Do these ball markers violate rule 10-2b?

[CoolPercussion]

You or your caddy must not set an object down anywhere on or off the putting green to show your line of play. This is not allowed even if that object is removed before your stroke is made.

 

 

https://images.app.goo.gl/B849rmoXcjk2eDnN7

 

 

https://images.app.goo.gl/Tg1gNa8JRr1DWiNq7

 

Sorry about posting links instead of just inserting pictures. I can't figure out how to do it. it doesn't seem to be working right

[noodle3872]

If the Cameron tool is conforming, I don’t see why the ones you linked wouldn’t be conforming too.

 

[Halebopp]

Here's Sawgrass passing on the most definite answer I'm aware of, unfortunately. To me it seems like those would fall under "typical ball markers":

 

https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/18253188#Comment_18253188

[Newby]

I wonder why there is no specification in the Equipment Rules

[LeoLeo99]

> @Newby said:

> I wonder why there is no specification in the Equipment Rules

 

Ball markers are equipment?

[Halebopp]

> @LeoLeo99 said:

> > @Newby said:

> > I wonder why there is no specification in the Equipment Rules

>

> Ball markers are equipment?

 

"An artificial object when used to mark the spot of a ball to be lifted, such as a tee, a coin, an object made to be a ball-marker or another small piece of equipment."

[Newby]

> @LeoLeo99 said:

> > @Newby said:

> > I wonder why there is no specification in the Equipment Rules

>

> Ball markers are equipment?

Definition - Equipment: _Anything used, worn, held or carried by the player or the player’s caddie._

[Sawgrass]

> @Halebopp said:

> Here's Sawgrass passing on the most definite answer I'm aware of, unfortunately. To me it seems like those would fall under "typical ball markers":

>

> https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/18253188#Comment_18253188

 

I agree with you about these (presumably legal) markers.

 

It was amusing for me to re-read my previous post. And now I'll share that after he answered my question in the way he did, I asked if he might refer me to the section of the rules that justifies his response, and he said something along the lines of "You'll have to trust me on this, it's complicated." I replied that I most certainly did "trust" him. But I silently worried as to whether people would trust me in recounting his comments!

 

I'd like to see some mention somewhere in the rules about it.

 

 

[antip]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Halebopp said:

> > Here's Sawgrass passing on the most definite answer I'm aware of, unfortunately. To me it seems like those would fall under "typical ball markers":

> >

> > https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/18253188#Comment_18253188

>

> I agree with you about these (presumably legal) markers.

>

> It was amusing for me to re-read my previous post. And now I'll share that after he answered my question in the way he did, I asked if he might refer me to the section of the rules that justifies his response, and he said something along the lines of "You'll have to trust me on this, it's complicated." I replied that I most certainly did "trust" him. But I silently worried as to whether people would trust me in recounting his comments!

>

> I'd like to see some mention somewhere in the rules about it.

>

>

Me too!

The regulator's lament - whenever they attempt to draw a sharp black and white line to guide people, some clever creature comes up with a shade of grey in the middle that confuses things. So here we have an example where the regulator won't even publish pictures of what is legal and what is not, even in an enormously lengthy equipment guide.

[tatertot]

Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

[CoolPercussion]

> @noodle3872 said:

> If the Cameron tool is conforming, I don’t see why the ones you linked wouldn’t be conforming too.

>

 

I agree but I don't understand _why_it is conforming as it goes against the letter (if not the intent) of the rules.

 

Sawgrass thanks for your input. I'm glad this question was put to an authority. I wonder if "it's complicated" has something to do with ball/equipment manufacturers' influence. I would never call someone on this in a tournament but when there are things like this that don't seem to make sense it makes my brain uncomfortable and I try to resolve it.

[sui generis]

> @tatertot said:

> Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

 

Here's their phone number - 908.326.1850 . . . let us know their answer to your question.

