Belly/long/broomstick putter itself legal, anchoring not... Possible ruling

[RookieBlue7]

Figured this would spark a nice debate. It seems the belly and long putter hoopla may not yet be over. The following article discusses how the USGA and R&A are in talks about banning anchoring the putter. Thought it was worthy of its own post. If I read correctly, no equipment will be deemed non-conforming, just the practice of anchoring (which IMO is just to protect them from being sued by equipment manufacturers). See article:

 

http://mobile.golfweek.com/news/2012/feb/05/usga-r-may-not-spare-belly-putters-after-all/

[Tony Covey MGS]

Figured this would spark a nice debate. It seems the belly and long putter hoopla may not yet be over. The following article discusses how the USGA and R&A are in talks about banning anchoring the putter. Thought it was worthy of its own post. If I read correctly, no equipment will be deemed non-conforming, just the practice of anchoring (which IMO is just to protect them from being sued by equipment manufacturers). See article:

 

http://mobile.golfwe...ters-after-all/

 

Here we go again. Have scores on tour suddenly dropped? Are tournaments being won exclusively by guys who use belly putters? More to the point, are belly putters not available to anyone who wants to use them?

 

There's no unfair advantage that I can see. If there was, EVERYONE would be using a belly putter. It's nonsense.

 

More to the point, however, I think it would be a huge mistake for the USGA and the R&A to get in the business of regulating what is and is not anchored and what is or is not a legal stroke. Best to leave this one alone, I think.

[RookieBlue7]

That's what they said about croquet style putting too, and ruled you can't stand astride your line. This is a big ruling, but my problem is you're not giving an advantage to the guys that play well under pressure or are great at putting. The advantage is going to those that get rattled and are poor putters. I don't care either way, I built 3 different ones and can't get comfortable in the position. That said, one dude I play with has gotten worse and worse at putting over the years. He asked me to build him a belly from a Vincino and now he's making everything he looks at. If your putting goes bad, bad, bad and you dramatically improve, to me, it's giving that guy an advantage he wouldn't normally have. Do I care? No, because I'm still up on him a fair amount of $.

 

That said, we can't make a blanket statement about it lowering the stroke average on tour. Instead, let's look at the individual's now using them versus when they were using conventional putters. Their PPR have decreased significantly is where their argument comes in to play. Plus they're ruling based on what is a traditional stroke.

[GolfSpy WD]

Nobody (within the ruling bodies) wants children to know nothing else but sticking putters in their bellys,” the source said. “It now seems possible that an entire new generation of golfers could learn to putt this way and never use the traditional method that has been the bedrock of putting for hundreds of years

 

Anyone else thinks this sounds like a bunch of old geezers who fear change? There's still no empirical evidence that using an anchored putter actually makes you a better putter.

 

The R&A do not like the fact that golfers can steady themselves by using a putter as a crutch in windy, rainy or cold weather,” the source said. “In essence, they are steadying themselves with the putter. This was never intended under the Rules of Golf. They are using the putter for something other than a traditional stroke

 

Seriously?

[Tony Covey MGS]

That's what they said about croquet style putting too, and ruled you can't stand astride your line. This is a big ruling, but my problem is you're not giving an advantage to the guys that play well under pressure or are great at putting. The advantage is going to those that get rattled and are poor putters. I don't care either way, I built 3 different ones and can't get comfortable in the position. That said, one dude I play with has gotten worse and worse at putting over the years. He asked me to build him a belly from a Vincino and now he's making everything he looks at. If your putting goes bad, bad, bad and you dramatically improve, to me, it's giving that guy an advantage he wouldn't normally have. Do I care? No, because I'm still up on him a fair amount of $.

 

That said, we can't make a blanket statement about it lowering the stroke average on tour. Instead, let's look at the individual's now using them versus when they were using conventional putters. Their PPR have decreased significantly is where their argument comes in to play. Plus they're ruling based on what is a traditional stroke.

 

Personally...it's not the end of the world if the rules change. I can go back if I have too (and I love this Radius putter I have here so much that I might do it anyway), but I don't buy into the notion that belly putters have an advantage under pressure. Spencer Levin carries a belly putter, and we saw what happened yesterday. To that same end, Kyle Stanley had a huge pressure putt yesterday, and managed to make it with a standard putter. Of course, there are enough examples out there to make any case any of us wants to make.

