Shivas's cheater line

[John Kirk]

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.

To complete the task, the USGA needs to institute the instant replay, so shots can be carefully reviewed by an impartial panel in a special replay booth at each green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

John Kirk,

Over time the USGA has instituted a slow play policy.

It included a prohibition against going forward to determine yardage to the green.

To be consistent, and more importantly, to speed up the game, their should be a prohibition against lining up your ball.

If the USGA wants to improve the game, speeding up play is a cornerstone.

Enough of the prima donna's and acts of determining the angular deflection between true north and magnetic north.

Get up and hit the ball before your beard grows two inches.

[JESII]

Shivas,

I think the logic behind your opinion is fine, I think enforcing it is the biggest issue...is your complaint purely on the aiming function? Or could it be primarily a pace of play issue?

If these guys could do it immediately and with no re-do's, would you have a problem?

Would a shot clock be a good answer in competitive golf? As you know, unless you/your group is out of position you can take as long as you want to hit a shot today...should we put a 60 second rule in even when the player is in position?

[John Moore II]

You know Ian MacCalister called it a Cheater Line the other day on a new NXT commercial. I thought about this thread and that commercial and laughed. They're both silly.

[CHrisB]

Dave S,
Did you enjoy the part where the announcers and the USGA official were congratulating the players for staying below the 3 hour, 56 minute pace for twosomes?

[John Moore II]

Shiv-I use a cheater line to line up my putts, have since I started playing really. When I have to mark my ball (I don't mark when playing by myself or with just one other unless I really have to) I'd bet that it takes not more than 2 seconds per putt to line up the cheater line, so even if I have to do that 36 times a round, which would be a horrendous number of putts, thats only 72 seconds of time. Don't equate slowness with a cheater line, its simply that (some) guys on tour are slow and no one on the tour gives a damn enough to speed them up by putting a foot in their asses.

[CHrisB]

Looks like you just may get another chance to watch Kittleson play tomorrow.

[CHrisB]

I agree that the only real way to speed up play is to enforce pace of play rules, and not by banning certain practices that will only be replaced by something else to take up the same time.

I remember playing in the USAPL one year in a match against the eventual champion (it wasn't the final match). We had a few adventures on the front nine, fell behind, and were put on the clock. I was 3 down after 9, won the 10th hole with a par, and was then informed coming off the green that I had taken 31 seconds to play one of my shots (it was a 30 second shot clock in that particular year--mid 90's) and was penalized by losing the hole. So I go from 2 down to 4 down with 8 to play and lost on the 15th.

By the next year I think they had changed the shot clock to 40 seconds, and in the years since I don't remember even being put on the clock again in a USGA tournament. But I'll never forget being penalized like that--I may have been the only person in the history of golf to be penalized for taking exactly 31 seconds to play a shot.

Go back to strict enforcement of pace of play rules and it will get everyone moving. Penalties are the only possible deterrants.

[John Moore II]

JKM:  nobody takes 2 seconds to line up the cheater line.

Nobody.  It's more like 5, minimum.

5 X20 = 100.  Times 4 players = 400 seconds.  That's 6 2/3 minutes.

And it's not just the cheater line.  It's the pre-shot routine.  How long did it take this Mitchell kid and Kittleson just take to hit two putts, each of which was less than 10 feet?  4-5 minutes?

That should take 1 minute, start to finish, tops.

Indeed it should take not more than a minute to hit a shot. Thats even the USGA requirement if you get off pace. I personally think you should be on the clock from the time you step on the first tee. Really strictly enforce pace of play. But look at it like this: If the first group of the day plays in 3hrs 30mins, if you run 7 groups an hour, like we did at Mid South, and lose just 1 minute of time per group through the day (which is a low figure, 2-3 minutes is a better number) then by the time you go through 4 hours of groups, you're at 4 hours, and if you're a busy course and can get 8 hours of tee times full, then you're now at 4hrs 26 minutes. If you start at 4hrs 20 minutes like we liked to do (I didn't BTW) in 4 hours you're over pushing 5 and theres nothing to do about it. People simply like to play slow and golf course managers and owners don't give a damn enough to fix it. Maybe thats why I am glad I'm done with the Country Club side of the golf business. CHEATER LINES ARE ONLY PART OF THE PROBLEM, THEY CERTAINLY ARE NOT THE ROOT CAUSE.

