Jump to content
IGNORED

Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016)


mvmac
Note: This thread is 2491 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Some people just have to defy authority, and when that doesn't work, then they bitch.  The possibility that anyone can tell them what they can do on the golf course is untenable to them.

And other people have to impose their will on others.

I think pull carts look ugly and are dorky, so should I want everyone not to have them?

Driver: Ping K15 10°, Mitsubishi Diamana Blueboard 63g Stiff
Fairway 4-wood: TaylorMade RocketBallz Tour TP 17.5°, Matrix Ozik TP7HD S shaft

Hybrids: Callaway Diablo Edge 3H-4H, Aldila DVS Stiff
Irons: MIURA PP-9003, Dynamic Gold Superlite S300, Sand Wedge: Scratch 8620 56°
Putter: Nike Method Concept Belly 44"
Ball: Bridgestone Tour B330-S

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Golfingdad

In the blue example, the forearms are braced against the side of the body, but there is no pivot point that the club is being anchored to ... you still have to swing it with either your shoulders or wrists.

If your forearms are braced against the side of the body and don't move, and your shoulders don't move, then the movement by the wrists is a "pivot."

In order to "swing" the club, your arms or shoulders must move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

And other people have to impose their will on others.

That's funny.

You're talking about the RULING BODY of the game.

So...........

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

And other people have to impose their will on others. I think pull carts look ugly and are dorky, so should I want everyone not to have them?

You're reaching now.

Brandon a.k.a. Tony Stark

-------------------------

The Fastest Flip in the West

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Texian

Your conviction is correct. I do consider myself smarter than the average Bear(Kat).

But let's say that something similar happened in 2016, and my playing partner, in a club championship match for instance, says, "Your forearm was touching your torso on that putting stroke. So I win the hole."

And I say, truthfully, "Well, I always hold my forearm away from my body on my putting stroke, so if it was touching, it wasn't intentional.'

It's almost impossible to prove "intent" in a court of law. Can you imagine the arguments and hard feelings this could cause on a golf course, when the "judge" is in the pro shop selling shirts or on the driving range giving a lesson?

Since you admit you are smarter then you really were making it up when you said you weren't making it up.  So my conclusion that you were just being silly is confirmed.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

You agree you're smarter, but you contend there's some way for you or your friends to confuse what's a legal stroke and what's not.   The picture below makes it quite clear.  The putter can't be anchored directly against your body and you can't anchor your forearm against your body and hold the top of the putter.  Forearms and elbows touching the body are legal as is forearms held against the body.

Instead of posting here various scenarios that will cost you strokes in the future why not take some time to review the photos.  Print the picture out so you can help your not so smart friends understand what is and isn't a legal stroke and you should be fine in 3 years.

Because he isn't really interested in what is allowed and what isn't, he is just grousing about something he doesn't like.

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

Again, the croquet style Sam Snead was banned from using was a stroke by your definition.

What happened?

Great point.  The rules say I cannot ground my club in a bunker.  So if I hit a ball out of bounds why can't I hit it from there?  After all, I'm not grounding my club in a bunker!  < / sarcasm >

I'm wondering where in the world you ever got the idea that there can only be ONE reason for banning a technique, since you apparently are arguing that since the new rule bans anchoring, ANYTHING that is not anchoring should be OK.

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

And other people have to impose their will on others.

I think pull carts look ugly and are dorky, so should I want everyone not to have them?

Go for it.  If you can convince the USGA . . .

No one says you have to play by the USGA rules.  They are a ruling body of a sport, not an arm of the government with police power.

Originally Posted by bplewis24

You're reaching now.

Now?  These guys have been reaching from the first moment

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by bplewis24

You're reaching now.

I often forget how literal most of you are.

I’m making the point that most people opposed the long putter/anchoring because they didn’t like the way it looked compared to what they personally envision as a traditional putting stroke. Therefore, they don’t want anyone to use it. They lobbied hard (imposing their will) to the governing boards to do away with it without one shred of numerical statistics that proved it gave an advantage to user.
They just wanted less putting options for everyone and wanted everyone to be more like them (imposing their will).

