Cheat to Win

Of couse, winning is a very big "if " in that situation. Finishing 20th will not offer the heroic opportunity. Then, not only are you a loser, you can be considered a few other things as well…

Tiger only deep in his heart knows the answer. It comes down to the rules. What are the rules? You play by the rules and accept them and any punishment for violating them. It’s that stark. What were you thinking at the time…you have to take a man at his word, it’s an honorable game. Now you add intentions, it looks sketchy because the Twitterverse has weighed in, now how do you proceed as a golfer when you go to tee it up?

Faldo thought Tiger got confused in the heat of the moment because he had just come back from the drop zone and was thinking you can go farther back and that thinking muddled his second drop. Why didn’t his caddy Joey LaCava step in and say something? I wouldn’t hire a caddy unless he knew the rules cold. Joey failed him there.

JPav, if for even one millisecond I had doubt I would DQ myself.

I am all for adhering strictly to the rules of golf if the rules are in place to protect the integrity of the game, which they clearly are not. There are so many silly rules that are being adhered to from a century ago… but in my mind, you can’t have it both ways. The USGA can’t get on their high horse and talk about these sacred traditional rules then allow the golf ball to go 50 yards farther, allow giant frying pan drivers and anchored putters, while then banning Snead’s side saddle method etc. They just do whatever is convenient for them. Had I teed off in my US Amateur quarterfinal match in 1983 with a modern frying pan driver… I would have been roped and hung by the USGA.

Why in the world should a TV viewer be able to call in and change the outcome of such an event? Other sports don’t allow this. It’s silly. If the officials missed the call… so be it. Isn’t that what they are there for? The DQ thing for signing a wrong card to me is silly and absurd. Especially in an event with scorekeepers and rules officials on every hole. Why are they there then?

De Vicenzo signed for a higher score than what he shot. Everyone knows what he shot. No one was contesting that he shot one shot lower than he actually shot from tee to green. Silly.

I had this happen to me in our conference championship in college. I tied for first, but missed on my card that I had made a 4 not a 3 on the par three 11th hole at Sandpiper Links in Santa Barbara CA. My nines of 34 - 36 were correct as was the final round 70 on the card that I signed for. But I was disqualified, even though no one was contesting that I cheated. I wasn’t trying to cheat… and argue that I won the event outright… or was trying to pull the wool and hope no one noticed. We had 100 people following us around. It’s a crap rule and silly.

Now like I said… I am fine with adhering to this nonsense, IF the game remains honorable and TRADITIONAL… but not in this day in age with the game being run over by technology and all the silly gear and laser scopes etc.

As far as this situation with Tiger… it should be a call made by The Masters Rules Committee and the USGA should stay in their own parlor of madness and hypocrisy for their own events. Whatever the Rules Committee determines, that is what stands for the player and players.

If Tiger tried to cheat… then only he knows… and only he has to live with that.

From an abstract perspective, it would be a better rule that if you strike the pin from the fairway, you pocket the ball with a birdie and walk to the next tee. A reward rather than a potential penalty for a perfectly executed golf shot. I’m sure I would have Hogan and Moe on my side on this concept. It would speed up play also for a double win.

Neither Faldo nor Norman have much love for Tiger so natural they should be all over him but it seems pretty clear that TW broke the rules by intentionally not dropping as near as possible (which was likely a mistake rather than an attempt to cheat) then signed for a wrong score. Should have DQ or walked for me if player is ultimately responsible for knowing rules and signing for correct score.

Hoping Snedecker goes on to win, he’s a breath of fresh air.

How about Arnie’s flirting with the rules? In his first win at Augusta, he had a rules official and a playing partner (Venturi) both tell him that he was not entitled to take a drop from an embedded ball on the 12th hole. After making a double with that ball, he told both that he was going to play a second ball. They both told him that it was too late to do that, but he did it anyway. Eventually the rules committee let him get away with it, but my understanding is that Bobby Jones and Clifford Roberts both later told Venturi that they had made the wrong decision.

In this case and in Tiger’s I think the Masters let their emotions get away with them. Whether they would admit it or not, I think they wanted to protect a marquee player and devised a rules interpretation to let them do it.

I just watched the interview with rules official in “The Cabin”.

Rule 33?

Ok… gives them discretion… ok… fair enough…

Then they should do the right thing… De Vicenzo is still alive… they need to fly him out to Augusta, if he is not there already, and give him a “co” Green Jacket based upon their new discretionary powers. It would be the right thing to do. Obviously he didn’t INTEND to sign for a higher score.

It’s the constant breaking of tradition… then hammering home “A tradition like no other” that drives me crazy.

