when they issued Decision 14-2/4, which may explain why Tom is having such a hard time coming up with any!"

Shivas:

Your posts since my last one only show how preposterous your carrying on of this discussion has become. I think all you're interested in is just the fact that you're somehow able to keep this thread going.

We've given you the rationale and reasoning behind the way the Rules treat this thing you call the "cheater line" but you either choose to ignore it or just stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the validity of it.

I spoke to John Vander Borght today to see if we are compeletely on the same page on the logic behind this issue and he said he thinks you understand perfectly well what we've said and you know we're right but if you admitted that you'd have to stop this ridiculous hair-splitting arguing and it's pretty obvious you don't want to do that.

Every question you asked me and JohnV we answered accurately as to how the Rules of Golf view this. He's done with this thread and so am I. Furthermore, an amazing amount of people view this website including some people in Rules with the USGA and a few of them are just scratching their heads and laughing out loud reading the things you've come up with on this thread.    

[Eric_Terhorst]

I don't think it is unclear at all.  That is not Shivas' issue as I perceive the dialogue.  What Shivas is asking is "why did the USGA make the distinction between a mark on the green and a mark on the ball"?  It is the rationale he is after.... if one is looking for a rationale, it is likely to be one of degree and not kind.  An intermediate mark on the green is likely to be viewed as more helpful than a mark on a ball, which in turn is more helpful than a mark on a club.  Marking the course leaves it changed for others and numerous marks could impair the course.  The practical difficulties of policing "cheater lines" when manufacturer's logos can be used for similar purposes also militates against a rule. So the USGA took a stand on marking the line itself, not the equipment. Its not a perfect answer.  If the objective is to eliminate alignment assistance, then balls would be blank except for identification marks (?) and putters would be plain on top.  Whither the 2 ball and other alignment assisting putters under that regime?

Shivas, you seem to be searching for an answer, and SL Solow's looks pretty good.

Is this really a huge issue?  Has there been an epidemic of 15 handicappers turning into 5s because they're allowed to put lines on the ball?  If memory serves, Tiger has no marks besides a swoosh on his ball and I don't see any of the "cheaters" challenging him for dominance...

[Joe Hancock]

I don't think it is unclear at all.  That is not Shivas' issue as I perceive the dialogue.  What Shivas is asking is "why did the USGA make the distinction between a mark on the green and a mark on the ball"?  It is the rationale he is after.... if one is looking for a rationale, it is likely to be one of degree and not kind.  An intermediate mark on the green is likely to be viewed as more helpful than a mark on a ball, which in turn is more helpful than a mark on a club.  Marking the course leaves it changed for others and numerous marks could impair the course.  The practical difficulties of policing "cheater lines" when manufacturer's logos can be used for similar purposes also militates against a rule. So the USGA took a stand on marking the line itself, not the equipment. Its not a perfect answer.  If the objective is to eliminate alignment assistance, then balls would be blank except for identification marks (?) and putters would be plain on top.  Whither the 2 ball and other alignment assisting putters under that regime?

Shivas, you seem to be searching for an answer, and SL Solow's looks pretty good.

Is this really a huge issue?  Has there been an epidemic of 15 handicappers turning into 5s because they're allowed to put lines on the ball?  If memory serves, Tiger has no marks besides a swoosh on his ball and I don't see any of the "cheaters" challenging him for dominance...

15's aren't turning into 5's, they're turning into 5 hours....

Joe

[Steve Wilson]

Two or three years ago Dan Kelly and I, among others, engaged in a competition claiming to be the most effective threadkiller in the Discussion Group.  I'm not sure I won, but I know I was in the Final Four.  So it's time to see if I still have it and can administer the coup de grace to this enormity.

I have never used a cheater line, I don't even use the logo to line up my putts, I had never considered doing it.  Then, Monday night when I was lining up my first putt of the evening, I flashed on this thread and someone's assertion that he went off of his way to make certain he was only staring at pure white.  To make a long story short, (the only such effort in this saga), I couldn't get cheater lines and other means of alignment out of my head all evening and had one of my worst putting rounds in recent memory--of course, given my age recent is pretty damned recent.

  I think the least Shivas could do is cover my losses as I missed four easy putts of less than six feet--two of them for birdies.

Well, that's my good deed for the day.  I'll check back tomorrow and see if I've managed to reduce this profligate expenditure of bandwidth to zombiehood if not interred it fully.  

Hand me the shovel, Sparky.






















 

 

 

[Steve Wilson]

Why you?

Beacause your name is in the thread title?

Because you are billing someone else for the time spent on this thread?

Because in my despair at having fallen into the slough of putting despond, I lash out blindly at any and all within my limited range?

I think that's probably enough alternative theories or excuses or alibis.

To wake up and see a response to my attempt to Kevorikian this thread, I must admit that my vaunted prowess as a threadkiller is more vaunt than prow.

And it's also apparent that there's little to no chance of me acquiring one of those cool Viking nicknames (Thorfiin Skullplitter, Harald Blood Axe) Stevin Threadkiller.   It's just as well.  Who wants to be known as Steve the Yipper, or Push Fade Wilson.

[TEPaul]

Thorfiin Skullplitter?

I love that. That's you. You must be of quite pure Scandanavian extraction. Am I right? To complete the aura I think you should get a bright red "identification" line about one inch wide tatooed from the top of your head to your chin too.

