A Parting Shot In The Long Putter Controversy

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texian

This shows just how unnecessary, stupid and unenforceable this rule is.

Here's a scenario.

Two players are tied on the last hole of their club championship match. They're pretty competitive and haven't really liked each other for years. One of them, the one with the long putter, putts, makes it, and apparently wins the match.

His opponent, who is standing to his side, yells immediately--"Hey, that was an illegal stroke. Your hand was touching your chest."

"Was not," says the apparent winner. "Well, maybe it was, just a little bit. But it wasn't intentional. And that's what the rule says it has to be, intentional."

So they storm into the pro shop. You're the pro. What's your decision?

Quickly appoint a rules committee and refer the players to them.

But seriously, in the end, golf is a gentlemen's game, and it would be one player's word against the other. I don't see how the pro could give the match to the complaining player. He has no proof that a breach existed.

In virtually all of the rules, any doubt as to what actually occurred is resolved against the player.  Best suggestion get a regular putter and learn how to putt.  No longer any doubt.

[Texian]

Also there has never been a time when an opponent pulled out a long putter that I thought I was at a disadvantage on the greens.

That's a good positive attitude, and I'm sure you've played against some good competition. But Keegan Bradley (2011 PGA Championship), Bill Haas (2011 Tour Championship), Webb Simpson (2012 U. S. Open), and Ernie Els (2012 British Open), put a lot of good players at a "disadvantage," whether they admitted it or not. And by the 2012 British Open, 27 percent of the field used long putters. That, obviously, drove the old-timers in the R&A; and USGA over the brink of insanity.

[MS256]

That's a good positive attitude, and I'm sure you've played against some good competition. But Keegan Bradley (2011 PGA Championship), Bill Haas (2011 Tour Championship), Webb Simpson (2012 U. S. Open), and Ernie Els (2012 British Open), put a lot of good players at a "disadvantage," whether they admitted it or not. And by the 2012 British Open, 27 percent of the field used long putters. That, obviously, drove the old-timers in the R&A; and USGA over the brink of insanity.

And for everybody you can name that had an advantage on the greens using a long putter I can name one that had an advantage on the greens using a short one.

[Texian]

And for everybody you can name that had an advantage on the greens using a long putter I can name one that had an advantage on the greens using a short one.

The fact is that the trend, as evidenced by tournament winners and numbers of golfers going to long putters, was toward long putters becoming a major factor among the pros, because it gave them an "advantage." Pros are funny that way. They look for any advantage they can get. This was too much for the dinosaurs who make the decisions "for the good of the game," and they blew it this time.

[geauxforbroke]

The fact is that the trend, as evidenced by tournament winners and numbers of golfers going to long putters, was toward long putters becoming a major factor among the pros, because it gave them an "advantage." Pros are funny that way. They look for any advantage they can get. This was too much for the dinosaurs who make the decisions "for the good of the game," and they blew it this time.

So, to clarify, do you think that putting with an anchored stroke is an "advantage"?

[MS256]

So, to clarify, do you think that putting with an anchored stroke is an "advantage"?

The irony:

The OP believes an anchored putting stroke shouldn't have been banned and believes it is a huge advantage. I believe an anchored putting stroke shouldn't have been banned because I don't think it is an advantage.

So I end up on the same side of the issue because I disagree with him (pretty funny).

P.S. Of course I don't have a dog in the hunt and I am not very passionate about it either way.

[Texian]

So, to clarify, do you think that putting with an anchored stroke is an "advantage"?

Decide for yourself if it's an "advantage," based on trends, including majors won and players switching to long putters. Most of those who switched probably anchored. Whether anchoring is an advantage or not should not be an issue. Pausing at the top of the backswing may or may not be an advantage. Some do it and most these days don't. But it shouldn't be outlawed.

The ruling bodies said that "one or both elbows braced against body" or "forearms held against body without anchor point" would be legal with a short putter but "anchored point created by forearm" with a long putter would not be. "This is not an equipment rule," they maintained, but that's a lie. They just didn't like the look of long putters.

I've got news for them. Mine's not going away, and I hope the tour players who were so successful with them make the minor adjustments needed so they don't have to stop using them either.

[geauxforbroke]

Decide for yourself if it's an "advantage," based on trends, including majors won and players switching to long putters. Most of those who switched probably anchored. Whether anchoring is an advantage or not should not be an issue. Pausing at the top of the backswing may or may not be an advantage. Some do it and most these days don't. But it shouldn't be outlawed.

The ruling bodies said that "one or both elbows braced against body" or "forearms held against body without anchor point" would be legal with a short putter but "anchored point created by forearm" with a long putter would not be. "This is not an equipment rule," they maintained, but that's a lie. They just didn't like the look of long putters.

I've got news for them. Mine's not going away, and I hope the tour players who were so successful with them make the minor adjustments needed so they don't have to stop using them either.

Well, the way you're talking about it, you seem to think it's an advantage. Yes, more players have started playing with long putters, but that doesn't mean that it gives them some kind of advantage. Think about it this way, if there really was some kind of "advantage" in using a long putter (suggesting that by using them, a player's putting would automatically improve, regardless of skill or practice), then why aren't 100% of the pros using them? Because it works for some, but not for all. Putting with a long putter is no more an advantage than using a drive with a longer shaft. It may work for some, but not for all.

And if you really think they just disliked the look of long putters, why wouldn't they just outlaw them?

