• Announcements

    • iacas

      Introducing TST "Clubs!"   08/28/2017

      No, we're not getting into the equipment business, but we do have "clubs" here on TST now. Groups. Check them out here:
Sign in to follow this  
bkuehn1952

Competitor fixes spike mark on your line of putt

Recommended Posts

You have a delicate downhill 6-footer for par but you note two pretty large spike marks in your line.  A fellow competitor putts first and his ball ends up on your line but only three feet from the hole.  He stares at his ball and you sense he is about to smash down those two spike marks.  The thought crosses your mind that flattening those spike marks will make your putt a lot easier.  As you are pondering whether to warn him about not fixing spike marks he smashes the spike marks and rolls in his putt.

Do you accept a 2-stroke penalty and advise him to add 2 to his score?  Or do you consider your delay in warning the other player to not have risen to the level of tacit approval of his actions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

You have a delicate downhill 6-footer for par but you note two pretty large spike marks in your line.  A fellow competitor putts first and his ball ends up on your line but only three feet from the hole.  He stares at his ball and you sense he is about to smash down those two spike marks.  The thought crosses your mind that flattening those spike marks will make your putt a lot easier.  As you are pondering whether to warn him about not fixing spike marks he smashes the spike marks and rolls in his putt.

Do you accept a 2-stroke penalty and advise him to add 2 to his score?  Or do you consider your delay in warning the other player to not have risen to the level of tacit approval of his actions?

2 stoke penalty for him, nothing for you, IMO.  You are not responsible for his actions, unless he is your partner or unless you actively collude with him to circumvent the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 stoke penalty for him, nothing for you, IMO.  You are not responsible for his actions, unless he is your partner or unless you actively collude with him to circumvent the rules.

Not quite, decision 13-2/36 applies.....

13-2/36

Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor

Q.If a fellow-competitor purposely improves the competitor's line of putt by repairing spike damage, the fellow-competitor is penalized under Rule 1-2 . If the fellow-competitor's action is sanctioned, tacitly or otherwise, by the competitor, is the competitor also subject to penalty?

A.Yes, under Rule 13-2 , for allowing his line of play to be improved.

Now the question becomes, as the OP asked, did you give tacit approval by not taking any action to prevent it.  That's a tough one.....but since the OP stated in his question that he "sensed" that the fellow competitor was about to tap down the spike marks and also recognized that doing so would be to his benefit, both before the FC actually tapped down the offending marks, I've got to say penalties to both.

@Fourputt , @Dormie1360 , @Rulesman .....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

You are not responsible for his actions, unless he is your partner or unless you actively collude with him to circumvent the rules.

Your opinion agrees with mine in as much as the player did not know his fellow competitor was going to tamp down the spike marks; he merely suspected his fellow competitor might do so. The USGA has decided that a player does not have to directly approve of the other player improving one's line; if a player tacitly permits the improvement, the same penalty is assessed to both players.  In this instance the player did nothing to give his fellow competitor the idea to fix the spike marks and the player did not remain silent in hopes his fellow competitor would fix them.

BTW, this actually happened to me in a tournament this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Your opinion agrees with mine in as much as the player did not know his fellow competitor was going to tamp down the spike marks; he merely suspected his fellow competitor might do so. The USGA has decided that a player does not have to directly approve of the other player improving one's line; if a player tacitly permits the improvement, the same penalty is assessed to both players.  In this instance the player did nothing to give his fellow competitor the idea to fix the spike marks and the player did not remain silent in hopes his fellow competitor would fix them.

BTW, this actually happened to me in a tournament this year.

I believe it all comes down to your own feeling whether you had enough reason to think he is going to improve your line of putt and enough time to give him a warning. Should you feel you lacked one or the other you are off the hook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite, decision 13-2/36 applies.....

13-2/36

Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor

Q.If a fellow-competitor purposely improves the competitor's line of putt by repairing spike damage, the fellow-competitor is penalized under Rule 1-2. If the fellow-competitor's action is sanctioned, tacitly or otherwise, by the competitor, is the competitor also subject to penalty?

A.Yes, under Rule 13-2, for allowing his line of play to be improved.

Now the question becomes, as the OP asked, did you give tacit approval by not taking any action to prevent it.  That's a tough one.....but since the OP stated in his question that he "sensed" that the fellow competitor was about to tap down the spike marks and also recognized that doing so would be to his benefit, both before the FC actually tapped down the offending marks, I've got to say penalties to both.

@Fourputt, @Dormie1360, @Rulesman.....?

Does it matter that his actions were intended to improve his own line and it seems coincidental that the other line was also fixed? It is not as if he was trying to improve your line, he was improving his.

If the guy had said something like, "I'm going to fix these #*$% spike marks." and you said nothing, then you gave approval by doing nothing. Or, if he fixed the first and you didn't say anything as he moved to fix the second, you could be considered to have gives "tacit" approval. But if your wondering if you are tacitly approving as he looked at the marks, I would side with not expecting you to have physic powers to know what he was going to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it matter that his actions were intended to improve his own line and it seems coincidental that the other line was also fixed? It is not as if he was trying to improve your line, he was improving his.

