Tiger Wants to Ban the Long Putter

[jameshk]

There is much discussion about how the long putter affects the performance of an individual or gives the golfer an advantage (remember the recent grooves ruling which served to allow the club player to play with different spec clubs). I am of the view that the length of the putter is not the issue, rather how it may be utilised. By this I mean holding or securing it against the body (any part including the Langer approach of old) which I believe is contrary to the intent of the RoG. The outright banning of long putters would be a faux pas as would establishing separate rules for Pros and the rest of us. I for one want to play the same game as they do with EXACTLY the same rules.

[TheGeekGolfer]

I've been thinking more about this lately and I still don't think the USGA or R&A; will ban the long putter or ban / define anchoring.  The USGA left it's definitions very vague on purpose, they don't regulate 'how' a stroke is made.  Sure, they define a stroke as "the forward movement of the club made with the intention of striking at and moving the ball".  The purposely don't tell you 'how' to make that stroke, just that it must be a stroke and not a push, spoon, etc.  I don't think they are going to start now and regulate how you can hold a club (which is essentially what they would be doing).  What's next, someone thinks that the 'claw' grip isn't 'how golf was meant to be played', so they ban that type of grip because it gives those golfers that can't putt holding the club in other manners an advantage.  Sounds to me like the same argument as anchoring the putter.  I think it's a slippery slope and they aren't going to go down it.  The 'we will discuss it' angle is (imo) just for show and to placate those that think it should be banned.  Interesting discussion, we'll see how it plays out.

[jhwmusic]

I feel it helps some and doesn't help others. Cuz I can't putt with it if my life depended on it. And putting is considered my strength. I feel it completely takes feel out of putting. I can knock the, em in with the belly from 5 and in all day, but if I step back beyond 10-15 my speed control gets worse and worse. And it isn't like I just tried it one day on the putting green....I own one. So I think people like Tiger need to stop their whining. He can't putt period right now...he should be more worried about that.

[LuciusWooding]

Originally Posted by jhwmusic

I feel it helps some and doesn't help others. Cuz I can't putt with it if my life depended on it. And putting is considered my strength. I feel it completely takes feel out of putting. I can knock the, em in with the belly from 5 and in all day, but if I step back beyond 10-15 my speed control gets worse and worse. And it isn't like I just tried it one day on the putting green....I own one. So I think people like Tiger need to stop their whining. He can't putt period right now...he should be more worried about that.

Tiger is working very hard right now regarding his putting. He already has excuses about why he can't putt on Bermuda, Zoysiagrass, Pikuya grass, and especially Poa. He just needs to work on Bent and Rye grass and he'll be all set. Honestly he could be putting on newspaper right now and he would misread it. Maybe he misses his putts because he's too busy glaring at Keegan's bag during his stroke.

[jhwmusic]

Tiger is working very hard right now regarding his putting. He already has excuses about why he can't putt on Bermuda, Zoysiagrass, Pikuya grass, and especially Poa. He just needs to work on Bent and Rye grass and he'll be all set. Honestly he could be putting on newspaper right now and he would misread it. Maybe he misses his putts because he's too busy glaring at Keegan's bag during his stroke.

What happened with him and Keegans bag?

[Stretch]

He spat in it.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

The purposely don't tell you 'how' to make that stroke, just that it must be a stroke and not a push, spoon, etc.  I don't think they are going to start now and regulate how you can hold a club (which is essentially what they would be doing).  What's next, someone thinks that the 'claw' grip isn't 'how golf was meant to be played', so they ban that type of grip because it gives those golfers that can't putt holding the club in other manners an advantage.

Bit of a straw man. We shouldn't do this because then they might ban the claw grip? I don't think it's a slippery slope, and I don't think the USGA or R&A; could care any less about the claw grip.

The USGA and R&A; do define several aspects of "how" you may make a stroke. You listed several. Standing astride the line of your putt is another. Any possible ruling on "anchoring" (if they wanted to go that route) would simply further refine the "how."

I still think perhaps a ruling on the grip could be the way to go. Limit shaft thickness and grip length to 11" or so from the butt end of the club and let the belly putters grip their putters on the steel shaft if they want. No more split grips or 24" grips. Then they wouldn't have to define the "how."

[TheGeekGolfer]

Originally Posted by iacas

Bit of a straw man. We shouldn't do this because then they might ban the claw grip? I don't think it's a slippery slope, and I don't think the USGA or R&A; could care any less about the claw grip.

