Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016)

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

I'm beginning to get the same feeling.  There appears to be a lot of posturing going on behind the scenes that has absolutely nothing to do with how the game actually should be played.  It seems at least possible that the governing bodies may end up selling the game out and going against it's best interests.

On another note, how many "local guys" do you know that would stop playing golf if they couldn't anchor their putter?  It seems like some of these pros are turning into politicians that are using the talking points that their lobbyists are urging them to.  Otherwise, I have no idea what the hell would give Steve Stricker that impression.

The only local guys I've seen use a long putter with an anchored stroke (2-3 people), all had a 2nd putter and appeared to either be practicing with the long putter or at least not putting it into play in every round.

The "it's bad while we're trying to grow the game" mantra is silly.  This thread is 700 posts long, so this has probably already been said at least 5 or 10 times, but new people will still be interested.  They start with hand me down clubs, or box sets, or what have you, and they don't even know enough yet to care about a long putter.  Nobody is going to decide not to take up the game because a club that they don't even know about isn't allowed anymore.  And diehards are not going to stop playing because of this either.  The ones who use these putters may grumble, but they're not quitting.

Heck, they could make a rule limiting bags to 10 clubs, or outlawing woods, or something ridiculous like that, and most people would still play.  I sure would.  I'd just learn how to hit a Tiger Woods stinger off the tee ... and I'd probably score better than I do now! :)

Originally Posted by SCfanatic35

maybe its just my club, but I have only seen 1 person anchor his putter at my course. Another guy has a long putter but doesnt anchor it. I have not seen very many people on the gcatour use them. The few that I have talked to didn't seem to mind all that much.

This reminds me of the aluminum bat change at the college level and down. It was more for safety issue, but still the game has changed and everyone has adapted just fine. I know its not really apples to apples but either way golfers will adjust if they have to.

I think I've maybe seen one player ever using an anchored putter.  I know one other person who has one, but I've yet to have the priviledge of golfing with him.  (I've beat him the one and only time I've played against him - in a team competition in different groups, but still)

[Stretch]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

There appears to be a lot of posturing going on behind the scenes that has absolutely nothing to do with how the game actually should be played.  It seems at least possible that the governing bodies may end up selling the game out and going against it's best interests.

Did Moses give you a free six iron when he descended from the mount and made you the arbiter of these matters? Why should your opinion be accorded any more weight than mine, or indeed anyone else in the community of all of us who play -- and love -- golf?

If there is pushback, the logical conclusion is that the ruling bodies have overreached in this case. And they need to learn a lesson. You govern by the consent of the governed.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Stretch

Did Moses give you a free six iron when he descended from the mount and made you the arbiter of these matters? Why should your opinion be accorded any more weight than mine, or indeed anyone else in the community of all of us who play -- and love -- golf?

If there is pushback, the logical conclusion is that the ruling bodies have overreached in this case. And they need to learn a lesson. You govern by the consent of the governed.

Stretch, you seem to be over-reacting. I took what you quoted as saying it is the USGA/R&A; who gets to "decide how the game is played." They ARE the arbiter of these matters. And re: the consent of the governed, again, this is a very small percentage who are complaining about it.

[teamroper60]

The ET resonded informally very quickly saying they had no issue with the proposed change.

Okay. I had not seen that. If their position is still the same, then the assumptions would hold. However, given the apparent softening of some PGA Tour players, I would be curious to know if the European Tour's stance remains steadfast.

[meenman]

Originally Posted by iacas

We just had grooves rules changed.

Huge difference - that rule does not go into effect for amateurs until 2024 and it will not affect the amateurs as much because maybe 10% spin the ball as much as they claim to.

Originally Posted by SCfanatic35

maybe its just my club, but I have only seen 1 person anchor his putter at my course. Another guy has a long putter but doesnt anchor it. I have not seen very many people on the gcatour use them. The few that I have talked to didn't seem to mind all that much.

This reminds me of the aluminum bat change at the college level and down. It was more for safety issue, but still the game has changed and everyone has adapted just fine. I know its not really apples to apples but either way golfers will adjust if they have to.

And at my club there are a little over 100 golfers out every Saturday morning - at least 20 of them carry broom stick putters (yes i am more apt to notice since I have one.)  Maybe it is the anti-anchoring crowd that needs to learn to adjust to us.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

And diehards are not going to stop playing because of this either.

Heck, they could make a rule limiting bags to 10 clubs, or outlawing woods, or something ridiculous like that, and most people would still play.

