Tiger Wants to Ban the Long Putter

[ApocG10]

Originally Posted by turtleback

In a segment with Paul Azinger on Thursday or Friday, Gary Player also expressed the opinion that they should do away with anchoring.

I happened to see that this morning. I agree completely. It is not a golf swing. Anchoring should be outlawed, and quick.

[trlong]

They set a length for the driver, at no longer than 48".....why should the putter be any different.  Some of these guys are up in the mid 50's for length.   I really don't care much on banning them, or not banning them, but what I'd like to see is them banned as a measuring club.  If I get 2 club length from a hazard, and get 90" (2 drivers), why should the guy beside me get 108" just because he has a long putter?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by trlong

They set a length for the driver, at no longer than 48".....why should the putter be any different.  Some of these guys are up in the mid 50's for length.   I really don't care much on banning them, or not banning them, but what I'd like to see is them banned as a measuring club.  If I get 2 club length from a hazard, and get 90" (2 drivers), why should the guy beside me get 108" just because he has a long putter?

Because the idea behind limiting the driver is to limit the speed at which you can swing it. Putters have several different rules concerning length, grip, etc.

I'm still not worried about the 18" (and to be fair it's 96" versus 108" or so - if you're going to take the longest of one take the longest of the other).

[danimal85]

Originally Posted by LuciusWooding

It doesn't really make a big difference, IMO. Sure you can control your stroke a bit better, but most pros miss putts from reads as opposed to a mishit. Lots of players have used long putters of late, but their success is temporary. They find ways to miss putts with the belly putter just like they still shank drives with the 460cc driver. When players with belly putters completely dominate the sport to the exclusion of others, let me know. So far a few no names using them have had a good year, which Tiger sees as bad. He likes rules that make the game harder and hurt the shakier players, like the groove rule. Phil Mickelson is an example of a good player who switched back since he still yipped putts with the long stick. It's a band aid fix at best.

Besides, Tiger has never had a problem using equipment to gain an advantage before; he uses the latest stuff custom made for him and still doesn't dominate like he used to. It's not the other players cheating, it's your mental game going to the crapper. He wouldn't get an advantage from switching to one, but he wants to ensure no one else can. Otherwise he would have already switched.

They can ban it if they want, but it's a dick move that doesn't need to be made since it will take care of itself. Tiger should shut his damn mouth and the authorities shouldn't listen to him at all. There's no need for the highest profile player to whine about the rules. That would be like Tom Brady asking the NFL to allow intentional grounding and let offensive linemen hold pass rushers.

This is the best post ever. Why you ask? All tour pro's can get their hands on any piece of cutting edge technology they want. Tiger is given clubs 2 years befor any other pro is allowed to use them. AAANNNDDD THE GOD DAMN BRADY "TUCK" RULE. Yeah, like a chump you used a guy who has a rule in the nfl defined by him, as your example as to why tiger shouldnt talk? hahahahah FAIL

[brocks]

I think they should ban that putter they keep advertising that has front wheel drive. If rear wheel drive was good enough for Bobby Jones, it should be good enough for everybody.

[ay33660]

Originally Posted by iacas

Because the idea behind limiting the driver is to limit the speed at which you can swing it. Putters have several different rules concerning length, grip, etc.

I'm still not worried about the 18" (and to be fair it's 96" versus 108" or so - if you're going to take the longest of one take the longest of the other).

I'm confused.

Are you saying that one player having a 18" advantage in terms of where they can drop a ball is NOT something to be concerned with?

Clearly there will be cases whereby an additional 18" will grant one player a better lie. Just look at Bradley's drop on the first day. The use of his long putter allowed him a drop out of the hay (he did not take this option) whereas it would have not be available to a player without a long putter.

How fair is that?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by ay33660

I'm confused.

Are you saying that one player having a 18" advantage in terms of where they can drop a ball is NOT something to be concerned with?

Clearly there will be cases whereby an additional 18" will grant one player a better lie. Just look at Bradley's drop on the first day. The use of his long putter allowed him a drop out of the hay (he did not take this option) whereas it would have not be available to a player without a long putter.

How fair is that?

Bradley's putter is no longer than a driver, so that's wrong.

And you're not confused. You got it. You could simply make the rule "you must use a non-putter to measure two club lengths" and that wouldn't ban the putters.

[daniel2852]

Personally I'm neutral on the issue.

Having used a belly putter only a handful times, I personally don't see a huge advantage that just every player can benefit from(like metal drivers).

On the other hand, it may be helpful for those player who have a hard time keeping their center of gravity over the ball when putting, most of my favorite players though don't have this problem.

I do agree with those who have said it isn't in the spirit of the game, but hey they didn't exactly imagine in the 17th century that we would have rangefinders, metal shafts, multi-piece rubber golf balls and all the other technology we have today. But it still hasn't changed the game that much, St. Andrews is still a difficult course and as long as golf remains challenging I don't see a problem with any of these "helper" technologies.

It happens in every sport really player's find ways to improve, hell the sandwedge only came about in the last century and you don't hear players complaining about open-faced clubs.

I say they could go either way on this issue. For Tiger though his stake is clear, he sees players benefiting from these types of putters. To him, that means they would putt worse with a regular putter like he uses, therefore he is trying to get an advantage by making them use equipment which they have a harder time using. It's clear to me that much.

[dednaH tfeL]

I hope they just come out with a rule that says you can't anchor the end of a golf club to your torso. That would take care of it.

[ApocG10]

Ya, I dont understand why writing thr rule would be difficult as some believe.

'The player may not, at any time, anchor a club to their body while making a stroke'

Simple enough. Length of the putter should not matter, but it should never be anchored.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by ApocG10

Ya, I dont understand why writing thr rule would be difficult as some believe.

