Leupold GX4i Laser - legal in comps?

[fundy]

Im looking to get a laser and came across this model. The crux of it is it has a removeable faceplate which changes it from being a slope to a non slope device.

Does this come under the same rule as the compass within phones in that because the device has the capability to measure slope that its banned or are you modifying the device sufficiently that it is legal in competition (the faceplate for slope is bright yellow compared to chrome so highly identifiable that it is attached)

Also does anyone use a Leupold laser and if so would you recommend?

 

[User20205]

I had a look at one of these, as from what I could gather they are the best in the market, I couldn't really justify the cost on something I will probably drop and lose in about 6 months.

My understanding is, as you say, they have different coloured faceplates as a visual tell tale of what mode it is in.

with the chrome it can even tell you which club to hit !! With the yellow in, I would guess it was legal. they are easily distinguishable.

You maybe paying for a load of features you're never going to use.

 

[fundy]

Thanks for the reply Rod, I have emailed the R&A to see if they have made a formal decision on the unit.

With regards to not being able to use most of the functions, they would obviously be useable in non comp rounds and think it would be quite educational to see the calculated effect slopes have, especially a couple of spots on my home course!

Im more worried about spending the money on it then finding I cant use it in comps, then it does become a white elephant!

 

[edgey]

Hi

I previously asked the same question and I was advised that the GX4i is not legal for comps as it has slope features built in. That they can be switched off with the use of the faceplate does not meet the current definitions.

I have also contacted Leupold and they have also confirmed it is not legal to use in comps.

All seemed a bit daft to me but I didnt buy one and went with Bushnell.

 

[fundy]

Thanks edgey, pretty much what I expected the answer to be (a bad rule imo but no point labouring that point lol), have to say Im amazed Leupold didnt get approval before they developed it. Leaves me back deciding which to buy once again lol

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Begs the question why would anyone want to shell out on anything you can't use if in comps. Self defeating

 

[fundy]

I can understand pro's or serious amateurs buying slope versions to help them to add to their yardage books, I guess there is a market for golfers who only play friendly golf, for me and most on here it would be completely pointless

As I say would love to use one for a bit to better understand the effect of slopes on distances, but not going to pay £300 for a unit I cant use in comps, thats for sure!

 

[duncan mackie]

I'm not aware of an R&A specific ruling but understand that the USGA were asked in Feb and advised that it was NC (Non-conforming) with or without the faceplate.

This is probably the basis of the Leupold response, and I can't see the R&A making a different reply.

 

[fundy]

thanks Duncan, I think it makes sense with regard to the law as it is written, surely must have been a costly error for Leupold not to have checked in advance tho

 

[Scottjd1]

Leaves me back deciding which to buy once again lol

.

All seemed a bit daft to me but I didnt buy one and went with Bushnell.

You have your answer, I cant recommend Bushnell enough, quality product you wont regret it :thup:

 

[fundy]

as expected the R&A have confirmed that it is not allowed in comps irrelevant of which faceplate is on, the ruling I expected (but as per the phones ruling one I think is poor)

 

[Scottjd1]

as expected the R&A have confirmed that it is not allowed in comps irrelevant of which faceplate is on, the ruling I expected (but as per the phones ruling one I think is poor)

Did they explain why at all Fundy, I had a good look at it when you put up your original post and I just dont get it.

I understand the phone situation.

But thi is 2 rangefinders in 1, if I had one and left the yelow bit at home then how is it not conforming.

I think they have this one wrong (although im sure Leupold have done all they can)...

I wonder if my Titlesit 910 (16 setings) will be outlawed soon ......

 

[chrisd]

I wonder if my Titlesit 910 (16 setings) will be outlawed soon ......

............... only because of danger to other golfers ....

 

[fundy]

Did they explain why at all Fundy, I had a good look at it when you put up your original post and I just dont get it.

I understand the phone situation.

But thi is 2 rangefinders in 1, if I had one and left the yelow bit at home then how is it not conforming.

I think they have this one wrong (although im sure Leupold have done all they can)...

I wonder if my Titlesit 910 (16 setings) will be outlawed soon ......

The email I got back was relatively short but the key part was that a GX4i had been submitted to them by Leupold and they said "its use was ruled contrary to both Rule 14-3 and the Local Rule. This is because, in some configurations, the device is capable of measuring conditions other than simply distance"

For the record rule 14-3 is as follows:

14-3 - Artificial Devices, Unusual Equipment and Unusual Use of Equipment

The R&A reserves the right, at any time, to change the Rules relating to artificial devices, unusual equipment and the unusual use of equipment, and to make or change the interpretations relating to these Rules.
A player in doubt as to whether use of an item would constitute a breach of Rule 14-3 should consult the R&A.
A manufacturer should submit to the R&A a sample of an item to be manufactured for a ruling as to whether its use during a stipulated round would cause a player to be in breach of Rule 14-3. The sample becomes the property of the R&A for reference purposes. If a manufacturer fails to submit a sample or, having submitted a sample, fails to await a ruling before manufacturing and/or marketing the item, the manufacturer assumes the risk of a ruling that use of the item would be contrary to the Rules.

Except as provided in the Rules, during a stipulated round the player must not use any artificial device or unusual equipment (see Appendix IV for detailed specifications and interpretations), or use any equipment in an unusual manner:
a. That might assist him in making a stroke or in his play; or
b. For the purpose of gauging or measuring distance or conditions that might affect his play; or
c. That might assist him in gripping the club, except that:
(i) gloves may be worn provided that they are plain gloves;
(ii) resin, powder and drying or moisturising agents may be used; and
(iii) a towel or handkerchief may be wrapped around the grip.

Exceptions:
1. A player is not in breach of this Rule if (a) the equipment or device is designed for or has the effect of alleviating a medical condition, (b) the player has a legitimate medical reason to use the equipment or device, and (c) the Committee is satisfied that its use does not give the player any undue advantage over other players.
2. A player is not in breach of this Rule if he uses equipment in a traditionally accepted manner.

PENALTY FOR BREACH OF RULE 14-3:
Disqualification.

Note: The Committee may make a Local Rule allowing players to use devices that measure or gauge distance only.

Link to rule: http://www.randa.org/en/Rules-and-Amateur-Status/Rules-of-Golf.aspx#/rules/?ruleNum=14&subRuleNum=3