Tiger Wants to Ban the Long Putter

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by ejimsmith

if it were to be banned, then i'd expect the usga to pick up the tab on its purchase.

On what grounds?

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Shorty

On what grounds?

Petulance.

[onesome]

Let me try one of those things first before they get deemed illegal and I'll let em know if there is an unfair advantage.

[Chas]

Agree with Erik.  It's clear that what's up for consideration is banning anchoring - the location of the pivot point is is irrelevant.

Some interesting points from the latest Golf World article by Michael Johnson:

- 43 of 156 players (27%) in the British Open used long or belly putters, compared with only 10 players in the 2007 Open.  Must admit I didn't realize they were quite that popular with the pros.

- Harrington is quoted as saying that the only reason belly putters were allowed 20 years ago, when first seen, was that the people using them were coming to the end of their careers.  They didn't have the heart to put an "early" end to the career of players like Bernard Langer.

-  One reason for the need for a decision fairly soon (likely in the Autumn) is that players will have three years to make the adjustment.  The new rule would be implemented in the next round, on Jan. 1, 2016.

-  "We won't be taking anyone's clubs away", said Mike Davis of the USGA.  This won't be an equipment rule.

Clearly they will have to precisely define "anchoring" and will presumably deal with the issues Erik has raised here.  I think it can be done in a reasonable and practical way but I'm sure it'll taking a whole lot of discussion and editing of text, facilitated with a wee dram or two of single malt.

[broomhandle]

Sure it's about 'anchoring'. The problem is that means very little more than saying it's about long putting.

The only remotely technical quote I've seen from an insider defines an anchored stroke as 'around a fixed pivot'.

Belly putters and shoulder turning long putters don't actually do that so that definition contributes only confusion.

Yes, I'm at the other, OCD, software engineering geek extreme but it blows my mind that people can actually believe that just throwing around an undefined word means anything.

[The Recreational Golfer]

Originally Posted by iacas

1.

No we don't [need long putters for golfers who have a bad back].

First off, belly putters stand in the same postures as regular putters. Second, Raymond Floyd. He stood really upright and used a longer putter but didn't anchor it - he simply putted normally with it.

2.

Webb and Keegan and Tim could lose lots of fans, me among them.

Ruling bodies cannot be scared of lawsuits - nor should equipment makers threaten with them - if they want to change the rules for the betterment of the game (as they would feel any such change is). Ruling bodies should have the autonomy.

The PING lawsuit was a lot more involved than you want to make it. It involved equipment verified as conforming and then later marked as non-conforming, and a whole lot more.

1. Clearly you have never played golf with low back pain. You stand over a putt for a significantly longer time than over a standard golf shot, and the ache appears. Believe, me, it's different.

2. I doubt they would care if you or anybody else weren't their fan anymore. The point would be that an integral part of their professional success would be taken away arbitrarily. That smells like a lawsuit to me.

[brocks]

The only remotely technical quote I've seen from an insider defines an anchored stroke as 'around a fixed pivot'. Belly putters and shoulder turning long putters don't actually do that so that definition contributes only confusion.

What if they added a requirement that your hands have to touch each other during a stroke? That would get rid of the broomstick technique, at least. I guess they could make an exception for tap-ins -- they already have a tap-in exception regarding the stance.

[broomhandle]

Originally Posted by brocks

What if they added a requirement that your hands have to touch each other during a stroke? That would get rid of the broomstick technique, at least. I guess they could make an exception for tap-ins -- they already have a tap-in exception regarding the stance.

That would be a workable way to kill the broomhandle w/o regulating length which is my own selfish worst nightmare.

That would be making the ra and usga both clear liars though.

Both on multiple occasions have said they don't want to kill long putters, just anchoring.

It would also kill split handed putting with a normal putter which has been a minor part of golf pretty much forever.

That should be considered at least slightly undesirable.

[broomhandle]

Originally Posted by The Recreational Golfer

Long putters were no a big deal until players started winning with it, just like Dave Pelz said they would years ago.

