Let battle commence! PGA V R&A and USGA

[Fader]

How anybody can say it doesn't give an advantage over a standard putter is beyond me!

Attaching the putter to the belly or chest creates a pivot and so the putter becomes a pendulum.

This means the likelihood of the wrists rotating the putter is greatly reduced so lessening the chances of pulling or blocking the putt, which we're most prone to do when under pressure.

We all talk about a pendulum action when trying to hone a good putting stroke and for good reason, the belly putter takes away some of the skill required to do this.

Saying it can be used by everybody is not the point.
We could equip everybody with a little trowel so they could dig a channel in the green to keep the putt on line all the way to the hole. We could say everybody could do it and so no advantage is given.
It would be fair but it would be totally against the spirit of the game of golf, to me that's what the belly putter is.

Quite easy that first bit... Stats for the season will show how many wins and how many are top putters! All in the numbers...

Not sure the greenkeepers would like the new drainage ditches you'd be digging with them! Mind you could hlo in the current climate!

 

[USER1999]

So what?

So to me, it ceases to be golf. It will look similar to golf, but will not be golf as I see it. I don't have any affiliation to long putter users, and never will. If most of the pros used long putters, I wouldn't be watching, as I would have no interest. I'd still play, but would no longer follow it on telly, or in the press.

 

[shewy]

Been reading this with interest and some very good points made by both sides.
But it boils down to the method of stroke in the end,I can only guess these guys are under huge pressure especially the majors,you need bottle to sink those fidly little putts,if you don't have the bottle then you will be a nearly man,to me anchoring takes this out of the game and you get average players winning majors not the cream of the crop.
For those who say it is not an advantage just look at Ernie Els and Adam Scott,these guys careers were heading south before they put the long putters and more importantly started to anchor.
Advantage yes
Proper method of stroke no.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

How anybody can say it doesn't give an advantage over a standard putter is beyond me!

Attaching the putter to the belly or chest creates a pivot and so the putter becomes a pendulum.

This means the likelihood of the wrists rotating the putter is greatly reduced so lessening the chances of pulling or blocking the putt, which we're most prone to do when under pressure.

We all talk about a pendulum action when trying to hone a good putting stroke and for good reason, the belly putter takes away some of the skill required to do this.

Saying it can be used by everybody is not the point.
We could equip everybody with a little trowel so they could dig a channel in the green to keep the putt on line all the way to the hole. We could say everybody could do it and so no advantage is given.
It would be fair but it would be totally against the spirit of the game of golf, to me that's what the belly putter is.

But it doesn't give an advantage to anyone and it doesn't make the player necessarily better at putting than someone with a conventional putter. What it does do, is allow those players who aren't good enough with a standard putter better at putting. It allows them to compete at a higher level. And before anyone tells me to prove it, I don't need to, I just know that the only reason anyone would use a longer putter is because they are better at putting with it, that is the only conceivable reason for doing so

 

[Crow]

But it doesn't give an advantage to anyone and it doesn't make the player necessarily better at putting than someone with a conventional putter. What it does do, is allow those players who aren't good enough with a standard putter better at putting. It allows them to compete at a higher level. And before anyone tells me to prove it, I don't need to, I just know that the only reason anyone would use a longer putter is because they are better at putting with it, that is the only conceivable reason for doing so

Advantage has several dictionary definitions, a few are;
Noun - gain or benefit
Noun - A favouring condition or circumstance
Verb - To benefit or profit
Surely your description above of what use of the belly putter allows fits all of these quite well?

I'm not saying it will necessarily make them a better putter than somebody else, but it makes them a better putter and so provides an advantage.

 

[jimbob.someroo]

I don't think this is ever going to come to an agreement and I know many disagree with mine (and other's) viewpoint that they should be band.

Put simply (IMO), if they're saying that a ban would negatively effect the enjoyment and playing capabilities of those (amateur or professional) using an anchoring method, then by definition, those who it would negatively effect are gaining an advantage by using this method. Whether it be psychological or statistical, they are still gaining an advantage, otherwise they would have no argument for keeping it.