If the guy had said something like, "I'm going to fix these #*$% spike marks." and you said nothing, then you gave approval by doing nothing. Or, if he fixed the first and you didn't say anything as he moved to fix the second, you could be considered to have gives "tacit" approval. But if your wondering if you are tacitly approving as he looked at the marks, I would side with not expecting you to have physic powers to know what he was going to do.

I got the impression the the spike marks were between the two balls. ie not on the other player's line but on the poster's line only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the impression the the spike marks were between the two balls. ie not on the other player's line but on the poster's line only.

That would be pretty generous of him. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:

Originally Posted by David in FL

Not quite, decision 13-2/36 applies.....

13-2/36

Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor

Q.If a fellow-competitor purposely improves the competitor's line of putt by repairing spike damage, the fellow-competitor is penalized under Rule 1-2. If the fellow-competitor's action is sanctioned, tacitly or otherwise, by the competitor, is the competitor also subject to penalty?

A.Yes, under Rule 13-2, for allowing his line of play to be improved.

Now the question becomes, as the OP asked, did you give tacit approval by not taking any action to prevent it.  That's a tough one.....but since the OP stated in his question that he "sensed" that the fellow competitor was about to tap down the spike marks and also recognized that doing so would be to his benefit, both before the FC actually tapped down the offending marks, I've got to say penalties to both.

@Fourputt, @Dormie1360, @Rulesman.....?

Does it matter that his actions were intended to improve his own line and it seems coincidental that the other line was also fixed? It is not as if he was trying to improve your line, he was improving his.

If the guy had said something like, "I'm going to fix these #*$% spike marks." and you said nothing, then you gave approval by doing nothing. Or, if he fixed the first and you didn't say anything as he moved to fix the second, you could be considered to have gives "tacit" approval. But if your wondering if you are tacitly approving as he looked at the marks, I would side with not expecting you to have physic powers to know what he was going to do.

If you were able to tell what he was planning to do, had time to prevent it and took no action, then you are at fault.  If you were not watching, or if it happened like with Dyson and he did it so abruptly that you didn't have time to react, then you are in the clear.  Your vulnerability for his acts depends on whether or not you were aware of his intentions and and whether or not you had time to react to that awareness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Not quite, decision 13-2/36 applies.....

13-2/36

Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor

Q.If a fellow-competitor purposely improves the competitor's line of putt by repairing spike damage, the fellow-competitor is penalized under Rule 1-2. If the fellow-competitor's action is sanctioned, tacitly or otherwise, by the competitor, is the competitor also subject to penalty?

A.Yes, under Rule 13-2, for allowing his line of play to be improved.

Now the question becomes, as the OP asked, did you give tacit approval by not taking any action to prevent it.  That's a tough one.....but since the OP stated in his question that he "sensed" that the fellow competitor was about to tap down the spike marks and also recognized that doing so would be to his benefit, both before the FC actually tapped down the offending marks, I've got to say penalties to both.

@Fourputt, @Dormie1360, @Rulesman.....?

Yeah the word actively was probably poorly chosen on my part.  But even tacitly has the connotation of some kind of indication of approval of the action, I think.  And if it is silence I think it has to be silence in th face of more than just a wondering thought about whether the guy is going to do something.  Which was nowhere present in the OP's story.  He was wondering if the guy was going to do it and then bam, the guy did it  Where did he approve of the action?  It isn't as if the guy said I'm going to fix that spikemark and the OP stayed silent.  Or what if the guy said that and the OP said "No, you can't do that it is a penalty" and the guy did it anyway?  Clearly no penalty for the OP, yet he still benefits.Maybe if the guy had been regularly tamping down spikemarks all round long and then the situation arose where it was on the same line as the OP there might be a case, since the OP would then have a real suspicion, not just a wondering thought.  But otherwise, I just do not see it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

If you were able to tell what he was planning to do, had time to prevent it and took no action, then you are at fault.  If you were not watching, or if it happened like with Dyson and he did it so abruptly that you didn't have time to react, then you are in the clear.  Your vulnerability for his acts depends on whether or not you were aware of his intentions and and whether or not you had time to react to that awareness.

Well put.  Along with this if there was any prearranged agreement to "help each other out with spike marks", that would be a violation or R1-3 Agreement to Waive Rules.  The penalty in that case would be disqualification to both players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Good discussion.  The spike marks were in both of our lines.  Up to that point, I had not seen him fix any spike marks but there was just something in the way he stared at the large and obvious marks that made me wonder if he was thinking about smashing them flat.  He acted too quickly for me to remind him of the prohibition about fixing anything but ball marks.

At least that is my story and I am sticking to it! O:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Good discussion.  The spike marks were in both of our lines.  Up to that point, I had not seen him fix any spike marks but there was just something in the way he stared at the large and obvious marks that made me wonder if he was thinking about smashing them flat.  He acted too quickly for me to remind him of the prohibition about fixing anything but ball marks.

At least that is my story and I am sticking to it!

