Wedge distances on shaft?

[Halebopp]

19 hours ago, Newby said:

I must admit I still can't see anything in the Equipment Rules or in 4.3 of the RoG to support the Facebook statement

 

But I did find this

(3) Information Gathered Before or During Round.

• Allowed.

  • Using information that was gathered before the round (such as playing information from previous rounds, swing tips or club recommendations), 

 

The USGA thinks tape is a temporary attachment rather than semi-permanent. I'm getting a deja vu feeling of having said this before somewhere but the whole thing resembles the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. You don't know if an attachment is legal before you try to remove it. If the attachment breaks, it was legal but has now been rendered useless.

[Dpavs]

17 minutes ago, Halebopp said:

 

The USGA thinks tape is a temporary attachment rather than semi-permanent. I'm getting a deja vu feeling of having said this before somewhere but the whole thing resembles the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. You don't know if an attachment is legal before you try to remove it. If the attachment breaks, it was legal but has now been rendered useless.

 

I think the question that can be asked is simply is it the sort of thing that is designed to be easily removed? If it is, then it does not meet the semi-permanent requirement. At least that's what I have in my head!

 

So things like clear tape which are meant to be removed easily if need be, do not qualify for example but some decals, pin striping, etc. which are designed to not be easily removed do.

 

And yes... this entire conversation is very similar to one we had before regarding adding pin striping to the top of a putter as an additional alignment aid. In that conversation I had reached out to the USGA regarding the question and that is how I have arrived at how I look at what qualifies and what does not.

Edited October 26, 2023 by Dpavs

[Shilgy]

Strange how some can respond to:the “divot hole relief” crowd with a simple answer of “because” but cannot respect this rule and instead say “but but but”.

[Hawkeye77]

55 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Strange how some can respond to:the “divot hole relief” crowd with a simple answer of “because” but cannot respect this rule and instead say “but but but”.

 

I've got it from the USGA, another USGA opinion was published in this thread but "poo poo'd" in favor of "Rules Guy". I don't see "but but but" from people suggesting they can put semi-permanent transparent tape over a little piece of paper with numbers and attach to a shaft.  I see discussing the rules, which have allowed the practice basically forever.  

 

"Tape" isn't "tape" isn't "tape".  And a pretty easy and fair interpretation of the rules by reading what they are trying to achieve and examples in the rules and so forth also leads to a pretty easy conclusion it isn't a problem.  

 

Sorry, I'm not really seeing the "but" and nothing else from folks approving the practice.  

 

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Hawkeye77

[Hawkeye77]

6 hours ago, Dpavs said:

 

I think the question that can be asked is simply is it the sort of thing that is designed to be easily removed? If it is, then it does not meet the semi-permanent requirement. At least that's what I have in my head!

 

So things like clear tape which are meant to be removed easily if need be, do not qualify for example but some decals, pin striping, etc. which are designed to not be easily removed do.

 

And yes... this entire conversation is very similar to one we had before regarding adding pin striping to the top of a putter as an additional alignment aid. In that conversation I had reached out to the USGA regarding the question and that is how I have arrived at how I look at what qualifies and what does not.

It's not whether it is  "meant to be removed easily".  Put some scotch tape on an iron shaft and play a few rounds - you won't get it off easily and it will have to be basically ripped off in pieces most of the time.  If scotch tape was so easy to get off stuff we'd just easily remove it from our Christmas gifts and never buy tape again.

 

And . . . Scotch tape is not designed to be removed easily or "meant" to be.  But it isn't permanent.

 

Maybe we agree, and it may depend on the "tape" used and characteristics which is why folks rushing to praise a Facebook post overgeneralizing "tape" from someone messing about on social media are ignoring application of the actual rules.

Edited October 26, 2023 by Hawkeye77

[antip]

59 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

It's not whether it is  "meant to be removed easily".  Put some scotch tape on an iron shaft and play a few rounds - you won't get it off easily and it will have to be basically ripped off in pieces most of the time.  If scotch tape was so easy to get off stuff we'd just easily remove it from our Christmas gifts and never buy tape again.

 

And . . . Scotch tape is not designed to be removed easily or "meant" to be.  But it isn't permanent.

 

Maybe we agree, and it may depend on the "tape" used and characteristics which is why folks rushing to praise a Facebook post overgeneralizing "tape" from someone messing about on social media are ignoring application of the actual rules.