 

[JustOne]

Put simply (IMO), if they're saying that a ban would negatively effect the enjoyment and playing capabilities of those (amateur or professional) using an anchoring method, then by definition, those who it would negatively effect are gaining an advantage by using this method. Whether it be psychological or statistical, they are still gaining an advantage, otherwise they would have no argument for keeping it.

Do you like using your short putter? Would you therefore be gaining an advantage using one if they (for a laugh) made anchoring MANDATORY?

(humour me, I just thought of that)

 

[jimbob.someroo]

Do you like using your short putter? Would you therefore be gaining an advantage using one if they (for a laugh) made anchoring MANDATORY?

(humour me, I just thought of that)

I don't 'like' using it any more that I'd 'like' using a long one. If they changed the rules to say that everyone had to switch the other way, I'd learn to make that work. Heck, I might even hole a few more.

They introduced the offside rule in football years ago after people had grown up with no offsides and developed 'goal-hanging' tendencies. No one team gained an advantage as everyone could do it, but everyone sucked it up and got one with it, and in the long-run, the game is better for it.

(good effort though, did make me giggle)

 

[JustOne]

So does that mean you already have an advantage by choosing the method you prefer? (even though you apparently don't like using your putter) Doesn't having a choice mean that EVERYONE can play their best?

 

[jimbob.someroo]

So does that mean you already have an advantage by choosing the method you prefer? (even though you apparently don't like using your putter) Doesn't having a choice mean that EVERYONE can play their best?

Everyone should be allowed to play their best within the confines of the rules and if those rules outlaw the anchored putting 'stroke' then tough.

I 'chose' my putting style because belly/broomhandles weren't readily available when I started playing and I seem to do okay without going searching for a new putter (I've had mine for about a third of my life). I did try a belly putter after a round in the summer and seemed to putt pretty well with it - certainly allowed me to keep the putter stable and on plane much easier - but don't want to invest in something which gets banned in a couple of months :whoo:

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Advantage has several dictionary definitions, a few are;
Noun - gain or benefit
Noun - A favouring condition or circumstance
Verb - To benefit or profit
Surely your description above of what use of the belly putter allows fits all of these quite well?

I'm not saying it will necessarily make them a better putter than somebody else, but it makes them a better putter and so provides an advantage.

I suppose if you want to go by the dictionary then you could argue it does yeah. But the advantage is purely personal, the advantage is that it makes some people better than they were with the short putter, but it doesn't necessarily give them an advantage over someone else.

 

[SocketRocket]

The attached video from Jeff Ritter shows how a long putter is used and how it helps to reduce sway. He then shows how to create the same action with a standard putter. I use this method of holding my elbows into my body with a standard putte and find it very effective.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6qhaLAkp7o

 

[Scadge]

A lot of the discussion seems to be centred on fairness or advantage gained largely by one or two elite pros (either relative to others or their own inferior putting with a shorter putter).

I am in the camp of those who say it is about the method of the stroke, what technically constitutes a golf stroke. If you take this view then it isn't about advantage or fairness, this view says that if you anchor the club rather than playing only with the hands then you aren't making a legitimate stroke, you are in fact playing some game other than golf. If you want to do that then fine go and play this other game, invent your own rules, allow corquet style putting and happy Gilmore esque driving, but leave our wonderful game of golf and its centuries of tradition alone.

ps can we resolve any gripes that Keegan Bradley may have under Queensbury rules cos there would be many volunteers to sort him out.

 

[Wildrover]

My take on this is as follows.

1. The argument that the manufacturers are against the ban doesn't really wash as long putters sell in very small numbers compared to standard ones. You could even argue they would favour a ban as everyone with a long putter would now need to buy a new one, and if they struggle with a standard length then they would be the people who are more likely to change their putter more often.

2. Comparing the long putter to things like oversize heads and hybrids is nonsense. Regardless of what shape or size the head is with these clubs, the way in which the stroke is made is exactly the same, unlike an anchored putter.

3. If you are a poor putter then there is a distinct advantage TO YOU, if an anchored one works better, but what other area of the game can you overcome a shortcoming like this? Seve was a wild driver of the ball but he couldn't fundamentally alter the way he drove a ball to overcome this, he worked at it and strove to improve, but the advent of the long putter brought all the poor putters much closer to his level on the green, totally unfair!