[Mr. Bean]

> @tatertot said:

> Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

 

Who exactly are these 'USGA officials' ? I am curious to know because those are referred to on this forum in almost every thread even though Rules are written by Ruling Bodies, not 'USGA officials', whoever they might be.

[Sawgrass]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @tatertot said:

> > Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

>

> Who exactly are these 'USGA officials' ? I am curious to know because those are referred to on this forum in almost every thread even though Rules are written by Ruling Bodies, not 'USGA officials', whoever they might be.

 

I find many scorecards here in the USA stating, “USGA rules govern all play.” I bet that less than 25% of Americans know that the rules are jointly issued by the USGA and R & A.

 

Plus, mud slingers probably prefer to criticize just one entity. The whole conspiracy theory required to slam both organizations is too challenging.

[tatertot]

> @"sui generis" said:

> > @tatertot said:

> > Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

>

> Here's their phone number - 908.326.1850 . . . let us know their answer to your question.

 

You're a bitter, ugly little man. Can they answer me why that is?

[tatertot]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @tatertot said:

> > Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

>

> Who exactly are these 'USGA officials' ? I am curious to know because those are referred to on this forum in almost every thread even though Rules are written by Ruling Bodies, not 'USGA officials', whoever they might be.

 

Who do you think make up "ruling bodies"? People? Probably officials? Probably officials that work for a group, like say the USGA and the R&A? So, the the "ruling bodies" are made up of "USGA officials" ... get it?

 

Do you guys go out of your ways to try to seem like dorks, or does it just come naturally to you?

[Mr. Bean]

> @tatertot said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @tatertot said:

> > > Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

> >

> > Who exactly are these 'USGA officials' ? I am curious to know because those are referred to on this forum in almost every thread even though Rules are written by Ruling Bodies, not 'USGA officials', whoever they might be.

>

> Who do you think make up "ruling bodies"? People? Probably officials? Probably officials that work for a group, like say the USGA and the R&A? So, the the "ruling bodies" are made up of "USGA officials" ... get it?

>

> Do you guys go out of your ways to try to seem like dorks, or does it just come naturally to you?

 

You made a big mistake and now you try to save yourself by adding things you ignored in your post. Grow up and admit your mistake instead of blaming me for it.

 

P.S. What or who exactly are 'officials' ?

[tatertot]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @tatertot said:

> > > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > > @tatertot said:

> > > > Sometimes I wonder if USGA officials keep rules vague to ensure job security.

> > >

> > > Who exactly are these 'USGA officials' ? I am curious to know because those are referred to on this forum in almost every thread even though Rules are written by Ruling Bodies, not 'USGA officials', whoever they might be.

> >

> > Who do you think make up "ruling bodies"? People? Probably officials? Probably officials that work for a group, like say the USGA and the R&A? So, the the "ruling bodies" are made up of "USGA officials" ... get it?

> >

> > Do you guys go out of your ways to try to seem like dorks, or does it just come naturally to you?

>

> You made a big mistake and now you try to save yourself by adding things you ignored in your post. Grow up and admit your mistake instead of blaming me for it.

>

> P.S. What or who exactly are 'officials' ?

 

I made a "big mistake"? Dude, this a golf board, not life. Trust me, I can't make a "big mistake" here.

 

According to Webster's, an official is:

 

: one who administers the rules of a game or sport especially as a referee or umpire

 

And a moron is:

 

: a very stupid person

[Mr. Bean]

Tatertot, Webster is not a good source when we are talking about Rules of Golf.

[varno]

Well that escalated quickly!

[LeoLeo99]

The rules for ball > @varno said:

> Well that escalated quickly!

 

As usual.

[2bGood]

> @varno said:

> Well that escalated quickly!

 

Yes what the hell happened? How did a ball marker question go south in 5 posts???

 

 

[antip]

> @2bGood said:

> > @varno said:

> > Well that escalated quickly!

>

> Yes what the **** happened? How did a ball marker question go south in 5 posts???