  • Upvote 1

Driver: Ping K15 10°, Mitsubishi Diamana Blueboard 63g Stiff
Fairway 4-wood: TaylorMade RocketBallz Tour TP 17.5°, Matrix Ozik TP7HD S shaft

Hybrids: Callaway Diablo Edge 3H-4H, Aldila DVS Stiff
Irons: MIURA PP-9003, Dynamic Gold Superlite S300, Sand Wedge: Scratch 8620 56°
Putter: Nike Method Concept Belly 44"
Ball: Bridgestone Tour B330-S

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I often forget how literal most of you are. I’m making the point that most people opposed the long putter/anchoring because they didn’t like the way it looked compared to what they personally envision as a traditional putting stroke. Therefore, they don’t want anyone to use it. They lobbied hard (imposing their will) to the governing boards to do away with it without one shred of numerical statistics that proved it gave an advantage to user. They just wanted less putting options for everyone and wanted everyone to be more like them (imposing their will).

It has nothing to do with how the putter or the stroke looks , but rather the mechanics of what is deemed to be an appropriate way to make that stroke. Thank goodness. If they were to ban strokes/swings deemed to be "ugly" I'd likely be asked to give up the game!

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by David in FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

I often forget how literal most of you are.

I’m making the point that most people opposed the long putter/anchoring because they didn’t like the way it looked compared to what they personally envision as a traditional putting stroke. Therefore, they don’t want anyone to use it. They lobbied hard (imposing their will) to the governing boards to do away with it without one shred of numerical statistics that proved it gave an advantage to user.

They just wanted less putting options for everyone and wanted everyone to be more like them (imposing their will).

It has nothing to do with how the putter or the stroke looks, but rather the mechanics of what is deemed to be an appropriate way to make that stroke.

Thank goodness. If they were to ban strokes/swings deemed to be "ugly" I'd likely be asked to give up the game!

He and Texian ran out of logical arguments several pages ago, so now they are just shooting blanks - lots of noise with no substance.  Common sense has long since deserted this thread.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

I often forget how literal most of you are.

I’m making the point that most people opposed the long putter/anchoring because they didn’t like the way it looked compared to what they personally envision as a traditional putting stroke.

No, it has nothing to do with taking you literally.  I never thought you were serious with your golf cart analogy.  My point was that you're reaching because you're attempting to reduce the argument to a concept that is silly in nature because they may share one similarity.  You're purposefully oversimplifying the issue.

Look, this isn't that difficult or convoluted, but it also isn't as simple as a bunch of Big Brothers on a power trip that dislike the aesthetics of something.  Anybody using a long putter will still look weird, actually.  Maybe even more so.

I find that typically when people stop challenging something on the merits and instead start attempting to project a mens rea (state of mind; malice aforethought) on the people making the argument, they simply don't like the argument [or outcome] and thus want to paint the people making the argument in a negative light.  There's no real way to argue against you anymore when you're basically saying that the people doing this are bad people with bad intentions trying to do a bad thing....even if you aren't arguing that the thing itself lacks merit.

Brandon a.k.a. Tony Stark

-------------------------

The Fastest Flip in the West

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Fourputt

He and Texian ran out of logical arguments several pages ago, so now they are just shooting blanks - lots of noise with no substance.  Common sense has long since deserted this thread.


We didn't run out of arguments. We presented arguments that no one could refute other than insightful comments like "I'll know it when I see it,." and "Uh, if you say so. It's about the stroke in my opinion."

The people (USGA and R&A;) imposing this change don’t seem to understand what it takes to propel a golf ball a short distance, as on a green.

You don’t have to “swing” at it. A “tap,” a “jab,” or a tiny movement that is no more than a “pivot” can move it the necessary distance on most putts.

You have to “swing” clubs other than the putter. If you tried a “pivot” movement with your driver, unless you have wrists like King Kong, the ball wouldn’t go 30 yards.

