Coming soon: decision on long putters

First topic message reminder :

"The day after the 2012 British Open concluded, Peter Dawson, chief executive of the Royal & Ancient, which governs the rules of golf along with the United States Golf Association, said the two organizations were going to come to a decision on the permissibility of long putters this fall.

“The subject is firmly on our radar, and we need to clarify the position as soon as possible,” Dawson said".

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/sports/golf/golf-pros-line-up-to-debate-use-of-long-putters.html

Looks like this issue will finally be addressed. The tone of Dawson's comments suggest they will be banned. As mentioned on another thread, Keegan Bradley's pressure putting has been a joy to watch over the past year, is this down to the belly putter he uses? We may find out if he is forced to use a short putter.

Ha ha, I like that Robo.

I feel as though this whole debate is something I should have a strong opinion on but I really don't.

I really couldn't care less whether they're banned or not. I'd never use one myself because it smacks too much of caring too much about what as has been said before is meant to be a bit of fun.

Very different for the pros where it does matter but again my opinion seems to be if they're banned (yes I know they will be now) then don't use one and if they're not then carry on.

gaelgowfer wrote:

I seem to recall you saying your goal was to get down to 3 but when I subsequently asked you sometime later as to whether or not you had yet achieved this, you didn't respond. Still, given this ...

I've long since learned there are more important things in life than worrying about a number ...

... I'm guessing you didn't!

Incidentally, for me to have known you (claimed to have) a low h'cap then you must have "boasted" about this yourself on some previous occasion.

Hilarious that you bring up being a Cat 1 player, though it must be preposterously easy off the ladies tees ...

I could lecture you on comparative differentials but since you seem unable to understand even the most basic english, twould be way over whatever passes for a brain in your case.

Firstly Gael, I've only been as "high" as a three handicap for a short spell once in the last 5 years. So I think it must be your addled brain that thought I needed to get "down" to three. You must be confusing me with someone else.

However, you seem to think that being a low handicapper it puts in some sort of esteemed club which gives you greater knowledge than anyone else and that your opinion carries greater weight than other peoples. You, me or any other low handicapper doesn't give us any more knowledge that someone else who might be of a higher handicap.

Whether or not I can understand English is a different matter. I understand English perfectly well, what I don't always understand is the terrible way in which you write it.

A cat1 lady golfer? doesn't that just mean you can reach some of the par 4s in two and can hit some par 3s without using a driver?

beninho wrote:Mr Navyblueshorts, you mention "what the Hell does enjoyment have to do with it?" Is the reason you play golf not for enjoyment? Do you not enjoy playing the game? I am assuming you are not a professional, so do not play for an income. So i would assume you play because you enjoy it?

You mention you would tell on anyone you saw using an anchored putting technique in a competition, but same as Mr Super Realist, i did not mention competitions. The vast majority of golfers, i would say, do not compete in competitions. Why should these people who just enjoy the game, why should they be penalised because of a handful of professional players?

It's complex. Yes, I like to enjoy golf but I also enjoy it as a challenging sport. I don't want it made continually easier. I want to play the game to the best of my ability according to the defined set of rules - that's the challenge. I mentioned comps because if you're not playing in one you can do whatever you want - kick the ball out of the rough, use a hot driver, take mulligans etc etc. Fine. Use juiced kit -in this scenario, I couldn't care less.
I think you (and others?) are missing the point with this. If you go out with three mates for a friendly four-ball and are all happy to allow anchored putting, that's entirely up to you. Same with any other bounce rules you happen to want to play by. This is all about competitive play.

Conehead wrote:Take a 3 wood instead of a driver , play a chip and run with a 7 iron instead of a flop shot with a 60 degree wedge,hit a hybrid rather than a low iron and finally use a long putter rather than a shorter one.

The point I'm trying to make is It's not like every golfer out there is using identical clubs, swings and techniques. The players (at the moment) have a huge choice of different styles and clubs at their disposal and the belly/long putter just happens to be one of the options that some players have chosen to use. As SR states if it's such an advantage the long putter would be in everyone's bag.

Still nobody has provided stats to back up the so called advantage as well which surely says something about the "facts" regarding anchoring and it's advantage.