Side issue here. You are referring to "Rules Guy" a bit like their product is something unpleasant stuck to your shoe. My understanding is nothing goes on there without anything that is uncertain or contentious under the Rules being taken through the USGA first. That is precisely the case under discussion. The Rules Guy words on this issue actually came from the USGA Rules team - there is zero doubt about that. So the view that you do not personally like is the USGA Rules team view, not some usual journalist hack.

[Hawkeye77]

22 minutes ago, antip said:

Side issue here. You are referring to "Rules Guy" a bit like their product is something unpleasant stuck to your shoe. My understanding is nothing goes on there without anything that is uncertain or contentious under the Rules being taken through the USGA first. That is precisely the case under discussion. The Rules Guy words on this issue actually came from the USGA Rules team - there is zero doubt about that. So the view that you do not personally like is the USGA Rules team view, not some usual journalist hack.

First, you don't actually know that.  Second, I have a USGA Rules answer from the USGA and am satisfied.  Third, a previous opinion you discounted which was written and directly from USGA Equipment folks you tried to minimize because it came from the Equipment folks as if that somehow wasn't a rules answer when the Rules say the Equipment Rules govern the question at hand.  Way more obfuscating and avoidance than dealing with the issue until some Facebook post was found - I don't think that's how you usually approach the rules and wouldn't if faced with a situation in reality, I really don't. 

 

We aren't going to agree, that's fine and to each their own.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye77 said:

First, you don't actually know that.  Second, I have a USGA Rules answer from the USGA and am satisfied.  Third, a previous opinion you discounted which was written and directly from USGA Equipment folks you tried to minimize because it came from the Equipment folks as if that somehow wasn't a rules answer when the Rules say the Equipment Rules govern the question at hand.  Way more obfuscating and avoidance than dealing with the issue until some Facebook post was found - I don't think that's how you usually approach the rules and wouldn't if faced with a situation in reality, I really don't. 

 

We aren't going to agree, that's fine and to each their own.

 

3 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

I've got it from the USGA, another USGA opinion was published in this thread but "poo poo'd" in favor of "Rules Guy". I don't see "but but but" from people suggesting they can put semi-permanent transparent tape over a little piece of paper with numbers and attach to a shaft.  I see discussing the rules, which have allowed the practice basically forever.  

 

"Tape" isn't "tape" isn't "tape".  And a pretty easy and fair interpretation of the rules by reading what they are trying to achieve and examples in the rules and so forth also leads to a pretty easy conclusion it isn't a problem.  

 

Sorry, I'm not really seeing the "but" and nothing else from folks approving the practice.  

 

 

You’ve mentioned this other USGA opinion a few times but I couldn’t find it in this thread.  Mind pointing me to the correct post or reposting?

[GwrxMod]

Topic cleaned up.

[antip]

On 10/26/2023 at 8:26 AM, Hawkeye77 said:

I’ll go with the direct question posed and answer received officially from the USGA a few days ago, thanks. 100% legal.

Which you are not prepared to share?

[Dpavs]

12 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

It's not whether it is  "meant to be removed easily".  Put some scotch tape on an iron shaft and play a few rounds - you won't get it off easily and it will have to be basically ripped off in pieces most of the time.  If scotch tape was so easy to get off stuff we'd just easily remove it from our Christmas gifts and never buy tape again.

 

And . . . Scotch tape is not designed to be removed easily or "meant" to be.  But it isn't permanent.

 

Maybe we agree, and it may depend on the "tape" used and characteristics which is why folks rushing to praise a Facebook post overgeneralizing "tape" from someone messing about on social media are ignoring application of the actual rules.

 

I think I have to disagree regarding the bold and underlined part of your statement above. I believe the criteria regarding the attachment being "not easily removable" is pretty explicit in the equipment rules in helping to define what is meant by semi-permanent-

 

Other material added to the shaft, such as for alignment purposes,
provided it is considered semi-permanent. However, such applications
must not breach Rule 4.3. “Semi-permanent” is interpreted to mean
durable and not easily removable. Additionally, it must not be re-usable
and/or must be essentially destroyed upon removal.

 

This was also discussed and affirmed when the someone from the rules committee reached out to me directly on my prior inquiry.

 

In regards to tape in general I was relying on my memory and belief that it's use was not allowed. In searching I found this in an old post on the internet but cannot find a contemporary context at the moment. The same was discussed here in regards to using tape to reduce glare from the top of a crown in 2020. (See Antitip's post.)

