Old Hickory Putter

[Ryanhutchinson4540]

Me and a friend of mine found an old wooden shafted grooveless putter in his shed and we've spent some time cleaning it up and was wondering if these old clubs can still be used in competition ? I've tried looking for rules about them online but havnt found anything conclusive.

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

Me and a friend of mine found an old wooden shafted grooveless putter in his shed and we've spent some time cleaning it up and was wondering if these old clubs can still be used in competition ? I've tried looking for rules about them online but havnt found anything conclusive.

They're perfectly legal (or more accurately, conforming).
I have a Tad Moore Chicopee and a Louisville Ambi-Dex.
Both are legal under both R&A and USGA rules.

Some modern putters have no grooves; Ping just released a new line.
Others have no grooves, but dot punches instead.
Yet other have grooves that are not subject to the new groove rules because the latter apply only to clubs of 25 or more degrees loft.

 

[Ryanhutchinson4540]

Thanks for the info, I look forward to using it on the course.

 

[Foxholer]

Some modern putters have no grooves; Ping just released a new line.
Others have no grooves, but dot punches instead.
Yet other have grooves that are not subject to the new groove rules because the latter apply only to clubs of 25 or more degrees loft.

Or even honeycomb milling!

 

[Ryanhutchinson4540]

 

[patricks148]

using this at the moment... also found

 

[rulie]

They're perfectly legal (or more accurately, conforming).
I have a Tad Moore Chicopee and a Louisville Ambi-Dex.
Both are legal under both R&A and USGA rules.

Some modern putters have no grooves; Ping just released a new line.
Others have no grooves, but dot punches instead.
Yet other have grooves that are not subject to the new groove rules because the latter apply only to clubs of 25 or more degrees loft.

Please note the there is only one "Rules of golf". The USGA and R&A Rules are identical.

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

Please note the there is only one "Rules of golf". The USGA and R&A Rules are identical.

Thank you, rulie.

I do hope that the R&A retains some input because I'd trust them more than our USGA types with whom I'm more familiar.
I was upset with the R&A caving on the 1.62" ball years ago. I would have liked to try them in the post wound era.

 

[Crow]

View attachment 29151

Nice, does it say anything on the sole?

 

[rulie]

Thank you, rulie.

I do hope that the R&A retains some input because I'd trust them more than our USGA types with whom I'm more familiar.
I was upset with the R&A caving on the 1.62" ball years ago. I would have liked to try them in the post wound era.

The USGA has jurisdiction in the USA and Mexico; the R&A has jurisdiction for the rest of the world. I'd say that the R&A "retains some input"!!!

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

The USGA has jurisdiction in the USA and Mexico; the R&A has jurisdiction for the rest of the world. I'd say that the R&A "retains some input"!!!

That's good, but no opinions on the 1.62" ball issue? I may have mistaken that as capitulation, but whether it was or it wasn't, it didn't look good.

 

[rulie]

Both the R&A and USGA make decisions that are for the best of the game; it's great that they do it together and make decisions in concert. Imo, nobody "capitulates" - each decision is well thought out, thoroughly discussed, made and then implemented.

 

[jim8flog]

Ve

View attachment 29151

Very hard to see from your photos

Is that actually a putter. To meet current requirements on equipment the angle between the shaft and the face is not allowed to exceed 10 degrees.

 

[rulie]

Ve


Very hard to see from your photos

Is that actually a putter. To meet current requirements on equipment the angle between the shaft and the face is not allowed to exceed 10 degrees.

Not sure what you are saying here? If you are referring to the "lie" angle, ie, the angle between the shaft and the a line perpendicular to the sole of the club, then that angle must be at least 10 degrees.

 

[Crow]

Ve


Very hard to see from your photos

Is that actually a putter. To meet current requirements on equipment the angle between the shaft and the face is not allowed to exceed 10 degrees.

All pictures show the back of the head.

 

[rulie]

Or,

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

Both the R&A and USGA make decisions that are for the best of the game; it's great that they do it together and make decisions in concert. Imo, nobody "capitulates" - each decision is well thought out, thoroughly discussed, made and then implemented.

Fair enough. Reasonable people can disagree.
Having played golf since 1961, I'm still waiting for the governing bodies to impress me for the first time.
Another might not regard impressing me as their first priority.
So there we are.

 

[Crow]

That's good, but no opinions on the 1.62" ball issue? I may have mistaken that as capitulation, but whether it was or it wasn't, it didn't look good.

There was huge debate in the UK at the time, there was even a suggestion that a 1.65" ball be used and a few were made and tested.

The general consensus was that the larger ball (which span more and so was easier to draw or fade) called for greater skill in it's control and provided more opportunity for shot making, as well as sitting up more invitingly for lesser players.

The smaller ball was also longer and distance was a concern at the time, as it seems to have been ever since the demise of the feathery.

It wasn't a capitulation.


While on the subject of the ball, an old book I'm reading at the moment suggests that a way to control distance would be to make a ball have to float in water in order to comply with the rules,. This would bring the weight of a 1.68" ball down to about 1.3 oz and would have a dramatic affect on distance. Experiments at the time suggested that the drop off in distance would impact the longer hitters the most, but would still impact all players.

 

[rulie]

Fair enough. Reasonable people can disagree.
Having played golf since 1961, I'm still waiting for the governing bodies to impress me for the first time.
Another might not regard impressing me as their first priority.
So there we are.

But you're right - impressing you isn't on their priority list.
I've been playing since 1959, and while I may not like or understand everything, I am very impressed with the ruling bodies in their preservation of the game and its traditions.