Rule Prohibiting Caddies/Partners from Lining up Players

[foreleft]

it shouldn't be allowed on any shot, in my opinion. alignment is a critical piece of the shot, and should be the sole responsibility of the player.

[Dan42nepa]

thats fair.. as long as its consistant.

 

[phillyk]

I wonder whether there is a significant difference between the two in terms of performance?  I mean, I'd like to think that at such a high level, the golfer could probably tell if they are aiming 10yds right or left before they hit.  So, they'd step back and re-adjust.  But with a caddy, they are skipping that stepping back part because it's almost a sure thing the first time.

[ev780]

I didn't read every post. But for those against, what is the difference between lining up and helping read a green? Or choosing a club? Or helping point out a line of play? Or spotting a flaw in your swing and coaching the player through that? Or a myriad of other things that a caddie is supposed to do for the player.

I am not trolling but I have trouble deciding where the assistance of a caddie ends. If we go far enough just replace them with push carts or golf cars {gasp}and the player keeps all his or her money.  Then the game is pure. Player only vs the course.  Would stop the bitching about Spieth using the term "we" as well.

 

[Fourputt]

2 minutes ago, ev780 said:

I didn't read every post. But for those against, what is the difference between lining up and helping read a green? Or choosing a club? Or helping point out a line of play? Or spotting a flaw in your swing and coaching the player through that? Or a myriad of other things that a caddie is supposed to do for the player.

I am not trolling but I have trouble deciding where the assistance of a caddie ends. If we go far enough just replace them with push carts or golf cars {gasp}and the player keeps all his or her money.  Then the game is pure. Player only vs the course.  Would stop the bitching about Spieth using the term "we" as well.

 

Because proper alignment is part and parcel to gripping the club and making a stroke.  It's part of the skill set required to play golf.  If they can banish the anchored stroke because it simplifies one of the skills necessary for playing the game, then this is right there with it.  

If a golfer can do everything else required to play golf at a high level, then he/she damn sure ought to be able to point him/herself in the right direction.

If I could give 10 yes votes on the poll, they'd be there.

[Golfingdad]

9 minutes ago, ev780 said:

I didn't read every post. But for those against, what is the difference between lining up and helping read a green? Or choosing a club? Or helping point out a line of play? Or spotting a flaw in your swing and coaching the player through that? Or a myriad of other things that a caddie is supposed to do for the player.

I am not trolling but I have trouble deciding where the assistance of a caddie ends. If we go far enough just replace them with push carts or golf cars {gasp}and the player keeps all his or her money.  Then the game is pure. Player only vs the course.  Would stop the bitching about Spieth using the term "we" as well.

 

 

4 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

Because proper alignment is part and parcel to gripping the club and making a stroke.  It's part of the skill set required to play golf.  If they can banish the anchored stroke because it simplifies one of the skills necessary for playing the game, then this is right there with it.  

If a golfer can do everything else required to play golf at a high level, then he/she damn sure ought to be able to point him/herself in the right direction.

If I could give 10 yes votes on the poll, they'd be there.

That doesn't really answer his question in context, though.

Is reading a green NOT part of the skill set required to play golf?  How about choosing a club?  Seems to me like both of those are as equally important as alignment.

It's a valid question, and I feel like the only real answer is "because we don't like it."  Part of that might be because it looks bad or because you think it takes extra time, but, again, those can also be applied to the other examples that @ev780 mentioned.

[Fourputt]

1 minute ago, Golfingdad said:

 

That doesn't really answer his question in context, though.

Is reading a green NOT part of the skill set required to play golf?  How about choosing a club?  Seems to me like both of those are as equally important as alignment.

It's a valid question, and I feel like the only real answer is "because we don't like it."  Part of that might be because it looks bad or because you think it takes extra time, but, again, those can also be applied to the other examples that @ev780 mentioned.

Reading a green is as much art as science.  It's not part of the act of playing the ball.  Alignment is part of the physical act of setting up and hitting the ball, and it can be finitely defined.  

Let's face it, it's really a fairly simple skill.  Players have been doing it without assistance (and most of them without any difficulty) for 400 years.  