4. Regardless of what your view is on whether anchored putters give an advantage or not, the argument of the R&A and USGA is that it does not constitute a legal stroke and therefore should be banned, they have been perfectly fair imho in giving such a long notice of the ban to allow players to adjust to the standard putter. Advantage or not doesn't come into it. The only problem is that it should have happened years ago.

5. Speaking for myself I think of every victory obtained with an anchored putter as slightly tainted, not totally invalid, just kind of under a question mark. I include the way Matt Kuchar putts in this as well, he swithched to that method and he was already a good putter, advantage????

 

[pendodave]

I think the possible interest of the big OEMs in this is the thin end of the wedge and a real issue for the game of golf in its current form.

While there's not much money in selling long putters, there is a huge amount of money in selling other non-compliant equipment. If the PGA manage to 'pursuade' the R&A that they are wrong on this, who knows where it will end. Look at the comments recently made by the adidas/tm head honcho.

IMHO, the business model of the big equipment manufacturers is not sustainable over the long term, even with club ho's like us. Now that most items of equipment have reached the limit of current regulatory tolerances, it's only marketing cash and golfers' inate gulibility that requires any turnover of kit. How many clubs have any of us ever actually worn out ? How many perfectly fine sets are on the bay for next to nothing ? There's no year-on-year growth in profits if we all start acting rationally. Unless drivers really do start going 25yds longer (which can only happen if the R&A and USGA cave in).

 

[Slab]

We might be in danger on concentrating on the wrong thing here

I can’t find anywhere in the proposed new rule or the R&A’s background that says that this has anything to do with having an advantage or not, it simply is not a factor for this rule proposal (unless they are being less than truthful)

The rule they want to add to is 14-1 Currently it is:

The ball must be fairly struck at with the head of the club and must not be pushed, scraped or spooned.

This would become 14-1-a with the new anchoring rule to be 14-1-b

As anchoring does not break any current rule, the reasoning for the new rule is clearly stated to be purely about protecting the character & tradition of the game of golf i.e

(from the R&A website)

“The conclusion was that the Rules of Golf should be amended to preserve the traditional character of the golf swing by eliminating the growing practice of anchoring the club.”

“Our concern is that anchored strokes threaten to supplant traditional putting strokes which are integral to the longstanding character of the sport”

However the PGA says "We have to look if anchoring is good, bad or indifferent for the game and we have concluded it's not been negative,"

Not sure what this really means... So is “it’s not been negative” good bad or indifferent Tim?

 

[MarkE]

It will be a disaster if the usga, r&a back down on this. The pga must not be allowed to dictate rules, that's the usga and r&a job. It will fundamentally undermine everything the governing bodies stand for.

 

[JustOne]

It will be a disaster if the usga, r&a back down on this. The pga must not be allowed to dictate rules, that's the usga and r&a job. It will fundamentally undermine everything the governing bodies stand for.

I don't agree, it wouldn't be a disaster if the PGA bring a reasonable argument to the table and the R&A listen accordingly. They are still free to make a decision and it could quite fairly go either way.

I don't think anchoring is a bad thing, I've never played golf with someone who uses one and thought "I don't want to play golf with you".

Might be an argument for banning it on the actual tour though.... and let us amateurs decide to do whatever we prefer.

 

[Yer Maw]

I don't agree, it wouldn't be a disaster if the PGA bring a reasonable argument to the table and the R&A listen accordingly. They are still free to make a decision and it could quite fairly go either way.

I don't think anchoring is a bad thing, I've never played golf with someone who uses one and thought "I don't want to play golf with you".

Might be an argument for banning it on the actual tour though.... and let us amateurs decide to do whatever we prefer.

They may be making a reasonable argument but they are being unreasonable with their thinly veiled threats, and they (like you) are in the minority. Anchoring isn't playing with a stroke that is within the ethics of the game.

 

[shivas irons]

The R&A and USPGA have been running the rules of golf since day one and now Fincham wants to make a name for himself and will proberly end up dividing the sport,what is it with some Americans and authority.Time to get rid of Fincham and get somebody else in who has the games best interests at heart.