Monday, July 31, 2017

If you play efficiently... are you a bad person?

Another week, another "rules" discussion.  This time it's the US Girls Junior Amateur Championship. On extra holes, Elisabeth Moon was faced with a birdie putt to win the semi-final match over Erica Shepherd.  Moon missed the putt and immediately raked the remaining putt of about 8 inches away, assuming it would be given. The problem was - it wasn't.  Shepherd made no mention, motion, or otherwise attempt to concede the putt and because of this Moon lost the match under rule 18-2. The internet at large is calling Shepherd a "bad sport" and questioning her integrity in the game over the win.  You would think rightly so, but is it just mis-understanding of the rules and match play that are blinding them to the way the game is played? They're rules - not a test to get your wings, Clarence.

Match play is the one time in golf where your score doesn't matter as a whole.  You are playing heads-up against your playing competitor and if you take a 10 it doesn't matter, as long as they take an 11.  In addition, you could shoot a 68 and STILL LOSE to someone who shot 82.  It's an amazing format and has a few rules stipulated ONLY for that format - and for good reason. Let's look at two that applied to the whole deal this past week....



Let's start where the hub-ub is.  Rule 2-4 Concession of Match, hole, or stroke.  In match play, at any time, a player may concede a hole or match. In addition, a player may concede their opponent's next stroke provided the opponent's ball is at rest. Once given, it cannot be taken back in any circumstance. There is a KEY word here.  The player MAY concede. It is that player's choice to do so.  Nowhere does it say that a player MUST concede a stroke at any time - for any reason - at any length. There is also no mention of "if they're nice" or "as a show of respect". Nothing about equity.  This is very important in application and use and is a powerful tool in playing a match.  Look at it this way.....

You're playing a match and your opponent hits their putts close right off the bat.  They're the type of person who rakes away gimmes so you concede 1 foot, 2 foot, maybe even a 3 foot putt for the first couple holes.  By the 7th hole your opponent hasn't putted anything inside 3 feet or longer, but now has a 3 footer to win a hole. How comfortable do you think they're going to be over that putt? Sure, it depends on the caliber of player but there's not one of you out there who hasn't yipped on a 2 footer or even a 12 incher once in their lives. Anything can and does happen in golf. In 1983 at the open championship, Hale Irwin whiffed on a 2 inch putt. 2 inches- if it was even that. Whiffed. Mental lapse. Not match play and no excuse for a misunderstanding because you have to hole everything but it still happened. He got no "pass" because it was a "gimme" length putt. Same in match play.

By the same token as my previous example - maybe you don't give ANYTHING at all. Make your opponent putt everything out for the first 9 holes? Maybe they get to thinking you're a jerk and it gets them off their game when you finally DO give a putt.  A stretch maybe - but stranger things do happen.  It's not a "gimme" until it's given. Thing is, the "gimme" in match play is as much about gamesmanship and strategy as it is a show of respect to the opponent's game.  That's not to say you HOPE for anyone to miss a shot ever, but just know that you're not a bad person for not giving them a short putt if you don't want to. Just expect tit for tat. Regardless never ASSUME something is given. Like a provisional ball, it must be voiced that a concession has taken place before it's actually good.  If you didn't hear it.. ask.

This leads us into the actual penalty rule - 18-2 Ball at rest moved by player, partner, caddie.....  This is actually the breach the lead to Moon's loss.  Because there was no concession, the officials stepped in when she moved the ball.  Under 18-2 it's one stroke penalty in match play.  Because of this, Moon lost since Shepherd was already in for a 5.  It's unfortunate but it's the rule and is there to protect  the field. In this case, the "Field" is one person. Shepherd. Concentration is key and if you lose it - be prepared for a penalty. There is no room for precedent in applying the rules of golf. If it were a 2 foot putt and she raked it back because she just gave Shepherd a 2 foot putt... is that ok? It's not pretty and you can feel how you want about it, but the rules are the rules. Sure as your ball is unplayable from out of bounds, you'll be penalized if you don't get an actual concession before moving the ball in any circumstance.

Now reading this - you'll probably think me a monster.  Playing on people's emotions and fears to try and win.  It's not that at all. In fact, the entire purpose of match play is to "Put pressure" on the other player.  Hit your shot close, force them to change the game plan. Don't give away strokes. Giving or not giving a putt is simply using the rules to an advantage - same as any other rule. This one just has another person in play directly. It should not be viewed as something noble or seen as martyrdom to give strokes away. It's a strategy, and if you're not using it as such, then you're playing a losing game. If you're going to let morality and self assessment dictate gimmies - when does it stop? how far is too far? What if the winning putt is within your very liberally measured "gimmie" circle? Do you make them putt it then? Well that's not very nice if you do...

Bottom line... It's not your fault if your opponent gets yippy over a 3 foot putt.   Nor is it a problem or malcontent to exploit that weakness. Now..... you're a bad sport if you call them names and make comments calling Mr. Lippy McYipsalot out, but simply making them (or not making them) hit a shot is no reason to think you're Mephistopheles or the angel Gabriel. It's no different than say - telling your partner that play needs to speed up because the group is behind?  Not your fault if it gets in their head.  How about intentionally hitting the ball long and into the bleachers on a long par 4 to get a free drop and take the hazard out of play when the tournament is on the line. Or say more recently - taking relief for an unplayable on the driving range where it's nice and flat so you can get a full swing and a perfect lie. Come on - man up and play it straight right?  To allow someone to get away with a blatant rules violation so you can feel good about yourself isn't noble - it's a disservice to that person. They haven't learned anything and all you've done is let everyone know you're a pushover.  Sure, you can sleep a little easier that night knowing you lost because you didn't call a penalty what it was - if you're not tossing and turning thinking about the moment that cost you the match, that is. But hey, by that point you drank yourself to sleep -  right, Champ? There's no reason to feel bad about being competitive, but there are things that exist between falling on a sword yourself and intentionally breaking your competitor's kneecaps that are perfectly acceptable. Learn to use your gimmies.......

