or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016) - Page 7

post #109 of 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post

What I think will be most interesting is to see how the anchored putter guys handle the rule change.  Will they wait until 2016 or make the switch immediately.  Will also be interesting to see how the change affects their scores.  Some guys used a traditional putting stroke first so they will be more comfortable going back to it, but I'd think guys like Bradley will have a tougher time making the switch. 

 

If I were them, I'd do this:

 

2013 - Putt with my belly putter. Occasionally mess around with short putter.

2014 - Putt with my belly putter. Mess around during off-season and off weeks with short putter. Maybe pull out the short putter for an event or three at the end of the year (fall series stuff).

2015 - Putt with belly putter and short putter in PGA Tour events, moving more towards the short putter as the year went on.

2016 - Short putter! :)

post #110 of 1852

Makes sense as rushing to the short putter could cost some their pro card.  I wonder how those that continue to use the anchored stroke after the rule change is announced will be treated by the galleries and if they will feel more self conscious given the rules committees basically will have ruled that the stroke is illegal and after 2016 would be considered cheating. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

If I were them, I'd do this:

 

2013 - Putt with my belly putter. Occasionally mess around with short putter.

2014 - Putt with my belly putter. Mess around during off-season and off weeks with short putter. Maybe pull out the short putter for an event or three at the end of the year (fall series stuff).

2015 - Putt with belly putter and short putter in PGA Tour events, moving more towards the short putter as the year went on.

2016 - Short putter! :)

post #111 of 1852
post #112 of 1852

I'd expect Scott and others to defend their putting style as they currently depend on it to put food on their tables.  Woods hasn't said or done anything more than Arnie has for year, he's provided a personal opinion on the topic when asked. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick Parker View Post

I find this interesting

 

http://www.sbnation.com/golf/2012/11/6/3609908/tiger-woods-adam-scott-belly-putters

post #113 of 1852
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

 

If I were them, I'd do this:

 

2013 - Putt with my belly putter. Occasionally mess around with short putter.

2014 - Putt with my belly putter. Mess around during off-season and off weeks with short putter. Maybe pull out the short putter for an event or three at the end of the year (fall series stuff).

2015 - Putt with belly putter and short putter in PGA Tour events, moving more towards the short putter as the year went on.

2016 - Short putter! :)

 

Too much common sense involved 

 

 

More from Scott  It definitely seems that the players that use long putters don't get that the rules change is revolves around the definition of a golf stroke not that it's easier to putt with.  They'll say the 460cc titanium driver are easier to hit than an older driver so why not outlaw the modern driver.  Missing the point.  

 

 

 

Quote:

I don't believe it would be a hard thing for me to go back to the short putter," Scott, 32, said in a recent interview, parts of which are in the December issue of Golf Magazine. "I could do it this week, and I think I would putt better than I did in 2010 and 2009.  The long putter has taught me how to putt again

They've got to look beyond professional golf. The governing bodies don't run the Tour; they run golf. Some recreational golfers can't play the game without a long putter. I think that would be a shame if they're going to take people away from the game. I'm sure that's not their intention, but it'll be interesting to see what they come up with.

[The rule change] seems like it's being pushed by some players, so could we push for the rules to be changed on other clubs -- hybrids, for example?"

Yeah, I think some people definitely have a problem with guys putting with a belly putter or a long putter," he says. "That's because they haven't putted well with it, or they haven't tried it. That's part of my argument -- it's still a learned skill. It's not like you just pick it up and make putts. You have to learn how to use it.

post #114 of 1852
Thread Starter 

Phil Mickelson offers his opinion on the anchoring ban.  Phil used a belly putter briefly during the '11 Fed Ex Cup Playoffs and he's buddies with Keegan Bradley.

 

Quote:

“It’s not an issue that I’m involved with, (but) I understand both sides,” he said Wednesday at The Barclays Singapore Open, according to the AFP. “It’s just that I don’t think you can take away what you’ve allowed players to use, practice and play with for 30 years. I think it is grossly unfair.”
post #115 of 1852

Has the USGA and or the R&A stated when they would make an official announcement on the subject?  

post #116 of 1852

I personally would like the governing bodies to focus on other rules that are (in my humble opinion) bad for the game.  One example is grazing a blade of grass or leaf while in a hazard.  Another one is when a ball oscillates slightly when you have addressed it on the green or in the fairway.  These are just 2 examples that in no way improves your lie or stroke but is a penalty under the current rules.  As for the topic though I personally do not like the anchored putters but I don't feel it gives players an unfair advantage.  Full disclosure, I do not and never have used an anchored putter.