>

>

 

Most come here to discuss the rules constructively (as per the early responses), some just come here to find someone/something (eg USGA) to dump their vitriol on. Some (fortunately a very small proportion) are ambidextrous.

[Sawgrass]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Halebopp said:

> > Here's Sawgrass passing on the most definite answer I'm aware of, unfortunately. To me it seems like those would fall under "typical ball markers":

> >

> > https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/18253188#Comment_18253188

>

> I agree with you about these (presumably legal) markers.

>

> It was amusing for me to re-read my previous post. And now I'll share that after he answered my question in the way he did, I asked if he might refer me to the section of the rules that justifies his response, and he said something along the lines of "You'll have to trust me on this, it's complicated." I replied that I most certainly did "trust" him. But I silently worried as to whether people would trust me in recounting his comments!

>

> I'd like to see some mention somewhere in the rules about it.

>

> For the record, I have now been communicated with by an equipment person at the USGA who has told me that ball markers 2 inches or less in diameter and 1 inch or less in height (?) are legal even if they are being used to indicate a line. (Of course 14.1a requires you to lift the marker prior to your stroke.) I’m also told that a Clarification covering this will be on its way.

 

 

[antip]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @Halebopp said:

> > > Here's Sawgrass passing on the most definite answer I'm aware of, unfortunately. To me it seems like those would fall under "typical ball markers":

> > >

> > > https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/18253188#Comment_18253188

> >

> > I agree with you about these (presumably legal) markers.

> >

> > It was amusing for me to re-read my previous post. And now I'll share that after he answered my question in the way he did, I asked if he might refer me to the section of the rules that justifies his response, and he said something along the lines of "You'll have to trust me on this, it's complicated." I replied that I most certainly did "trust" him. But I silently worried as to whether people would trust me in recounting his comments!

> >

> > I'd like to see some mention somewhere in the rules about it.

> >

> > For the record, I have now been communicated with by an equipment person at the USGA who has told me that ball markers 2 inches or less in diameter and 1 inch or less in height (?) are legal even if they are being used to indicate a line. (Of course 14.1a requires you to lift the marker prior to your stroke.) I’m also told that a Clarification covering this will be on its way.

>

>

 

Saw

Presumably ones larger than the 2 by 1 inch (whatever 'diameter' and 'height' mean in this context) remain legal providing they are not used to indicate a line? Still, I think it is a positive move to define more clearly what is in and what is out, so bring it on folks.

[Sawgrass]

> @antip said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @Halebopp said:

> > > > Here's Sawgrass passing on the most definite answer I'm aware of, unfortunately. To me it seems like those would fall under "typical ball markers":

> > > >

> > > > https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/18253188#Comment_18253188

> > >

> > > I agree with you about these (presumably legal) markers.

> > >

> > > It was amusing for me to re-read my previous post. And now I'll share that after he answered my question in the way he did, I asked if he might refer me to the section of the rules that justifies his response, and he said something along the lines of "You'll have to trust me on this, it's complicated." I replied that I most certainly did "trust" him. But I silently worried as to whether people would trust me in recounting his comments!

> > >

> > > I'd like to see some mention somewhere in the rules about it.

> > >

> > > For the record, I have now been communicated with by an equipment person at the USGA who has told me that ball markers 2 inches or less in diameter and 1 inch or less in height (?) are legal even if they are being used to indicate a line. (Of course 14.1a requires you to lift the marker prior to your stroke.) I’m also told that a Clarification covering this will be on its way.

> >

> >

>

> Saw

> Presumably ones larger than the 2 by 1 inch (whatever 'diameter' and 'height' mean in this context) remain legal providing they are not used to indicate a line? Still, I think it is a positive move to define more clearly what is in and what is out, so bring it on folks.

 

Yes, that was implied by the person, though he only provided specifics regarding the described markers and the use of these described markers that is, in fact, legal. Use of a larger marker to indicate a line is probably illegal, but I suspect that will be a judgment call based on the other particulars in the upcoming announcement.