'The player may not, at any time, anchor a club to their body while making a stroke'

Simple enough. Length of the putter should not matter, but it should never be anchored.

Define "anchored." Does putting your hand fully around the grip but touching your hand to your chest to solidify things constitute "anchoring"?

That's why it's not simple. Define "anchored."

[ApocG10]

Originally Posted by iacas

Define "anchored." Does putting your hand fully around the grip but touching your hand to your chest to solidify things constitute "anchoring"?

That's why it's not simple. Define "anchored."

Anchored is if any part of the putter, shaft, or hands are firmly against the body. Its pretty damn simple to define.

[brocks]

Is it me, or has there been a sea change on this subject? When I started this thread less than six months ago, my impression was that the pro-anchoring side was in the majority. Or maybe not pro-anchoring, but at least anti-changing-rules-after-millions-of-golfers-have-grown-up-using-the-long-putter. But in both spoken and written commentary I've seen this week, it seems like the majority is now for banning at least anchoring, if not long putters altogether. In fact, I can't recall seeing anyone against a rule change. Even after the guy they interviewed from the USGA made it sound like a rule change was coming, I didn't hear any opposition to it. So is it now the consensus that anchoring should be banned?

[ay33660]

Originally Posted by iacas

Bradley's putter is no longer than a driver, so that's wrong.

And you're not confused. You got it. You could simply make the rule "you must use a non-putter to measure two club lengths" and that wouldn't ban the putters.

I assumed that since Bradley used his long putter to measure it would be the longest club in his bag. Obviously you seem to know that this his putter is not longer than his driver so I will take your word on it.

Still haven't answered my question as to your assertion that a 18 inch difference in relief is not important.

I am a supporter of banning both the long and belly putter.

But I'm asserting that if they have to take some time to ban the long putter at least level the playing field immediately by banning the use of the long putter to measure relief.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by ApocG10

Anchored is if any part of the putter, shaft, or hands are firmly against the body. Its pretty damn simple to define.

Now define "firmly." What if I contend that my hand is "loosely" against my chest or the butt end of the club is only loosely in my belly?

Smarter "rules geeks" than you (and I) have tried to define "anchoring" in a simple way that doesn't invalidate the occasional normal stroke. Do you limit it only to the putting green, because sometimes the butt end of the club might touch my midsection when I have to grip down and chip out of trouble.

Originally Posted by brocks

So is it now the consensus that anchoring should be banned?

I don't think so. I think perhaps people are simply less shy on that side now.

Originally Posted by ay33660

I assumed that since Bradley used his long putter to measure it would be the longest club in his bag. Obviously you seem to know that this his putter is not longer than his driver so I will take your word on it.

All I'm saying is that belly putters tend to be in the 38-42" range. Maybe he didn't want to take the headcover off his driver? LONG putters are longer almost always, but belly putters are rarely longer. You'd have to be tall, thin, and stand fairly far from the golf ball.

Originally Posted by ay33660

Still haven't answered my question as to your assertion that a 18 inch difference in relief is not important.

It's not important enough for me to care about that aspect of the rule(s) very much. I oppose them pretty much entirely due to the fact that they are not made with what I consider a true "stroke."

[ThominOH]

I don't see what all the hub bub is about this putter length issue.. What happen at the Open this past weekend proved nothing.. a long putter WON the open.. and a longer putter LOST the open..  What's next? Banning putters with parameter weighting versus putters that are blade or mallet?..  ALL equipment used today has evolved and changed the game, rather it be the balls or clubs.. For the pro's to be whining as some is hypocritical in my opinion..  They all have benefited from the changes, some just like to "selectively" choose what is approved or not..  I don't see Tiger using persimmon woods.. do you?

[brocks]

I don't see what all the hub bub is about this putter length issue.. What happen at the Open this past weekend proved nothing.. a long putter WON the open.. and a longer putter LOST the open.

Then I guess you do see, after all. Guys using long putters finished first and second. [quote]ALL equipment used today has evolved and changed the game, rather it be the balls or clubs.. For the pro's to be whining as some is hypocritical in my opinion.. They all have benefited from the changes, some just like to "selectively" choose what is approved or not.[/quote] Well, what's the alternative? To allow anything at all? Laser sights? If you want to preserve the spirit of the game (and there's no law that says you have to want that), you have to be selective about what changes you allow in the balls and clubs. Many people feel that anchoring the club changes the basic idea of a stroke, while using a metal wood or a solid core ball does not. You may disagree, but I don't see anything hypocritical about it.

[DirtCheap]

Originally Posted by brocks

Then I guess you do see, after all. Guys using long putters finished first and second.

Well, what's the alternative? To allow anything at all? Laser sights?

If you want to preserve the spirit of the game (and there's no law that says you have to want that), you have to be selective about what changes you allow in the balls and clubs. Many people feel that anchoring the club changes the basic idea of a stroke, while using a metal wood or a solid core ball does not. You may disagree, but I don't see anything hypocritical about it.

A few years back (I think it was 2009) Golf magazine ran a story about some courses that were considering opening the holes up to 8 inches. The rationale was that, the current size hole did not allow for balls to be chipped in (think flying in, not rolling in) and evidently the research showed that openeing the hole up just a couple of inches would allow for far more "flying" chip-ins.
Of course, this went over like a lead balloon, but I personally thought it wasn't that different than any other technological changes in the game.


Edit:
Actually it was 2007.. I just found where I started a thread about it back then, and you can see how well the idea was recieved.

http://thesandtrap.com/t/13127/usga-decides-to-go-to-8-inch-holes