Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016) - Page 30

 

All I see from that is that he wants to be the dictator instead of the dictated, and that desire is as usual driven by the bottom line.  He's a businessman, and just like Solheim, that prevents him from seeing any other viewpoint.  He's after the unlimited right to destroy the game of golf by putting out virtually any equipment he wants to without restrictions.  He says it's for the player, but the reality is that he can't see anything past the dollar signs in his eyes.

This guy, if he has his way, will kill golf.  Something else, loosely related to golf will follow, but golf will be dead.  Because making money became more important than the game.  And so, as we now do in so many areas of life, he wants to dumb it down to accommodate the lowest common denominator for purely selfish reasons.

 

Frankly I see almost no value to the average golfer in the obsession to "grow the game",  The "grow the game" guys are primarily the guys who make money off the game and THAT is their motivation.  Why should I or any other average golfer care if the game grows or not???

     I think maybe he realizes the writing is on the wall about the USGA coming after drivers next and this is his attempt to quell any momentum the USGA may get from banning anchoring. 

 

  If they really wanted to grow the game they could make it cheaper so that more people would have the opportunity to play on a regular basis. When you consider the price of clubs and green fees it is insane compared to what a soccer ball and a one time league fee costs or better yet an open field and a few trees as goal posts.

 

That's the first I've heard of this.  Is this well-known information?

Golf is the only sport that has such a powerful equipment industry around it and this industry has led to some sub-optimal results as of late. Golf courses being longer and more expensive (maintenance). It'll be good to see something done to shorten the courses. I don't know how they would do this, but it'd be the single biggest boon to the courses and teaching pros.

Edit. And of course the taylormade guy is bitching. His company is all about longer, longer, longer (which works). Bridgestone advertises the anti-side spin and different ball flight characteristics, so there's plenty of room for innovation that could actually make the game easier.

   I have heard a few people suggest it -  USGA articles, golf analysts but nobody has actually come out and said we are going to put restrictions on drivers....yet -  and it seems to me that they need to do something about course length. I do not know how much land it takes to build a 7600 yard course but I have no doubt that it is a lot and it just is not realistic to keep building longer courses especially when you consider water consumption etc.  

 

For the record I am in favor of driver restrictions.  I'm looking for a new driver this year and the size of those things just irritates me.  I just hadn't heard anything yet (although I took the last few months off of any golf news).  But driver restrictions seems like it would be a much bigger undertaking.  

 

Then again, it means the manufacturers get to sell a lot of new drivers to replace the illegal ones, right? 

 

It would have to be like the groove issue though, with a delayed implementation, or the guys who just bought those $500 drivers will scream bloody murder.

Yes it would but I also have a feeling it would only apply to future drivers and the limits would be the standard of the current drivers. They would not allow them to get any bigger etc. It is too late to actually go backward.  

 

 

Uhh, they ALREADY restricted drivers.  460 cc is the limit.  If they do NOTHING there will be no getting bigger.  I have no idea what restrictions you guys are talking about or where these articles and hints are coming from since it already happened years ago.  And there really was very little uproar.

 

The 460 cc limit was imposed in 2004. 

If golf courses can have local rules regarding the course, can they have local rules allowing the use of certain clubs?

 

There are no approved local rules which would change the club rules.

 

And that is still too big.  However, I have heard nothing on this as well...which is why I asked the question.

It's not the driver in the crosshairs, it's the golf ball. King comes right out with it in the interview and says TM will not "roll back the ball" no matter what the USGA does. Pretty sure that was a preemptive shot at something the manufacturers think is quite likely coming down the pike.

 

Although I'd be in favor of a rollback, I can see his point in this regard.  A lot of R&D has gone into designing a ball which maximizes distance without sacrificing performance (and the Penta is one of the top performing balls you can buy).To be told now that they have to toss all of that work in the trash and design for underperformance instead would be a slap in the face.  It's a lot different from the long putter which took took no real effort to develop, and isn't that hard to discontinue. 

the companies must be taking this seriously. I was asked fill out a survey this weekend and 1 of the questions was whether or not I would be willing to play a nonconforming ball

Another view.

 

http://www.titleist.com/teamtitleist/b/tourblog/archive/2013/01/21/the-case-for-unification-a-perspective-from-wally-uihlein-ceo-acushnet-company.aspx

 

Great editorial.  I'm keeping that one.