[phillyk]

14 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

Reading a green is as much art as science.  It's not part of the act of playing the ball.  Alignment is part of the physical act of setting up and hitting the ball, and it can be finitely defined.  

Let's face it, it's really a fairly simple skill.  Players have been doing it without assistance (and most of them without any difficulty) for 400 years.  

I doubt these players got to where they are by relying on a caddies advice for reading greens or setting up to the ball.  If there were to be a rules change, they would adjust easily.  Just like you said, it's an easy skill.  They just do it because they can.

[Joe from MD]

Take responsibility for your game.

[Golfingdad]

20 minutes ago, phillyk said:

I doubt these players got to where they are by relying on a caddies advice for reading greens or setting up to the ball.  If there were to be a rules change, they would adjust easily.  Just like you said, it's an easy skill.  They just do it because they can.

Agreed.  I don't have anything against the idea of changing this rule, I just don't buy most of the arguments being presented here.  Just say "I think it's ugly, it's unnecessary, players don't need that crutch anyway, and I don't like it."

I think you are right in saying that they use it because they can, and that none of them would be hurt by eliminating it.  (unless they were hurt mentally, but that would be their own fault.)

47 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

Reading a green is as much art as science.  It's not part of the act of playing the ball.  Alignment is part of the physical act of setting up and hitting the ball, and it can be finitely defined.  

Disagree vehemently in regards to the green reading comment - but that's an article for another (aimpoint related) thread. ;)  Regarding the other comment, I agree with what you said (mainly because it's just factual, not opinion) and you should just confine your argument to the last part.  When @ev780 asked what the difference was between green reading, choosing a club, and alignment, you could have said "alignment is part of the act of setting up to the ball and is finitely defined."  The others are equally a part of the skill set required to play golf, they're just not finitely defined. :)

47 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

Let's face it, it's really a fairly simple skill.  Players have been doing it without assistance (and most of them without any difficulty) for 400 years.  

I agree.

[craps]

On 12/17/2015 at 10:58 AM, boogielicious said:

I voted yes. Aiming your body for your shots is part of the game and players should do that themselves.

Why not limit a caddy to just attend to the clubs!! Players needs to do everything by themselves. I voted 'no' because everybody are at level with one another no matter what rules are imposed. That's the most important thing. Why not ban everybody from making or reading notes that were recorded during practice round. That's a big advantage too.

[iacas]

@Golfingdad, much as the definition of a stroke was changed 19 days ago or so to eliminate anchoring, I think this rule should be changed to make "lining up" as one of the things that is solely the responsibility of the player.

There are several of those types of things already. The player is ultimately the only one who can "play" the ball, and the caddie is prohibited from doing several things like standing on the line during the stroke, holding an umbrella over the player while making a stroke, holding a stick near the golfer's hands to help his takeaway during the backswing… etc. I would argue that lining up is a basic player responsibility, like making the stroke, protecting himself from the elements in doing so, etc.

[ev780]

19 hours ago, Fourputt said:

Because proper alignment is part and parcel to gripping the club and making a stroke.  It's part of the skill set required to play golf.  If they can banish the anchored stroke because it simplifies one of the skills necessary for playing the game, then this is right there with it.  

If a golfer can do everything else required to play golf at a high level, then he/she damn sure ought to be able to point him/herself in the right direction.

If I could give 10 yes votes on the poll, they'd be there.

Not a fair comparison.  The anchor ban was related to the actual shot not the PSR.  So a caddie spots a grip that has gotten a little strong, or a right elbow that flies a little bit or a ball position that has drifted. Can he/she not correct the player? Grip, elbow, and ball position are integral to to the game and a skill we should all have.  As is green reading, distance calculation, wind judgement, etc etc.  

I have only seen one answer that makes sense to me. As  @Golfingdad stated, "we don't like it!" 

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, ev780 said:

Not a fair comparison.  The anchor ban was related to the actual shot not the PSR.  So a caddie spots a grip that has gotten a little strong, or a right elbow that flies a little bit or a ball position that has drifted. Can he/she not correct the player? Grip, elbow, and ball position are integral to to the game and a skill we should all have.  As is green reading, distance calculation, wind judgement, etc etc.  