Not a valid argument. All your analogies strike the ball with a standard, single-anchored swing except the long putter. As for the stats, lets all be silly in which case I'll answer you by saying you haven't provided any stats to say anchoring isn't an advantage.

I can see both sides of the argument. I just don't believe it should be such a big deal.
There's a lot more wrong with the game than a questionable putting technique.

As for proof that it isn't an advantage, you only need to look at the putting stats to see that no long putter users are up there in disproportionately high numbers.

If it provides an advantage, it's unfair and should be stopped. If it doesn't provide an advantage, nobody's going to lose out by it being banned. Either way, the ban's the right thing.

[quote="super_realist"][quote="gaelgowfer"]

Firstly Gael, I've only been as "high" as a three handicap for a short spell once in the last 5 years. You must be confusing me with someone else.

Hmm ...

However, you seem to think that being a low handicapper it puts in some sort of esteemed club which gives you greater knowledge than anyone else and that your opinion carries greater weight than other peoples. You, me or any other low handicapper doesn't give us any more knowledge that someone else who might be of a higher handicap.

I certainly have the advantage of knowing what it takes to get down to and retain a low h'cap and if you disagree with this, then you're an even bigger idiot that I already thought you were.

Besides which, had you read that particular paragraph properly, then even someone as mentally challenged as you should have realised that it was said in the context of my assertion (via my own observations) that golfers who seem most likely to be affected by the yips, play or have played from a low h'cap. This makes sense to me as it this group of golfers who are most likely to have played and (particularly) practised more often than higher h'cappers. And, before someone decides to have a pop at me for this last comment, it is a well known fact that high h'cappers spend the majority of any practice time blasting balls on the range and very little time (if at all) honing their short game. In other words, not practising your putting might still make you a rotten putter but it is unlikely ever to make you a rotten yippy putter.

Incidentally this ...

The yips will never ever happen to me, because I putt with total freedom ...

... sounds very much like a boast to me. Pretty dumb boast as well as you can't possibly know whether or not you will be affected at some point in the future regardless of how free you claim your putting stroke to be.

Whether or not I can understand English is a different matter. I understand English perfectly well ...

I beg to differ.

Enough of this nonsense. I'll leave you with the final word. You'd settle for nothing less.

What do you mean you have the advantage of getting down to a low handicap and maintaining it?
How do you think I got there and have managed to maintain a low handicap?

You really are full of yourself and without a doubt the most unpleasant person on this forum.

Robo

That was really funny, thanks. Although you forgot to mention that the 11th green had been floated into the Eden estuary to produce the worlds longest par 3 island hole.

Didn't take them too long...

http://www.odysseygolf.com/global/en-us/tour/articles/2012/odyssey-to-announce-metal-x-arm-lock-putter.html

This is another strange one on me... controversy aside, why on earth would they allow this exception to the long putters? If it's so hard to make such 'big' decisions in golf, you may as well do it properly and go all the way when you decide to implement one.

It may not be exactly the same as anchoring, and maybe not as easy to master it and to get comfortable with, but if you do, mechanically this arm-locking would create a pretty similar sort of 'advantage' like the belly or chest anchoring. I'm not an expert in mechanics, but to me the main issue is that they have identified wrongly the actual problem: it's not anchoring, it's locking which can potentially create an advantage... anchoring is just another type of locking (reducind the degrees of freedom).

Imagine again, if in a few years time a bunch of guys who got very good at this, would win a few majors... With this anchoring ban precedent, would be pretty embarassing for the USGA and R&A to have to revisit this all over again...

princedracula wrote:Didn't take them too long...

http://www.odysseygolf.com/global/en-us/tour/articles/2012/odyssey-to-announce-metal-x-arm-lock-putter.html

This is another strange one on me... controversy aside, why on earth woud they allow this exception to the long putters? If it's so hard to make such 'big' decisions in golf, you may as well do it properly and go all the way when you decide to implement one.