The USGA and R&A; do define several aspects of "how" you may make a stroke. You listed several. Standing astride the line of your putt is another. Any possible ruling on "anchoring" (if they wanted to go that route) would simply further refine the "how."

I still think perhaps a ruling on the grip could be the way to go. Limit shaft thickness and grip length to 11" or so from the butt end of the club and let the belly putters grip their putters on the steel shaft if they want. No more split grips or 24" grips. Then they wouldn't have to define the "how."

They define "how" you take a "stance", not how you make a stroke.  They define how the ball is to be struck, not in the manner in which you swing the club.  They did this on purpose, to allow for creativity during the course of a round.  It's what allows a golfer to adjust to certain situations on the course.  What if a ball is under a bush and I kneel on the ground to hit it.  In the course of doing so, the only way to swing is if the butt of the club is wedged up against my body.  Would that be banned under 'anchoring'?  That's why I don't think they will change the rule, it would end up effecting other situation and aspects of the game that they have chosen not to govern.

So, now they should change the grip rule?  No, sorry, I don't buy it.  I just don't think they should or will.  They examined this issue years ago and put in the bit about putters having two grips, which they would have known would be for long putters.  Plus, with limiting the grip to 11", you could still  anchor the putter in your belly and have a larger thickness shaft.  I looked at appendix II and didn't see any specifications about shaft thickness.  Plus, you could just wear another glove on your bottom hand that enabled you to grip the shaft better.

That's the slippery slope I'm talking about, they would have to start defining many aspects of the game that they haven't defined in the past and would end up stifling on-course creativity, just to ban something that I don't even think the majority of golfers would want banned.  What is the purpose of that?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

They define "how" you take a "stance", not how you make a stroke.  They define how the ball is to be struck, not in the manner in which you swing the club.

Fine. If you want to play that game, then they may simply define "how" you "grip" the club legally.

But from where I'm sitting, "how" you make a stroke includes how you are standing when you make the stroke and how you use the implement to make the stroke. But okay - the grip

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

Would that be banned under 'anchoring'?

First, I don't think that situation would necessitate anchoring, so I don't really care if it would ban that type of stroke. Stick the butt of the club outside of the left side of your body. I had to play a chip that was on a nearly vertical wall at Oakmont once and the butt of the club stuck out. No reason you can't do that.

Beyond that, I think it's pointless to discuss what would be banned given we don't know what the USGA is going to do if they do anything at all.

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

So, now they should change the grip rule?  No, sorry, I don't buy it.  I just don't think they should or will.

I think we're aware of how you feel on the issue. I was simply demonstrating a way to effectively "ban" belly putters without mandating "how" using your definition.

Debating would be awfully easy if we just get to say "Nope, I think you're wrong. I don't buy it" to everything.

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

They examined this issue years ago and put in the bit about putters having two grips, which they would have known would be for long putters.  Plus, with limiting the grip to 11", you could still  anchor the putter in your belly and have a larger thickness shaft.

So? Once a rule's added it can't ever be removed? Ooh, my turn to try! "No, I don't buy it."

And if someone wanted to putt using gloves (they'd have to conform to the Rules too, of course) by gripping the thin steel shaft of a putter, I say go for it. It's not easy, and people would greatly prefer to put their hands on a grip rather than on the shaft of their putter.

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

That's the slippery slope I'm talking about, they would have to start defining many aspects of the game that they haven't defined in the past and would end up stifling on-course creativity, just to ban something that I don't even think the majority of golfers would want banned.  What is the purpose of that?

The Overall Distance Standard defined aspects of the game that weren't defined in the past. Or would you rather we didn't have the ODS, too?

And we're not talking about defining "many aspects" - we're talking about defining ONE aspect - the aspect of anchoring a putter to your body. It only becomes a slippery slope if people let it become one. You're arguing against possible belly putter legislation because of vague things that are highly unlikely (in my estimation) to occur.

[jhwmusic]

He spat in it.

Ha No way! What really happened?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by jhwmusic

Ha No way! What really happened?

No. Was a wisecrack about Keegan's spitting "issue."

[jhwmusic]

No. Was a wisecrack about Keegan's spitting "issue."

got it

[TheGeekGolfer]

Originally Posted by iacas

Fine. If you want to play that game, then they may simply define "how" you "grip" the club legally.

But from where I'm sitting, "how" you make a stroke includes how you are standing when you make the stroke and how you use the implement to make the stroke. But okay - the grip

I'm not playing any 'games', I'm simply stating my opinion.

