Anchored Putters Rules Change - Page 32

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave67az 

 

Wow.

 

I've tried to be nice and ignore the garbage but this is too much.  Just to address a few things...

 

1.  First he says that because he had a bad day with a long putter that it means they shouldn't be illegal because they obviously provide no advantage.  Really?  So if a baseball player on steroids strikes out it means that they're okay to use because they provide no advantage?  One of the dumber arguments I've heard.

 

2.  "They're amateurs policing a professional game."  No, dillweed, you're a professional playing a game that's enjoyed by WAY more amateurs than professionals and if you think the USGA should cater to the professionals just because you make your money at it then you don't understand why the USGA exists in the first place.

 

3.  If Tim Clark can swing every club in the bag without anchoring EXCEPT the putter, that's a little hard to believe don't you think?

 

4.  Yeah, it's unfortunate that nerves are a part of the game...for people who aren't mentally capable of controlling them.  It's also unfortunate that extreme muscle control is a part of the game...for people who don't have as much muscle control as others.  It's also unfortunate that physical strength is a part of the game...for people who aren't as strong.  They're ALL part of the game and putting the whole package together is what we ALL strive to do.  It's also why we respect the truly great golfers...because we KNOW how hard it is to put them all together.  To remove any of those requirements is to lessen the efforts and accomplishments of all the great golfers in our history.

 

Step down from your little professional, elitist perch and stop acting like the USGA has a responsibility to do whatever the pros want them to do.  How about you show a little respect for the traditions of golf.  It's a shame the USGA let it go this long before squashing it.  That's the ONLY logical argument, in my opinion.

I think it's funny that you label Garrigus an "elitist", when he barely has two teeth that point in the same direction. It has always been the amateur, country club set that have done the looking down upon the riff raff who have to actually play golf for a living. Recall if you will that professionals, in the good old days, weren't even allowed to enter the clubhouse -- so much had they sullied "the traditions of golf" by taking money for their performance! But this isn't the 1900s anymore, and the governing bodies are playing with fire. The groove rule was a complete farrago, anchoring was a stupid fight to pick next, and the ball -- if they go there -- is three strikes and you're out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stretch 

 

 

I think it's funny that you label Garrigus an "elitist", when he barely has two teeth that point in the same direction.

I got a good laugh out of this comment :-)

So here's my question: if they polled the PGA tour card-carrying members and the ruling came out in favor of banning the anchored stroke, would that end this particular path of logic?

It really is a non-sequitur to begin with, but I will indulge it for the sake of fleshing out the logic behind it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stretch 

 

 

I think it's funny that you label Garrigus an "elitist", when he barely has two teeth that point in the same direction. It has always been the amateur, country club set that have done the looking down upon the riff raff who have to actually play golf for a living. Recall if you will that professionals, in the good old days, weren't even allowed to enter the clubhouse -- so much had they sullied "the traditions of golf" by taking money for their performance! But this isn't the 1900s anymore, and the governing bodies are playing with fire. The groove rule was a complete farrago, anchoring was a stupid fight to pick next, and the ball -- if they go there -- is three strikes and you're out.

I didn't realize we still judged people by their looks and expected to get away with it.  I hope you're proud of that.  If you don't mind, could you please post a pic of yourself so we can all judge you appropriately?

His LANGUAGE is what indicates his elitism--by saying that amateurs have no business making rules for a "professional sport" (hell, just using the term "professional sport" to refer to something in which ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE ARE PROFESSIONALS is, by definition, an elitist statement).

The PGA is a professional organization.  The USGA is not.  If the PGA wants to set their own rules, cool.  As has been said numerous times in this thread, there are different rule sets for MANY professional/amateur sports organizations.  Baseball's bats are a great example.  Overtime rules in NCAA Football is another.  There's no reason the PGA can't adopt different standards.  Right?  So to knock the USGA for changing their rules that govern ALL golfers at this time, and to make it sound like because "I'm a professional and you aren't so you can't tell me what to do" just screams of entitlement, and I really can't stand that kind of attitude.

I agree, I'm against the anchored putting stroke and believe the R&A / USGA got the rule right.  That said, the PGA has spoken out against the ban so it places the PGA Tour in the position to break the tie within the United States. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas 

 

I don't know. Is the PGA Tour willing to let two majors be contested under different rules? And the Masters may very well follow suit given their USGA membership.

 

I agree with and like the proposed rules change, so I'm not going to favor the PGA Tour or the players that pushed for it if they buck the USGA.