Woods broke the rules and was penalized and is called a cheat, Vincenzo is called back for a jacket. Maybe no one bullied the referees for free drops more than Player (except Seve?) and he’s a hero. If your face fits I suppose. Or do we choose which rules to bend? :confused:

Again, I keep going back to the reality on the ground. The rules are what they are at this time. I may not like the change–the HD rule–but it is in the books. (Actually I do like this change).

You can’t say on one hand here is the rule and then turn around and penalize the player some more because of what you thought was an intent when no nefarious intent was evident. Tiger paid the price. Yes, some might say, but I hate him for his off-course lifestyle, he needs to pay some more.

Tiger brings a lot of emotion to the table. Can you divorce your feelings for him, either way, and look at the ruling in the cold light of day? And by the way, the ruling committee in this case was comprised of Augusta honchos and rules official Mark Russell from the USGA (sorry, Lag. :laughing:) And they ran their decision by the R&A and other golf bodies as well. They all agreed it was the right decision.


When asked in a post round interview, Tiger said “I went two yards back.” When asked at Augusta, Tiger said he adhered to the rule regarding his drop. Both statements cannot be true. Either he was confused (for which he was rightly assessed the penalty), or he was not confused. Augusta says “we asked, and Tiger was very candid that he adhered to the rule.” This is not congruent with the “I was confused and didn’t mean to” defense.

Tiger wasn’t trying to cheat, but he was found violating the rules. When asked directly, it appears he prevaricated. At the very least, he created a chasm of gray area here that leaves his integrity in doubt. It’s not Augusta’s job to police Tiger’s integrity. And I’m not arguing “the ruling.”

None of this has anything to do with “silly rules.” I think incorrectly tallied scorecards and a host of other things can be improved upon, no argument here. But publicly admitting he did not drop over his divot and then telling the rules committee that “he did” begs the question: for which interview was he being dishonest?

If we need to use some euphemism for cheating because that’s too harsh a word, then use whatever word you want to call it. But last time Tiger was heard “speaking candidly” he was found in the middle of the street with a long iron bent over his head.

The HD rule amendment (33-7/4.5) has nothing to do with it IMO, because it states:

This is the rule that kept Woods in the tournament:

The committee investigated the alleged infraction with Woods still on the course, and at that time found no breach. Then with the additional evidence provided in the interview after the round, they decided that a 2 stroke penalty was in order. This would lead to a DQ for an incorrect scorecard. They decided to waive the DQ, presumably because they did not want to punish Woods for their lack of thoroughness in the original investigation.

In the past… he would have been disqualified for what actually happened.

In golf’s storied tradition, which is about all they talk about at Augusta, he should be DQed. But the reality is that both Augusta and USGA / R and A have deviated from tradition by miles on many issues, especially and obviously on the ball and equipment.

I agree that technically he should be DQed or he should bow out himself after reviewing the facts in more detail watching some of today’s telecast.

My personal feeling differs from that… as I have commented many times about the absurdity of many of golf’s rules… but this only is hinting at someday starting a rival organization that puts golf back to tradition. I do hope that at some point, this gathers enough momentum to actually happen. It has in other sports and for good reasons.

But back to Tiger, I know while I was playing on tour… if I had done that, and signed my card under the rules of the game at that time… I would not have been playing on the weekend… either by my own WD or being escorted off the property.

While I do like rule 33.7, I also can see it being abused… and suspect it has been this week. Giving free discretion to the ruling body is consistent with other sports… but does open up the possibility for “bad calls”.

Of course a better solution would be for the implementation of a universal drop procedure that is simple, clear, and easily followed from the tour down to Saturday morning golf at the CC.

I agree with Palmer that the rules ideally should not split… however, I think they need to because of the poor decision making of the USGA over the years, and their inability to right the ship on the much bigger issues.

I say he should be DQ no question about it. Ignorance no excuse

Of course, with Tigers track record, i doubt he and his kind have much trouble getting to sleep


I wouldn’t be surprised if the ‘we reviewed it whilst he was on the 18th & found no problem’ story was concocted to allow them a way of keeping him in the event, I’m sure the sponsors would have been somewhat disappointed had he been DQ.

It is an exciting tournament, the final round should be worth watching. I’m hoping Sned prevails over the bombers. … id=3324061

Di Vicenzo article

golf’s costliest mistakes … rs#slide=1

After seeing the interviews or “full evidence” I am pretty shocked they didn’t DQ Tiger under the rules. It’s a terrible rule, but it is the current rule. If rule 33.7 is the new rule… then they must give Roberto a co green jacket. While I am sure the one awarded to him here at ABS means a lot to him :sunglasses: … getting one tailored up by the The Masters committee with a USGA logo sewn into the inside lapel right across his heart might mean even more…