 

The use of lead tape is an exception to Appendix II, 1b(ii). 4-1/5 Adhesive Bandage or Tape Applied to Clubhead to Reduce Glare or for Protection Q.May a player put an adhesive bandage or tape on the clubhead to reduce glare or to protect the club from being damaged? A.An adhesive bandage or tape added to the clubhead is considered an external attachment, rendering the club non-conforming (see Appendix II, Rule 1a but see also Decision 4-1/4). However, material attached to the clubhead that does not affect the performance of the club and is semi-permanent, durable, not easily removable and conforms to the shape of the clubhead may be permitted by exception, but an adhesive bandage or tape does not fall under that exception because such items are temporary in nature and easily removable.

 

So unless the USGA posture has changed I think tape is still prohibited (not including lead tape of course which is specifically allowed).

 

Edited October 27, 2023 by Dpavs

[Hawkeye77]

1 hour ago, antip said:

Which you are not prepared to share?

Now you’re interested? 

 

As you well know: 
“This response is for your personal information and may not be posted or disclosed by email or internet posting.”

 

Like I said, we aren’t going to agree and that’s fine, but I need to get back to the latest LIV outrages, lol, we’re just going in circles here and I’ll do my part and not keep it going. 

[Hawkeye77]

4 minutes ago, Dpavs said:

 

I think I have to disagree regarding the bold and underlined part of your statement above. I believe the criteria regarding the attachment being "not easily removable" is pretty explicit in the equipment rules in helping to define what is meant by semi-permanent-

 

Other material added to the shaft, such as for alignment purposes,
provided it is considered semi-permanent. However, such applications
must not breach Rule 4.3. “Semi-permanent” is interpreted to mean
durable and not easily removable. Additionally, it must not be re-usable
and/or must be essentially destroyed upon removal.

 

This was also discussed and affirmed when the someone from the rules committee reached out to me directly on my prior inquiry.

 

In regards to tape in general I was relying on my memory and belief that it's use was not allowed. In searching I found this in an old post on the internet but cannot find a contemporary context at the moment. The same was discussed here in regards to using tape to reduce glare from the top of a crown in 2020. (See Antitip's post.)

 

The use of lead tape is an exception to Appendix II, 1b(ii). 4-1/5 Adhesive Bandage or Tape Applied to Clubhead to Reduce Glare or for Protection Q.May a player put an adhesive bandage or tape on the clubhead to reduce glare or to protect the club from being damaged? A.An adhesive bandage or tape added to the clubhead is considered an external attachment, rendering the club non-conforming (see Appendix II, Rule 1a but see also Decision 4-1/4). However, material attached to the clubhead that does not affect the performance of the club and is semi-permanent, durable, not easily removable and conforms to the shape of the clubhead may be permitted by exception, but an adhesive bandage or tape does not fall under that exception because such items are temporary in nature and easily removable.

 

So unless the USGA posture has changed I think tape is still prohibited (not including lead tape of course which is specifically allowed).

 

There is a clear difference between “meant to be” and the actual and controlling language in the rule.  Use the language in rule - don’t need several paragraphs to understand what “semi-permanent” is described to be - “meant to be” isn’t in there. The language is chosen for a reason. 
 

Out, lol. 

[Dpavs]

14 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

There is a clear difference between “meant to be” and the actual and controlling language in the rule.  Use the language in rule - don’t need several paragraphs to understand what “semi-permanent” is described to be - “meant to be” isn’t in there. The language is chosen for a reason. 
 

Out, lol. 

 

I think I get your point regarding my choice of words in a prior post even though I was not citing the rule directly at that point. Regardless of this, not needlessly deflecting from the core issue being discussed, the question which I believe was raised was whether tape is allowed or not and per all that I have read or been told directly I believe it is not.  Now we are both out...lol.

 

 

[antip]

15 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Now you’re interested? 

 

As you well know: 
“This response is for your personal information and may not be posted or disclosed by email or internet posting.”

 

Like I said, we aren’t going to agree and that’s fine, but I need to get back to the latest LIV outrages, lol, we’re just going in circles here and I’ll do my part and not keep it going. 

If you can't provide the answer you received, please supply the question that you posed. 

 

Interested? Absolutely. My interest remains in how you feel you can come to a conclusion that entirely flies in the face of the specific question put to the USGA and answered publicly.

I would be extremely confident that you have not put a very specific question to the USGA, eg, "can I write distances on a piece of paper and tape that to my shaft to access that information easily when I am playing a round?"
I suspect - feel free to demonstrate that I do not have this correct - that you have put a general question to someone on the Equipment side and they have provided general words consistent with what is published in the Equipment Rules - words along the lines of: "All parts of the club
must be fixed so that the club is one unit, and it must have no external attachments. Exceptions may be made for attachments that do not affect the performance of the club."