 

 

Beachcomber... I just heard on the Golf Channel that the decision will be made before the end of the calendar year.

post #117 of 1852

I understand Phil's logic, but it's not like the rule would impact golfers overnight.

 

Also, by that logic other equipment changes would be unfair as well.  But as long as they are uniform, it will be equitable.  And again, if anchoring a putter offers no advantage, then it shouldn't matter.

post #118 of 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyTNgolfer View Post

I personally would like the governing bodies to focus on other rules that are (in my humble opinion) bad for the game.  One example is grazing a blade of grass or leaf while in a hazard.  Another one is when a ball oscillates slightly when you have addressed it on the green or in the fairway.  These are just 2 examples that in no way improves your lie or stroke but is a penalty under the current rules.  As for the topic though I personally do not like the anchored putters but I don't feel it gives players an unfair advantage.  Full disclosure, I do not and never have used an anchored putter.

 

 

Beachcomber... I just heard on the Golf Channel that the decision will be made before the end of the calendar year.

 

Um.... neither of the examples you cited is a breach unless the blade of grass or leaf is detached and lying loose, AND your ball lies in a water hazard or bunker.  Brushing grass or brush or weeds which are still attached or growing is never a penalty unless in the process you do something to improve your lie or the area of your intended swing.  The ball oscillating is also not a penalty.  It's only a penalty if it moves.   The definition of Move from the Rules of Golf:

 

 

 

Quote:

Move Or Moved

A ball is deemed to have “moved’’ if it leaves its position and comes to rest in any other place.

post #119 of 1852

I just do not understand the problem with the rule changes. I played university hockey, and have been training athletes for years now. So many changes came down the pipes through the years, that I could not name them all if I tried. Never have I seen lawsuits over rule changes, it is just absurd. I am 6'4, and 245 pounds. I was one of the roughest defenseman that minor hockey, AAA, and university hockey had ever seen. Not just rough, but dirty. A McSorley who could actually play hockey.

 

I had to alter my playstyle drasticly over the years. I grew up in an era where going for the head was just what you did. It wasn't a good check unless you caught the jaw with it. The instigator rule affected me also, because back then, fighting was a part of hockey. I mean, our teams paid for us to train in boxing gyms, and coaches pointed out who they wanted 'taken out'. When rules changed, I didn't threaten lawsuits because my style of play had to change. I changed my style of play.

 

Rules change. Governing bodies have a right to do that. If they feel something is not in line with the spirit of the game, then it is up to them to change it. It is their right.

post #120 of 1852

I have no use for belly putters. But then I have no use for a 460cc driver, either. However, if other golfers do like these things and choose to use them, then that's up to them.

 

Not sure how you can attempt to roll back innovation in golf equipment. Sure, you could say that everyone has to play persimmon, blades, and balata - but all you'd be doing then would be rolling back time to technologies that were "cutting edge" in the 1960s, and hence a huge improvement over the hickory of the 1920s or whatever...

 

I guess what I'm saying is that you can't "put the genie back in the bottle."

 

It seems that manufacturers have tried (so they'd tell us) to make this game easier ever since it was conceived. Still difficult though, isn't it? Belly putters, spring-faced drivers, whatever else....none of it really matters, you can't buy yourself a golf game, all you can do is buy the equipment that seems to work best for you and your swing. It's not as though anyone is coming for my traditional-looking bladed putter and forcing me to play with one of those outlandish-looking putters I seem to see in pro shops everywhere these days, so depriving other players of the equipment they choose to use strikes me as an odd idea for leveling the playing field - not that I'm certain the playing field needs leveling.

post #121 of 1852

Uniform changes are not equitable. For example imagine they banned left handed golf swings (after all they look stupida3_biggrin.gif).  Would you be willing to say that if left handed play didn't offer an advantage, then the change wouldn't matter? I doubt it. The belly guys have spent time on a skill that was rendered useless by the change. 

 

Now that doesn't mean the change shouldn't be done. It just means that it will impact some players more than others. But so did the 460 driver, graphite shafts, the modern golf ball, and a ton of other changes through the years.

 

Personally it seems to me the evidence that belly putter, long putters, mallet putters, heavy putters, left hand low, claw, and so on are actually better putting techniques is minimal at best.  They helps some people and hurts others. 

 

As far as making golf fun for the average guy, belly putters have basically zero effect. No on starting the game plays one.   The old guys do use a lot more long putters but it isn't clear to me if they will be banned by this ruling.

 

If they really wanted something to help the high handicapper and speed up play, legalize butter on the driver. Cutting the side spin by 2/3s would change the game drastically for pretty much anyone that can't break 100. Obviously I am a bit tongue in cheek about that.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bplewis24 View Post

I understand Phil's logic, but it's not like the rule would impact golfers overnight.