 

The thing is, while putting is important, it's not the only thing that matters. If we reach a point where a statistically legitimate argument can be made that a higher percentage of putts are made withe belly putters, then maybe...but again, it's not there are guys on tour who can't get access to them.

 

Do white drivers give golfers an unfair advantage too. Where does it end, and don't these guys have anything better to worry about (I don't know...like actually promoting and growing the game)?

 

I thought the new groove rule was stupid too. Much ado about nothing...a pointless attempt to protect that which needs no protection.

[RoverRick]

This is crap. Now they are saying that the longer putter is unfair because it can be used to steady yourself on a windy day. B.S. How can you swing the putter if you are holding yourself up with it? The long putters are not significantly easier to use than the short putter. It takes practice to be good with any putter.

 

The problem with golf is not the length or style of putting or how far the golf ball goes. IT IS THE RULES. There are too many already, and now they want to start legistlating how the clubs should be swung.

 

If the long putter is so much easier on the nerves than the short putter, how the heck did Kyle Stanley win yesterdays tournament over Spenser Levin who not only had a longer putter but a 7 stroke lead.

[RoverRick]

I wish I had not taken the time to proof read the above post. Now it looks like I plagiarized Golfspy T.

[Tony Covey MGS]

How can you swing the putter if you are holding yourself up with it? The long putters are not significantly easier to use than the short putter.

 

 

The problem with golf is not the length or style of putting or how far the golf ball goes. IT IS THE RULES. There are too many already, and now they want to start legistlating how the clubs should be swung.

 

 

2 great points here. If the argument is b...b...b...because wind then it's beyond the standard operational stupidity of both the USGA and R&A.

 

And you're right about the rules. I'm guessing 95% of recreation amateurs don't know the basic rules (white stakes, red stakes, when to take a drop, and when to eat your stroke + distance, 1 stroke vs. 2 stoke pentalties, etc.). Get into things like obstructions and you're probably up to 98%. Sort down a bit more into decisions and and what not, and I'm guessing most pros don't know every rule (which is why they have an army of rules officials at every tournament).

 

I know bifurcation scares the crap out of everybody (and so we pretend that it hasn't already happened), but what you imply, I believe is correct...we'd all be better off if they simplified the rules rather than worrying about anchored strokes.

[JBones]

I don't think the belly putter is an advantage by any means. If you're a good putter, you're going to be good with anything, if you're a bad putter, you're going to be bad with anything.

[RookieBlue7]

My problem is that it helps playerd with physical limitations, such as a bad back. Meanwhile Casey Martin has a physical limitation along the same lines where he can play golf but can't walk to do so. He's competitive when he's allowed to use a cart, and the legal system backed him. The PGA is a private enterprise though and basically said screw you, walk or don't play. Well, you can't say one physical ailment is more important than another IMO. If he can't have a cart, players with bad backs shouldn't be allowed their crutch.

[Jmikecpa]

If this ruling passes then you will have the ADA advocates all over the USGA and R&A. I have used and still own several broom handle putters and there is no advantage whatsoever in using one over a traditional putter. As I have said on here before.....the pros play for a lot of money and if it was that big of an advantage more pros would be doing. Just look at how many ball players did a drug that was illegal in order to compete and make a good living; this is just a simple equipment change.

 

On a side note it is funny how Els and Goosen blasted belly putters until both of them got a little jittery with the flat stick.

[Will Par]

For years there was a stigma attached to using the long putter. The only players who used them were players who struggled with putting. In almost every case these players were able to recapture a level of putting proficiency by going long. That in itself proves that anchoring the putter and automatically taking the wrists out of the stroke simplifies the putting action.

 

Today there is no stigma that keeps anyone from trying an anchored putter. Some young players are starting out with a long putter. I personally was flabbergasted a few years ago when I saw college players in the US Amateur using long putters. But I now understand completely. It's an easier method to control and learn. Most young players are going to start out using a long putter unless something is done.