[sui generis]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > @Halebopp said:

> > > > > Here's Sawgrass passing on the most definite answer I'm aware of, unfortunately. To me it seems like those would fall under "typical ball markers":

> > > > >

> > > > > https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/18253188#Comment_18253188

> > > >

> > > > I agree with you about these (presumably legal) markers.

> > > >

> > > > It was amusing for me to re-read my previous post. And now I'll share that after he answered my question in the way he did, I asked if he might refer me to the section of the rules that justifies his response, and he said something along the lines of "You'll have to trust me on this, it's complicated." I replied that I most certainly did "trust" him. But I silently worried as to whether people would trust me in recounting his comments!

> > > >

> > > > I'd like to see some mention somewhere in the rules about it.

> > > >

> > > > For the record, I have now been communicated with by an equipment person at the USGA who has told me that ball markers 2 inches or less in diameter and 1 inch or less in height (?) are legal even if they are being used to indicate a line. (Of course 14.1a requires you to lift the marker prior to your stroke.) I’m also told that a Clarification covering this will be on its way.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Saw

> > Presumably ones larger than the 2 by 1 inch (whatever 'diameter' and 'height' mean in this context) remain legal providing they are not used to indicate a line? Still, I think it is a positive move to define more clearly what is in and what is out, so bring it on folks.

>

> Yes, that was implied by the person, though he only provided specifics regarding the described markers and the use of these described markers that is, in fact, legal. Use of a larger marker to indicate a line is probably illegal, but I suspect that will be a judgment call based on the other particulars in the upcoming announcement.

 

Right now we have very few dimensions specified in the Rules. A club length seems a bit much for the max diameter of a ball marker, four and a quarter inches might be too big also, but a max of 1.68" might do the trick.

[antip]

I've come across information elsewhere that provides an update to this discussion about ball markers. A week ago, RBs (or at least one of them) went public with a consultation process as per the following letter copied in it's entirety.

 

**_ 4 October 2019

Notice to Manufacturers

 

Definition of Alignment Device and Treatment of Ball-Markers

 

Introduction of Definition

 

For many years, The R&A and USGA have evaluated a variety of ball-markers and alignment devices. Generally, the governing bodies have determined that objects classified as alignment devices, which include certain ball-markers, may not be used by the player in a specific manner because such devices artificially eliminate or reduce a skill or judgment that is essential to the game. This was formerly covered under Rule 14-3 and, in the revised Rules of Golf, use of such devices in a manner that creates a potential advantage for the player is a breach of Rule 4.3.

 

In order to facilitate consistent decisions by The R&A and USGA, and to provide manufacturers of ball-markers and other similar objects with guidance as they continue to develop product in this area, following is a definition of alignment device that will appear as an addition to Part 6 of the next update of the Equipment Rules:

 

Alignment Device Definition

 

The following criteria are used to determine when an object manufactured to mark the spot of a ball is an alignment device. Features include, but are not limited to:

 

The object incorporates features designed to measure, gauge or interpret slope, green speed or other conditions, or includes optical or electronic components or,

The vertical height of the object, in any orientation or configuration, is greater than 1.0” or,

The maximum dimension in any horizontal direction exceeds 2.0” and incorporates any of the features noted below (or similar features):

the object incorporates painted, etched or inscribed line(s) or similar features greater than or equal to 2.0” in length (“line” includes any line, arrow or other straight marking that could be solid or broken, but has a defined start, a defined end and whose length can be measured),

the object has an appendage(s) or an extended feature(s) greater than 2.0” in length or that extends a feature of the object to a length greater than 2.0”.

 

Note 1:An object is an alignment device if it exceeds the dimensional specifications listed above and advertising, marketing or intellectual property descriptions or claims related to the object indicates that it is primarily for the purpose of showing the line of play.

 

Note 2:An object is an alignment device if it is modified in any manner that would satisfy any of the above provisions.