[RJ_Daley]

Melnyk got it right with knowing there are 102 bars in downtown Athens.  He knows a good college town when he sees one. 

But, those modeled preshot routines are maddening.  How many are now modelling that silly little walk around before playing your shot like Mickelson with his twirling the iron or putter, spinning it in his hands while contemplating the artistry he is about to create with the stroke.  How many minutes in a round does that twirling-spinning take Dave? 

How many minutes does flipping the coin before each putt take during the round for Lorena?   

After 36 pages of posts, which I lost track of long ago, I'm surprised there could be anything left not said about the fallacy of the line being cheating... 

[CHrisB]

Melnyk got it right with knowing there are 102 bars in downtown Athens.  He knows a good college town when he sees one. 

Yeah, but didn't he get a little too excited when he suggested that Patrick Reed chose Georgia because of the co-eds? Slow down there, big fella.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Shivas,

I think the logic behind your opinion is fine, I think enforcing it is the biggest issue...

That's the easiest part.

Don't allow a line, or the equivalent on the ball, from the competitor or the manufacturer.    End of story.

[CHrisB]

Patrick,
But you wouldn't be OK with a player aligning the "Titleist" name along the line of the putt and using that, would you?

If not, how would you enforce the new rule? (I assume you'd let Titleist continue to put their name on their ball )

It seems to me that enforcement has to begin on the green when the player replaces his ball, not when the manufacturer produces it or when the player marks it.

[John Moore II]

Patrick,
But you wouldn't be OK with a player aligning the "Titleist" name along the line of the putt and using that, would you?

If not, how would you enforce the new rule? (I assume you'd let Titleist continue to put their name on their ball )

It seems to me that enforcement has to begin on the green when the player replaces his ball, not when the manufacturer produces it or when the player marks it.

This has been beaten to death a few times, and the reasoning for allowing the companies to keep the logo and such is that you can't align it exactly. But I feel that if you write "Pro V1 392" on the ball it does the same thing as the full blown lines you see in Titleists today. You still line it up. Either way, in 1250 posts, everything possible on both sides of the issue has been beaten to death and revived 2 or 3 times and the sides are pretty concrete on what they believe. And won't change.

[CHrisB]

JKM,
Wow--I disagree on every count, except that this has beaten to death a few times.

Do you have a reference for the reason that companies are allowed to keep the trademark/logo is that a player "can't align it exactly"?

If that is the case, then why did the USGA come up with Decision 20-3a/2 which has been such a big part of this discussion?

20-3a/2 Trademark Aimed Along Line of Putt When Ball Replaced

Q. When a player is replacing his ball, is it permissible for him to position the ball so that the trademark is aimed along the line of putt to indicate the line of play?

A. Yes.

Sounds like the USGA believes that a trademark can indeed be aimed along the line of putt to indicate the line of play. Either that, or they said "let's write a Decision to allow them to try it because we know it won't work". But somehow I don't think that's how rules are made.

And as far as everyone being concrete in what they believe, I had an opinion changed by Dave Schmidt on page 35 of at least the second long thread we've had about the cheater line (after at least a year-and-a-half of on-and-off discussing it, and at least 5 years since Dave S first referred to it as a "cheater line" on here). One of my hang-ups was that I could not see a practical difference between having a line on the ball and having a line on the putterhead, but after his explanation on page 35 I now share his view that lines on putters are fundamentally different (unless a player gets behind the line, uses the line on the putter to line up, the steps around and takes his stance a la Betsy King).

But if you feel that everything possible has been discussed over and over, and that nothing will change, remember that the beauty of this forum is that you are free to not participate in whatever thread you wish.

[John Moore II]

Chris Brauner--My only reference for saying you can't align the "titleist" logo is that it has been said numerous times on this thread and the site that you can't align the trademark as easily as you can a 'cheater line.' I don't agree with that, but many on here seem to think its the case. I don't care either way, if I am allowed to use a cheater line, I likely will. If the USGA says I can't, I won't.