 

So much of putting is percentages and how close to the hole you are. No matter what method you use, you will always be subject to those percentages. I doubt there will ever be any measurable way to prove one method is better than another. But it is obvious that an anchored putter simplifies the stroke and helps golfers who struggle using the standard putter. Are we going to continue to permit some players to take a shortcut or should everyone learn to putt the standard way and face the same challenges? I'm opposed to long putters, but I'll be surprised if they are ever outlawed. And if they remain legal, a generation from now, almost everyone will be using them.

[RookieBlue7]

My thing is, for those arguing in favor of them that there's no advantage to them, question for you. Why don't you use a standard putter since there's zero advantage? If you're gaining absolutely nothing by using it, why not just use a standard putter? You have no valid reason to use a belly or long putter if there's no advantage for you no?

[Jmikecpa]

My thing is, for those arguing in favor of them that there's no advantage to them, question for you. Why don't you use a standard putter since there's zero advantage? If you're gaining absolutely nothing by using it, why not just use a standard putter? You have no valid reason to use a belly or long putter if there's no advantage for you no?

 

I first went to one when I tore my ACL so that I could do anything on a golf course and it was impossible to put with a conventional putter when I was in a brace from my ankle to my groin. Once I got the brace off I stayed with the putter since it was comfortable to me and I was used to it. That being said I went back to a conventional putter two years ago as I had lost my comfort with the broomstick. I equate switching to a long or belly putter to the same decision as switching from a blade to mallet - one is not necessarily better than the other but it is all what makes you comfortable over the ball.

[RoverRick]

At the end of last year the Golf Channel had 14 days or something about lessons. They had Ray Floyd, Nick Flado, and the expert, Johnny Miller. They all had a putting segment, and the first rule about putting is pick a putter you are comfortable with. Some people are more comfortable with the long putter some are not.

 

Sunday, I took a belly putter to the course. I usually meet a couple of the high handicap guys a couple of hours early and we work on different parts of their game. Sunday I had each of them putt several times with the belly putter. Of course they were not used to it and did not putt well, the interesting thing is they both putted better when they went back to their putters.

 

A valid reason for having a long putter is you get up to two club lengths when taking a drop. If you have a long putter then you get more to move futher from the hazard. That is two more feet than if you use a wedge and up to 8 inches if you have a 44 inch driver. If your driver is longer than that maybe the USGA should ban it. You might be able to lean on it in the wind uses it as a crutch.

[RookieBlue7]

I first went to one when I tore my ACL so that I could do anything on a golf course and it was impossible to put with a conventional putter when I was in a brace from my ankle to my groin. Once I got the brace off I stayed with the putter since it was comfortable to me and I was used to it. That being said I went back to a conventional putter two years ago as I had lost my comfort with the broomstick. I equate switching to a long or belly putter to the same decision as switching from a blade to mallet - one is not necessarily better than the other but it is all what makes you comfortable over the ball.

 

 

Same head, same putter, but using it not anchored then you'd make just as many putts as you would with it anchored then? Again, we're talking about the point of anchoring and anchoring only, and the fact that anchoring doesn't give one an advantage or does. If there's no advantage, then it's safe to assume one makes just as many putts with it not anchored as one that is anchored.

[GolfSpy WD]

My thing is, for those arguing in favor of them that there's no advantage to them, question for you. Why don't you use a standard putter since there's zero advantage? If you're gaining absolutely nothing by using it, why not just use a standard putter? You have no valid reason to use a belly or long putter if there's no advantage for you no?

 

The same argument could be made for mallet putters, plumber neck hosels. People play belly putters (or other types of putters) because it suits their game better. I don't see Simpson or Bradley as having a more consistent stroke as someone like Luke Donald. For comparison, here are the top three standard putters vs the top three long putters in average strokes gained - putting (minimum 10 rounds):

 

standard putter:

Martin Flores (1.572)

Ben Crane (1.534)

Rory Sabbatini (1.372)

 

long putter:

David Hearn (.872)

Charles Howell III (.789)

Blake Adams (.761)

 

http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/?02564

[RookieBlue7]

The same argument could be made for mallet putters, plumber neck hosels. People play belly putters (or other types of putters) because it suits their game better. I don't see Simpson or Bradley as having a more consistent stroke as someone like Luke Donald. For comparison, here are the top three standard putters vs the top three long putters in average strokes gained - putting (minimum 10 rounds):

 

standard putter:

Martin Flores (1.572)

Ben Crane (1.534)

Rory Sabbatini (1.372)

 

long putter:

David Hearn (.872)

Charles Howell III (.789)

Blake Adams (.761)

 

http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/?02564

 

What has been Adam Scott's achilles heel for a long time? Putting... And he goes to the Masters with a broomstick and putts the eyes out of it. No measurable improvements though? (I was there, saw it first hand, and have been there for every Masters for the last 11 years, save one). He was an awful putter at Augusta, yet he put the broomstick in play and improved dramatically. His problem was flipping the putter head when using a conventional length putter (again, observed first hand, heard him talking about it on the putting green, etc), yet when he went to the long putter that problem disappeared.

 

From Webb Simpson:

"I switched so long ago, it was my first semester at Wake [Forest],'' Simpson said. "Actually it was kind of a joke why I tried it. I went to the pro shop and I was with my dad and I was kind of making fun of the belly putter, and I thought, I just have to make a couple putts with this.

 

"I went on the green, made a few long ones and thought, this is pretty good. So I took it out on the course for nine holes and made everything. I knew I was going to get made fun of by my teammates, but took it back to Wake. I used it, one of my teammates, two years older than me, he was making fun of me for using it, which I knew he would, but he saw me putt with it and he went out and got the same exact putter and won his first college event two weeks later.

 

 

 

We could go round and round in circles forever. I don't care either way, because putting has been one of my strong suits for a long time. It won't effect me in the slightest. I just find it funny that people argue there's no advantage to anchoring, yet they admit that if you struggle with putting that one should try a belly putter. Why should you if you struggle with putting? Because in theory, it eliminates one of the biggest mistakes one makes with a conventional length putter and that's becoming too handsy. It takes the hands out of the equation. Then they say it's not from anchoring, well go take your belly or broomstick and putt without it anchored and tell me you make just as many putts without anchoring it as you do with it anchored. You won't, I promise.

 

I don't knock guys for using them, because it makes the game more enjoyable to them because it helps them with the putter. But, don't sit and tell me there's zero advantage for someone that's a poor putter that's struggling to switch to a belly and start making everything and magically stop flipping the putter head because it's impossible to do with it anchored.

 

I'd have zero problem if these guys using them admitted that it helped them by eliminating mistakes, but to say it doesn't give them, personally, an advantage when it clearly does is laughable to me. I've seen too many people switch and dramatically improve their putting because they can't make the most common mistake with the putter anymore to be told differently.

[GolfSpy WD]

What has been Adam Scott's achilles heel for a long time? Putting... And he goes to the Masters with a broomstick and putts the eyes out of it. No measurable improvements though? (I was there, saw it first hand, and have been there for every Masters for the last 11 years, save one). He was an awful putter at Augusta, yet he put the broomstick in play and improved dramatically. His problem was flipping the putter head when using a conventional length putter (again, observed first hand, heard him talking about it on the putting green, etc), yet when he went to the long putter that problem disappeared.

 

From Webb Simpson:

 

 

 

 

We could go round and round in circles forever. I don't care either way, because putting has been one of my strong suits for a long time. It won't effect me in the slightest. I just find it funny that people argue there's no advantage to anchoring, yet they admit that if you struggle with putting that one should try a belly putter. Why should you if you struggle with putting? Because in theory, it eliminates one of the biggest mistakes one makes with a conventional length putter and that's becoming too handsy. It takes the hands out of the equation. Then they say it's not from anchoring, well go take your belly or broomstick and putt without it anchored and tell me you make just as many putts without anchoring it as you do with it anchored. You won't, I promise.

 

I don't knock guys for using them, because it makes the game more enjoyable to them because it helps them with the putter. But, don't sit and tell me there's zero advantage for someone that's a poor putter that's struggling to switch to a belly and start making everything and magically stop flipping the putter head because it's impossible to do with it anchored.

 

I'd have zero problem if these guys using them admitted that it helped them by eliminating mistakes, but to say it doesn't give them, personally, an advantage when it clearly does is laughable to me. I've seen too many people switch and dramatically improve their putting because they can't make the most common mistake with the putter anymore to be told differently.