 

If an “alignment device” is placed by the a player to show the line of play and the player places his or her ball based on the orientation of the alignment device, the player is in breach of Rule 4.3a, which prohibits a player from creating “a potential advantage by using equipment (other than a club or a ball) that artificially eliminates or reduces the need for a skill or judgment that is essential to the challenge of the game.”

 

Ball-marker and other similar submissions, use of which have previously been ruled in breach of the Rules of Golf, will be re-evaluated at the request of the submitter or manufacturer.

 

Please provide any comments or suggestions regarding the proposed definition by November 15, 2019 to Ian Scott, Assistant Director - Equipment Standards, at [email protected]_**

 

For my part, I find the wording of the definition of an alignment device to be ambiguous. The vertical height criteria is clear - greater than one inch means it meets the definition; but what about horizontal length of 4 inches but no marking whatsoever other than a plain straight line/arrow of less than two inches? The drafting suggests something long but without "the features noted below..." would not meet the definition. Perhaps "and incorporates..." should be "or incorporates..."?

[Sawgrass]

> @antip said:

> I've come across information elsewhere that provides an update to this discussion about ball markers. A week ago, RBs (or at least one of them) went public with a consultation process as per the following letter copied in it's entirety.

>

> **_ 4 October 2019

> Notice to Manufacturers

>

> Definition of Alignment Device and Treatment of Ball-Markers

>

> Introduction of Definition

>

> For many years, The R&A and USGA have evaluated a variety of ball-markers and alignment devices. Generally, the governing bodies have determined that objects classified as alignment devices, which include certain ball-markers, may not be used by the player in a specific manner because such devices artificially eliminate or reduce a skill or judgment that is essential to the game. This was formerly covered under Rule 14-3 and, in the revised Rules of Golf, use of such devices in a manner that creates a potential advantage for the player is a breach of Rule 4.3.

>

> In order to facilitate consistent decisions by The R&A and USGA, and to provide manufacturers of ball-markers and other similar objects with guidance as they continue to develop product in this area, following is a definition of alignment device that will appear as an addition to Part 6 of the next update of the Equipment Rules:

>

> Alignment Device Definition

>

> The following criteria are used to determine when an object manufactured to mark the spot of a ball is an alignment device. Features include, but are not limited to:

>

> The object incorporates features designed to measure, gauge or interpret slope, green speed or other conditions, or includes optical or electronic components or,

> The vertical height of the object, in any orientation or configuration, is greater than 1.0” or,

> The maximum dimension in any horizontal direction exceeds 2.0” and incorporates any of the features noted below (or similar features):

> the object incorporates painted, etched or inscribed line(s) or similar features greater than or equal to 2.0” in length (“line” includes any line, arrow or other straight marking that could be solid or broken, but has a defined start, a defined end and whose length can be measured),

> the object has an appendage(s) or an extended feature(s) greater than 2.0” in length or that extends a feature of the object to a length greater than 2.0”.

>

> Note 1:An object is an alignment device if it exceeds the dimensional specifications listed above and advertising, marketing or intellectual property descriptions or claims related to the object indicates that it is primarily for the purpose of showing the line of play.

>

> Note 2:An object is an alignment device if it is modified in any manner that would satisfy any of the above provisions.

>

> If an “alignment device” is placed by the a player to show the line of play and the player places his or her ball based on the orientation of the alignment device, the player is in breach of Rule 4.3a, which prohibits a player from creating “a potential advantage by using equipment (other than a club or a ball) that artificially eliminates or reduces the need for a skill or judgment that is essential to the challenge of the game.”

>

> Ball-marker and other similar submissions, use of which have previously been ruled in breach of the Rules of Golf, will be re-evaluated at the request of the submitter or manufacturer.