We all recognize that the PGA Tour is not the only tour in the world, but I'm not sure what your point is in stating that every time the discussion comes up.  No one really cares about the Asian tour, and most of the top European Tour players are playing a significant number of PGA Tour events so it's naïve to pretend like the decision of the PGA Tour is irrelevant to professional golf. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman 

The Opens are owned by the R&A and USGA. The PGA Tour is not the only tour in the world. The European Tour will go with the R&A and probably the Asian also. All the feeder tours will stick with the RBs as they are fed by the amateurs who won't have any experience of anchoring.

I believe the European Tour have already indicated they would go with whatever the R&A decide, as has the PGA (ie the real owners of the title as opposed to the PGA of America)

The Asian Tour may not mean much in the US but it does in Asia where the game is actually growing. The R&A pump a lot of money and time into golf in Asia, I doubt that that is not noticed.

I get bothered by the statement that the game is "tough enough for amateurs"... I don't want the game easier personally. Equipment is where it is because of advancements. Some of us do utilize those drivers and compressions. Those who don't hopefully use the lower compression and softer flex shafts made to keep the playing field even. I personally have no problem with 7000 yard course for tournaments and do not see how we could even police stips of public courses. There is nothing wrong with a little tradition in the game ie walking in professional tournaments. Can you imagine watching golf on tv with them all racing around on carts? Now can we just let the long putters die quietly?

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtogolf 

We all recognize that the PGA Tour is not the only tour in the world, but I'm not sure what your point is in stating that every time the discussion comes up.  No one really cares about the Asian tour, and most of the top European Tour players are playing a significant number of PGA Tour events so it's naïve to pretend like the decision of the PGA Tour is irrelevant to professional golf. 

I'm guessing that his point is that the PGA Tour would have to go against the grain in order to ignore the ban/ruling.  There are other consequences and ramifications in proactively bucking the other tours/governing bodies in order to make a statement.  

I still think this is largely hypothetical and that there isn't much substantive evidence of them actually going through with this.  However if they did, it would be a pretty big gamble IMO, as they would be making the statement that if the PGA Tour decides not to accept the rule, that the other bodies will eventually ignore the rule as well.  They may be right, but at what cost?

How is it that Tim Clark cannot physically putt without anchoring yet he can chip without anchoring?

Can you say pretext?

I knew you could.
 

In addition to dave67az's excellent points, I'd also like to point out that in one breath Garrigus implies that anchoring doesn't give an advantage ("Look how terrible a putter I am with it!"), and in the next breath implies that he needs his anchored putter to make those million dollar putts. This is a common contradiction present in the pro-anchor arguments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stretch 

I think it's funny that you label Garrigus an "elitist", when he barely has two teeth that point in the same direction. It has always been the amateur, country club set that have done the looking down upon the riff raff who have to actually play golf for a living. Recall if you will that professionals, in the good old days, weren't even allowed to enter the clubhouse -- so much had they sullied "the traditions of golf" by taking money for their performance!

You are correct when you say professionals used to be looked down on by the amateurs. You are incorrect when you say it has "always been" that way, since clearly the situation is reversed now, and has been for decades.  (Perhaps not in the sense that pros "look down on" amateurs, but certainly in the sense that many amateurs covet the financial reward and lifestyle that the pros enjoy.)

In the past the members of country clubs were wealthy and most of the pro's were just barely making a living.  Today, it's the reverse in that most pro's make more money than the members of country clubs they play tournaments at (except for a few).

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacm3bill 

 

You are correct when you say professionals used to be looked down on by the amateurs. You are incorrect when you say it has "always been" that way, since clearly the situation is reversed now, and has been for decades.  (Perhaps not in the sense that pros "look down on" amateurs, but certainly in the sense that many amateurs covet the financial reward and lifestyle that the pros enjoy.)

Yeah.  At one time professional golfers were little more than hustlers and professional gamblers.  That was how they made a living, certainly not from the prize purses for placing highly in tournaments.  That has all changed.  While there still are some uber-elite clubs which will not allow anyone who is not member or special guest to play regardless of playing level, most would fall all over themselves to invite a known pro to grace their premises.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer 

 

 

Pelz's whine about banning the belly putter.