I have only seen one answer that makes sense to me. As  @Golfingdad stated, "we don't like it!" 

I think it's fair.

I think aligning should be the sole responsibility of the player.

Again, the caddie is not allowed to stand on the line while the player's making a stroke (even though, what, is he going to yell out advice mid-swing?), so I simply favor extending the timeline that disallows the caddie to stand there back 15 seconds or so to when the player takes his stance.

Just as the definition of a "stroke" was recently changed, we can re-define slightly (only slightly, it's not like this is a massive change where we're saying caddies can't do the majority of their job functions) what is and isn't the player's sole responsibility.

[turtleback]

Once again, I think the governing principle for caddie duties should be that the caddie may not do anything for the player that the player could not do for himself.

Reading the greens? Fine, because the player can do it himself as well.

But a player physically cannot stand behind himself and line himself up, so the caddie should not be allowed to do that either.  

I think that is a clear logical principle that takes this out of the "we do not like it" category and, at its heart, is probably WHY we do not like it.  Having a caddie along should not ADD a capability to your game that you could not have added yourself.  It can enhance abilities you already have, or relieve you of labor.  But adding a capability that you could never have had if you didn't have the caddie?  That should be out of bounds.

Are there any other activities of caddies that, if push came to shove the player could not do for himself?

[Fourputt]

7 minutes ago, turtleback said:

Once again, I think the governing principle for caddie duties should be that the caddie may not do anything for the player that the player could not do for himself.

Reading the greens? Fine, because the player can do it himself as well.

But a player physically cannot stand behind himself and line himself up, so the caddie should not be allowed to do that either.  

I think that is a clear logical principle that takes this out of the "we do not like it" category and, at its heart, is probably WHY we do not like it.  Having a caddie along should not ADD a capability to your game that you could not have added yourself.  It can enhance abilities you already have, or relieve you of labor.  But adding a capability that you could never have had if you didn't have the caddie?  That should be out of bounds.

Are there any other activities of caddies that, if push came to shove the player could not do for himself?

As I see it, this is more or less in line with the prohibition barring the caddie from giving the player protection from the elements during his stroke.  The player would have trouble trying to swing the club while holding an umbrella.

[Golfingdad]

35 minutes ago, turtleback said:

Once again, I think the governing principle for caddie duties should be that the caddie may not do anything for the player that the player could not do for himself.

Reading the greens? Fine, because the player can do it himself as well.

But a player physically cannot stand behind himself and line himself up, so the caddie should not be allowed to do that either.  

I think that is a clear logical principle that takes this out of the "we do not like it" category and, at its heart, is probably WHY we do not like it.  Having a caddie along should not ADD a capability to your game that you could not have added yourself.  It can enhance abilities you already have, or relieve you of labor.  But adding a capability that you could never have had if you didn't have the caddie?  That should be out of bounds.

Are there any other activities of caddies that, if push came to shove the player could not do for himself?

Aha, good point.  This is a good rebuttal to @ev780's question.  

[ev780]

 

23 hours ago, turtleback said:

Once again, I think the governing principle for caddie duties should be that the caddie may not do anything for the player that the player could not do for himself.

Reading the greens? Fine, because the player can do it himself as well.

But a player physically cannot stand behind himself and line himself up, so the caddie should not be allowed to do that either.  

I think that is a clear logical principle that takes this out of the "we do not like it" category and, at its heart, is probably WHY we do not like it.  Having a caddie along should not ADD a capability to your game that you could not have added yourself.  It can enhance abilities you already have, or relieve you of labor.  But adding a capability that you could never have had if you didn't have the caddie?  That should be out of bounds.

Are there any other activities of caddies that, if push came to shove the player could not do for himself?

 

23 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

Aha, good point.  This is a good rebuttal to @ev780's question.  

 

OK.  Now we have logic. I disagree that it is a big deal but at least I could accept it as a logical decision.