Club Championship

[AAA]

I sometimes wonder if this Condition was introduced onto the tours at the behest of the manufacturers. It ensures that their contracted players stick with their ball.
I seem to remember McEnroe playing with a diguised Dunlop raquet when he was contracted to Wilson.

[Gary Hill]

Does tennis have a "one raquet rule"?

[Sphere Hunter]

I sometimes wonder if this Condition was introduced onto the tours at the behest of the manufacturers. It ensures that their contracted players stick with their ball.

That wouldn't surprize me. I seem to remember following a tour event many years ago at Glen Abbey where a top player teed off with one brand and switched on the second hole. My friend and I asked the caddie and he said the player had to play a certain ball by contract but hated the ball. Can't remember who the player was.
SH

[BC MIST]

The reason why I play different balls is because I really, really refuse to buy golf balls and prefer to play golf balls that I find.
(1) Does this preclude me from playing in a Club Championship with the one ball rule?
(2) What about the student who can't afford to buy 2 sleeves of ProV1x's?
Silly rule. Maybe even a snobbish rule.

(1) Yes. One down, three to go.
(2) Because JJ and AK are students who can't afford the ProV1's, they're gone, too. Three down, one to go.
(3) DF slept in.

I win by acclamation.

BTW: I hope your Golf-O-Max cleaners game used the one ball rule.
What kind of stories are you feeding Geoff

[Samick]

If some people dont care enough to buy a certain ball (or any balls for that matter) to put in their bag because of its performance (and there are some cheap balls with pretty good performance), why should they care enough to play in a club championship, or any other tournament. You have registration fees and other expenses....I just dont get the big deal here. Its a rule, play by it!

If you dont want to play by the rule of one ball, whats to stop you from playing a Pinnacle or whatever gets you the best distance off the tee..and then switch to a ProV1 for your approach shot on the same hole? Its the same thing. Pinnacle on a par five.....ProV1 on a par 3.

But back to the original post....as far as I know, all stroke play tournaments have this rule, or at least the ones I have played in. So it could be just a rule by the USGA or RCGA. If you play a tournament its governed by these rules.

[AAA]

Does tennis have a "one raquet rule"?

No but the sponsors are ultra keen that 'their' players are 'seen' to be using them.
A company I worked for made raquet strings and wanted the logo stencilled on the strings. We had big battles with the raquet manufactures about whose logo was on. Some bright spark suggested stencilling a different one on each face

[AAA]

But back to the original post....as far as I know, all stroke play tournaments have this rule, or at least the ones I have played in. So it could be just a rule by the USGA or RCGA. If you play a tournament its governed by these rules.

I don't think all competitions are run by the USGA or RCGA (even in the US or Canada)
Certainly in Europe, I have never heard of any club using that Condition of Competition in the weekly medals or matchplay comps. I doubt that any of the top amateur comps use it. And I havn't noticed it on the European Seniors tour.

[Sphere Hunter]

I win by acclamation.

Yep, same result, silly rule or not. Just wait though, Spalding is coming out with a new "spin/distance" Molitor. No need to switch brands any more, I will have the best of both worlds! I am saving for a box. You are in huge trouble!!!!!!!!
SH

[Sphere Hunter]

If some people dont care enough to buy a certain ball (or any balls for that matter) to put in their bag because of its performance (and there are some cheap balls with pretty good performance), why should they care enough to play in a club championship, or any other tournament. You have registration fees and other expenses....I just dont get the big deal here. Its a rule, play by it!

It's not a rule. It sounds like something cooked up by a little group of organizers who have there heads in the dirt. While some people feel that a balls performace can make a big difference to their score, I don't. I do have a preference but have no trouble playing any ball.

This is probably the same group who decided you had to wear knee socks if you wore shorts on the golf course. Another really important and equally useful rule.

I have played in many golf tournaments including National level events run by the rcga and have never heard of this rule.

When I play a draw, my ball travels further down the fairway, when I play a fade, it travels straighter, but not as far. Their next rule might be that if you hit a draw off the first tee, you MUST continue to hit that shot throughout your round. It wouldn't be fair to switch from a distance shot to a spin shot. Better protect the field.
SH

[1dash1]

But back to the original post....

In the original situation, there was NO problem with misidentification of balls or cheating. The same group of people played with each other year round.

Hence the starting question of whether it was a good idea to put this rule into effect just for this one tournament a year?

[AAA]

In the original situation, there was NO problem with misidentification of balls or cheating. The same group of people played with each other year round.

Hence the starting question of whether it was a good idea to put this rule into effect just for this one tournament a year?

