or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Tiger Wants to Ban the Long Putter
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tiger Wants to Ban the Long Putter - Page 7

post #109 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachcomber View Post



Camper said 'Long Putter'.  The Long Putter and Belly Putter are different.



As I have stated, I don't care how long the putter is. The length isn't the issue. The issue is anchoring. A belly putter is anchoring.

 

And, by definition, for a putter to reach to the belly, it has to be a 'long putter'. Unless you're Danny DeVito.

post #110 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocks View Post

At his press conference today, Tiger revealed that he has been talking with Peter Dawson of the R&A for "a number of years" about banning the long putter. Tiger wants to restrict the length of the putter to no longer than the shortest other club in the bag.
I agree with him -- not only does anchoring the putter against the body go against the spirit of the game IMO, but having a super long putter gives a player an unfair advantage when measuring club lengths for a drop.
But I can just hear the howls about how the USGA/R&A are kowtowing to Tiger, if they do come up with some kind of ban.
For historical perspective, a few decades ago some pros, notably Sam Snead, were experimenting with croquet putting, where you straddle the line and face the hole, swinging the putter between your legs. It didn't take them very long to ban that
What do you think? Ban it? Allow it for amateurs, but not for pros? Or leave it alone?

Do you know the story of why "they" banned Sam's style? If Tiger gets what he wants, it could be history repeating itself. 

 

Since Sam's style does not have to involve a long putter and it's not anchored to the body would people opposed to long or belly be fine with it?  

 

Can anybody name the one person who used a non-conventional putter that finally seemed to make it OK for all to use and seemed to make some feel OK about using it i.e. Phil?  HInt: think back no longer than the start of last year.

 

post #111 of 781

I agree with a lot of you on this.   I don't think it has as much to do with the length, but how it is anchored by the body.   But on the other side of it...a belly putter doesn't help everyone...it just doesn't feel comfortable to certain people...Like me.   I own a sabertooth with a black series insert that was given to me by a friend who works on the PGA tour...the putter was actually used by Jim Furyk for a couple of practice rounds when he was going through some putting changes on the west coast swing a few years ago...it still has the lead tape on it from when I got it.   Anyway...I turned it into a belly putter to make an exact replica to Keegen Bradley's with the hopes that it would make a huge improvement on my putting.  But I can't putt with it to save my life.  I have tried and tried but it just feels weird...I can't get my hands to stop taking over.  Although belly putters are a great training tool...even if you can't necessarily putt successfully with it.   It trains you to quiet the hands and just rock those shoulders.   it is impossible to keep that shaft attached to your belly if your stroke is real handsy.   

 

That being said, I think they should rule on it based on anchoring the putter to your body rather than length of the putter itself...because I really don't see anything wrong with the tall putters.  There are some guys like Martin laird that use a belly length putter but don't actually anchor it to their belly...he has the shaft running up his left arm...he just likes the length and the feeling of choking way up on it.  I think Kuchar did this for awhile as well...not sure if he still does or not.  But the more I think about it, enforcing this rule may be really tough.               

post #112 of 781


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zipazoid View Post



As I have stated, I don't care how long the putter is. The length isn't the issue. The issue is anchoring. A belly putter is anchoring.

 

And, by definition, for a putter to reach to the belly, it has to be a 'long putter'. Unless you're Danny DeVito.



Yes. I agree with you. That's the difference of the two.

 

 

 

post #113 of 781

In other words folks. 

 

The long putter and the belly putter are not such a threat to the game are they?

 

I haven't checked yet but I wonder if it's a standard fixture on the Champions tour?

 

In my experience people switch when their eyes go bad.

post #114 of 781

I can remember the Sam Snead croquet style putting.

 

I think it was banned because it just didn't look good on television.

post #115 of 781

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by camper6 View Post

In my experience people switch when their eyes go bad.


Yeah, I'm sure Keegan Bradley's eyes are shot. And Jason Day, and Adam Scott, etc.

post #116 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

 


Yeah, I'm sure Keegan Bradley's eyes are shot. And Jason Day, and Adam Scott, etc.


There is always the exceptions to the rule.

 

As a senior I am only going by personal experience.

 

Keegan Bradley won one major.  And his winning put could have been made with a hockey stick.

 

post #117 of 781

People switch for numerous reasons but the common reason is that a conventional length putter does not work as well for them as a belly / long putter.   

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by camper6 View Post

In other words folks. 