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS256

And for everybody you can name that had an advantage on the greens using a long putter I can name one that had an advantage on the greens using a short one.

The fact is that the trend, as evidenced by tournament winners and numbers of golfers going to long putters, was toward long putters becoming a major factor among the pros, because it gave them an "advantage." Pros are funny that way. They look for any advantage they can get. This was too much for the dinosaurs who make the decisions "for the good of the game," and they blew it this time.

Those "dinosaurs" average about 45 years old.  Better get the facts before you start bitching.

[Texian]

And if you really think they just disliked the look of long putters, why wouldn't they just outlaw them?

For the same reason that they don't do anything about some of the things that really need fixing--like club and ball technology that should be reined in to keep from making our courses obsolete and the game a mockery compared to how it was once played. The equipment industry is too powerful.

They thought their stupid ruling would make long putters go away without having to fight that battle.

[geauxforbroke]

For the same reason that they don't do anything about some of the things that really need fixing--like club and ball technology that should be reined in to keep from making our courses obsolete and the game a mockery compared to how it was once played. The equipment industry is too powerful.

They thought their stupid ruling would make long putters go away without having to fight that battle.

So there have been no rule changes in recent years for maximum MOI, groove shape and depth, driver head size, etc.?

I'm sure your long putter fits in well with your mashie, spoon, and niblick.

[Texian]

So there have been no rule changes in recent years for maximum MOI, groove shape and depth, driver head size, etc.?

Not enough. The equipment engineers are still way ahead.

[geauxforbroke]

Quote:

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

So there have been no rule changes in recent years for maximum MOI, groove shape and depth, driver head size, etc.?

Not enough. The equipment engineers are still way ahead.

Are you having trouble finding good featheries?

Your view on equipment is unbelievably archaic. Do you condemn doctors that use cutting edge technology to treat their patients? I'm surprised that you're using something as modern as a computer instead of sending carrier pidgeons. And what about cars and airplanes. They sure are making the world smaller. Surely we should just stick to walking everywhere...

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

And if you really think they just disliked the look of long putters, why wouldn't they just outlaw them?

For the same reason that they don't do anything about some of the things that really need fixing--like club and ball technology that should be reined in to keep from making our courses obsolete and the game a mockery compared to how it was once played. The equipment industry is too powerful.

They thought their stupid ruling would make long putters go away without having to fight that battle.

And the moment they start trying that, they get other golfers on their case.  Maybe it wouldn't bother you, and I'd be for it too, but they'd end up being sued by the equipment manufacturers for restraint of trade or something similar.  There are a lot more who would cry about any rollback of the ball or driver than will ever complain about the anchoring ban.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texian

Quote:

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

So there have been no rule changes in recent years for maximum MOI, groove shape and depth, driver head size, etc.?

Not enough. The equipment engineers are still way ahead.

Are you having trouble finding good featheries?

Your view on equipment is unbelievably archaic. Do you condemn doctors that use cutting edge technology to treat their patients? I'm surprised that you're using something as modern as a computer instead of sending carrier pidgeons. And what about cars and airplanes. They sure are making the world smaller. Surely we should just stick to walking everywhere...

That a bit of an extreme comparison.  Golf equipment doesn't make a life and death difference to the world at large.

[geauxforbroke]

That a bit of an extreme comparison.  Golf equipment doesn't make a life and death difference to the world at large.

A bit extreme I admit, but a valid comparison nonetheless.

[Texian]

And the moment they start trying that, they get other golfers on their case.  Maybe it wouldn't bother you, and I'd be for it too, but they'd end up being sued by the equipment manufacturers for restraint of trade or something similar...

...Golf equipment doesn't make a life and death difference to the world at large.

Agree on both, and a good place for me to end my part in this discussion, which started as a way to remind golfers that there are positive aspects to the anchored putter ban, and not to re-hash something that we can't do anything about. The positive aspects--you can still use long putters with minor modifications to your stroke, fewer of your opponents will be using them, and supposedly they're less expensive.

[lakawak]

Taking a very small recent sample is just plain ignorant of basic statistics. Especially when if you went back just a few more years, you would find absolutely no advantage and someone equally as ignorant of statistics could use those years as proof of it being a DISADVANTAGE us to a long putter. IT is simply very ignorant of statistics to think that Bradley, Haas, Webb and Els' victory proves anything. Especially since you say, such a high percentage of people are using long putters. Meaning it is not that big of a statistical anomaly for there to have been so many long putters in such a short sample.

Imagine pulling cards out of an ordinary deck. Any clubs you pull represents a long putter. (25% of the total population...so less than 27% that you say used them in the 2012 British Open. Pull out enough and you would expect it to be about 1 in 4. Pull out just 8 or so, and you very well may get 4 clubs. Half of the sample.

Bottom line...to anyone with more than an 8th grade knowledge of statistics, there is ZERO evidence of it being an advantage. The rules makers just overreacted out of sheer ignorance.

Hell...look at the 2013 British Open. Won by a short putter who had his best putting season in YEARS...just after switching back from a long putter. The long putter sure didn't help Phil.

[JerseyThursday]

Probably not a penalty if your shirt or torso gets brushed against, but I have to wonder if what you describe isn't the least repeatable, clunkiest, and most difficult to perform under pressure stroke I have ever heard of.

How is this the least repeatable, clunkiest, and most difficult to perform under pressure stroke you have ever heard of?
Its simply a long putter an inch (or so) away from touching the stomach.
Think before you write.