OK, now let's define how one grips the club.  Let's read that definition... one or two hands, do the hands have to be touching, interlocking?  Can I grip it with my opposite hand on top or must it be 'traditional'?  This stifles creativity and it's my opinion that that is bad for the game.  That's why I don't think the USGA will do it.

Originally Posted by iacas

First, I don't think that situation would necessitate anchoring, so I don't really care if it would ban that type of stroke. Stick the butt of the club outside of the left side of your body. I had to play a chip that was on a nearly vertical wall at Oakmont once and the butt of the club stuck out. No reason you can't do that.

Beyond that, I think it's pointless to discuss what would be banned given we don't know what the USGA is going to do if they do anything at all.

Sure, you don't think that situation would require anchoring, but the point is, it limit you on the course, because there are situation where it would be necessary.  When you stuck the club outside the left side of your body, did you grip it on the steel of the shaft?  What if the definition of 'grip' included that the hands had to be touching the 11" grip portion of the club.  Once again, it limits you in situations on the golf course.  Golf is to random of a game to limit or ban certain ways of 'how' make a stroke at the ball.

Originally Posted by iacas

Beyond that, I think it's pointless to discuss what would be banned given we don't know what the USGA is going to do if they do anything at all.

Isn't that the point of this thread?  To discuss why we as individuals think it should or shouldn't be banned and what might be banned and why you think the USGA should go one way or the other?  I guess this whole thread is pointless then?

Originally Posted by iacas

So? Once a rule's added it can't ever be removed? Ooh, my turn to try! "No, I don't buy it."

Eric, I'm not arguing with you or trying to convince you, I know that is a 'pointless' discussion .  You just happen to be very vocal on the subject and I use that to further define my opinion for others (if they want) to read.  And no, I never said once a rule is added it can't be removed. My opinion is simply this, it lends more credit to leaving it the way it is currently defined.

Originally Posted by iacas

And if someone wanted to putt using gloves (they'd have to conform to the Rules too, of course) by gripping the thin steel shaft of a putter, I say go for it. It's not easy, and people would greatly prefer to put their hands on a grip rather than on the shaft of their putter.

Of course those gloves must conform, never said otherwise.  So, first you are against 'anchoring', but wait, that argument isn't working, let's try the grip and let them go ahead if they want to grip the shaft.  I thought you were against the stroke itself?

Originally Posted by iacas

And we're not talking about defining "many aspects" - we're talking about defining ONE aspect - the aspect of anchoring a putter to your body. It only becomes a slippery slope if people let it become one. You're arguing against possible belly putter legislation because of vague things that are highly unlikely (in my estimation) to occur.

Your making my point, to define this 'one' aspect, you have to define quite a few other things.  You want to define 'anchoring' or maybe 'the grip' of the club or wait, maybe 'how' the club is gripped?  In my opinion, you are going into an area that the USGA has purposely left alone.  Why, because it makes the game more creative and open to a larger population of golfers.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

OK, now let's define how one grips the club.  Let's read that definition... one or two hands, do the hands have to be touching, interlocking?  Can I grip it with my opposite hand on top or must it be 'traditional'?  This stifles creativity and it's my opinion that that is bad for the game.  That's why I don't think the USGA will do it.

It stifles creativity? Assuming it does (and I think that's a massive stretch), why is that a bad thing? Again, you can't putt standing astride the line of the putt. So that stifles creativity. You can't whack the ball with the grip of the club. That stifles creativity. You can't use an 80" club. I guess that stifles creativity, too.

You're raising straw men issues. Nobody cares if you grip the club with the opposite hand on top. That's not what this issue is about. You keep arguing the belly putter stuff by trying to argue stuff much farther down a slippery slope I don't think we'll get to.

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

When you stuck the club outside the left side of your body, did you grip it on the steel of the shaft?  What if the definition of 'grip' included that the hands had to be touching the 11" grip portion of the club.

And there's more made up stuff. I'm not responding to that kind of stuff anymore because it's silly to discuss things that haven't happened and which nobody is talking about doing. Nobody's suggested the claw or left-hand-low or gripping the club on the steel will be made illegal, and it's silly to think that it would be.

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

So, first you are against 'anchoring', but wait, that argument isn't working, let's try the grip and let them go ahead if they want to grip the shaft. I thought you were against the stroke itself?