I can see the attraction of doing it for a one off 'fun' competition but for the Club Championship its seems pretentious.

[BC MIST]

Hence the starting question of whether it was a good idea to put this rule into effect just for this one tournament a year?

NO! It is meaningless rule that neither helps nor hurts in separating the "men from the boys."

This is probably the same group who decided you had to wear knee socks if you wore shorts on the golf course. Another really important and equally useful rule.SH

Funny you mention this. One year when I was a member at one of the local private clubs, if you wore shorts they had to be down to just above the knees AND you HAD to wear knee socks to just below the knee. It was actually cooler wearing long pants. At this same club club the Intersectional team shirts one year, were peach with black trim so I showed up on the Sunday with black MATCHING pants, thinking that I was being very fashionable. I was berated by the Team captain because I should have been wearing navy pants, about which he told everyone else to wear, but me. In recent years, again at this same club, a friend showed up to play an Intersectional practice round with athletic socks on and was told by the pro that he could not play. My friend asked for a pair of scissors, cut the socks off to ankle height, and walked to the first tee.

I recall my mom telling me that in CLGA events in which she played, the ladies had to get down on their knees on the first tee to have their shorts measured and if they were more than 1" from the ground, they were asked to leave.

Some of the people in charge must still be around, judging by the "one ball rule."

[Gary Hill]

So I am guessing you are totally in favour of the one ball rule.

[sensfan63]

Listen, ALL levels of professional golf use this Condition of Competition, so get off it. It's not a big deal. If you don't like it being used in your CC, go to the captain and state your position.

Two other things:

1. "Someone" COUGH COUGH BC MIST stated that balls really don't make a difference. Why do the REMAX Long Drive competitors use the Pinnacle Extreme Balls for their drives? I also challenge you to hit a regular Pro V1 into a howling wind as far as a
Pro V1x. Doesn't happen. The regular Pro V1 spins a little more, and the X is able to cut through the wind a little better.

2. "Someone" got all bent out of shape when it was suggested that the typical private club players are better than others in this area. I think it's an inferiority complex myself. But if you look at the Intersectional matches over the last 10 years, Rivermead, Rideau View, and Ottawa Hunt are pretty much always in the A division. They must get lucky every year.

Back to the topic, however...

[Samick]

In the original situation, there was NO problem with misidentification of balls or cheating. The same group of people played with each other year round.

Hence the starting question of whether it was a good idea to put this rule into effect just for this one tournament a year?

Personally, myself, I think its a good idea. I have played tournaments that it is automatic to identify your ball to your playing partners for ID purposes, and for the one ball rule.

AAA.....If PGA Tour Tournaments aren't governed by the USGA, what are they governed by? Canada is ruled under the rules of the RCGA, and Europe has the R&A.

I for one think that playing a tournament with more that one type of ball is cheating. You are trying to use the golf ball to your advantage, using a distance ball on one hole..and a spin ball on the next. ITS GARBAGE! If people have integrity and respect for the game and the way its meant to be played, they will play with one ball make/model. If I play a tournament, I would expect it to be upheld in a professional way and play under the rules of the Big Boys. PERIOD.

[Samick]

It's not a rule. It sounds like something cooked up by a little group of organizers who have there heads in the dirt......
SH

RCGA Rules

Appendix I, Part C 1.b......One Ball Condition.

[el tigre]

I for one think that playing a tournament with more that one type of ball is cheating. You are trying to use the golf ball to your advantage, using a distance ball on one hole..and a spin ball on the next. ITS GARBAGE! If people have integrity and respect for the game and the way its meant to be played, they will play with one ball make/model. If I play a tournament, I would expect it to be upheld in a professional way and play under the rules of the Big Boys. PERIOD.

Cheating!!??!! Give me a break!!! A golf ball is a piece of equipment - no more and no less.

So if I continue your reasoning to the rest of the my golf bag, having a low-profile fairway wood for shots off the fairway and an oversize fairway wood for shots of the tee must be cheating then??? Or having hybrid long irons, cavity-back mid-irons and blade wedges in my bag somehow calls my integrity into question - after all, I'm trying to use my equipment to my advantage, right???

RCGA Rules
Appendix I, Part C 1.b......One Ball Condition.

Read the fine print. The so-called "one-ball rule" is not a Rule of Golf and it never has been and never will be. Appendix I merely suggests the wording for the "One Ball Condition" should the Committee choose to invoke this option as a Condition of Competition.

[AAA]

AAA.....If PGA Tour Tournaments aren't governed by the USGA, what are they governed by? Canada is ruled under the rules of the RCGA, and Europe has the R&A.