It may not be exactly the same as anchoring, and maybe not as easy to master it and to get comfortable with, but if you do, mechanically this arm-locking would create a pretty similar sort of 'advantage' like the belly or chest anchoring. I'm not an expert in mechanics, but to me the main issue is that they have identified wrongly the actual problem: it's not anchoring, it's locking which can potentially create an advantage... anchoring is just another type of locking (reducind the degrees of freedom).

Imagine again, if in a few years time a bunch of guys who got very good at this, would win a few majors... With this anchoring ban precedent, would be pretty embarassing for the USGA and R&A to have to revisit this all over again...

Sorry PD but I think you're missing the point entirely. Your arms are able to move in 3 dimensions away from your body. Whilst it's still possible to sway while anchoring, it's relatively much less likely, and no more likely than swaying when not anchoring. Therefore, an anchored (against the torso) putting stroke has to all intents and purposes only 2 potential planes on which it can veer from the intended line. You may be less likely to flick with an arm grip, but you can still move away from or towards your body, which you pretty much can't when anchoring.

Well, I understand all that SJ, and as I said, it's not the same thing or as 'advantageous', but it is nevertheless just another way of reducing the degrees of (unwanted) freedom in the putter movement...

Poor Keegan got some abuse from the gallery during the Chevron relating to his long putter use. Any success these guys have between now and the rule change will defo have a shadow over it imo.

incontinentia wrote:Poor Keegan got some abuse from the gallery during the Chevron relating to his long putter use. Any success these guys have between now and the rule change will defo have a shadow over it imo.

To be fair, there's plenty for the crowd to have a go at him before getting stuck into his perfectly legal putter.

I'm glad they are getting rid of broom putters...

Ever since my brother took mine I've had nothing to sweep the floor with...

He's here all week folks.

Thrustman, u think long putters had any effect on the outcome of the ryder cup?

super_realist wrote:He's here all week folks.

Please, no!!!!

golfchannel.com account of last night's Players Meeting:

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golftalkcentral/finchem-players-have-meeting/?mid=343&rid=641253&source=email

Following the ban, can people still use a long putter providing it isn't anchored?

I'm sure they will be permitted to s_r; I like the fact that Timmy Clark was the most vocal - where are the Bradleys and Simpsons when the time comes to speak up in public, and not just to the press?

Clark's good mate Pettersson has been calling the ban on anchoring a "witch hunt" so his reaction will be interesting.

Probably in Church Kwini,
Wonder how it will be policed and what punishments will be dished out should someone inadvertantly anchor. THe arm chair pedants will be delighted to phone in.

The only hunt Carl appreciates takes place around the dinner buffet.

Imagine him and Lowry rushing for the last sausage roll, be like two zepellins crashing.

If I were Bradley, Simpson or Clarke I sure would start working on (1) non-anchored putting styles and (2) hitting closer approach shots. Does anyone think this will not pass?

Sr,
Tim Clark has always claimed a congenital (is that the right word?) wrist condition that makes putting normally difficult and hampers his chipping.
Not sure if it's as severe as my full-swing problem whereby my head lifts skywards just before (intended) impact.

Kwin - I simply swing like I'm throwing luggage onto a conveyor belt. I've got a pretty impressive "lunge" working.

A wrist complaint shouldnt hamper putting, in fact putting is when it ought feels better as using the wrists in putting is a definite no no.

So if they ban anchored putters, we can expect a whole rush of touring pros applying for dispensation on medical grounds??

Shotrock wrote:If I were Bradley, Simpson or Clarke I sure would start working on (1) non-anchored putting styles and (2) hitting closer approach shots. Does anyone think this will not pass?

Shotrock, the decision has already been made. Finchem has made it very clear their tour will not go against the governing bodies decision to ban anchoring.

Bradley and Simpson are still in their twenties with the prospect of a longer career ahead so I'd be very surprised if they weren't seeking an alternative non-anchoring method. On the other hand, Tim Clark is in his late thirties so, a big chunk of his career is already behind him added to which he'll be 40ish when the rule does change so he may decide not to mess with his head and delay doing anything until nearer the time.

Remain to be convinced that not anchoring the putter will unduly affect Clark's putting though (unless he's a closet twitcher). He can still use a long putter which in turn should still make it relatively easier for him just to use his shoulders to propel the ball. Hell, his putting might even improve!