 

The long putter and the belly putter are not such a threat to the game are they?

 

I haven't checked yet but I wonder if it's a standard fixture on the Champions tour?

 

In my experience people switch when their eyes go bad.



 


Edited by newtogolf - 2/14/12 at 10:10am
post #118 of 781

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by camper6 View Post

Keegan Bradley won one major.  And his winning put could have been made with a hockey stick.


Yes, but he's also the only player in the history of golf to have a career record of winning 100% of the majors in which he's played. And he made more than just the last putt with his putter all week. C'mon now…

post #119 of 781

I just put in 5 rounds with the belly and I have dropped my putts per round average from 31.72 to 31.0. My gains have been in 3 putt avoidance and from 7-10 feet, while in closer is not too much different (actually better with traditional putter).  The total distance made has gone up from from 70 to 85 feet. While this is a sample representation based on 155 putts and maybe not statistically significant, it does seem that I can putt the same or slightly better than the way I have been putting since @ 1988.  I never considered myself a bad putter, I just figured that if I could take advantage of the belly stroke and it worked, then why not? One putt more is the difference between being a mid 5 cap to a mid 4 cap all other things being equal. I think that this thinking is what is different when it comes to long putters. They are not just for bad putters, they are for people trying to get better at any level. I still think that anchoring is questionable, but I will continue until a ruling is made. 

post #120 of 781

I still don't see the problem, and the arguments about them being "unfair" or making putting too easy for bad putters are not getting any more convincing even after dozens of repetitions. It's an equipment choice. I play a hybrid because a long iron is harder for me to use; is that unfair to the good iron strikers?

 

Also, the fact that these long putters have been around for a long time is important to the debate. It's a little late to decide that these just weren't the way people were intended to putt. They're not a common choice, but unlike the croquet-style ban, the putter has been an accepted option for a long time. Given that they don't hurt anything, I don't buy into the hate. Just like any other piece of equipment, choose the option that best suits your game.

post #121 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

 


Yes, but he's also the only player in the history of golf to have a career record of winning 100% of the majors in which he's played. 



This quote made me chuckle... Come on now! d2_doh.gif

post #122 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachcomber View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

 


Yes, but he's also the only player in the history of golf to have a career record of winning 100% of the majors in which he's played. 



This quote made me chuckle... Come on now! d2_doh.gif



Yeah, that could have been said for any player who won their first trip to a major, until the next one. Where is Keegan now? Is it that his season hasn't started or did he retire?

 

post #123 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean_miller View Post



Yeah, that could have been said for any player who won their first trip to a major, until the next one. Where is Keegan now? Is it that his season hasn't started or did he retire?

 



I think he's off practicing with a normal length putter, so when he wins the Masters he will become the 1st person to win the 1st major he used a traditional putter in.a1_smile.gif

 

post #124 of 781

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachcomber View Post

This quote made me chuckle... Come on now! d2_doh.gif


I was responding in a way that seemed similarly silly to the post I'd quoted! :)
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeg View Post

I still don't see the problem, and the arguments about them being "unfair" or making putting too easy for bad putters are not getting any more convincing even after dozens of repetitions.

 

Who keeps saying this? Again, virtually all of the long-standing arguments from people who oppose them have more to do with how golf should be played - not by anchoring - and have nothing to do with "unfair" or "easier" or "advantage."

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by zeg View Post

Also, the fact that these long putters have been around for a long time is important to the debate. It's a little late to decide that these just weren't the way people were intended to putt. They're not a common choice, but unlike the croquet-style ban, the putter has been an accepted option for a long time. Given that they don't hurt anything, I don't buy into the hate. Just like any other piece of equipment, choose the option that best suits your game.


Wedge grooves were around for a long time and they were changed. I don't think it's important to the debate. The NFL changes long-standing rules for the betterment of the game all the time. Why should golf not change the rules for the betterment of the game simply because they've been around for awhile?

 

post #125 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeg View Post

I still don't see the problem, and the arguments about them being "unfair" or making putting too easy for bad putters are not getting any more convincing even after dozens of repetitions. It's an equipment choice. I play a hybrid because a long iron is harder for me to use; is that unfair to the good iron strikers?


Do you still have to swing the hybrid?

post #126 of 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by camper6 View Post

In my experience people switch when their eyes go bad.

Why don't they just get contacts?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tour Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Tiger Wants to Ban the Long Putter