[John Moore II]

I don't care either way, if I am allowed to use a cheater line, I likely will. If the USGA says I can't, I won't.

JKM:  You're allowed to take performance-enhancing drugs, cough in people's backswings, jingle coins in your pocket and play golf on heroin, too...

Yeah. I prefer to use "The Clear," but I still at times take direct injections. Sneezing works better than coughing. Jingling coins doesn't make enough noise, I like using a large bag of marbles. And crack works far better than heroin. And Kalen can attest to all those things. I fired up the crack pipe while we were playing and he commented that he thought my build looked somewhat like Lou Ferrigno.

[CHrisB]

Why do you guys all keep harping on this purported unenforceability?

Because I suspect that enforceability may be part of the reason of why the USGA has so far refused to ban the practice.

Enforceability becomes a issue when a competitor calls a rules official to come over and determine whether a trademark, logo, shape, series of dots, seam, or anything else about his opponent's ball really does indicate a line for putting or not. And because there is no hard-and-fast rule for him to determine that, he'll have to rely on his own judgment, so that enforcement of the rule depends on the judgment of individual rules officials. Remember the stink caused by Ernie Els at the Masters a few years ago when he kept calling rules officials over until he found one that let him take relief from brush that had been "piled for removal"? My guess is that the USGA wants to avoid introducing new rules that rely too much on the judgement of individual rules officials and therefore will not be applicable across the board.

On the other hand, when a player tees off in front of the markers, there is a clear method for an official to determine whether the ball was in front of the markers or not (in other words, he knows what questions to ask). Same for determining whether a ball is OB or not. Same with a guy bumping his ball, illegally substituting a ball, playing out of turn in match play, catching sand on his takeaway in a bunker, knocking down leaves or pine needles in a practice swing, and most if not all of the other rules situations you have cited as similar in enforceability.

That's why about 1000 pages ago I challenged you to write a hard-and-fast rule for helping a rules official determine if a mark really indicates the line for putting or not. Something like "A mark on a golf ball is deemed to indicate a line for putting if, when the player replaces his ball on the green, the mark has the following characteristics: _________________" that any rules official anywhere can use to arrive at the same interpretation of whatever mark they see on a ball and however the ball is oriented on the green. If I remember, you made a pretty good attempt at it, and indeed I think if you ever want to see the rule changed, then this is your key challenge.

But again, that's just my guess at what the issue is--I have asked the USGA about all this and will report what they reply if and when they do.

[Sean_A]

Shivas,

I think the logic behind your opinion is fine, I think enforcing it is the biggest issue...is your complaint purely on the aiming function? Or could it be primarily a pace of play issue?

It's principle first; practical second.  This is wrong in concept; and wrong in effect.

If these guys could do it immediately and with no re-do's, would you have a problem?

Hell no, because it's still wrong in principle.

Would a shot clock be a good answer in competitive golf?

No.  You don't need one if players have something resembling the spirit of the game.  All I see is narcissistic me, me, me over all else.

As you know, unless you/your group is out of position you can take as long as you want to hit a shot today...should we put a 60 second rule in even when the player is in position?

No, a shot clock is as against the spirit of the game as Cheater Lines and Range Cheaters.  The spirit of the game is first and foremost, that it's a gentleman's game.  Gentlemen call penalties on themselves.  And gentlemen do not selfishly waste other peoples' time. 

Here's the sick thing: 

A hundred years ago, this stuff was so obvious, it didn't even even need to be said.

Fast forward 100 years, and I'm almost a lone voice.  Our society has gone to shit and it's now polluted golf, too. 

The interesting thing here, and it was a question I never received an answer to previously, does the cheater line go against the spirit of the rules?  To state the use of the cheater line is wrong in principle suggests that it is isn't in the spirit of the rules.  Now, if we look back at the history of this rule, which I pointed out on another thread, I think it is easy to say the cheater line is wrong in principle, but much harder to back up with evidence especially in context with the history of the rule. 

