Pros tapping down ground on line of putt

[zeg]

Originally Posted by iacas

Good for him. I've had little to add because he's done well in stating the obvious simplicity of the point on which he and I apparently agree.

It's up to you now to either state that "reason" or concede that you've not really got a reason why the rules should stay the way they are (outside of "because that's the way they've always been.").

Well, it seems we do agree that the green is special, but I am actually not sure I agree that the rule should be changed.

I haven't thought about this very hard in the past, but here's a stab at how the current logic goes down. The basic ideas embodied in the rules are that you play it as it lies, and you're entitled to the lie you "earned" with your stroke. Without the special exceptions for the putting green, we'd have the situation Ignorant is arguing for: you get what you get and you deal with it. If you're unfortunate enough to have a ball mark on your line, so be it. However, since you're entitled to the lie you "earned," if a subsequent approach puts a ball mark on your line, you can repair it. This, of course, requires that you be able to identify conclusively the ball mark of each ball. Because this is not always practical, instead you're simply allowed to repair obvious ball marks, avoiding arguments and speculation about how a particular mark was created.

Unlike ball marks, spike marks or other imperfections can safely be assumed to have been present prior to the group's reaching the green, so unless you observe the mark being created, you don't have any justification for repairing it.

Anyway, that's my guess at the rationale. It's not an airtight argument by any means, as it still leaves room to bicker over whether a mark is a ball mark or a spike mark, but it seems at least roughly in keeping with the rest of the rules.

Overall, I'd say I'm just a hair on the "leave the rules as they are" side of the fence. I don't see this as being a big enough deal that the rules really need changing, but it wouldn't particularly offend me if they did.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zeg

Well, it seems we do agree that the green is special, but I am actually not sure I agree that the rule should be changed.

Fair enough. And to be clear, I'm not sure I think the rule SHOULD be changed either. I just think that if I was in charge of the Rules, it's about the only one I could see changing. And I'm leaning towards changing it, because I haven't heard a good argument why not. Getting stuck playing behind a guy who drags his feet doesn't seem fair, and unlike other things which aren't "fair," this is something which can be rectified.

Originally Posted by zeg

I haven't thought about this very hard in the past, but here's a stab at how the current logic goes down. The basic ideas embodied in the rules are that you play it as it lies, and you're entitled to the lie you "earned" with your stroke. Without the special exceptions for the putting green, we'd have the situation Ignorant is arguing for: you get what you get and you deal with it. If you're unfortunate enough to have a ball mark on your line, so be it. However, since you're entitled to the lie you "earned," if a subsequent approach puts a ball mark on your line, you can repair it. This, of course, requires that you be able to identify conclusively the ball mark of each ball. Because this is not always practical, instead you're simply allowed to repair obvious ball marks, avoiding arguments and speculation about how a particular mark was created.

The problem with that line of thinking is that if nobody else hits the green you can be virtually certain that the three ball marks near your line were not caused by people who hit after you. Same is true if you're the last person to hit onto the green - you obviously hit with all of the ball marks that existed (including your own - which you can't repair in the fairway but you can on the green).

Originally Posted by zeg

Unlike ball marks, spike marks or other imperfections can safely be assumed to have been present prior to the group's reaching the green, so unless you observe the mark being created, you don't have any justification for repairing it.

That doesn't rise to the level of the examples I just provided, though. You can be virtually certain that the ball marks were there before your ball, but you still get to repair those.

Originally Posted by zeg

Overall, I'd say I'm just a hair on the "leave the rules as they are" side of the fence. I don't see this as being a big enough deal that the rules really need changing, but it wouldn't particularly offend me if they did.

Yeah, I don't remember the last time I had to deal with a spike mark. Most things we play in have been softspikes only for a loooooong time.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by iacas

Good for him. I've had little to add because he's done well in stating the obvious simplicity of the point on which he and I apparently agree.

It's up to you now to either state that "reason" or concede that you've not really got a reason why the rules should stay the way they are (outside of "because that's the way they've always been.").

The reason is quite simple. If a player would be allowed to tap down all possible irregularities on the green he would be altering the circumstances not only for himself but for all the others, too. Pressing the surface with a putter or the like would also be difficult to control, would a player really be smoothing irregularities or actually creating a path for his ball. Furthermore, as someone already mentioned, this allround smoothing would slow play tremendously and we would have one more problem to solve on the courses. It is difficult enough to keep competitors in schedule as it is today, I do not wish any more dawdlers hanging around to watch over.