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

Did we witness blatant cheating and get a "No Call"?

I can't get away from this weekend's rules "debacle" with John Rahm seemingly placing his ball back on a different spot than where he originally marked it.  Facebook, all the golf forums, hell I swear I saw it in the newspaper and I'm pretty sure my cat was muttering about it in his sleep on the window sill.  It seems a number of weeks ago, we saw this from Lexi Thompson and she was given a swift and brutal penalty of four total strokes, whereas Rahm was basically smiled at, told not to do it again, then invited over for tea and biscuits.  Some say it's BECAUSE of Lexi's penalty that Rahm was not penalized for mis-placing the ball and that may be part of it.  I think it's a mis-application of the rules in general and it begs the question -  "Are we looking at applying the rules incorrectly this whole time?"  

The nature of the penalty is that Lexi "played from the wrong place".  OK shit happens right? She played from the wrong place by about 1 inch total if that? Let's look at the whole here..... This was snapped from a video analyzing the move with a black square placed on the video at a fixed point, showing the move.


To me, yes, it's clear that she moved the ball after marking. It could be reasonably assumed that she put the coin down, had a brain fart when aligning the ball, but then took care to put it back down in front of the coin on line with her target.  There's no arguing that this is the wrong place but does it REALLY give her an advantage.  Let's blow up her 2 foot putt....


This is the after-image.  Nowhere on this line of putt does it look like she's going to gain any sort of advantage by moving the ball left or right, even up to a putter head-width!! If anything she moves it INTO A WORSE SPOT with what appears to be a mark or dark bit right there in front of the ball now.  She also does not move the ball closer to the hole nearly as much as Rahm did, so basically she was penalized not for the intent to cheat, just for losing focus and placing the ball incorrectly.  But what about Rahm???


Looking at Rahm's video - it's raining. The greens are getting traffic and it's kind of ugly.   Here we can see that he clearly places his marker to the right side of the ball.  Everyone seems to agree with that...


When golfers routinely mark behind the ball, why this time does he choose to go right of the ball?  Sure, he has to move the marker but you can move one, two, three putter heads and not have an issue - and actually that's what the ROG says to do. But.....  If you look closer at the image... you'll see the reason, in my own opinion, that he marked to the right of the ball.....


Would you look at that? Right there, in front of his ball and right on the line of his putt... holy spike mark, Batman!!!  Clearly a huge issue in this weather, and it's a confidence building short putt to boot.  Could you imagine if he missed it? With the weather as it was and a short fuse temper - there's no amount of a lead that can predict what would happen at this point.  Rahm marks to the right, lifts the ball and moves his mark, clearing the way for his playing competitor to sink his short putt which is on a line just outside this spike mark towards the camera.  Now, let's look at Rahm's replacement of the ball.  He has already moved the mark back quite precisely if you ask me, then goes to put the ball back down......

I'm just gonna put this right here....

Ruh Roh, Shaggy! By moving the ball to the FRONT of the mark, rather than replacing it at the side, he has given himself a clear advantage by making an unobstructed line to the hole.  That friends... is motive. The video doesn't lie. 

You can't handle the truth!!!


The USGA is looking at "intent" in the rules right now.  I'm a member of a number of forums and a person on there had an interesting thing to say.  When exactly does intent stop and responsibility to follow the rules begin? You don't INTEND to hit a ball out of bounds, yet there's still a penalty for it. Bernhard Langer doesn't INTEND to anchor the putter to his chest, yet it still looks like it from an outside perspective and it surely brushes his shirt - which the USGA lets go as part of it's new initiative.  Lexi presumably didn't INTEND to move the ball either, she was just lining up the putt as some say Rahm was. Being a little too focused on one thing and not on another. Here's where I draw the line though.  

The opportunity for mal-intent exists and THAT'S where a penalty should happen.  This was backwards. If you look at Lexi's putt, there was no advantage to be had by moving the ball and in equity it could have been said that it was an accident and therefore a no-call situation would have been OK as it wouldn't be reasonable to say that she intentionally cheated when there was no gain to be had. It's entirely plausible to be a "brain fart".  In Rahm's case, you can look at it and SEE there's an issue that in fact DID IMPROVE his situation when the ball was moved. I don't for a second believe that he had that much of a fart where the ball is moved exactly enough to clear an impediment. THAT warrants a penalty.  In fact, it may be the most clear definition of cheating.  The thing is - it's over and done with and the call is made. Rahm is adamant in his explanation that he took due care in placing and replacing his ball.  Basically staying positive and not wavering. Sell it to the end, so to speak.

In either case, there will be arguments on both sides for weeks to come.  People in their weekend beer matches are going to be watching each other like hawks and ribbing the entire foursome every time someone marks a ball - all in good fun of course. Still, this raises serious questions about both the clear application of the rules, and the opportunity for creative cheating on tour and wherever the cameras aren't looking especially.  From Tiger Wood's ADMITTED incorrect drop with no penalty to the slow-mo replay of a grain of sand being touched by Anna Nordqvist resulting in a win for Brittany Lang, there are just too many instances and inconsistencies that have sent the USGA back-pedaling to try and "re-apply" the rules properly.  I think that "intent" is a good thing to look at in the case of the rules, but also keeping in mind the "opportunity for mal-intent"  (let's face it, cheating is an UGLY word until you're proven to have done it).   What do you think?