 

And you are pleasuring us all with your personal interpretation of what that means for written on paper taped onto a shaft.

 

 

 

[st1800e]

16 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

This response is for your personal information and may not be posted or disclosed by email or internet posting.”

Go ahead, post it, I seriously doubt they’re going to file a lawsuit….they’re too busy with “the ball” and other things.  
 

And what would the damages be? 

Edited October 28, 2023 by st1800e

[Hawkeye77]

8 hours ago, antip said:

If you can't provide the answer you received, please supply the question that you posed. 

 

Interested? Absolutely. My interest remains in how you feel you can come to a conclusion that entirely flies in the face of the specific question put to the USGA and answered publicly.

I would be extremely confident that you have not put a very specific question to the USGA, eg, "can I write distances on a piece of paper and tape that to my shaft to access that information easily when I am playing a round?"
I suspect - feel free to demonstrate that I do not have this correct - that you have put a general question to someone on the Equipment side and they have provided general words consistent with what is published in the Equipment Rules - words along the lines of: "All parts of the club
must be fixed so that the club is one unit, and it must have no external attachments. Exceptions may be made for attachments that do not affect the performance of the club."

 

And you are pleasuring us all with your personal interpretation of what that means for written on paper taped onto a shaft.

 

 

 

 

I always chuckle at folks who say they are "out" of a thread and keep coming back, but I'll come back in just for this post and what you posted above is more about junior high taunting than it is discussing the rules, I don't have time for it, lol - okay I guess I have time for this post.  And posting it doesn't render my credibility any more or less, I'm pretty secure in being interested in facts more than anything else in my time here.

 

"If someone wants to put wedge distances on a tiny piece of paper and attach them to a wedge shaft with transparent tape, and it doesn’t affect the performance of the club, does that violate the ROG?"

 

Feel free to submit it yourself, you may very well get a different answer, I don't care. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Newby]

8 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

I always chuckle at folks who say they are "out" of a thread and keep coming back, but I'll come back in just for this post and what you posted above is more about junior high taunting than it is discussing the rules, I don't have time for it, lol - okay I guess I have time for this post.  And posting it doesn't render my credibility any more or less, I'm pretty secure in being interested in facts more than anything else in my time here.

 

"If someone wants to put wedge distances on a tiny piece of paper and attach them to a wedge shaft with transparent tape, and it doesn’t affect the performance of the club, does that violate the ROG?"

 

I would speculate that the answer was "No"

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would speculate that the answer was "No"

Edited October 28, 2023 by Newby

[st1800e]

2 hours ago, Newby said:

 

Appears nothing posted after the quote , was there something you wanted to add?  

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, st1800e said:

Appears nothing posted after the quote , was there something you wanted to add?  

It happens…look at the very bottom of the post he quoted.  That last line is his.

[st1800e]

14 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

It happens…look at the very bottom of the post he quoted.  That last line is his.

Yes, seems a roundabout way, when posted shows up as nothing. Hide and seek game?  

[Shilgy]

9 minutes ago, st1800e said:

Yes, seems a roundabout way, when posted shows up as nothing. Hide and seek game?  

Not at all…could just be fat finger syndrome on an iPad or phone.  I’ve had it happen to me where I accidentally typed inside the post replied to box.

[Newby]

4 hours ago, st1800e said:

Appears nothing posted after the quote , was there something you wanted to add?  

Corrected

[antip]

10 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

I always chuckle at folks who say they are "out" of a thread and keep coming back, but I'll come back in just for this post and what you posted above is more about junior high taunting than it is discussing the rules, I don't have time for it, lol - okay I guess I have time for this post.  And posting it doesn't render my credibility any more or less, I'm pretty secure in being interested in facts more than anything else in my time here.

 

"If someone wants to put wedge distances on a tiny piece of paper and attach them to a wedge shaft with transparent tape, and it doesn’t affect the performance of the club, does that violate the ROG?"

 

Feel free to submit it yourself, you may very well get a different answer, I don't care. 

 

 

 

 

 

LOL Hawkeye, I chuckle at the same thing, but you must be thinking of someone else because at no stage have I said I was out. On the contrary, I have continued to raise angles and observations that I think are relevant to the discussion. Some folk, but clearly not all, seem to have found them useful.

Here are the key points of the posts to date.