If smoothing would be allowed I bet there would be lots of tapping down going on around the hole before every single putt, and knowing the clumsiness and carelessness of an average golfer the edges of the hole would be ruined in no time.

[iacas]

Playing a bit of devil's advocate now because I'm not even certain I see a need to change the rule, let alone absolutely want to change it.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

The reason is quite simple. If a player would be allowed to tap down all possible irregularities on the green he would be altering the circumstances not only for himself but for all the others, too.

A player dragging his feet alters the circumstances for everyone else who follows him, too. Fixing irregularities seems like a good act, dragging your feet and not being able to fix them seems like a bad act.

What's wrong with altering the playing characteristics (if it's done to produce a more normal situation)? There are already examples where this is accepted, including the very thing we're talking about: repairing (ball marks) on the putting green.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Pressing the surface with a putter or the like would also be difficult to control, would a player really be smoothing irregularities or actually creating a path for his ball.

So you state that you can't press down firmly or create a path. We allow people to brush the ground to remove loose impediments, but not to brush in order to test the conditions. The distinctions are made elsewhere in the rules.

Also, I'm starting to wonder if you actually play golf. How do you propose someone "create a path" exactly? Do you know how awkward that would look and thus how obvious that would be? It wouldn't look at all like tamping down a spike mark.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Furthermore, as someone already mentioned, this allround smoothing would slow play tremendously and we would have one more problem to solve on the courses.

Seriously, you think someone's going to go around smoothing every bit of their ten footer? It's not happening. Fixing spike marks takes a second - WAY WAY less time than fixing a ball mark - and there aren't that many out there. You're way off base with this "would slow play tremendously."

Originally Posted by Ignorant

If smoothing would be allowed I bet there would be lots of tapping down going on around the hole before every single putt, and knowing the clumsiness and carelessness of an average golfer the edges of the hole would be ruined in no time.

Uhm, okay. I don't agree with that one bit. They're not going to damage the hole more than a guy who scoops the ball out with the head of his putter. Those people exist and the holes are fine.

Plus there's typically no damage within a few feet of the hole. People know not to step there.

[Ignorant]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

What's wrong with altering the playing characteristics (if it's done to produce a more normal situation)? There are already examples where this is accepted, including the very thing we're talking about: repairing (ball marks) on the putting green.

As strange as it may sound sometimes people do not want their line of putt to be touched, one way or the other. In fact, there is a Decision stating that it is not allowed to repair a ball mark from another player's line of putt without his concent.

Quote:

So you state that you can't press down firmly or create a path. We allow people to brush the ground to remove loose impediments, but not to brush in order to test the conditions. The distinctions are made elsewhere in the rules.

Also, I'm starting to wonder if you actually play golf. How do you propose someone "create a path" exactly? Do you know how awkward that would look and thus how obvious that would be? It wouldn't look at all like tamping down a spike mark.

Erik, I've played golf longer than you have ;-)

People do quite strange things when they are allowed to and I'm rather convinced people would misuse the Rule if changed.

Quote:

Seriously, you think someone's going to go around smoothing every bit of their ten footer? It's not happening. Fixing spike marks takes a second - WAY WAY less time than fixing a ball mark - and there aren't that many out there. You're way off base with this "would slow play tremendously."

Yes, seriously. Lots of people would go tapping their entire line of putt just to make sure it is in 'best possible condition'. Remember, there is a huge quantity of senior players out there who cannot even see a spike mark so they would smooth the surface just in case.

Quote:

Uhm, okay. I don't agree with that one bit. They're not going to damage the hole more than a guy who scoops the ball out with the head of his putter. Those people exist and the holes are fine.

Plus there's typically no damage within a few feet of the hole. People know not to step there.

Not around here they don't. A one foot rule is only a dream here. Younsters, middle-aged, seniors, men, women, just name it, careless people are found in every category.

Scooping a ball out of the hole is strictly forbidden here but some *******s do that in any case. Fortunately those are so few that it is not a real problem. But tapping the immediate vicinity of the hole would ultimately result in ragged edges as those 'tappers' would exist in much larger quantity than 'soopers'.