The key is *the diehards* - if they are the only guys playing, then even more people are not going to be able to afford to play. Golf courses are there to make money (or lose as little as possible) - maintenance costs do not go down, payroll needed to run a club can not go below a certain point (thanks for raising those minimum wages to cheapen what i make).

Now talk about limiting to 10 clubs or removing woods - now the rounds get longer and even less people play. Too many on here cry that a 4 hour round is too long. If 5 becomes the norm, then everyone will suffer.

Today it's my long putter. Tomorrow it's your hybrid. To the traditionalists that think we should all be playing persimmons - your tradition means nothing when a cheap muni becomes a $200/round.

Originally Posted by Stretch

Did Moses give you a free six iron when he descended from the mount and made you the arbiter of these matters? Why should your opinion be accorded any more weight than mine, or indeed anyone else in the community of all of us who play -- and love -- golf?

If there is pushback, the logical conclusion is that the ruling bodies have overreached in this case. And they need to learn a lesson. You govern by the consent of the governed.

Couldnt have said it better myself.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by meenman

Huge difference - that rule does not go into effect for amateurs until 2024 and it will not affect the amateurs as much because maybe 10% spin the ball as much as they claim to.

And not even 10% have anchored putters. So the putter decision will affect far fewer. And besides, do you honestly think a wedge from 2010 is performing better right now than a new 2013 wedge? The grooves rule goes is in effect for all right now because you can't purchase a wedge with the old grooves for a long time now.

Originally Posted by meenman

And at my club there are a little over 100 golfers out every Saturday morning - at least 20 of them carry broom stick putters (yes i am more apt to notice since I have one.)  Maybe it is the anti-anchoring crowd that needs to learn to adjust to us.

No thanks. You're not making "a golf stroke" IMO or in the opinion of the USGA/R&A.; I don't really care that much, but as I've always said, it's not a stroke in my opinion, and I think it should not be allowed.

Originally Posted by meenman

The key is *the diehards* - if they are the only guys playing, then even more people are not going to be able to afford to play. Golf courses are there to make money (or lose as little as possible) - maintenance costs do not go down, payroll needed to run a club can not go below a certain point (thanks for raising those minimum wages to cheapen what i make).

By "diehards" I think he was just referring to those who didn't fit into his first group. "People will quit golf" is a straw man argument. It's not going to happen, not anywhere near as much as the fearmongers want to suggest it will. No idea why you're talking about costs and payroll. The weather will continue to affect rounds played several orders of magnitude more than an anchored stroke rule.

Originally Posted by meenman

Now talk about limiting to 10 clubs or removing woods - now the rounds get longer and even less people play. Too many on here cry that a 4 hour round is too long. If 5 becomes the norm, then everyone will suffer.

I think rounds would be more likely to get faster, not slower. And I don't see anyone "crying" about a 4 hour round. It's the five and six hour rounds that suck.

Originally Posted by meenman

Today it's my long putter. Tomorrow it's your hybrid. To the traditionalists that think we should all be playing persimmons - your tradition means nothing when a cheap muni becomes a $200/round.

Straw men. Fearmonger. FUD. Give me a break man. They can say "not a stroke" without targeting your hybrid next. Take off your tin foil hat and join the real world. It's nice here. :)

[meenman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

And not even 10% have anchored putters. So the putter decision will affect far fewer. And besides, do you honestly think a wedge from 2010 is performing better right now than a new 2013 wedge? The grooves rule goes is in effect for all right now because you can't purchase a wedge with the old grooves for a long time now.

I know the pro-anchor crowd gets accused of trying to have it both ways, but if there are less than 10% anchoring, how are we ruining your *traditions?*

Quote:

No thanks. You're not making "a golf stroke" IMO or in the opinion of the USGA/R&A.; I don't really care that much, but as I've always said, it's not a stroke in my opinion, and I think it should not be allowed.

That's your opinion. Why should yours be any more important than mine? (outside of the ST of course)

Quote:

By "diehards" I think he was just referring to those who didn't fit into his first group. "People will quit golf" is a straw man argument. It's not going to happen, not anywhere near as much as the fearmongers want to suggest it will. No idea why you're talking about costs and payroll. The weather will continue to affect rounds played several orders of magnitude more than an anchored stroke rule.

Costs and payroll matter because less golfers means less revenue - everyone will be paying more.

Quote:

I think rounds would be more likely to get faster, not slower. And I don't see anyone "crying" about a 4 hour round. It's the five and six hour rounds that suck.