>

> Please provide any comments or suggestions regarding the proposed definition by November 15, 2019 to Ian Scott, Assistant Director - Equipment Standards, at [email protected]_**

>

> For my part, I find the wording of the definition of an alignment device to be ambiguous. The vertical height criteria is clear - greater than one inch means it meets the definition; but what about horizontal length of 4 inches but no marking whatsoever other than a plain straight line/arrow of less than two inches? The drafting suggests something long but without "the features noted below..." would not meet the definition. Perhaps "and incorporates..." should be "or incorporates..."?

 

Thanks for posting that. It took quite a while but let’s just say, “The wheels of justice grind slow but exceedingly fine.”

[antip]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @antip said:

> > I've come across information elsewhere that provides an update to this discussion about ball markers. A week ago, RBs (or at least one of them) went public with a consultation process as per the following letter copied in it's entirety.

> >

> > **_ 4 October 2019

> > Notice to Manufacturers

> >

> > Definition of Alignment Device and Treatment of Ball-Markers

> >

> > Introduction of Definition

> >

> > For many years, The R&A and USGA have evaluated a variety of ball-markers and alignment devices. Generally, the governing bodies have determined that objects classified as alignment devices, which include certain ball-markers, may not be used by the player in a specific manner because such devices artificially eliminate or reduce a skill or judgment that is essential to the game. This was formerly covered under Rule 14-3 and, in the revised Rules of Golf, use of such devices in a manner that creates a potential advantage for the player is a breach of Rule 4.3.

> >

> > In order to facilitate consistent decisions by The R&A and USGA, and to provide manufacturers of ball-markers and other similar objects with guidance as they continue to develop product in this area, following is a definition of alignment device that will appear as an addition to Part 6 of the next update of the Equipment Rules:

> >

> > Alignment Device Definition

> >

> > The following criteria are used to determine when an object manufactured to mark the spot of a ball is an alignment device. Features include, but are not limited to:

> >

> > The object incorporates features designed to measure, gauge or interpret slope, green speed or other conditions, or includes optical or electronic components or,

> > The vertical height of the object, in any orientation or configuration, is greater than 1.0” or,

> > The maximum dimension in any horizontal direction exceeds 2.0” and incorporates any of the features noted below (or similar features):

> > the object incorporates painted, etched or inscribed line(s) or similar features greater than or equal to 2.0” in length (“line” includes any line, arrow or other straight marking that could be solid or broken, but has a defined start, a defined end and whose length can be measured),

> > the object has an appendage(s) or an extended feature(s) greater than 2.0” in length or that extends a feature of the object to a length greater than 2.0”.

> >

> > Note 1:An object is an alignment device if it exceeds the dimensional specifications listed above and advertising, marketing or intellectual property descriptions or claims related to the object indicates that it is primarily for the purpose of showing the line of play.

> >

> > Note 2:An object is an alignment device if it is modified in any manner that would satisfy any of the above provisions.

> >

> > If an “alignment device” is placed by the a player to show the line of play and the player places his or her ball based on the orientation of the alignment device, the player is in breach of Rule 4.3a, which prohibits a player from creating “a potential advantage by using equipment (other than a club or a ball) that artificially eliminates or reduces the need for a skill or judgment that is essential to the challenge of the game.”

> >

> > Ball-marker and other similar submissions, use of which have previously been ruled in breach of the Rules of Golf, will be re-evaluated at the request of the submitter or manufacturer.

> >

> > Please provide any comments or suggestions regarding the proposed definition by November 15, 2019 to Ian Scott, Assistant Director - Equipment Standards, at [email protected]_**

> >

> > For my part, I find the wording of the definition of an alignment device to be ambiguous. The vertical height criteria is clear - greater than one inch means it meets the definition; but what about horizontal length of 4 inches but no marking whatsoever other than a plain straight line/arrow of less than two inches? The drafting suggests something long but without "the features noted below..." would not meet the definition. Perhaps "and incorporates..." should be "or incorporates..."?

>

> Thanks for posting that. It took quite a while but let’s just say, “The wheels of justice grind slow but exceedingly fine.”

 

I'm with you, providing the final version is in a form we can all understand.