 

I'll concede your point, the long putter solves the handsy issue, so there's an advantage there, if that's a fault in your putting. However, it doesn't help reading greens or hitting the ball at the correct speed. There are advantages and disadvantages to every type of putter and most other clubs in your bag. So does the belly putter create an unfair advantage?

 

I think the right question to ask is, if you put someone in a putting competition (just greens) who's very good with a standard putter against someone who's very good with a belly putter, will the belly putter win most times? My guess is no. This can probably be figured out by comparing putting statistics of the top putters on the PGA tour.

[RookieBlue7]

Okay, we'll go the physics route? Which is more stable? A steel ball swinging from a v-shaped steel rod or from 2 loosely attached pieces of string? Which one is easier to deviate from it's path? That's the argument in a nutshell, to be honest. The putter has nothing to do with it, it's the manner in which it is intended to be used.

 

If there's no advantage to anchoring, why are there zero players using a long putter without anchoring it?

[RookieBlue7]

Another thought, sorry, I'm rapid fire at the moment.

 

What are the reasons people use belly putters if not for the advantage of artificial stability? I saw someone said mere "comfort and preference" so with that in mind, you would then be OK with the original premise of the thread, that the length of belly putters is acceptable, but anchoring of them is not. Would that be correct or incorrect?

[RookieBlue7]

At the end of last year the Golf Channel had 14 days or something about lessons. They had Ray Floyd, Nick Flado, and the expert, Johnny Miller. They all had a putting segment, and the first rule about putting is pick a putter you are comfortable with. Some people are more comfortable with the long putter some are not.

 

Sunday, I took a belly putter to the course. I usually meet a couple of the high handicap guys a couple of hours early and we work on different parts of their game. Sunday I had each of them putt several times with the belly putter. Of course they were not used to it and did not putt well, the interesting thing is they both putted better when they went back to their putters.

 

A valid reason for having a long putter is you get up to two club lengths when taking a drop. If you have a long putter then you get more to move futher from the hazard. That is two more feet than if you use a wedge and up to 8 inches if you have a 44 inch driver. If your driver is longer than that maybe the USGA should ban it. You might be able to lean on it in the wind uses it as a crutch.

 

 

The bolded part is what piqued my interest. I've seen the argument that draw biased, fade biased, larger head, longer drivers, etc being used. Let me ask, how does the swing change from one type of club to another? I'm actually astonished that these arguments are being brought forth, but I'll bite. Advancements in technology for these clubs to make the game easier are around the same premise that the parts of the swing are still being equal. Old Tom Morris's old hickory stick is different than today's modern club in the fact that the shafts and heads react differently. But, the premise remains the same. You still have to swing the club around your body with your hands and one could even say your arms being the only attachment to the clubs. No GI, SGI iron, hybrid, biased this way or that driver ever tried to change that aspect of the swing or the game. The belly and long putter does. That's the fundamental basis of the argument, and why that argument when presented by long and belly users is laughable because it's a rather obvious difference.

[Jmikecpa]

I can't comment on belly putters since I have never used one more than in a golf shop and can't putt a lick with one. When it comes to the broom stick it is not the anchoring part that helps but the true pendulum stroke it produces. For all the good that it does from inside ten feet they are hard as hell to roll from long distance. For me I was no better with the long putter than I was with a conventional putter and much like you I can putt with just about anything. Most people that go to a long putter do it because of a health issue (Rocco, Tim Clark, Nick O'Hearn and Carl Peterson) and Adam Scott is an outlier. I think he could have putted left handed at Augusta and would have had better results than with his old stroke. Anything would have been an improvement.

[RoverRick]

The bolded part is what piqued my interest. I've seen the argument that draw biased, fade biased, larger head, longer drivers, etc being used. Let me ask, how does the swing change from one type of club to another? I'm actually astonished that these arguments are being brought forth, but I'll bite. Advancements in technology for these clubs to make the game easier are around the same premise that the parts of the swing are still being equal. Old Tom Morris's old hickory stick is different than today's modern club in the fact that the shafts and heads react differently. But, the premise remains the same. You still have to swing the club around your body with your hands and one could even say your arms being the only attachment to the clubs. No GI, SGI iron, hybrid, biased this way or that driver ever tried to change that aspect of the swing or the game. The belly and long putter does. That's the fundamental basis of the argument, and why that argument when presented by long and belly users is laughable because it's a rather obvious difference.