I didn't say PGA Tour Tournaments are not governed by the USGA.

I am saying that the USGA do not organise all competitions played in the US & Mexico. Any club/state/group of players can organise a competition. As 'the one ball condition' is not a Rule of Golf the organisers are free to decide whether or not to make 'one ball make/type' a Condition of that competition. The words that appear in the Appendix are simply a suggestion by the RBs (USGA/RCGA/R&A) of how such a Condition of Competition should be worded if the organisers choose to include one. But is has to written down on the entry form or posted prominently on the notices so that players know that it is a Condition for this competition or all competitions arranged by this particular organision. If included it becomes a 'Rule' for the competition only (not a Rule of Golf).

[Samick]

Cheating!!??!! Give me a break!!! A golf ball is a piece of equipment - no more and no less.

So if I continue your reasoning to the rest of the my golf bag, having a low-profile fairway wood for shots off the fairway and an oversize fairway wood for shots of the tee must be cheating then??? Or having hybrid long irons, cavity-back mid-irons and blade wedges in my bag somehow calls my integrity into question - after all, I'm trying to use my equipment to my advantage, right???



Read the fine print. The so-called "one-ball rule" is not a Rule of Golf and it never has been and never will be. Appendix I merely suggests the wording for the "One Ball Condition" should the Committee choose to invoke this option as a Condition of Competition.

If it is envoked...it is a rule. Read the penalties for breaching this "rule".
If a club decides to envoke the rule of "one ball", then its a rule and you will be penalized for breaking it...so I ask, if its not a rule, why would you be penalized?

My statement for using multiple balls as cheating is to be considered with this rule envoked. Afterall, we are talking about a tournament here....not a casual round of golf.

Your assumption of my reasoning is not correct in what I am trying to say....we are talking golf balls, not the 14 clubs in which you have in your bag. We all know you cant change your setup in mid round....so why should you be able to change the type of ball you play in mid round? Can you take out that low profile fairway wood on the 3rd hole and throw in a hybred instead? Nope. Thats the same reasoning why I think you shouldnt be able to change balls.

In my statement, I said "I think its a good idea..." which is one mans opinion. You can have another opinion if you wish. I want to play a tournament with the same rules as the big boys....if you choose not to play that way then so be it, use your Pinnacle Gold or Precept Lady to try and win the long drive hole, and a ProV 1 on the closest to the pin par 3......have at it. But be sure that the rule isnt envoked...


AAA.....I misread your previous post and would agree with the last one you have written. You are right, it is an "optional rule". Just so happens the tournys I have played have this rule.

[Sphere Hunter]

I went to the rcga web site and was surprized to see that this IS a recommended rule for competition involving "expert" golfers.

I still think it's silly because I just don't see any advantage to switching balls in the middle of a game if the intention is to find a ball with different characteristics and some how take advantage of it.

Nevertheless, it is a rule but it is "recommended" for "expert" players. Not sure what this means but I know I'm no expert. I have asked the rcga to give a definition of the word "Expert". It will be interesting to hear their reply.

I am sure of thing, any player who switches back and forth between different balls for the purpose of taking advantage of different characteristics is no expert. There is no advantage to this that I can see.

I lost 11 balls in one round playing the Marshes a couple of years ago. I'm sure glad they were pinnacles, Noodles and Top Flights. If I were playing under the One Ball Rule and had teed off with a ProV1X it would have been an expensive day.

SH

[Samick]

You can play any ball you want......as long as you play the same ball all round. Whether its a Pinnacle, ProV.....Molitor.....its not meant for one ball for everybody.

Some people see no difference in golf balls.....but for myself, I can make a Srixon Z-UR-S or a ProV1 stop very quickly.....but you put a Topflite XL-Ti in there.....and its screaming over the green.....especially on chip/pitch shots.

I'm no expert either...far from it. But I do like to play tournaments with the same rulse the PGA play by...

[ironmaster15213]

It seems to me that the only rule that would make everybody except those trying to gain an advantage happy would be a one type of ball at a time rule. You must use the same ball till you lose it, then you can replace it with another type if you choose, as long as you inform your playing partner(s) before you make the switch. If you have hit 6 cart paths and your ball is looking a little ratty you may change balls after completing a hole but in that case it must be the same type of ball. I don't think anybody would be willing to take a one or two stroke penalty on a hole just to lose their ball so they can change to a pro v for that short hole with the pin tucked over a bunker. If you really don't believe there's any difference between ball performance just answer this question. If you had 3 balls, one a pro v1 x, one a rock flite, and one a titelist balata, would you let your competition pick the ball that you were to play with for each hole. If you answer yes, you are a little naive, if you answer no you are looking for an advantage by changing balls in the middle of a round, it's really that simple! But whatever the case, do play in the tournament and enjoy the game and competetion. good luck

[Sphere Hunter]

If you really don't believe there's any difference between ball performance just answer this question. If you had 3 balls, one a pro v1 x, one a rock flite, and one a titelist balata, would you let your competition pick the ball that you were to play with for each hole. If you answer yes, you are a little naive, if you answer no you are looking for an advantage by changing balls in the middle of a round, it's really that simple!