I have presented as many views as I want to by now so I will stop it here. The future will show if this Rule will be changed or not, and if so, in which way. I will live with all the changes in the future as I've lived until now. It is always a pleasure to hear your arguments as they make me think my own ones in a different light. Thx.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

As strange as it may sound sometimes people do not want their line of putt to be touched, one way or the other. In fact, there is a Decision stating that it is not allowed to repair a ball mark from another player's line of putt without his concent.

Great. That's got little to do with this discussion. Keep the same provision for tamping down spike marks. Done.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Erik, I've played golf longer than you have ;-) People do quite strange things when they are allowed to and I'm rather convinced people would misuse the Rule if changed.

You can brush the ground to remove loose impediments but not brush the ground to test. I don't know about you, but I haven't seen droves of people brushing the ground and claiming they're removing loose impediments.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Yes, seriously. Lots of people would go tapping their entire line of putt just to make sure it is in 'best possible condition'. Remember, there is a huge quantity of senior players out there who cannot even see a spike mark so they would smooth the surface just in case.

I disagree.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Not around here they don't. A one foot rule is only a dream here. Younsters, middle-aged, seniors, men, women, just name it, careless people are found in every category.

Clearly, people where you play golf suck. They are constantly brushing the ground and they step on the hole every time they take their ball out of it. They're so clumsy they can't hit a spike mark with a putter two inches above it, and instead hit the hole that's a foot away. Tell them they can tamp down a spike mark and they'll carve a groove in the green between their ball and the hole. No wonder you're so grumpy.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

But tapping the immediate vicinity of the hole would ultimately result in ragged edges as those 'tappers' would exist in much larger quantity than 'soopers'.

I disagree, but I don't play golf with the idiots you seem to have.

Originally Posted by Ignorant

I have presented as many views as I want to by now so I will stop it here. The future will show if this Rule will be changed or not, and if so, in which way. I will live with all the changes in the future as I've lived until now. It is always a pleasure to hear your arguments as they make me think my own ones in a different light. Thx.

It won't be changed, and I'm not that worried about it, again because we almost never see spike marks anymore, and even on the PGA Tour level they're becoming less and less and less common as the older generation, you know, ages.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by iacas

The problem with that line of thinking is that if nobody else hits the green you can be virtually certain that the three ball marks near your line were not caused by people who hit after you. Same is true if you're the last person to hit onto the green - you obviously hit with all of the ball marks that existed (including your own - which you can't repair in the fairway but you can on the green).

Oh yes, my reasoning falls well short of reaching a QED type conclusion, it's more of an attempt to rationalize the rules as they stand. I think there's something to it as a rough line of reasoning, but I wouldn't present it in a courtroom. (And this is why I said it wasn't airtight above.)

Another reason one might limit the repairs to ballmarks is that, unlike spikemarks, most ballmarks are readily identifiable as such. If one does not want to grant a blanket license to resculpt the putting surface but does want to grant "relief" from clearly unintended obstacles, drawing the line at clearly identifiable ball marks is easy to define and relatively easy to interpret (though, as the premise of this thread suggests, still open for some abuse). On greens manicured to PGA Tour standards, it'd be easy to just allow any imperfection to be repaired---there aren't many. On the cow pastures many of us play, this would be rather less practical.

That's still not a conclusive argument, but I suspect that or the previous are probably how the rules came to be what they are today. That's really all I have to say on the matter, though. I'm not going to step in between you and Ignorant any more as it seems to be a dangerous place to be, but I will just say that I think this is an area where there's not really a clear answer. There are several defensible options for the rule so it really comes down to preference and one's belief about what golf "should be" more than which rule is "right."

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zeg

Another reason one might limit the repairs to ballmarks is that, unlike spikemarks, most ballmarks are readily identifiable as such. If one does not want to grant a blanket license to resculpt the putting surface but does want to grant "relief" from clearly unintended obstacles, drawing the line at clearly identifiable ball marks is easy to define and relatively easy to interpret (though, as the premise of this thread suggests, still open for some abuse). On greens manicured to PGA Tour standards, it'd be easy to just allow any imperfection to be repaired---there aren't many. On the cow pastures many of us play, this would be rather less practical.