 

 

First let me say, I am against more rules and regulations, period. There is a freaking book of rules for players, and another for equipment makers. They changed the grooves and the new grooves have had not effect on the pros but it does make a difference to the weekend golfer.

 

Second, the stroke for the putter is different than the other clubs. You do not swing the club around your body. So since the stroke is different the grip is also different.

 

Third, I do not use the belly putter I use the long putter and it does to touch your body, you hold it in your hands. Your arm is brace against you but that is no different than hold your elbows against you side and rocking your shoulders.

[RookieBlue7]

That is called anchoring, and it is fundamentally changing the putting stroke. Putt without it anchored to you. I'm willing to bet whatever sum of money you'd like to bet that your putting is measurably worse. Anchoring takes skill out of putting. This isn't a physical change to the putting stroke separate from equipment. The equipment is necessitating the change to the putting stroke. The putting stroke is not an inspired swing, it's an executed swing done by the shoulders arms and hands moving in unison. Long and belly putters remove the skill portion of that equation. By anchoring the club to your body you remove the skill of keeping these three in unison. Remove that anchor and tell me you putt as well with that putter, again I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. Guarantee you that you don't putt as well without anchoring it to your body and removing the skill portion of putting.

 

Citing another rule that does not fundamentally remove any skill involved with the swing in citing the groove rule. Again, a flawed argument. The groove rule does not alter the traditional method of swinging a golf club, nor does it change the way the ball is struck in the center of the club with it delivered square and on plane. Again, a fundamentally flawed argument.

 

And, hit more fairways and the grooves don't matter. Studies on grooves have proven that time and time again.

 

The title should've read long putters, as the belly and broomstick are both long putters. Regardless, it's not the equipment that's under fire, it's the method of using it, anchoring it. The equipment will stay legal, but you won't be allowed to anchor it, which removes any reasoning behind using it.

[JBones]

I'm sticking to my original comment; if you suck at putting your going to suck with whatever type of putter you're using, if you're good you're good.

 

Here's my question though.....what are they going to consider "anchoring"? Is it just going to be belly putters? I would consider Adam Scott's putter to be "anchored", even though the grip isn't making contact with anything but his hands. I don't remember who it is, but someone does/did have a long putter and they ran the grip up their arm and then gripped the putter and their wrist with their hand. Would that be deemed "anchoring"? They have a lot to think about before making a decision. If they go by the stats and see that it doesn't make a difference, then I think they'll drop it.

 

** After taking the last hour to type that on my cell, with my daughter distracting me, I see that the long putter "anchoring" has since been discussed.

[RookieBlue7]

It's not just bellies, it's all long putters (belly and brooomstick). Anchoring is contacting the putter to your body, and Adam Scott anchors the butt of the club to his sternum. It will be worded as such that one can not artificially stabilize the putter, which will cover all facets of long putting.

[RoverRick]

I'm willing to bet whatever sum of money you'd like to bet that your putting is measurably worse.

 

... which removes any reasoning behind using it.

 

I will take the bet because I putt better with the short putter. I just can not stay bent over that long because of my back. I usually play 27 to 36 holes on the Saturdays and Sundays and the tilting at the waist is a problem. The more I play and use the short putter the more problems I have that night and the next morning.

 

Since anchoring it to my body is not the "reason" I use it, that is the flaw in your argument.

[RookieBlue7]

I will take the bet because I putt better with the short putter. I just can not stay bent over that long because of my back. I usually play 27 to 36 holes on the Saturdays and Sundays and the tilting at the waist is a problem. The more I play and use the short putter the more problems I have that night and the next morning.

 

Since anchoring it to my body is not the "reason" I use it, that is the flaw in your argument.

 

I didn't say the short putter, I said use the same putter, your long putter, without it anchored to your body. Guarantee you that your putting with the long putter is worse without it anchored versus it being anchored. The rule isn't to ban the club, the rule is to prevent one from cramming it in one's chest or in their gut and creating a perfect pendulum and remove the skill from using it. That's another problem people are having understanding this. They don't care about the putter itself, they care about the manner in which it is used because of it removing a skill from putting. That's the foundation of this proposal. Again, go use the long putter without it anchored, guarantee you put putt worse with your long putter not anchored than you do with it anchored. That's what the proposal will change, one's ability to anchor it to improve the putting stroke, removing a variable and skill.