We need the long putter for players with a bad back. I use a 38" putter, BTW, which I don't anchor, and it's one inch longer than my lob wedge. If you were to play golf with me, you would never notice the difference.

As for anchoring, if I were Webb Simpson or Keegan Bradley or Tim Clark, etc, I would ask my lawyer to start preparing the case for a lawsuit in case anchoring gets banned. What Ping did with grooves, I would do with this, in spades, if I were in their shoes.

Do you think your putter is in danger?

The Woods suggestion that the putter be the shortest club is NOT on the table currently.

They have said clearly that they will not regulate length but there may(near certainty, I think) be a rule on stroke method.

[brocks]

That would be a workable way to kill the broomhandle w/o regulating length which is my own selfish worst nightmare. That would be making the ra and usga both clear liars though. Both on multiple occasions have said they don't want to kill long putters, just anchoring. It would also kill split handed putting with a normal putter which has been a minor part of golf pretty much forever. That should be considered at least slightly undesirable.

I wouldn't say it would make the USGA liars. IIRC, they said that they wanted to address the problem in the context of the definition of a stroke, rather than as an equipment issue, and making the hands stay together (along with banning the end of the club as a pivot point) would do that. As you noted, it would not ban long putters. The split grip issue with conventional putting is IMO a tougher issue, and "hands together" would also affect sidesaddle putting. If I were the dictator of golf, I would still say no pivot and no separate hands. IMO the three full years before the changes take effect is plenty of time for people to make the transition. I've always thought that the toughest part of putting was reading the greens, anyway.

[ThominOH]

Originally Posted by broomhandle

Do you think your putter is in danger?

The Woods suggestion that the putter be the shortest club is NOT on the table currently.

They have said clearly that they will not regulate length but there may(near certainty, I think) be a rule on stroke method.

Thing is.. What's next?  Because I have low back issues.. I have to putt with a longer then average length.. (not belly length) I actually use a Odesey Rossie II.. and I stand closer to the ball then normal because of comfort, plus I can control my backswing more.. I go less offline because it's more of a pendulum swing, then a sweep... Will that be deemed illegal someday down the road? I have to laugh tho because I keep remembering a comment made here on the forums about people trying to justify banning the long putter, while ignoring "the 460cc frying pan on the end of a stick" driver..

[broomhandle]

Originally Posted by brocks

I wouldn't say it would make the USGA liars. IIRC, they said that they wanted to address the problem in the context of the definition of a stroke, rather than as an equipment issue, and making the hands stay together (along with banning the end of the club as a pivot point) would do that. As you noted, it would not ban long putters.

The split grip issue with conventional putting is IMO a tougher issue, and "hands together" would also affect sidesaddle putting. If I were the dictator of golf, I would still say no pivot and no separate hands. IMO the three full years before the changes take effect is plenty of time for people to make the transition.

I've always thought that the toughest part of putting was reading the greens, anyway.

They have said both. Some quotes explicitly state they don't want to ban the long putter. If they leave no feasible way to use it they lied.

Of course they could and would just say well, we couldn't ban anchoring any other way, sorry. Cover the exposed lie with a second unprovable lie like national politicians.

I think it was Dawson who had a quote along the lines of "we don't mind long/belly putters existing but we're getting scared that belly putters might become the main way of putting"

I think that's probably the real agenda. Leave it in as a desperation method for a few but cripple it enough so there's no danger of it becoming standard.

I think the closest thing to a rational outcome we might get would be:

1. club only touches hands

1a exception(s) for 'incidental and temporary' and/or putting only - Shouldn't make choking way up a risk of a penalty.

2. possibly hand beyond wrist cant rest on body

STOP!!

That would kill the perceived threat to normalcy from belly putters.

It would effect broomhandles a little but not a lot but they don't seem to be an imminent threat to orthodoxy as belly putters are so I think maybe they could live with that.

Personally, my choice would be STFU and live with part of sports being finding a better way but that seems very unlikely.

[Slim from SF]

BAN THE DAMNED THING!  I returned my USGA membership renewal to the president of the USGA saying "hell no I won't renew" while that embarrassing abomination is allowed to persist in the rules.