Personally, I think it is a badly worded rule which was a mistake because it clearly does not follow the logic of the previous version of the rule.  Which again leads me to the question, if the  rule were written so that a line on the ball was clearly permissable (such as from a fairway shot), would this be against the spirit of the rules?

Ciao

[Mike McGuire]

Maybe Drew Kittleson will be the final straw. One of the slowest players in the history of golf in the US am final. The cameras have no other matches to cut away to so the world gets to see his ridiculous routine over and over.... Could be a record tomorrow for the most naps taken ever during a final.

[Mike McGuire]

Tiger uses the cheater line. Is that a factor at all for the USGA?

[Phil McDade]

I agree that the only real way to speed up play is to enforce pace of play rules, and not by banning certain practices that will only be replaced by something else to take up the same time.

I remember playing in the USAPL one year in a match against the eventual champion (it wasn't the final match). We had a few adventures on the front nine, fell behind, and were put on the clock. I was 3 down after 9, won the 10th hole with a par, and was then informed coming off the green that I had taken 31 seconds to play one of my shots (it was a 30 second shot clock in that particular year--mid 90's) and was penalized by losing the hole. So I go from 2 down to 4 down with 8 to play and lost on the 15th.

By the next year I think they had changed the shot clock to 40 seconds, and in the years since I don't remember even being put on the clock again in a USGA tournament. But I'll never forget being penalized like that--I may have been the only person in the history of golf to be penalized for taking exactly 31 seconds to play a shot.

Go back to strict enforcement of pace of play rules and it will get everyone moving. Penalties are the only possible deterrants.

Sorry, Chris, but you sound like one of those whining PGA/LPGA/US Am (if there are any) players who occasionally -- and I do mean occasionally -- get put on the clock and penalized for slow play.

Why in God's name did it take you 31 seconds to play a shot?

I'm struck by how most of the (apparently) very good golfers on this site bend over backwards to defend the cheater line, and those hacks among us (save for Pat Mucci, who I hear is quite good) see the rationale behind banning it.

[CHrisB]

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."

Dave S,
Again, I asked the USGA about this and am awaiting a reply, but I forgot that Michael Moore emailed the USGA last year (don't know how he phrased his question) and received the above response.

What do you think the USGA means by "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."

[CHrisB]

Sorry, Chris, but you sound like one of those whining PGA/LPGA/US Am (if there are any) players who occasionally -- and I do mean occasionally -- get put on the clock and penalized for slow play.

Why in God's name did it take you 31 seconds to play a shot?

I'm struck by how most of the (apparently) very good golfers on this site bend over backwards to defend the cheater line, and those hacks among us (save for Pat Mucci, who I hear is quite good) see the rationale behind banning it.

Phil,
Are you serious? If so, bring a stopwatch to the course next time you go and time how long it takes for people (yourself included) to hit a shot once they arrive at their ball (not once they pull a club, not once they've gotten yardage, but once they've arrived at their ball) and it's their turn to play--I think you'll be surprised.

P.S.--I don't use the cheater line and I see the rationale behind banning it. I'm more interested in why the USGA hasn't banned it (yet), and I suspect it has something to do with enforceablility.

[Phil McDade]

Sorry, Chris, but you sound like one of those whining PGA/LPGA/US Am (if there are any) players who occasionally -- and I do mean occasionally -- get put on the clock and penalized for slow play.

Why in God's name did it take you 31 seconds to play a shot?

I'm struck by how most of the (apparently) very good golfers on this site bend over backwards to defend the cheater line, and those hacks among us (save for Pat Mucci, who I hear is quite good) see the rationale behind banning it.

Phil,
Are you serious? If so, bring a stopwatch to the course next time you go and time how long it takes for people (yourself included) to hit a shot once they arrive at their ball (not once they pull a club, not once they've gotten yardage, but once they've arrived at their ball) and it's their turn to play--I think you'll be surprised.

P.S.--I don't use the cheater line and I see the rationale behind banning it. I'm more interested in why the USGA hasn't banned it (yet), and I suspect it has something to do with enforceablility.

Chris:

I can absolutely guarantee you that in my 20-plus years of playing golf, once I got to my ball, and had a clear green/fairway in front of me, it's never taken me 31 seconds to play a shot.