[Tom Huckaby]

In light of Peters insightful comment, I brought this over from a different thread and thought it applied perfectly here in so many ways.  (And I'm sure Shiv will use it as ammo in the Rangefinder thread).

How perfect is this..I couldn't agree more!

I just read Jeff's fine article on Vernon Macan and think the target golf, pro-range finder crowd should read his quote about front to back sloping greens:

"Today, the uninformed believe a green should be constructed with the slope from back to front, so that it will retain the ball," he said. "In brief, this suggests the shot should be a mechanical operation and the result a mathematical certainty. This is not the game of golf. Golf was not conceived as a mechanical operation but rather full of fun and adventure. Many things could happen to the ball after it pitched on the green. The ill-happenings were not regarded as ill-fortune or ill-luck, but part of the adventure, and the more skilled found methods to overcome the risks of ill-fortune."

Interesting, but inapplicable to the rangefinder issue.  See my response to shivas.
TH

[CHrisB]

Jim, the reason that alignment of the seam is a violation of the spirit of the game is that you're supposed to use your own two eyes to align yourself.  Using blemishes on the green is fine because they're there.  Using a tree in the distance on a big breaker is fine because it's there. 

But when you start manufacturing alignment, by definition, you erode judgment.  And judgment is part of the game.

So then you must also be against putters with lines or anything else on them (e.g., the 2-ball putter) that assist in alignment, correct?

[CHrisB]

Not so much, because THAT line isn't lined up until the player is already astride the ball.

OK, so you'd have no problem with the cheater line if a player lined it up astride the ball, correct?

[Jim_Kennedy]

So then you must also be against putters with lines or anything else on them (e.g., the 2-ball putter) that assist in alignment, correct? CBrauner

Not so much, because THAT line isn't lined up until the player is already astride the ball shivas

So I guess you haven't watched very many women line up there putter face while behind the ball, then walk around into their stance.

[Kalen Braley]

You still have to swing the club on the line though, so that line moves well before impact, wheras the cheater line stays put all the way till impact.

[CHrisB]

You still have to swing the club on the line though, so that line moves well before impact, wheras the cheater line stays put all the way till impact.

Kalen,
It doesn't matter how much the practice assists in alignment, only whether it does or not.

[CHrisB]

The fact is that the putter is placed for the purpose of doing the putting, not for the purpose of indicating a line for putting.   You can't have an 8-2(b) violation without the purpose being "to indicate a line for putting." 

It is not any violation of anything to place your putter on the line you intend to putt on because the purpose element is lacking.

So why is the line on the putterhead? The line doesn't "do the putting".

The answer, of course, is to assist the player in alignment. That's its purpose.

You said:

Jim, the reason that alignment of the seam is a violation of the spirit of the game is that you're supposed to use your own two eyes to align yourself.  Using blemishes on the green is fine because they're there.  Using a tree in the distance on a big breaker is fine because it's there. 

But when you start manufacturing alignment, by definition, you erode judgment.  And judgment is part of the game.

And since it doesn't matter to you whether the alignment aid is used behind or astride the ball, then it must be a violation of the spirit of the game to have a line on the putterhead that you use to help you align yourself, correct?

[Michael Moore]

Chris -

The line on the putterhead is used simply to identify the sweet spot of the putter.

This is not a true, primal, core, seminal, original, constructionalist, rock-in-the-rabbit hole, my country 'tis of thee golfing skill, so you are afforded as much artificial help as you can get.

Didn't you know that?

[CHrisB]

I'm glad you used the word "practical", because it has always been my argument that enforcement of a ban on the cheater line would not be practical even if the rules were re-written to ban it. Imagine having to monitor how a player sets his ball down on the green and what lines, marks, etc. appear on his ball.

And since you rightly agree that lines on putters also assist in alignment, then it wouldn't be long before consideration would have to be given to extend the cheater line ban to a ban on marks on putterheads that assist the player in alignment.

That's a can or worms that isn't about to get opened any time soon.

[Kalen Braley]

I'm glad you used the word "practical", because it has always been my argument that enforcement of a ban on the cheater line would not be practical even if the rules were re-written to ban it. Imagine having to monitor how a player sets his ball down on the green and what lines, marks, etc. appear on his ball.

And since you rightly agree that lines on putters also assist in alignment, then it wouldn't be long before consideration would have to be given to extend the cheater line ban to a ban on marks on putterheads that assist the player in alignment.

That's a can or worms that isn't about to get opened any time soon.

Chris,

I don't see this as an additional burden.  One must already monitor a player to make sure they aren't grounding a club in a hazard, giving themselves preferred lies in the rough, moving the ball to a playable spot in the woods via a footwedge, double hits out of bunkers, etc, etc.

These things are already in the game and are supposed to be self-policied correct?  Not lining up your ball is just another thing that you aren't supposed to do and if a competitor notices you doing it could be subject to a two stroke penalty or whatever the crime would be.

[CHrisB]

Shivas,
Sorry--we seem to be going back and forth between the rules and the spirit of the rules. I think you have made a very good explanation in that last post, there.

I agree that the line on the putter assists the player in alignment to the line he has chosen. So for you that would have to be against the spirit of the rules, but not the rules.

But if a player goes behind the line, aligns the putter, and then steps into address (like Betsy King always did), then you'd say a line on the putter also indicates a line for putting, which should be against the rules. When aligning the putter astride the ball, there would be no indicating the line and therefore no rule breach.

OK--I can understand that. I don't agree with you about the cheater line being against the rules (or even the spirit of the rules), but I think understand your argument well enough.