You're right Ironmaster BUT, if the only issue for the golf shot was the amount of spin it has when it lands, the advantage would be huge. Much more important is the exact distance you want your ball to travel so it lands over the bunker. If you have just changed from a Pinnacle to a ProV, the ProV will spin more, fly higher and definitely not fly the same distance. Into the wind it would be shorter and with the wind arguably longer due to the increase height of the shot. Either way, if your ball doesn't land where you want it to, it doesn't really matter how much spin it has.

Now, if your an expert with the time and control to test and remember all the differences, maybe, maybe you can figure it all out and turn it into an advantage. I just don't see it.

Hopefully the RGCA will shed some light on this argument.

BTW - If I were choosing my opponents ball, I would always choose the softest one for him/her. IMO, the softer the ball, the more it will travel in a sideways direction (hook/slice) due to increased sidespin. At the skill level that most of us play, reducing the hook/slice is probably more valuable than adding backspin. Ah, but others will argue that point. That what makes this the greatest game on the planet.
SH

[AAA]

Apart from anything else, the main reason I'm against the idea is that I can't afford to use the same type, as that would mean buying them.
I always play with 'foundlings', as long as they are new and expensive.

[Sphere Hunter]

Apart from anything else, the main reason I'm against the idea is that I can't afford to use the same type, as that would mean buying them.

I couldn't agree more. This is where the problem with this rule is. It forces a player who wouldn't otherwise do so, to go out and, IMO, waste money on golf balls. What the heck does that have to do with indentifying a club champion? Nothing. For experts yes, but if a 25 handicap player goes out to the Marshes to play in his division of the CC how many balls do you think he will need? He might be forced to CHANGE his regular, more expensive brand just to be sure he has enough balls to get around without running out. I'll have 3 dozen Molitors please.
SH
PS. Can you imagine what the market for used golf balls would be if this rule ever worked it's way into the every day game? Sure sounds like there's a chance that the manufacturers may have somehow had a hand in it's birth.

[ironmaster15213]

I think the secret is to play Nike golf balls if you don't have a lot of money cause I swear every other ball I find has a swoosh on it. I really think there must be Nike trees and they drop their fruit in the summer months. For all I know they might be good balls but I never played them, but you would never run out of those during a round down here in Pa. USA. Hit a ball in the woods and come out with three more nikes beside the one you went in to look for.

[BC MIST]

sensfan63

"Someone" COUGH COUGH BC MIST stated that balls really don't make a difference.
While I don’t mind being disagreed with, I would appreciate that if you are going to quote me, that you do so accurately versus lying just to make a point or to discredit mine. The only place where I said I saw no difference between a “Super Long” and a “ProV1x” is off the driver, as stated. I also stated at least one advantage(difference) of each type over the other.

Why do the REMAX Long Drive competitors use the Pinnacle Extreme Balls for their drives? Because they are paid to use them????


I also challenge you to hit a regular Pro V1 into a howling wind as far as a
Pro V1x. Doesn't happen. The regular Pro V1 spins a little more, and the X is able to cut through the wind a little better. While your statement about these two balls is correct, your point is irrelevant as neither ball is classified as a distance ball.


"Someone" got all bent out of shape when it was suggested that the typical private club players are better than others in this area. If Canada has 100 world class curling teams and Japan has one, and the Japanese win the world championship, does that mean Japanese curlers are better than Canadian curlers? Just because the clubs you mentioned are in the A section of Intersectionals matches does not necessarily mean that they are better golfers than those at other clubs. It just means, and have you considered this? That there are just more of them. The depth of the private clubs makes the difference in winning or not, not each’s ultimate skill level.