I wouldn't have inferred anything from him staring at the spike marks.  How is that different than staring at them thinking how to (legally) minimize their impact on his putt?  I would have been staring at them thinking, "Which side should I go around them on?  Or should I maybe take my chances and go right over them?  Or, (crazy thought) if they are that bad should I go back to the 'back in the day' strategy for stymies and try to chip over them?"  And frankly, I would be a little offended if a fellow competitor chose that moment to warn me against fixing them, as it is pretty close to accusing me of being a potential cheater.

I don't think the Rules require to to be psychic.

The real question, in my mind, is did you call the 2-stroke penalty on the guy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The real question, in my mind, is did you call the 2-stroke penalty on the guy?

I pointed out the prohibition of fixing imperfections other than ball marks and he assessed the proper penalty on himself.  I do not like to think of "calling a penalty" on another player.  Usually, when presented with the facts, a player calls a penalty on himself.  When there is a dispute about the facts, I prefer to let the committee decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I wouldn't have inferred anything from him staring at the spike marks.  How is that different than staring at them thinking how to (legally) minimize their impact on his putt?  I would have been staring at them thinking, "Which side should I go around them on?  Or should I maybe take my chances and go right over them?  Or, (crazy thought) if they are that bad should I go back to the 'back in the day' strategy for stymies and try to chip over them?"  And frankly, I would be a little offended if a fellow competitor chose that moment to warn me against fixing them, as it is pretty close to accusing me of being a potential cheater.

I don't think the Rules require to to be psychic.

The real question, in my mind, is did you call the 2-stroke penalty on the guy?

As long as he doesn't call you Tiger.

"hey you're not thinking of fixing those are ya Tiger?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I'd just take the 2 strokes and invite him to do the same.

Unlucky I loose this sunday cheerio cookie contest by two strokes and see his mate called to the podium to walk away with 3 provewans. So then I talk to the organisation and have them both disqualified and banned for 12 months. :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    Talamore Golf Resort
    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Mission Belt
    Snell Golf
    Frogger Golf
    PitchFix USA
  • Posts

    • I ordered a PING G400 LST Driver with a Tour 65 x stiff shaft back in August. I was told that it wouldn't even ship until October. I had hit the regular G400 head with the x-stiff Project X HZRDUS Yellow shaft at a demo day and liked it even though I had to adjust the loft as low as it could go (8°) and I still launched it too high with too much spin. I was told the SLT head along with the Tour 65 shaft would correct the issues so I took a leap of faith and ordered it. While I waited for my driver to arrive I have been playing the demo because I hit it really straight even though I lost some distance due to launch and spin. Fast forward to yesterday, my new G400 SLT driver arrives. I take it out to the range and the course to play a few holes. What a difference! Club designers must be geniuses. Now with the loft set at 8.5° I launch the ball on a great angle and it goes and goes without falling out of the air. I haven't hit it on the monitor yet but I can tell the spin rates are much better. I hit the new driver and the demo to side by side and the SLT goes a good 15-20 yards farther. I just find it amazing what they are able to do with these driver heads by just moving a little weight around here and there. It's also a huge reason to get fitting if you want to play your best.
    • That new chart is wacked.  I have the original on my PC at home. Arturo has it the way I understood it... " the dot refers only to the head in relation to the factory standard lie angle which is black" I was measured on my wrist to floor and that gave them the starting point of Black +1". I then hit some balls off the lie board with tape and that showed I needed to be a lil upright so they gave me Blue dot, standard length shafts but it still off a bit.  Grabbed Blue dot, +1" and I was hitting the ball and board good so that was what I went with.  Any of my other clubs I have gone with 1* upright and +1" on shaft length.   ***** Just found this so I thought I would add it to the post ***** " a well-known standard in golf is that each 1/2" added to the shaft length = a 1* more UPRIGHT lie angle" Don't know if it is 100% but wanted to share as it might help OP with his dilemma.
    • Guess I'm not going to win this argument, so can't see the rules changing anytime soon. Hopefully the new 3 minute searching rule and maximum score on a hole will speed things up, as I guess that's one of the main reasons for changing them? Agree that ideally, we should have the same rules as the pros, but they do have advantages when it comes to looking for balls, in the form of a travelling army of spectators and marshals. Anybody who has followed a wild hitting group round in the British Open will know what I mean.
    • There are, particularly with Ping, a rather large set of variables.  And a large number of part options.  PowerSpec irons, as I understand, are "hosel bent" to reduce the loft.  Probably a bad description of what is done on my part but it, apparently, utilizes the cavity indentation near the heal/hosel.    Imagine doubling the number of parts in a Ping demo area.  Actually.... that's probably what they should do if they are going to offer it.  Regardless, it's back to the fitter time I am afraid.   
    • My understanding is that the dot refers only to the head in relation to the factory standard lie angle which is black. For example, a green dot would be the head bent to be 2 degrees upright. However, if the club is longer or shorter than standard length it is up to you and your fitter to decide which color code you need now to attain the effective lie angle that you want.
  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. KingHack82
      KingHack82
      (35 years old)
    2. TobyC
      TobyC
      (50 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon