Tiger Wants to Ban the Long Putter

[newtogolf]

Some may look at Tigers credentials and consider him an informed source on this topic and thereby base their opinion on his position.  Only real fanboys would forego their own opinion just to defend a celebrities position.  I am a fan of Robert Di Nero but I don't defend his political opinions because I like his movies.

Originally Posted by sean_miller

There's no need to paint every person as a hater for thinking fans of certain celebrities tend to share their opinions on their pet causes, and that if the celebrity had a change of heart, more than a few fans would experience the same change of heart. It's a fact. We see it every day.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by Merfal

It takes an average of ten years/10,000 of dedicated practice to be world class at something.

Talk about a meaningless and completely invented "statistic".

Whoever plucked this number out of the air is a fool.

[Merfal]

Originally Posted by Shorty

Talk about a meaningless and completely invented "statistic".

Whoever plucked this number out of the air is a fool.

[Shorty]

Talk about a meaningless and completely invented "statistic".

Posted by Merfal

Malcolm Gladwell is known as a "guru for the brain dead".

Not hard to see why.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Some may look at Tigers credentials and consider him an informed source on this topic and thereby base their opinion on his position.  Only real fanboys would forego their own opinion just to defend a celebrities position.  I am a fan of Robert Di Nero but I don't defend his political opinions because I like his movies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

There's no need to paint every person as a hater for thinking fans of certain celebrities tend to share their opinions on their pet causes, and that if the celebrity had a change of heart, more than a few fans would experience the same change of heart. It's a fact. We see it every day.

Regardless of what you'd do personally, people do it every day.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by mtsalmela80

I have not seen one good reason for any of you to support the ban. Even the head admin can only come up with "its not the way a golf club is meant to be swung"

there is no correlation between using a belly putter and more wins, I wonder if most of you would secretly change your mind if Tiger came out tomorrow and declared his support for belly putters. I would do almost anything to have Tiger starting using a belly putter next time he is playing, just to see where this thread goes from there.

It is much easier to just say your opponent's reasons are not good reasons than to come up with an actual argument.  Not more convincing, just easier.

As far as Tiger goes, I agree with him that the way they are currently being used should be banned.  But I completely disagree with him about the solution, since I don't think limiting the length of the putter to the shortest club in the bag makes sense. And I am a huger Tiger fan.  So maybe the world isn't as simple as you think.

[Texian]

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texian

What's the definition of "anchor"?

Does that mean "putter touching body"?

What if the hand holding the putter is touching the body, but the putter is not?

Here's what I offered earlier in this thread as proposed wording of the rule -

Quote:

The club or hands cannot touch the body above the elbows at address.

So that would cover either the club or hands anchoring the club.

This is a fun discussion but this whole thing is like a lot other "problems" or "issues" that we have that people try to legislate out of existence. Look up "prohibition," for instance.

It is a question that does not require an answer, and anything that is done in regards to making more rules is only going to cloud the issue.

Concerning your proposed wording:

Is that standing straight up or bent from the waist? (When I stand up, my elbows don't reach the level of my waist. I could still "anchor" the putter or my hands at or slightly below waist level and comply with your rule.)

Where do the "hands" start? (I can anchor my wrist and comply with your rule. That's what I do, in fact, because I want my top hand to swivel. If it's "anchored/fixed" to my body, it can't swivel.)

[Merfal]

Originally Posted by Shorty

Malcolm Gladwell is known as a "guru for the brain dead".

Not hard to see why.

It takes someone really smart to throw around insults without provocation and with a lack of reasoning. It also takes a big boy to be a jackwagon on a forum; you wouldn't be one to my face I promise you that.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by Merfal

It takes someone really smart to throw around insults without provocation and with a lack of reasoning. It also takes a big boy to be a jackwagon on a forum; you wouldn't be one to my face I promise you that.

I thought the facepalm emoticon was an insult. If you take seriously the notion that "it takes 10 years or 10,000 hours to be world class at something", then it's no wonder that your preferred mode of conflict resolution is violence.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Shorty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merfal

It takes someone really smart to throw around insults without provocation and with a lack of reasoning. It also takes a big boy to be a jackwagon on a forum; you wouldn't be one to my face I promise you that.

I thought the facepalm emoticon was an insult. If you take seriously the notion that "it takes 10 years or 10,000 hours to be world class at something", then it's no wonder that your preferred mode of conflict resolution is violence.

Certainly it is not!! It's a self depracating emoticon, directed back at the poster or perhaps someone you may have quoted earlier or something. Trust me - it's a Sandtrap thing.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Certainly it is not!! It's a self depracating emoticon, directed back at the poster or perhaps someone you may have quoted earlier or something. Trust me - it's a Sandtrap thing.

I thought that it usually is a Phil Mickelson "I.... am..... such an idiot" sort of thing", but in this instance, my interpretaion is that Merfal was like "Are you KIDDING ME!! This guy doesn't know who Malcolm Gladwell is!!!??? He doubts the fundamental truth of the 10year/10,000 hour theory!!!!!????

Not sure how else one can interpret it. (That's a nice, friendly smile, Sean)

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Texian

This is a fun discussion but this whole thing is like a lot other "problems" or "issues" that we have that people try to legislate out of existence. Look up "prohibition," for instance.

Is this a joke?

Originally Posted by Shorty

but in this instance, my interpretaion is that Merfal was like "Are you KIDDING ME!! This guy doesn't know who Malcolm Gladwell is!!!??? He doubts the fundamental truth of the 10year/10,000 hour theory!!!!!????

For what it's worth, that's how I interpreted it as well.

Brandon

[Texian]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texian

This is a fun discussion but this whole thing is like a lot other "problems" or "issues" that we have that people try to legislate out of existence. Look up "prohibition," for instance.

Is this a joke?

Brandon

No joke. Prohibition is analogous because it was also an attempt to solve a non-problem by meddling and over-legislation.

What's funny is trying to create a clear and enforceable definition of "anchor."

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Texian

No joke. Prohibition is analogous because it was also an attempt to solve a non-problem by meddling and over-legislation.

Then I need to figure out how to do the facepalm emoticon insult and quick!

[jamo]

Then I need to figure out how to do the facepalm emoticon insult and quick!

:doh: :-D

[Texian]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Then I need to figure out how to do the facepalm emoticon insult and quick!

Sticks and stones may break my golf clubs but words and emoticons will never hurt me or my score.

[mtsalmela80]

Prohibition didn't work because the word was not ready for it. Back then, we weren't even ready for civil rights? It was practically still legal to hang black people. But the world changes.....

Originally Posted by Texian

No joke. Prohibition is analogous because it was also an attempt to solve a non-problem by meddling and over-legislation.

What's funny is trying to create a clear and enforceable definition of "anchor."

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by Shorty

Talk about a meaningless and completely invented "statistic".

Whoever plucked this number out of the air is a fool.

Originally Posted by Shorty

Malcolm Gladwell is known as a "guru for the brain dead".

Not hard to see why.

Seriously, you're claiming to be insulted by something someone else posted on this forum?  BTW, for someone who is so smart and enlightened, personal attacks (i.e. calling people "fool" and "brain dead") destroy your credibility, detract from any valid points you may be making, and make every point of disagreement appear petty and personal.  I'm not sure who you're reading right now, but I can make some recommendations if you'd like.

Gladwell's books have been referenced by at least one President and are on very senior General Officer's lists of recommended reading.  I find his studies interesting and his arguments well-reasoned.  Blink is one of the best 5 books I have read in a year beginning with 20xx; maybe in the top 3.

And his Outliers argument is being completely misrepresented here.  He does not say that anyone who practices for 10,000 hours will be world class, or that no one will be world class unless they practice for 10,000 hours.  He has simply made an observation (which is what scientists do, BTW):  all of the very elite people (in the various fields studied) had spent at least 10,000 hours practicing their skill before they became the best of the best.  From that he has made an argument:  if you want to be the best in the world at a particular skill, you must have innate talent, and you would be well-advised to practice for 10,000 hours.

10,000 hours works out to something like 20 hours a week for 10 years.  Between Junior and High School golf and 3 semesters of college golf, I'm sure I hit the 10,000 hours mark by the time I was 20.  And guess what:  I still suck at golf, but that neither proves nor disproves Gladwell's argument.  In order to disprove his argument, you'd have to find a substantial number of elite professional athletes who picked up a sport one year and and competed in the Olympics the next year.