Once again, your opinion, but with a significant reduction in clubs, many would basically be re-learning the game.

Quote:

Straw men. Fearmonger. FUD. Give me a break man. They can say "not a stroke" without targeting your hybrid next. Take off your tin foil hat and join the real world. It's nice here. :)

Bottom line, the game needs younger people to start playing for it to grow. We all die someday and with no replacements, the game will die. What the USGA is trying to do is causing them to look like stuffy *elitests*, which WILL hurt the growth of the game.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by meenman

The key is *the diehards* - if they are the only guys playing, then even more people are not going to be able to afford to play. Golf courses are there to make money (or lose as little as possible) - maintenance costs do not go down, payroll needed to run a club can not go below a certain point (thanks for raising those minimum wages to cheapen what i make).

Originally Posted by iacas

By "diehards" I think he was just referring to those who didn't fit into his first group. "People will quit golf" is a straw man argument. It's not going to happen, not anywhere near as much as the fearmongers want to suggest it will. No idea why you're talking about costs and payroll. The weather will continue to affect rounds played several orders of magnitude more than an anchored stroke rule.

Exactly.  Maybe "diehards" isn't the right word, but I was referring to people who already play and like golf.

Maybe this example makes it simpler, and maybe not, but here goes anyway:  Bowling has two very distinct groups of people who play.

League bowlers are the ones who I would consider the equivalent of my golfing "diehards" even though they range from grandma who plays once a week with her plastic ball and 118 average to the serious scrath bowlers who play in 5 leagues, carry 6-8 balls, and average 225.

Then there is everybody else ... families, high schoolers, guys who just want to have fun and drink, what have you.  These would be the equivalent to my "new golfers" group.  (And really, its not only new golfers, it's all recreational golfers.  Your friends who have clubs from wal-mart, don't know the rules, and only want to drink as much as they can and swing as hard as they can, your wives who just want to spend time with you, people who just want a little exercise, etc.)

If the USBC or PBA or whoever makes the rules decided that bowling has gotten too easy and therefore either made all oil patterns more difficult or limited the technology in the balls, there would be A LOT of pushback from the league bowler group but none from the rec bowler group.  The rec group could give a flying flip because they use house balls and throw it straight and they aren't out there to score well, just to have fun.  The same is true for rec golfer group.  Most in that group probably don't even know what a belly putter is, nor would they have the slightest idea how to use it anyway.

And, league bowler group wouldn't give up the game because they love it.  After their griping died down, they'd figure out how best to play within the rules as they are now.

[Chas]

Originally Posted by Stretch

Again, just because you assert this, it doesn't make it true. All of the available historical evidence suggests that anchored putting is a fad, that its popularity moves in cycles and that the great majority of golfers (at all levels) who do try it out end up returning to the conventional method. For us to believe that anchoring is poised break out of that pattern and become the dominant mode of operation, we would need (at minimum) some demonstration that players who do adopt it -- in general -- experience some improvement in their putting. And no such data (or even aggregated anecdotal evidence) has ever been produced, to my knowledge .

I am simply stating my opinion, as are you.  That's fine and dandy.  We are both speculating about what might happen in the future based on what we know about the past and about the nature of the game.

I own a respectable collection of putters and do my part to ensure a comfortable retirement for those in the putter making/marketing industry.  The quality of my putting has improved somewhat but not commensurate with the investment IMO .....

Thus I had been considering trying a long putter but no more, not after the decision.  Of course this might well have been putting good money after bad - I'll probably never know.

Whatever the merits of the decision, it would be a serious mistake for golf to be played by different rules in different venues.

[meenman]

Originally Posted by Chas

Thus I had been considering trying a long putter but no more, not after the decision.  Of course this might well have been putting good money after bad - I'll probably never know.

What *decision* has been made?

All we have is a proposed rule change made by a soon to be obsolete *governing* body.

Trust me, we will be anchoring longer than the USGA will be relevant.

[Chas]

The proposal was a decision.  Not to propose would have been a different decision - obviously.  Let's not waste time with semantics.

Good point someone made about the possibility that certain pro golfers are being heavily leaned on by their sponsors to oppose the ban, having previously spoken out in support.  Kept men.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by meenman

Bottom line, the game needs younger people to start playing for it to grow. We all die someday and with no replacements, the game will die. What the USGA is trying to do is causing them to look like stuffy *elitests*, which WILL hurt the growth of the game.

So you literally think the ban on anchoring will cause the game to die because young people won't take up the game? Do you need directions back to the reservation? :)

I know you can't prove it, but not only that, I don't even think that makes sense.

[newtogolf]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Exactly.  Maybe "diehards" isn't the right word, but I was referring to people who already play and like golf.

Maybe this example makes it simpler, and maybe not, but here goes anyway:  Bowling has two very distinct groups of people who play.

League bowlers are the ones who I would consider the equivalent of my golfing "diehards" even though they range from grandma who plays once a week with her plastic ball and 118 average to the serious scrath bowlers who play in 5 leagues, carry 6-8 balls, and average 225.

Then there is everybody else ... families, high schoolers, guys who just want to have fun and drink, what have you.  These would be the equivalent to my "new golfers" group.  (And really, its not only new golfers, it's all recreational golfers.  Your friends who have clubs from wal-mart, don't know the rules, and only want to drink as much as they can and swing as hard as they can, your wives who just want to spend time with you, people who just want a little exercise, etc.)

If the USBC or PBA or whoever makes the rules decided that bowling has gotten too easy and therefore either made all oil patterns more difficult or limited the technology in the balls, there would be A LOT of pushback from the league bowler group but none from the rec bowler group.  The rec group could give a flying flip because they use house balls and throw it straight and they aren't out there to score well, just to have fun.  The same is true for rec golfer group.  Most in that group probably don't even know what a belly putter is, nor would they have the slightest idea how to use it anyway.

And, league bowler group wouldn't give up the game because they love it.  After their griping died down, they'd figure out how best to play within the rules as they are now.

No one except those with a severe case of the yips is going to give up golf because they ban the anchored stroke.  The hardcore golfers aren't going to walk away from the game they love because they can't anchor a putter.

New golfers and the average recreational golfer doesn't maintain a handicap, freely utilizes foot wedges, mulligans and gimme putts so if they decide they want to use an anchored putting stroke no one is going to care.

The ones most affected will be the pro golfers and tournament golfers that currently use an anchored stroke and will now  have to figure out how to putt with a conventional stroke.  Some pro's who are considering the use of an anchored stroke or fear future regulations regarding the stroke or technology may also join the cause.

The problem for the USGA is that while pro golfers are the minority of their membership they are their best marketing tool.  You don't want your spokespeople out there trashing your organization or openly on television ignoring your rules.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Quote:

Originally Posted by bplewis24

I'm beginning to get the same feeling.  There appears to be a lot of posturing going on behind the scenes that has absolutely nothing to do with how the game actually should be played.  It seems at least possible that the governing bodies may end up selling the game out and going against it's best interests.

On another note, how many "local guys" do you know that would stop playing golf if they couldn't anchor their putter?  It seems like some of these pros are turning into politicians that are using the talking points that their lobbyists are urging them to.  Otherwise, I have no idea what the hell would give Steve Stricker that impression.

The only local guys I've seen use a long putter with an anchored stroke (2-3 people), all had a 2nd putter and appeared to either be practicing with the long putter or at least not putting it into play in every round.

The "it's bad while we're trying to grow the game" mantra is silly.  This thread is 700 posts long, so this has probably already been said at least 5 or 10 times, but new people will still be interested.  They start with hand me down clubs, or box sets, or what have you, and they don't even know enough yet to care about a long putter.  Nobody is going to decide not to take up the game because a club that they don't even know about isn't allowed anymore.  And diehards are not going to stop playing because of this either.  The ones who use these putters may grumble, but they're not quitting.

Heck, they could make a rule limiting bags to 10 clubs, or outlawing woods, or something ridiculous like that, and most people would still play.  I sure would.  I'd just learn how to hit a Tiger Woods stinger off the tee ... and I'd probably score better than I do now! :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by SCfanatic35

maybe its just my club, but I have only seen 1 person anchor his putter at my course. Another guy has a long putter but doesnt anchor it. I have not seen very many people on the gcatour use them. The few that I have talked to didn't seem to mind all that much.

This reminds me of the aluminum bat change at the college level and down. It was more for safety issue, but still the game has changed and everyone has adapted just fine. I know its not really apples to apples but either way golfers will adjust if they have to.

I think I've maybe seen one player ever using an anchored putter.  I know one other person who has one, but I've yet to have the priviledge of golfing with him.  (I've beat him the one and only time I've played against him  - in a team competition in different groups, but still)

Originally Posted by meenman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chas

Thus I had been considering trying a long putter but no more, not after the decision.  Of course this might well have been putting good money after bad - I'll probably never know.

What *decision* has been made?