And we'll just agree to disagree whether enforcing a ban on cheater lines (or any other mark that could be used to indicate a line for putting) would be practical. I just don't think any benefits of regulating marks on golf balls justifies adding another 20-30 occasions per player per round where actions need to be monitored.

But I'll keep an open mind on it and of course, if the USGA agrees that (a) a rule change is needed, and (b) it is practical to enforce, then I will happily abide by it.

BTW, we have never been in disagreement that the cheater line or trademark indicates a line for putting when aligned to aim down the putting line. Decision 20-3a/2 states the intention as such.

But looking strictly at the language, the USGA obviously does not equate a "trademark aimed along the line of the putt" with a "mark placed". And apparently they don't equate a cheater line with a "mark placed". The question is whether they don't consider the trademark (or cheater line) a "mark", whether they don't consider it "placed", or both.

I might ask the USGA about that and see if I can get an answer (if for no other reason, so I never have to discuss this again!).

[Michael Moore]

I might ask the USGA about that and see if I can get an answer (if for no other reason, so I never have to discuss this again!)

"It would be unwise for the Rules to attempt to prohibit certain markings on a ball or a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced."

[SL_Solow]

Shiv;  I understand the point, each distinction is just a spot along the slippery slope.  But I still think it is really a question of picking a rule that is enforceable and has some acceptable rationale.  Given this amount of imprecision, there are bound to be disagreements and there is no correct answer.  But until the consensus changes, we enforce the rule.

Having made my statement, I must confess that I was ready to join up when I turned on the tube to watch a little of the Amateur this morning while eating lunch.  A young player had about a 5 footer for par to close out his quarter final match on the 16th hole.  He remarked his ball no less than 5 times, each time minutely adjusting his aiming line.  maybe it was nerves related to reaching the semis but it was excruciating to watch.

[Tom Huckaby]

Good lord will this NEVER die?  We had gone nearly a blissful week without posts in this thread....

 

[Kalen Braley]

Tom, Tom, TOm,

I think we can easily get to 40 pages.

Anyone ever purchase one of these?  http://dvice.com/archives/2006/10/digital_putter_makes_you_bette.php

 

[Bill_McBride]

Just wondering........

Do any of you guys work? 

[Tom Huckaby]

Just wondering........

Do any of you guys work? 

I confess that Friday afternoons, "work" would be a very loose way to describe my activities.

 

[Mike Benham]

Just wondering........

Do any of you guys work? 

In some way, his time is being billed to one of Shivas clients ... perhaps on the Morolto account ...

[Tom Huckaby]

Just wondering........

Do any of you guys work? 

In some way, his time is being billed to one of Shivas clients ... perhaps on the Morolto account ...

I speculated about the same many pages ago... or was it in one of the corollary threads?  He must be billing it somehow... if not think of the tens, nay hundreds of thousands of dollars lost....

 

[JESII]

12,000 posts that must average 5 minutes each is 60,000 minutes or 1,000 hours...

Frightening!

[Bill_McBride]

Well, have a nice weekend ya'll.  We have Tropical Storm Fay, could be Hurricane Fay, bearing down on little Pensacola. 

Ho hum. 

[Tom Huckaby]

The cheater line and the putter line are fundamentally different in terms of their purpose and effect.  What blows me away is that it took 35 pages for a collection of smart guys to figure that out.  They're totally different in terms of information flow to/from the player at address - and that's all the difference in the world.
 

The fact you continue to believe than anyone with any intelligence continues to CARE about this is the scariest part of all.... shel's a good guy for humoring you, that's all.

You know what we need? Michelle Wie to win a tournament and then attribute all her success to her fantastic aiming line on her golf ball.  Then you and Matt Ward could link white whales... and the GCA world would be complete.

 

[Phil McDade]

Sorry, Tom, but this thread cannot be complete until.....

Ward and Wie hook up for a grudge fourball match against Val James and Bob Probert on the Reverse Jans, with Ward using a cheater-line advantage to sink a putt on the last hole (after an illegal but un-challenged drop by Wie near the L), only to to have the W twosome get the crapped beat out of them by their opponents. Recorded for posterity, of course, so it can be uploaded to You-Tube and stuck on the hockey fights thread.

[Tom Huckaby]

Sorry, Tom, but this thread cannot be complete until.....

Ward and Wie hook up for a grudge fourball match against Val James and Bob Probert on the Reverse Jans, with Ward using a cheater-line advantage to sink a putt on the last hole (after an illegal but un-challenged drop by Wie near the L), only to to have the W twosome get the crapped beat out of them by their opponents. Recorded for posterity, of course, so it can be uploaded to You-Tube and stuck on the hockey fights thread.

I concur completely... and bow in the presence of greatness.

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Shiv;  I understand the point, each distinction is just a spot along the slippery slope. 

What the hell does that mean?

This isn't a slippery slope.  One slope goes uphill and the other downhill. 

The cheater line and the putter line are fundamentally different in terms of their purpose and effect.  What blows me away is that it took 35 pages for a collection of smart guys to figure that out.  They're totally different in terms of information flow to/from the player at address - and that's all the difference in the world.
 

Shivas,

I don't know if you watched the Quarter-final matches of the US Am today, but, one contestant lined up his putt, got over it, then stopped and realigned the ball, he got over it again, and then stopped and realigned it again.

Talk about slowing the game down, this is ridiculous.

I can't believe that the USGA permits this.

Remember when they prohibited walking forward from your ball to pace off the distance to the hole ?  In the name of speeding up play.  They need to get out the minutes of the meeting that decided to invoke that penalty.

Play has continued to slow down.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()