 

The question: "Can I write distances on paper and tape it to my shafts so I can see them quickly/easily when I play a round?"

 

Your answer: "Taping a piece of paper with yardages doesn't affect performance of the club and doesn't violate the Rules."

 

You have suggested there is information from USGA Equipment people that directly supports that. However, in your 15 posts to date, you have supplied no evidence that indicates those bolded words are anything other than your own opinion. 

 

The alternate answer: these being published words by the USGA responding to a photo of a club with a piece of paper with distances on it taped to the shaft of a club: 

"Glad we're able to chime in here... Many of you have hit on two different aspects of this situation... 1) If the player were to simply write the distances on their club with a sharpie that would be just fine...however 2) external attachments that are temporary in nature (which is what we consider tape to be) are not permitted on the shaft with the Equipment Rules providing exceptions for decals for identification and tape to protect the shaft. So doing what is shown in the picture is not allowed."

 

Anyone reading this post can decide which of those bolded words they wish to believe. But I suggest, if they are playing in any form of competition golf, the less risky approach is the USGA published words above. 

[tatertot]

2 minutes ago, antip said:

LOL Hawkeye, I chuckle at the same thing, but you must be thinking of someone else because at no stage have I said I was out. On the contrary, I have continued to raise angles and observations that I think are relevant to the discussion. Some folk, but clearly not all, seem to have found them useful.

Here are the key points of the posts to date.

 

The question: "Can I write distances on paper and tape it to my shafts so I can see them quickly/easily when I play a round?"

 

Your answer: "Taping a piece of paper with yardages doesn't affect performance of the club and doesn't violate the Rules."

 

You have suggested there is information from USGA Equipment people that directly supports that. However, in your 15 posts to date, you have supplied no evidence that indicates those bolded words are anything other than your own opinion. 

 

The alternate answer: these being published words by the USGA responding to a photo of a club with a piece of paper with distances on it taped to the shaft of a club: 

"Glad we're able to chime in here... Many of you have hit on two different aspects of this situation... 1) If the player were to simply write the distances on their club with a sharpie that would be just fine...however 2) external attachments that are temporary in nature (which is what we consider tape to be) are not permitted on the shaft with the Equipment Rules providing exceptions for decals for identification and tape to protect the shaft. So doing what is shown in the picture is not allowed."

 

Anyone reading this post can decide which of those bolded words they wish to believe. But I suggest, if they are playing in any form of competition golf, the less risky approach is the USGA published words above. 

But he has ... He directly asked the USGA the question and was told it didn't make the club illegal. As far as I can tell, he's the only one who has actually asked and received an answer.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, tatertot said:

But he has ... He directly asked the USGA the question and was told it didn't make the club illegal. As far as I can tell, he's the only one who has actually asked and received an answer.

I take it you didn’t read in @antip‘s post from earlier..

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/RulesOfGolf/permalink/5940293576026289/?mibextid=zDhOQc

 

as posted earlier you need to click twice once in there.  Once to expand to see USGA response and once to expand the response itself.

 

The post you just said none else has offered proof the bold WAS THE RESPONSE.

 

Cant be more clear.  All I suggest is if you play any high level events…or even club events…don’t do it. Write them the way the USGA suggests.

[tatertot]

47 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

I take it you didn’t read in @antip‘s post from earlier..

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/RulesOfGolf/permalink/5940293576026289/?mibextid=zDhOQc

 

as posted earlier you need to click twice once in there.  Once to expand to see USGA response and once to expand the response itself.

 

The post you just said none else has offered proof the bold WAS THE RESPONSE.

 

Cant be more clear.  All I suggest is if you play any high level events…or even club events…don’t do it. Write them the way the USGA suggests.

I did read ... But, from what I understood what I read, that was a reply to a Facebook post ... Like I said, only 1 poster has directly asked the USGA and gotten a direct response.

[Colin L]

55 minutes ago, tatertot said:

I did read ... But, from what I understood what I read, that was a reply to a Facebook post ... Like I said, only 1 poster has directly asked the USGA and gotten a direct response.

The USGA regularly responds  to questions/discussions on its Facebook page.  Why do you have difficulty in accepting that what it says on a matter is definitive?

[tatertot]

7 minutes ago, Colin L said:

The USGA regularly responds  to questions/discussions on its Facebook page.  Why do you have difficulty in accepting that what it says on a matter is definitive?

Did I say it wasn't? I said 1 poster has directly asked the USGA and gotten a response. Is any part of that sentence false?

[Colin L]

My wrong inference it would seem.