All we have is a proposed rule change made by a soon to be obsolete *governing* body.

Trust me, we will be anchoring longer than the USGA will be relevant.

Nobody is stopping you from anchoring, but that doesn't make anything else you say relevant.  You are dreaming if you think that the USGA and the R&A; will die over this issue.  You act like this is some sort of life-changing precedent.  Many rules have been instituted in the past which had a much greater impact on the game, with no more than a squeak of protest - possibly the 14 club limitation in 1939 being the closest equivalent to the current issue.

It's really only the rabble-rousers like you who are making all of the noise.  The typical player doesn't even care.  All he wants to do is go out and play golf.  The new player wouldn't even know what we are talking about.  It will have zero effect on whether the game "grows" or not.

I'll mention this along with others above, only 2 players I know use an anchored putter, and both use the broomstick style.  They are the head pro at my home course and the director of golf for the district (my head pro's boss) - both PGA of America members.  Not a single one of the 250 members of my men's club uses a long putter or an anchored stroke.  That's a spread of handicaps from scratch to 36, and zero users.  I think if you polled across the country, anchoring would be in such a tiny minority that the cries from the two PGA bodies would become no more than a whimper.  The RB's need to consider the entire body of players, not just a few corporate toadies on the Tour.

[meenman]

Originally Posted by iacas

So you literally think the ban on anchoring will cause the game to die because young people won't take up the game? Do you need directions back to the reservation? :)

I know you can't prove it, but not only that, I don't even think that makes sense.

Anchoring alone? no

But it will hurt perception of the game and it is a slippery slope to start on.

The general public is not too bright - even on here, a forum full of hard core golf enthusiasts, we have people thinking that there is already a ban in effect or that the actual putters are being banned.

The USGA, in making inane rules to keep up with *tradition*, will turn off prospective players. For a body that is supposed to be making it's rules simpler, it is only making them more confusing to newbies.

We already have a problem at my club alone, I am one of the youngest members there (and I am too old to be one of the youngest.) Youngsters, educated or not, do not want to feel like *the man* is making too many rules and taking their fun away.

The USGA is a lot like American unions - both once served their purpose, now they both need to go away quietly.

[SCfanatic35]

Anchoring alone? no But it will hurt perception of the game and it is a slippery slope to start on. The general public is not too bright - even on here, a forum full of hard core golf enthusiasts, we have people thinking that there is already a ban in effect or that the actual putters are being banned. The USGA, in making inane rules to keep up with *tradition*, will turn off prospective players. For a body that is supposed to be making it's rules simpler, it is only making them more confusing to newbies. We already have a problem at my club alone, I am one of the youngest members there (and I am too old to be one of the youngest.) Youngsters, educated or not, do not want to feel like *the man* is making too many rules and taking their fun away. The USGA is a lot like American unions - both once served their purpose, now they both need to go away quietly.

The only place I have heard anyone talking about this topic is on this site. The only guy at my club who anchors his putter, doesn't really care too much. His attitude is I will just have to practice more with my old putter and adjust.

[newtogolf]

Originally Posted by SCfanatic35

The only place I have heard anyone talking about this topic is on this site. The only guy at my club who anchors his putter, doesn't really care too much. His attitude is I will just have to practice more with my old putter and adjust.

I agree, the USGA position came during our off-season here in NY so there hasn't been much opportunity to discuss it except at our end of year meeting.  Everyone at the meeting acknowledged we'd follow the USGA ruling for our club tournaments which caused some moaning and groaning but nothing significant.

I think it will be discussed more when the course re-opens for the Spring.  I've only seen a few older guys use an anchored stroke at our club, but I'm sure there's more.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by meenman

Anchoring alone? no. But it will hurt perception of the game and it is a slippery slope to start on.

I disagree.

Originally Posted by meenman

The USGA, in making inane rules to keep up with *tradition*, will turn off prospective players.

I disagree. A prospective player doesn't even look at the rules. They don't know the ethos of the USGA. It's not a factor. A buddy invites them to a range to whack some balls. They go, get hooked, and they're in.

Originally Posted by meenman

We already have a problem at my club alone, I am one of the youngest members there (and I am too old to be one of the youngest.) Youngsters, educated or not, do not want to feel like *the man* is making too many rules and taking their fun away.

Uhm... Yeah, the "youngsters" aren't playing golf because of the USGA. Okay....

Originally Posted by meenman

The USGA is a lot like American unions - both once served their purpose, now they both need to go away quietly.

The reservation is that-a-way. ----->