[Dan Kelly]

Then, Monday night when I was lining up my first putt of the evening, I flashed on this thread and someone's assertion that he went off of his way to make certain he was only staring at pure white.

That, I'm sorry to report, was my assertion. My deepest apologies.

(You may be a better threadkiller than I am, Gunga Steve -- but neither of us stands a chance against this thread! Maybe we could get Jeff McDowell to drop by for a moment...)

[TEPaul]

"Tom, you realize that given this fact, what you've said makes no sense whatsoever, don't you?"

Shivas:

Is that right? So there are probably thousands of golfers today aligning identification marks on golf balls for the purpose of indicating the line for putting, including some on Tour on TV every week and there are Rules officials all over the world watching this and it makes no sense? And you and a super minority of brave souls who are IMing you privately are the only ones who realize it makes no sense, right? OK, whatever you say. This is clearly one of the crosses to bear that Rules writers must suffer---eg that super minority that constantly harrass and harangue them claiming they know the Rules and how to interpret them better than anyone!

As to why the words "on the putting green" was pulled from the wording of the basic 8-2b rule in 1988 after being in there for maybe 25 years, the reason and rationale behind that could be something as simple as the Rules writers assumed it's totally obvious that the Rule only indicates a line on the putting green itself. Not to mention the title of Rule 8-2b specifically says so and nothing more. You did notice the title of the Rule is "On the Putting Green" didn't you? When they talk about placing a mark they mean on the putting green. If they also meant on the ball they probably would have putt "And On the golf ball" in the title of Rule 8-2b too.  

I'm also beginning to wonder, Shivas, why it is you've carried on this discussion this way on here so long constantly asking us to explain the USGA/R&A Rules of Golf Committee's reasoning and rationale. Why don't you simply call the USGA Rules of Golf Committee and ask them?? You do realize the USGA/R&A Rules of Golf Committees are the ultimate authority on the Rules of Golf in the world don't you?

It's pretty simply really. Just pick up the telephone, dial 908-234-2300 ask Joan or Tom who may be manning the front desk at Far Hills to connect you to the Rules of Golf Committee. They are very friendly and polite and will put you through immediately to someone at the Rules of Golf Committee who are there to answer questions about the Rules of Golf.

What is the rationale and reasoning behind the fact that you have not done that or will not do that? My guess is that you haven't done that and probably won't because if you did you wouldn't be able to continue to argue your ridiculous "cheater line" point on here.  

[Dan Kelly]

This is clearly one of the crosses to bear that Rules writers must suffer---eg that super minority that constantly harrass and harangue them claiming they know the Rules and how to interpret them better than anyone!

You should see the IMs that Shivas sends to Anthony Kennedy!

[TEPaul]

Dan:

You know the real irony here in this discussion between Shivas and me is that years ago and well before GOLFCLUBATLAS.com existed I used to basically do the same thing that Shivas is doing now.

Unfortunately, I used to constantly take it out on the USGA's Rules of Golf committee and not on some chatroom.

I wrote them and called them constantly asking one thing and another about why their Rules were written the way they were and why one thing and another within the Rules made no logical sense to me. And not just that but I made a number of formal written proposals on why one Rule or another should be changed.

The "Honor" proposal was definitely the most interesting and long running at six years---and not to mention that no one seemed to know why the Honor required that the player must go first.

But there were others such as why they didn't put something into the Rules that better explained the act of continuous putting that basically abridged Rule 10.

Then I attacked them like a pit bull for the illogic of penalizing a player for moving his ball during search "through the green" when players are not penalized for moving their ball during search in hazards---which I felt was a far more unpropitious place to hit a ball anyway.

My problems were a few: First, I was beginning to officiate and second, I feel there is nothing quite so boring as sitting on the toilet with nothing to read and so over a few years I basically memorized the Rules of Golf book and the Decisions on the Rules of Golf book.

As a result of this they were under attack most violently and frequently in the winter months because that was the time I wasn't playing golf.

So, to make a long story short, over the years I have come to not only understand better how they think but I have very much come to commiserate with those long suffering Rules experts up there in Far Hills, NJ who man the Rules of Golf Committee for the USGA.  

[John Kavanaugh]

Confession:

I found a ball yesterday with a full circle cheater line.  It was the 15th hole and I was 9 over for the day.  Put the ball in play on the par 3 16th using the line on every tee and every putt...Played the next 12 holes one over par.  I bought a dozen Pro V's after the round and will attempt to replicate my success with the embedded pre-cheater line the manufacturer has provided.  I went from six bets down to one up and enjoyed the feeling of winning...I am afraid it is quite addictive.  

[TEPaul]

JohnK:

When your cheater line practice fails you miserably in the next week or so my advice to you is to see your club's professonal for a lesson in putting possibly brought on by improper body alignment due to "identification" mark cheater line addiction.

[John Kavanaugh]

What I noticed was that I was naturally lining up way right on every shot and putt.  I think at the very least the cheater line may be an excellent training aid.  

[John Kavanaugh]

I've always been scared to death of everything left.  I blame Bendelow and his clockwise routings.

[Dan Kelly]

What I noticed was that I was naturally lining up way right on every shot and putt.  I think at the very least the cheater line may be an excellent training aid.  

Just curious:

Are you left-eye-dominant?

[John Kavanaugh]

What I noticed was that I was naturally lining up way right on every shot and putt.  I think at the very least the cheater line may be an excellent training aid.  

Just curious:

Are you left-eye-dominant?

How could I tell?