I think it's an inferiority complex myself. What? Yours or mine? For your information, I spent many years as a member of two of the private clubs,(non-Clublink), played positions 1, 2 and or 3, on teams from Carleton and Rivermead (private) and Outaouais, in the “A” Intersectional matches. I assure you that being a member of a private club is nothing more special than being a member at any other, and playing on an “A” Intersectional team is no more or less significant that being on a team in “R” Division. While course conditions may be better on the average at private clubs, the beer tastes the same at the Meadows as it does at the Hunt, and is a heck of a lot cheaper, to boot. Each kind of club has some great people to play with and some jerks, too. I don’t know what the proper definition of an “expert” golfer is, but as I stated elsewhere, one does not have to be a member of a private club to be one. I would consider Chris McQuaig of the Hunt one, and Robert Fugere of Rivermead another, but I also listed elsewhere the names of others who are, IMO, experts, but do not belong to private clubs. Having also played with Canadian Amateur Champions, Warren Sye, Greg Olson and Graham Cooke over the years, and the likes of Brad Fritsch, Eric Kaufmanis and so on, I have a pretty good idea of what an expert golfer is. And while my golf game, like yours, is inferior to theirs, this does not make us inferior persons.

The one ball option is still unnecessary. Where's my rangefinder?

[Sphere Hunter]

I really think there must be Nike trees and they drop their fruit in the summer months.

I checked the Nike web site and there is no mention of this tree. Probably wouldn't grow in our climate anyway. Is this plant part of the same family as the Money Tree?

[davemiddle]

Agree with BC MIST Just a little comment when someone was making the comment about an inferiority complex and all and that one club produces betters golfer and such tha another or something like that. I will with you something from my own experience that will shed some light on this sort of strange subject. As a teenager I belonged to a club outside of Brandon Man.( late 60 early 70)There happened to be a very good golfer who was a member at our club as well as a club in Brandon. During my 3 years as a member there this golfer never won the club championship at my course. There was a not lot of great golfer at my club but he never won. But this person went on to play in the PGA his name was Dan Holderson. Does that mean that my old club was full of great golfers do not think so, I think what BC Mist said is true one club may have more depth that another but that all that can be assumed

[sensfan63]

Alright let's go through this point by point.

BC MIST I have scrolled back through your posts and you are right, you never said that "balls do not make a difference." I was lying. And my intentions were malevolent. I apologize. However, your basic point that, since you know your yardages/ball flight, etc., you will be better equipped to play with just one ball, has a flaw. It assumes you are playing in Arizona where there is no wind and you are basically playing indoor golf. What if conditions suddenly change during a round? When playing in the wind, a lot of players would probably prefer playing a lower-spin ball to reduce the sidespin. How about when it's wet? Surely a ball with a higher spin rate will carry farther. Note that in these circumstances I am trying to convey the difference between the Pro V1 and the Pro V1x, which are pretty much the gold standard of golf balls at the moment. How about in a scramble tournament like the one in Smiths Falls? When I used to play there, we would break out the Bridgestone ball (I forget what it was called but it was touted as their longest ball) off the tee, and then use the Pro V1 into the green. No mention of the one-ball rule on the rules sheet. But is there no advantage to that? Of course there is.

Notwithstanding these arguments, there is also the point about equipment. I think it was ap_logan who asked, why should you be able to change a piece of your equipment mid-round? I totally agree. If you can't throw a hybrid into your bag and take out a 5-wood on the 15th hole, why in the world would you be able to change the type of ball? Surely one can see the logic in this argument.

Next. If you think that the REMAX Long Drive competitors value the money they receive for using their specific brand of ball (not everyone is paid, by the way) over an actual victory...well, I won't argue semantics with you. Again, is there not logic in the argument that, if they felt a different ball would provide them with extra distance and control, they would use this ball to win?

Next. I see I have ruffled your feathers about the private vs. non-private club members thing. Gary the rules guy started it! I still think that showing you the results from Intersectional matches from the last ten years - which pit each club's ten best players against each other - is a pretty valid argument. You know what? I'm going to stop calling it "argument" and re-label it "discussion." Because that's all this is - a discussion, among knowledgeable golfers. Some of them even being expert golfers. But I digress. Back to the club thing. In the last 15 years, a lot of the region's best players, and I will say the majority, have come out of the private clubs listed. Why? I have no idea. But think about these players...the Moore brothers and McCuaig from the Hunt, Mike Walker from Outaouais, the Fritsch brothers from Carleton and Rideau View, Lee Curry from Rideau View, Bob Fugere from Rivermead. These are all pretty darn good players. Two of them have played in PGA Tour events in the last few years, others have won big amateur events in Quebec and Ottawa...but nowhere did I say that the "less prestigious" private clubs were INFERIOR, I just said that typically over the last little while, the clubs listed have produced the best players.

Alright, it's late and the Leafs scored 9 goals tonight. The world has turned upside down. I'm out.