Eh. I don't know about that one. That's what started this whole discussion. Pros regularly "tamp down" things that are definitely not ball marks, yet there's a culture of "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" on the PGA Tour about this kind of stuff. It's really rare that a PGA Tour player asks "is this a ball mark" and the guy playing with him says "no." You go on to say that.

It's all hypothetical because, again, spike marks are a diminishing problem approaching irrelevance, but I think you could write the rule to allow for basic maintenance without granting carte blanche to dig a trench between your ball and the hole.

Even on the "cow pastures" I think people would realize they can't do anything beyond a basic level to repair the green. You tamp down a bump or whatever, but you can't possibly do enough - even in 24 hours - to turn the line of their putt into a PGA Tour level putting surface let alone 24 seconds. What I mean by this (again hypothetically) is that I don't see that people are going to spend a lot of time getting rid of "irregularities" on cow pasture putting greens. It just wouldn't be effective or worth their time. They might tap tap a few things on a five-footer, but that doesn't take long.

And given the studies on people repairing ball marks over the years, I don't think we're going to see a bunch of people fixing the line of their putts either. Most people only ever seem to repair obvious ball marks right on the line of their putt. :(

Originally Posted by zeg

That's still not a conclusive argument, but I suspect that or the previous are probably how the rules came to be what they are today. That's really all I have to say on the matter, though. I'm not going to step in between you and Ignorant any more as it seems to be a dangerous place to be, but I will just say that I think this is an area where there's not really a clear answer. There are several defensible options for the rule so it really comes down to preference and one's belief about what golf "should be" more than which rule is "right."

You could be right about the "why."

I disagree on the "dangerous" part. I like mental exercises, but this one's getting long in the tooth. Spike marks are becoming a non-isuse.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by iacas

Pros regularly "tamp down" things that are definitely not ball marks, yet there's a culture of "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" on the PGA Tour about this kind of stuff. It's really rare that a PGA Tour player asks "is this a ball mark" and the guy playing with him says "no."

Yeah, IMO that is a problem that I would like to see addressed one way or the other. Of course, given the unpopularity of actual rule enforcement, I don't think we'll see penalties being handed down any time soon, so in that sense maybe changing the rule is a more practical approach to achieving rules compliance.

[golfing69]

yes i agree it seems they apply the rules to simon dyson and others differently and was i dreaming but did zach johnson cheat by tapping down line in open on 18th in playoff after the ref. ruled he could repair a ball mark which he did all above board he then went further down the line and tapped down presumably a spike mark which is illegal and a 2 stroke penalty?.

[saevel25]

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfing69

yes i agree it seems they apply the rules to simon dyson and others differently and was i dreaming but did zach johnson cheat by tapping down line in open on 18th in playoff after the ref. ruled he could repair a ball mark which he did all above board he then went further down the line and tapped down presumably a spike mark which is illegal and a 2 stroke penalty?.

You do not need a ref to rule on a ball mark unless it can not be certain it is one. Typically you can just ask your opponent for his opinion anyways.

Also you can not presume he was fixing a spike mark. That could have been a ball mark he repaired or someone else repaired and wasn't tapped down correctly. There is no indication that it was a spike mark he was fixing.

I would say no, he should not be assessed a 2 stroke penalty.

Quote:

c . Repair of Hole Plugs, Ball Marks and Other Damage

The player may repair an old hole plug or damage to the putting green caused by the impact of a ball, whether or not the player's ball lies on the putting green . If a ball or ball-marker is accidentally moved in the process of the repair, the ball or ball-marker must be replaced. There is no penalty, provided the movement of the ball or ball-marker is directly attributable to the specific act of repairing an old hole plug or damage to the putting green caused by the impact of a ball. Otherwise, Rule 18 applies

[Fourputt]

yes i agree it seems they apply the rules to simon dyson and others differently and was i dreaming but did zach johnson cheat by tapping down line in open on 18th in playoff after the ref. ruled he could repair a ball mark which he did all above board he then went further down the line and tapped down presumably a spike mark which is illegal and a 2 stroke penalty?.

I can guarantee you that Zach Johnson did not tap down a spike mark - why would you even make such a presumption?

Some 70+ players had played that hole that day before him, not to mention in the days preceding it, so that green was chock full of old pitch marks by then.  It's very common for players to tap previously repaired pitch marks just to ensure that there is nothing sticking up that might deflect the ball.