 

Using the long putter and belly putter is fine, as long as it's not anchored. I have no problem with it as long as it's not anchored. That's what they're aiming to remove from these types of putters, one's ability to anchor the putter to one's body to create the pendulum. Again, they don't care about the putter itself.

[RoverRick]

I didn't say the short putter, I said use the same putter, your long putter, without it anchored to your body. Guarantee you that your putting with the long putter is worse without it anchored versus it being anchored. The rule isn't to ban the club, the rule is to prevent one from cramming it in one's chest or in their gut and creating a perfect pendulum and remove the skill from using it. That's another problem people are having understanding this. They don't care about the putter itself, they care about the manner in which it is used because of it removing a skill from putting. That's the foundation of this proposal. Again, go use the long putter without it anchored, guarantee you put putt worse with your long putter not anchored than you do with it anchored. That's what the proposal will change, one's ability to anchor it to improve the putting stroke, removing a variable and skill.

 

Using the long putter and belly putter is fine, as long as it's not anchored. I have no problem with it as long as it's not anchored. That's what they're aiming to remove from these types of putters, one's ability to anchor the putter to one's body to create the pendulum. Again, they don't care about the putter itself.

 

I could take a mid putter and putt Happy Gilmore style with it. That would not anchor it too my body. I can not do that with my longer putter because the lie angle is wrong. If I gripped it like a regular putter, it is too long and would hit me in the chest. These were designed to be anchored, why? Because there is nothing illegal about it.

 

To make it illegal you would have to define the terms.

 

I guess you define anchoring as "...cramming it in one's chest or in their gut and creating a perfect pendulum and remove the skill from using it...." At no time does the club touch anything but my hands. And at no time does my hands touch my body during the stroke.

 

My arm does, but surely you are not for making a rule that your arm can not touch your body during the swing. I have more arm, different arm, different part, touching my body during the full swing than during the putting stroke. At what point do you start and stop legislating how much of what body part can touch the other during a swing.

 

And what is the penalty? Are we going to have fans calling in and saying Jim Furyk's elbow was touching his side when he teed off on number 4 causing a two stroke penalty that he did not assess and now he is disqualified because he has already signed his card. (I know they changed that stupid rule.) But seriously, when you start saying you can not use any part of your body as a guide or anchor where do you stop. I use my right side, as an anchor if you will, in keeping my right arm from lifting and overswinging. Is that illegal? No, because you are talking about anchoring the club. But I do not anchor the putter, I brace my arm.

 

And what do you mean you can not anchor a club to your stomach? The grip can not touch any part of your body but your hands? That means that if you chip with a fairway metal and you let the grip touch any part of your body you are in violation of the rule. Same for choking down on an iron, or hybrid. In all these instances you can cause the grip to come into contact with your body and then you have a penalty. Unless you specify that it has to be intentional. And now you have the thought police. Oh, so the grip was resting on my stomach, well, I guess I am just too fat for this putter length. Actually, my stomach was resting on the putter so that is not a penalty because I did not intend to get this fat.

 

More rules, more ruling, and more delays. It took the final three some in the Farmer's Insurance tournament an hour to play the first three holes a couple of weeks ago. The pros are playing a round of golf in 5 hours and 20 minutes. Amatuer's will disregard any rule they find inconvenient.

 

The biggest issue here is they are looking for a solution where there is no problem. Are the scores significantly lower using a long putter than a short? Are pros only playing as well as they are because the use the longer putters? Will a long putter keep you from blowing a seven shot lead?

 

The point of comparison between this proposed rule change and some of the other advances in equipment legislation is that it is the wrong solution to the problem. In this case, there is no problem. Long putters have been here decades. It was not until the stigma that was attached to them faded that it became an issue.

 

Do we go back and put an asterisk besides the peoples names that have won using a long putter?

 

And finally, why limit this to no anchoring of the club? What about those big huge grips, like Super Stroke or whatever? Does that not fundementally change the putting stroke because you can not use your wrist, "...creating a perfect pendulum and remove the skill from using it...." ?