Slice-Free Tees

[terrygray]

I was playing with someone the other day who used these special "slice-free" tees that they had picked up at Canadian Tire, and I was wondering if they were legal according to the RCGA.

If you haven't seen them before, the base is like a regular tee but they have a spoon-shaped piece attached that the back of the ball rests against. The face of your club actually strikes this spoon-shaped piece rather than the ball. I couldn't find anything in the RCGA rulebook that seemed to specifically prohibit them, but ...

[Gary Hill]

If you check Rule 14-3, it prohibits a player from using any artificial device or unusual equipment which might assist him in making a stroke or in his play.

The Rule book advises a player in doubt to contact the R.C.G.A. directly, but it would be impossible to specifically list every item which does not comply.

[spidey]

Yes, I'd automatically assume that this equipment would not be fair.

....but....

Suppose I'm playing a round of golf with a borrowed metalwood club. I put tape on the face of the club and around the edges of the face to ensure that I don't scratch or mar the club. ie. I am not attempting to improve the performance characteristics of the club.

1 - Can my competitor call a penalty on me?
2 - Am I required to post my score for handicap purposes?

spidey

[Gary Hill]

1. You would be disqualified for using illegal equipment.
2. You cannot enter Handicap scores using illegal equipment.

[4jag]

I've played with guys who have tried some other "shot enhancing" tricks.

1) Contact cemented fine grained sand paper to the face of his wedges. Very hard on the balls and only lasted a few strokes.

2) Filled the groves of his driver with Epoxy. The theory being less grip = less spin. There are some smooth faced drives on the market today.

I'm assuming that both of these are illegal. But then wouldn't filling your putter shaft with sugar or sand also be against the rules?

[terrygray]

Gary:

I checked Rule 14-3, but the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that it doesn't apply here, because:

1. The item is a tee. All tees "assist (players) in making a stroke", but since tees are permitted for use on the teeing ground under Rule 11-1 then you must be able to use a tee without being in breach of Rule 14-3.
2. Since the item is a tee, and tees are permitted under the rules, how can they be considered "unusual equipment" or an "artificial device"? The obvious answer would be that this item does not fit the definition of a tee, but this is where the problem with the rulebook is - I could not find a paragraph anywhere that actually defines what a "tee" is.

Rule 14-3 also suggests that a manufacturer (in this case, Spalding) can submit the item to the RCGA for a ruling, so I went to Spalding's website and asked them for their take on this. I'll let you know what their reply is.

Like you, my first reaction to these things is that they must be illegal. And so I checked the Rulebook expecting to find a paragraph defining what is a "tee" (which this thing wouldn't fit into), perhaps giving specs and characteristics like it does with balls and clubs. No such paragraph exists, and I think this is a loophole that the RCGA should probably address. There are at least a half-dozen kinds of tees available now - not just these ones but others that promote a higher loft, some with a larger "rest" for the ball, all kinds of different heights, etc. How do we know what is OK and what isn't?

[Gary Hill]

4jag -

There is no regulation on weight, so filling the shaft or adding lead tape (to the back of the club) is allowed. However, the striking face of the club is sacrosanct. Cementing sand to the face and filling or sanding the grooves are definite no no's.

terrygray -

I am glad to hear that you have given this some thought. Sometimes a simple looking Rule can be deceivingly complex. Many people are also mislead by subtle but important differences in wording. For example, "a ball" means any ball. "the ball" means only the ball in play. A player may drop "a ball" in taking relief from a water hazard, but must drop "the ball" when taking relief from an immovable obstruction.

Specifically to your analysis,

The item is not necessarily a tee. It may be called a tee, but that doesn't make it a tee as it applies to Rule 14-3. A policeman's nightstick might be called a club, but that does not mean that it conforms to the Rules of Golf.

I don't agree that using a tee assists the player as it applies to Rule 14-3. Rule 14 covers assistance in the form of physical assist, such as a caddie holding a player by the belt to prevent him from falling while playing off a steep slope, and equipment assistance such as range finders and compasses. Rule 11-1 addresses putting a ball into play on the teeing ground. It specifically allows the ball to be RAISED by a created irregularity of surface, or placing it ON sand, a tee, or any other substance. It does not say you can tee up your ball IN a coffee cup or IN a holder (slice-free tee) that prevents the club from directly striking the ball.

I agree that there is no definition of a tee. There is also no definition of wind, water, player, scorecard, pencil, stone, wall, dew, golf bag, swing, ground, frost, coin, grass, bush, tree, stake, line, etc, etc, etc. Every single word used in the Rules cannot have its own definition. The 47 definitions in the Rule book clarify terms used only in golf or terms used in the Rule book not normally associated with common usage. Everybody knows what a hole is, but in the Rules of Golf a hole has specific dimensions written into the definition. The answer does not lie in the exactly definition of a tee is but in the understanding of what artificial assistance is. Surgical tape is allowed when applied to a blister on your finger, but not when used to bind your fingers together for a better grip.

Unfortunately, not only are there many different and confusing tees, but supposedly well respected manufacturers have thrown the Rule book away by offering for sale clubs that do not conform to the Rules. Callaway ERC and ERC II, Mizuno 300E, Mizuno 300R, Mizuno T-Zoid Forged Plus 310, Killer Bee Stinger, Lynx Parrallax Tour, Snake Eyes AerMet, Snake Eyes FireForged, the list goes on and on.

Does the R.C.G.A. need to address this problem of a definition for a tee. I think not. The original Rules in 1744 were 300 words. Today, the Rule book is 26,500 words and a Decision Book covering another 1,000 specific cases. Some of the terms in the Rules, such as "reasonable evidence" and "as soon as practicable" are purposely and necessarily broad so as to permit sensible judgements to be reached on the basis of all the relevant circumstances of particualr cases. No amount of Rules and definitions could possibly cover every eventuality in golf.

How do you know what to do?

Play the course as you find it.
Play the ball as it lies.
Do what seems fair.