 

 

 

I get bothered by the statement that the game is "tough enough for amateurs"... I don't want the game easier personally. Equipment is where it is because of advancements. Some of us do utilize those drivers and compressions. Those who don't hopefully use the lower compression and softer flex shafts made to keep the playing field even. I personally have no problem with 7000 yard course for tournaments and do not see how we could even police stips of public courses. There is nothing wrong with a little tradition in the game ie walking in professional tournaments. Can you imagine watching golf on tv with them all racing around on carts? Now can we just let the long putters die quietly?

 

Jamieson responded to a Pelz article here: http://thesandtrap.com/b/trap_five/five_reactions_to_the_belly_putter_ban . Might be the same one.

BTW, "the game is too difficult" is another way of saying "anchored putters make the game easier" and yet in the next breath these people will say "it's not an advantage!" Which is it? Because the USGA is saying "it's not a stroke."

Also BTW, when Pelz says things like "you approve balls that generate extra distance when sufficiently compressed" I vote to take away his "scientist" card. That's been disproven time and time again I wrote about it a long time ago: http://thesandtrap.com/b/swing_thoughts/the_mythical_ball_boost . Plus, balls aren't "compressed," they're "deformed." :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52 

Mark King (TaylorMade): "It makes sense to me. I don't like it but I think we need to do it (ignore the USGA). Absolutely. I think we need to tell golfers you can play with a 15" cup, with 20 clubs in your bag, by playing winter rules, taking a gimme and saying that's cool. It's fine. It's okay to do that. Enjoy it."

This guy is out of line. He is using a ruling based on the STROKE to advance his position to just make more money. The ruling had nothing to do with the putter, which has not been banned. If they were going to ban the putter they would have instituted some ruling on the length of the putter. They can all start putting like Kuchar for all I care, but I agree with the USGA. It is not a stroke when it is anchored and they should have put a stop to it long ago. Better late than never.

Well, you gotta admit the rule still had *something* to do with the putter, since there's going to be a lot fewer long putters sold now. That said... Yeah, obviously anyone in the putter-making business is going to be a little biased in their remarks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacm3bill 

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52 

Mark King (TaylorMade): "It makes sense to me. I don't like it but I think we need to do it (ignore the USGA). Absolutely. I think we need to tell golfers you can play with a 15" cup, with 20 clubs in your bag, by playing winter rules, taking a gimme and saying that's cool. It's fine. It's okay to do that. Enjoy it."

This guy is out of line. He is using a ruling based on the STROKE to advance his position to just make more money. The ruling had nothing to do with the putter, which has not been banned. If they were going to ban the putter they would have instituted some ruling on the length of the putter. They can all start putting like Kuchar for all I care, but I agree with the USGA. It is not a stroke when it is anchored and they should have put a stop to it long ago. Better late than never.

 

Well, you gotta admit the rule still had *something* to do with the putter, since there's going to be a lot fewer long putters sold now. That said... Yeah, obviously anyone in the putter-making business is going to be a little biased in their remarks.

Yeah, but all of those players are still going to be using some sort of putter, so it shouldn't make a big difference in his bottom line.  The number of players who quit because of the rule will be minimal (golf is too addictive), and those that do decide to quit already have their long putters, so most of them are unlikely to be a huge source of revenue for him.  He's just rocketing off the deep end without any real thought given to it.

It's too late now but they (in my humble opinion) should have outlawed the "3-point" system....belly putters with both hands on well below the end of the club.that is anchored in the belly That is what caused the issues...a two-point anchoring should be allowed...one hand at the end of the club and another separated...remember the clubhead is still swinging.

Another point....years ago a company came out with a putter that had a teflon bottom and it looked like a "shuffleboard" head only it was designed to pull back from the ball (staying on the turf) and "pushed" through the ball like shuffleboard. According to the ruling on James Lepp's "saucer pass"" it should be allowed as the ball is being fairly struck at????????

Heard this reported on Golf Channel, but then found it's hit the web as well;

The PGA Tour may decide as early as Monday to encourage the USGA and R&A to take back their proposal to ban anchored putting, according to Brad Faxon. Commissioner Tim Finchem will convene a 5 p.m. ET conference call of the tour’s policy board to determine an official response to golf governing bodies’ bid to outlaw the stroke Keegan Bradley and several others use with their long putters, Faxon said Sunday for Golf.com.

The game’s regulators set a 90-day comment period, which will expire at the end of February, for discussion about the recommendation they announced in November. Faxon, who served on the policy board for four terms, believes Finchem will use the conference call to urge board members to reject the USGA’s plan, which would prohibit anchored putting starting in 2016.