 

Also, by that logic other equipment changes would be unfair as well.  But as long as they are uniform it will be equitable.  And again, if anchoring a putter offers no advantage, then it shouldn't matter.

post #122 of 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

I just do not understand the problem with the rule changes. I played university hockey, and have been training athletes for years now. So many changes came down the pipes through the years, that I could not name them all if I tried. Never have I seen lawsuits over rule changes, it is just absurd. I am 6'4, and 245 pounds. I was one of the roughest defenseman that minor hockey, AAA, and university hockey had ever seen. Not just rough, but dirty. A McSorley who could actually play hockey.

 

I had to alter my playstyle drasticly over the years. I grew up in an era where going for the head was just what you did. It wasn't a good check unless you caught the jaw with it. The instigator rule affected me also, because back then, fighting was a part of hockey. I mean, our teams paid for us to train in boxing gyms, and coaches pointed out who they wanted 'taken out'. When rules changed, I didn't threaten lawsuits because my style of play had to change. I changed my style of play.

 

Rules change. Governing bodies have a right to do that. If they feel something is not in line with the spirit of the game, then it is up to them to change it. It is their right.

Well posted and I have to say, wow!  I've never played ice hockey but followed it closely in Boston in the '73-74.  I knew it was a rough game and I don't wish to seem naive but ..... wow.

 

As you say, rules changes are common in many sports and have happened often in golf over the years.  Fundamentally the present case is nothing different.


Edited by Chas - 11/12/12 at 1:43pm
post #123 of 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApocG10 View Post

I just do not understand the problem with the rule changes. I played university hockey, and have been training athletes for years now. So many changes came down the pipes through the years, that I could not name them all if I tried. Never have I seen lawsuits over rule changes, it is just absurd. I am 6'4, and 245 pounds. I was one of the roughest defenseman that minor hockey, AAA, and university hockey had ever seen. Not just rough, but dirty. A McSorley who could actually play hockey.

 

I had to alter my playstyle drasticly over the years. I grew up in an era where going for the head was just what you did. It wasn't a good check unless you caught the jaw with it. The instigator rule affected me also, because back then, fighting was a part of hockey. I mean, our teams paid for us to train in boxing gyms, and coaches pointed out who they wanted 'taken out'. When rules changed, I didn't threaten lawsuits because my style of play had to change. I changed my style of play.

 

Rules change. Governing bodies have a right to do that. If they feel something is not in line with the spirit of the game, then it is up to them to change it. It is their right.

 

I agree.  It seems pretty absurd to me too, and somewhat petulant in the case of guys who just switched recently and are still implying they would bring legal action.

post #124 of 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chas View Post

Well posted and I have to say, wow!  I've never played ice hockey but followed it closely in Boston in the '73-74.  I knew it was a rough game and I don't wish to seem naive but ..... wow.

 

As you say, rules changes are common in many sports and have happened often in golf over the years.  Fundamentally the present case is nothing different.

 

 

Nice. I've been a lifelong Bruins fan. Bobby Orr was my Idol, along with Ray Bourque.

 

Ya, hockey was a rough sport until the late '90's. I don't care what anyone says, i've played hockey my whole life, and follow both Rugby and football. Those sports have some hard hitting, but nothing compared to checking 'up' into someone's jaw at 40kmh coming at you at the same speed with their head down. I mean, playing Peewee AAA (the youngest checking league in east coast canada), I broke a guys neck in two places when I checked him into the boards, and didn't even get a penalty.

 

Had to leave the rink with with my whole team at my back though, cuz we were in their hometown, and the fans wanted blood. But that was just Canadian hockey. That is the way we played the game. I'm glad it changed, personally. I took pride in it back then, but looking back, I can see the permanent damage we could have caused. Especially since my defense partner, who I playeded with from 4yo, to 23yo in university, was as big and mean as I was. Nobody got checked for concussions back then. The trainer asked how many fingers he was holding up, and as long as you were within one or two, you were good to play. f3_laugh.gif

post #125 of 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaGolfer View Post

Not sure how you can attempt to roll back innovation in golf equipment.

 

They're not. They're tightening the definition of a "stroke."

 

That ends up being a very different thing.

post #126 of 1852

Yeah, ask James Harrison what he thinks of the NFL rule changes and how he's liked being fined over $100K for flagrant fouls after years of them being legal hits. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bplewis24 View Post

 

I agree.  It seems pretty absurd to me too, and somewhat petulant in the case of guys who just switched recently and are still implying they would bring legal action.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rules of Golf
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016)