[Chas]

Originally Posted by brocks

I wouldn't say it would make the USGA liars. IIRC, they said that they wanted to address the problem in the context of the definition of a stroke, rather than as an equipment issue, and making the hands stay together (along with banning the end of the club as a pivot point) would do that. As you noted, it would not ban long putters.

Yes, and this has been made abundantly clear already - likely the result of many interactions with equipment manufacturers who obviously wish to be reassured on the point.  Why some on this board aren't getting it is something I don't understand.

The notion that the governing bodies should decide on the definition of a stroke because of the possibility of lawsuits is so very ... well, American - and quite ridiculous imho.  What exactly would be the grounds for such an action?  Discrimination, against older people who tend to get the yips perhaps?  And who would be bringing said lawsuit (other than perhaps ACLU I suppose)?

Let whoever does it make fools of themselves.

ThominOH:  you have nothing to worry about, unless you were thinking of going to a long putter AND anchoring the darned thing.  I'm not getting any younger myself and have been thinking about trying an anchored long putter to improve my game, not that I have the yips quite yet.  So people like me wouldn't have that option if they want to play by the rules of the great game of golf.  That's fine by me - I respect this glorious and exasperating game too much.

I have moderately severe peripheral neuropathy as a result of an intensive course of chemotherapy for bulky Hodgkins lymphoma.  It is difficult for me to walk 18 holes but I can do it if I have to, sitting down briefly many times along the way. It can be quite painful so I usually take a cart.  If I were a pro who had survived this dread diseases, should I be allowed to ride a cart ?   Hell no!

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by brocks

What if they added a requirement that your hands have to touch each other during a stroke? That would get rid of the broomstick technique, at least. I guess they could make an exception for tap-ins -- they already have a tap-in exception regarding the stance.

This would inadvertently (I think, but maybe not, maybe "advertently" ) affect some people that really have no dog in this fight ... the two that come to mind are Sergio Garcia and Mark Calcavecchia, who both use that "claw" grip and it appears as though their hands do not touch each other.

[ejimsmith]

Originally Posted by brocks

I've always thought that the toughest part of putting was reading the greens, anyway.

and after reading all the weird-a** rule modifications people are suggesting here, i think absolutely nothing is going to happen.   neither the belly putter or the long putter change the fact that you still have to read the green and judge the speed.   making up all sort of rules that you can't put your hand here and not anchor it there is going to make putting confusing and complicated.   golf already suffers from the thought that its too tough of a game, much less adding a whole volume of rules regarding the putting, never mind all the mini-golf places that will throw a fit if they have to penalize all those 8 year old kids for not putting correctly.

[Chas]

Originally Posted by broomhandle

They have said both. Some quotes explicitly state they don't want to ban the long putter. If they leave no feasible way to use it they lied.

Of course they could and would just say well, we couldn't ban anchoring any other way, sorry. Cover the exposed lie with a second unprovable lie like national politicians.

Please explain to us exactly why it is that there would be "no feasible way" to use a long putter if a new rule were introduced banning point-of-contact with the body?

Thanks in advance.

[broomhandle]

Originally Posted by Chas

Please explain to us exactly why it is that there would be "no feasible way" to use a long putter if a new rule were introduced banning point-of-contact with the body?

Thanks in advance.

A. I didn't say that anywhere.

B. Very few broomstickers literally touch the shaft/grip to the body anyway. I said in other posts I' d be quite happy putting either shoulder turn or pivot point broomstick with no point of contact with body or even with the hand to the body. Even with the upper arm really although I think that gets unenforceable. Tom Kite putts broomhandle arm free by choice. Sam Torrance says he does now but I haven't seen a picture/video.

C. 'No feasible way' was specifically in reply to a suggestion that hands must be touching. That is unfeasible because either you put with a very heavy four foot war mace or the extra shaft gets in the way much more than it helps. That's with a 'long putter' , ie broomstick. There are also  other ways to leave 'no feasible way' to use a broomhandle that I'm not going to volunteer into the discussion.

D. I said a simple 'hands only' rule would be the best likely outcome we could get.