It makes you wonder if those USGA and R&A; people even play the game, or just spend their time sitting around making up arcane rules to make it more complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by bplewis24

No, it has nothing to do with taking you literally.  I never thought you were serious with your golf cart analogy.  My point was that you're reaching because you're attempting to reduce the argument to a concept that is silly in nature because they may share one similarity.  You're purposefully oversimplifying the issue.

Look, this isn't that difficult or convoluted, but it also isn't as simple as a bunch of Big Brothers on a power trip that dislike the aesthetics of something.  Anybody using a long putter will still look weird, actually.  Maybe even more so.

I find that typically when people stop challenging something on the merits and instead start attempting to project a mens rea (state of mind; malice aforethought) on the people making the argument, they simply don't like the argument [or outcome] and thus want to paint the people making the argument in a negative light.  There's no real way to argue against you anymore when you're basically saying that the people doing this are bad people with bad intentions trying to do a bad thing....even if you aren't arguing that the thing itself lacks merit.I

I like how you edited out my key point: the governing boards are doing away with it without one shred of numerical statistics that proved it gave an advantage to user.

They were trying to solve a problem that never was a problem.

Driver: Ping K15 10°, Mitsubishi Diamana Blueboard 63g Stiff
Fairway 4-wood: TaylorMade RocketBallz Tour TP 17.5°, Matrix Ozik TP7HD S shaft

Hybrids: Callaway Diablo Edge 3H-4H, Aldila DVS Stiff
Irons: MIURA PP-9003, Dynamic Gold Superlite S300, Sand Wedge: Scratch 8620 56°
Putter: Nike Method Concept Belly 44"
Ball: Bridgestone Tour B330-S

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

I like how you edited out my key point: the governing boards are doing away with it without one shred of numerical statistics that proved it gave an advantage to user.

They were trying to solve a problem that never was a problem.

They don't have to show numerical statistics proving it gave an advantage in order to ban it. Not required. I would imagine they didn't do such an analysis when they banned straddling the line, or pool-cue putting or pushing the ball.

No other stroke in the game is executed from an anchor point, or anchored club. Thus the movement was unique, and contrary to the definition of a stroke. That's why they ruled like they did - based on observation and definition, not by data or evidence.

So it was definitely a "problem" as it altered their definition of a stroke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by zipazoid

They don't have to show numerical statistics proving it gave an advantage in order to ban it. Not required. I would imagine they didn't do such an analysis when they banned straddling the line, or pool-cue putting or pushing the ball.

No other stroke in the game is executed from an anchor point, or anchored club. Thus the movement was unique, and contrary to the definition of a stroke. That's why they ruled like they did - based on observation and definition, not by data or evidence.

So it was definitely a "problem" as it altered their definition of a stroke.

So, it took them 35 years to modify their definition of a stroke in regards to anchoring?

Then go on to make it more convoluted (made matters worse) by saying variations like this are somehow okay.

Driver: Ping K15 10°, Mitsubishi Diamana Blueboard 63g Stiff
Fairway 4-wood: TaylorMade RocketBallz Tour TP 17.5°, Matrix Ozik TP7HD S shaft

Hybrids: Callaway Diablo Edge 3H-4H, Aldila DVS Stiff
Irons: MIURA PP-9003, Dynamic Gold Superlite S300, Sand Wedge: Scratch 8620 56°
Putter: Nike Method Concept Belly 44"
Ball: Bridgestone Tour B330-S

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Not that I don’t mind get pummeled from all sides on the merit of the ruling, but what’s the deal with the Arm Lock putter?

Its hard to tell from the photo but it just looks like a standard belly putter (in the 45 inch range) braced against the forearm (Kuchar style).

Is the grip somehow configured to rest more comfortably against the arm?