I am against the stroke. Not by a lot, but if I had to pick, I'd lean towards making it illegal. I simply suggested the grip idea (the physical grip, not where a player puts his hands) as being a way of effectively banning belly putting and long putting, because I can't imagine pros wanting to putt by holding onto a thin round shaft just to gain the ability to stick the butt of the club in their belly button. Same goal: ban belly putting, and it may be easier to write the language by changing the equipment rules. It still allows older golfers or Raymond Floyd (he of the really long putter) to play with a more upright stance without requiring the putter to be the shortest club in the bag.

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

Your making my point, to define this 'one' aspect, you have to define quite a few other things. You want to define 'anchoring' or maybe 'the grip' of the club or wait, maybe 'how' the club is gripped?  In my opinion, you are going into an area that the USGA has purposely left alone.  Why, because it makes the game more creative and open to a larger population of golfers.

Jamming a club in your gut is not "more creative," and no, I'm not "defining quite a few other things." My proposed solution simply modifies existing rules regarding the make and form of equipment. That's it.

Respond to me again if you wish, but as with the Miceli thread, I'm repeating myself often enough to know that I've said about all I can say. Take care.

[Texian]

I think Lucius was referring to the fact that Keegan is probably the poster child for long putters right now, since he won a major with one.

Originally Posted by jhwmusic

What happened with him and Keegans bag?

[TheGeekGolfer]

Originally Posted by iacas

It stifles creativity? Assuming it does (and I think that's a massive stretch), why is that a bad thing? Again, you can't putt standing astride the line of the putt. So that stifles creativity. You can't whack the ball with the grip of the club. That stifles creativity. You can't use an 80" club. I guess that stifles creativity, too.

Once again, I never said this stuff.  I said it stifles creativity in regards to the way a legal stroke is made.  A legal stroke has already been defined.  This is why I have to quote you, you say things in regards to my posts that I didn't say and try to make it seem as if I said it.

An actually, yes, I do think you should be able to stand astride or any way you want when you make your stroke, but I live with that one.

Also, I think you can use an 80* club, I read Appendix II of the USGA rules and it never mentions anything about a maximum loft on a golf club.  Feel wedges has a 73* model on their website.

Originally Posted by iacas

It stifles creativity? Assuming it does (and I think that's a massive stretch), why is that a bad thing? Again, you can't putt standing astride the line of the putt. So that stifles creativity. You can't whack the ball with the grip of the club. That stifles creativity. You can't use an 80" club. I guess that stifles creativity, too.

You're raising straw men issues. Nobody cares if you grip the club with the opposite hand on top. That's not what this issue is about. You keep arguing the belly putter stuff by trying to argue stuff much farther down a slippery slope I don't think we'll get to.

And there's more made up stuff. I'm not responding to that kind of stuff anymore because it's silly to discuss things that haven't happened and which nobody is talking about doing. Nobody's suggested the claw or left-hand-low or gripping the club on the steel will be made illegal, and it's silly to think that it would be.

I am against the stroke. Not by a lot, but if I had to pick, I'd lean towards making it illegal. I simply suggested the grip idea (the physical grip, not where a player puts his hands) as being a way of effectively banning belly putting and long putting, because I can't imagine pros wanting to putt by holding onto a thin round shaft just to gain the ability to stick the butt of the club in their belly button. Same goal: ban belly putting, and it may be easier to write the language by changing the equipment rules. It still allows older golfers or Raymond Floyd (he of the really long putter) to play with a more upright stance without requiring the putter to be the shortest club in the bag.

Jamming a club in your gut is not "more creative," and no, I'm not "defining quite a few other things." My proposed solution simply modifies existing rules regarding the make and form of equipment. That's it.

Respond to me again if you wish, but as with the Miceli thread, I'm repeating myself often enough to know that I've said about all I can say. Take care.

I'm NOT trying to convince you are change your mind.  I DO think it is a slippery slope and that's my opinion and that's what I've stated.  Therefore, I'm giving examples of why I believe it to be a slippery slope.  I don't care if you think it isn't, the only reason I quote your posts is because you bring things up that I never said and post them as if that was my intent.  Then, I need to quote your posts to clarify.    I really don't care about your stance on the subject.  I think it's wrong, end of story.  I'm posting so if anyone else finds it relevant or not, they can read it and if they are 'sitting on the fence' or indifferent about the subject, they can think more about the issues with changing the current rules and definitions of golf.  Then they can make up their own mind with all the information.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

Also, I think you can use an 80* club

I typed " not °.

Inches.

[TheGeekGolfer]

Originally Posted by iacas

I typed " not °.

Inches.

Sorry, my bad on that one.