Driver: Ping K15 10°, Mitsubishi Diamana Blueboard 63g Stiff
Fairway 4-wood: TaylorMade RocketBallz Tour TP 17.5°, Matrix Ozik TP7HD S shaft

Hybrids: Callaway Diablo Edge 3H-4H, Aldila DVS Stiff
Irons: MIURA PP-9003, Dynamic Gold Superlite S300, Sand Wedge: Scratch 8620 56°
Putter: Nike Method Concept Belly 44"
Ball: Bridgestone Tour B330-S

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Texian

We didn't run out of arguments. We presented arguments that no one could refute other than insightful comments like "I'll know it when I see it,." and "Uh, if you say so. It's about the stroke in my opinion."

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

I like how you edited out my key point: the governing boards are doing away with it without one shred of numerical statistics that proved it gave an advantage to user.

* sigh*

There is a trend I'm noticing, where you two are intentionally ignoring the multiple times your arguments have been refuted.  I don't think it was even 20-30 posts ago that I and a few others illustrated that there is absolutely no burden on them to prove it's an advantage.  I'm not even going to get into what kind of a strawman argument that is, because it would take too much time.

And I'm sorry for lumping you into a group with Texian, since I know his posting history and you are nowhere near stooping to his level.  But I'm sure you will simply never see my point of view on this, so you can have the last word on it.

Brandon a.k.a. Tony Stark

-------------------------

The Fastest Flip in the West

Link to comment
Share on other sites


As the game evolves and people evolve the need for additional rules or clarification of existing rules may be required.  Look at how many new rules gets added to football and other sports on an annual basis or how many new laws get passed in our country.

Based on my limited insight to the rule change, it wasn't the USGA that pushed for the change, it was the R&A;, after Els won The Open.  According to the articles I've read, anchored putting is not as popular outside the US, and after seeing Ernie win their major the R&A; decided that they needed to ban anchoring before it became popular outside the US.  R&A; told the USGA of their intentions and gave them the option of joining in the decision or to have this affect only play outside the US.  USGA felt it would be confusing to have 2 sets of rules and joined with the R&A.;

Some might say that those using an anchored putting stroke were stretching the rules to their benefit.  While anchored putting overall may not provide an advantage to the traditional putting stroke, it does provide an advantage to those that use it.  There's a reason Keegan Bradley and Ernie Els use an anchored putting stroke and it's not because it makes them putt worse.  For them, and others that made the switch they did so because they putt better anchoring the putter than they did with a traditional putting stroke.

It's not convoluted if you take the time to review the rule and the examples.

Quote:

So, it took them 35 years to modify their definition of a stroke in regards to anchoring?

Then go on to make it more convoluted (made matters worse) by saying variations like this are somehow okay.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

So, it took them 35 years to modify their definition of a stroke in regards to anchoring?

Then go on to make it more convoluted (made matters worse) by saying variations like this are somehow okay.

Who cares how long it took? If it's right it's right. And it is.

And the only reason it seems "convoluted" to you is they had to not only accurately define anchoring, but to also address various methods of doing so. In the end, it's pretty clear what they were going for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 2491 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Day 85 - Played 9. Driver was solid, approach shots were pushed, chipping/pitching was better, putting was rough. 
    • Day 514, March 28, 2024 Quick ten minutes while waiting for the wife to come home for our trip.
    • Day 262: did a stack session. Worked on rehearsal swings during rest breaks. 
    • It's been a little more than a year since I can last remember hitting golf balls and today I just got my second cortisone injection in 11 months. I thought maybe shortly after the first injection I was going to be able to start playing again with therapy but the pain while doing my backswing past halfway just didn't subside like just lifting my hands up in the air did. So today the Orthopedic surgeon put more in the backside of the shoulder than before to address the tendon more. I'm going to try therapy for another 3 months and if I  can't swing the club without pain then I think surgery is going to be my next option.
    • I was just down visiting family in southern California and we played a couple rounds of golf. I hit my ball into the deep rough near some tree's and my cousin's husband offered me his Sim 2 Rescue Hybrid to try out. And I felt the same way, wow! I loved it, it also had a Pure DTX grip on it which I loved. As soon as I got back home, I ended up buying two used Calloway Rogue X hybrids, 3 and 5. So far I've only tested them out at the range, but I love them. They're much more forgiving than irons for me.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...