Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016)

[Texian]

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

Why can't you make a putt with a real putter?

I don't have any statistics other than the fact that I won 10 club championships with short putters and only one since I switched to the long one, which by the way I remind you again I use in the "approved" method.

This quote also reveals the disdain out there for long putters, by your not considering them "real."  The revisions say the long putter is as "legal," or "real" if you prefer, as a short one. It is the "stroke" that is supposedly in question, although it is really not.

What this really is about is that a majority of the old guys think like you, don't like the looks of long putters, and don't think they are "real." They didn't putt that way and they believe it is their holy duty to uphold the integrity of the game.

The integrity of the game is just fine, old guys. Butt out.

[Valleygolfer]

Originally Posted by Texian

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

Why can't you make a putt with a real putter?

I don't have any statistics other than the fact that I won 10 club championships with short putters and only one since I switched to the long one, which by the way I remind you again I use in the "approved" method.

This quote also reveals the disdain out there for long putters, by your not considering them "real."  The revisions say the long putter is as "legal," or "real" if you prefer, as a short one. It is the "stroke" that is supposedly in question, although it is really not.

What this really is about is that a majority of the old guys think like you, don't like the looks of long putters, and don't think they are "real." They didn't putt that way and they believe it is their holy duty to uphold the integrity of the game.

The integrity of the game is just fine, old guys. Butt out.

Really? It was a good move on your part to make the switch.... Yea I don't like them and never liked the anchor part from the get go. I am not sure I know how "old" an old guy is.

Is Tiger an old guy?

[Texian]

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

Really? It was a good move on your part to make the switch.... Yea I don't like them and never liked the anchor part from the get go. I am not sure I know how "old" an old guy is.

Is Tiger an old guy?

Apologies to anyone I might have offended. I'm an "old guy" myself (over 70). But I do expect that most of those who have a vote in this are past their prime. Tiger's not old but he's trying to break Jack's record and doesn't want someone using a long putter to keep him from doing it.

Tiger couldn't tell you himself why he says he doesn't like long putters because in his chase the record situation he's too biased against those four guys who won recent majors with long putters.

There's also an irony in this, because most of the old guys identify more closely with Jack than they do with Tiger, and they could just be making it possible for Tiger to overtake Jack as the best ever.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

The Pro Tours are supposed to be composed of the best players in the world, not just the best players who can't putt.  Players who use the belly or broomstick putters do so because they perceive it as an advantage to them.  If they can't take the heat for the next three years, then they better start to work in the off season and figure it out.  These guys have crazy hand eye coordination or they wouldn't be on Tour in the first place.  There is no way that they shouldn't be able to find a solution within the boundaries of the new stroke definition.

That may be true, but no one should be called a cheater for doing something that is clearly allowed in the rules at this time.

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

No, I’m saying for every Langer I could example 5 other pros who were having putting problems, tried the anchored putter, and still had putting problems.

It’s not a magic wand.

It is for some guys.  If some guys could improve their putting by going to a pool cue while it doesn't work for other guys would that justify allowing pool cue putting?  That is the same question you dodged once before and I imagine you will dodge it again, because there is no answer for it.  There is no argument you have presented that I cannot turn around and use to justify pool cue putting.

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

Really? It was a good move on your part to make the switch.... Yea I don't like them and never liked the anchor part from the get go. I am not sure I know how "old" an old guy is.

People who have no arguments will inevitably resort to ad hominem aimed at someone.

[jamo]

Apologies to anyone I might have offended. I'm an "old guy" myself (over 70). But I do expect that most of those who have a vote in this are past their prime. Tiger's not old but he's trying to break Jack's record and doesn't want someone using a long putter to keep him from doing it.

I doubt he wants guys with short putters to beat him too. [quote name="Texian" url="/t/62766/anchored-putters-rules-change-was-decision-coming-soon/390_30#post_789018"]Tiger couldn't tell you himself why he says he doesn't like long putters because in his chase the record situation he's too biased against those four guys who won recent majors with long putters. [/quote] Did you see Tiger's interview at the end of yesterday's coverage of his event? He went into pretty good detail about why he's opposed.

[Valleygolfer]

Originally Posted by turtleback

That may be true, but no one should be called a cheater for doing something that is clearly allowed in the rules at this time.

I am still going to call my buddy a cheater for using a belly putter... Gotta get into his head and mess with him...lol I need the strokes...

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

http://espn.go.com/golf/story/_/id/8699495/keegan-bradley-called-cheater-fan-using-belly-putter-world-challenge

I guess we'll see a few more stories like this over the next 12 months...although it doesn't appear to be that big of a deal.

Wow, USGA felt the need to come out with a statement in response:  http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2012/12/keegan-bradley-heckled-for-belly-putter-usga-responds.html.

From that:

Originally Posted by USGA

"We are sorry that Keegan had to experience this unfounded criticism from an obviously uneducated spectator..."

I don't think that's obvious at all. More likely one of the many people who have always felt it *should* be cheating and are just in the habit of shouting things like that.

(Incidentally, there are at least 3 grammatical errors in USGA's statement. Come on guys, hire a proofreader...)

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

I said it to change of course. I have always thought the anchor was unfair. Yea there is a bunch of variances on why or why they don't help. Green reading, speed are part of it but I am happy they will be out. My personal opinion was that they looked stupid and felt like it was one more way to cut a corner on skill. I do tend to be more traditional in my club selection though..

[JerseyThursday]

Name one pro player that said I putt better with an anchored putter but choose not to do so based on principle.

Its a technique. Works for some, doesn’t work for others.

The players that don’t use it simply want a leg up by eliminating the anchored putter competition.

Tiger is even more self-serving in this regard. He wanted putters to be no longer than a sand wedge. Ironically, he uses a putter no longer than a sand wedge.

[JerseyThursday]

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

My personal opinion was that they looked stupid.

Well, that’s a sensible reason.

[dave67az]

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

Name one pro player that said I putt better with an anchored putter but choose not to do so based on principle.

Ernie Els.

Before he switched to it, he played around with it, saw that it gave an advantage, and came out publicly to say that this was exactly why it should be banned in his opinion.  He said that nerves were part of the game and the anchored putter eliminated a fundamental part of the game.

Since then, he realized that if others were using it and getting that advantage, he needed to switch in order to even the playing field.  Only recently has he come out supporting it after years of opposing the anchored stroke.

We see the same thing in other sports with PEDs.  They speak out against it, and then many give in because they need to in order to compete.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

Name one pro player that said I putt better with an anchored putter but choose not to do so based on principle.

Straw man. And what PGA Tour player - what human being - in his right mind would do so when it comes to earning a living?

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

Its a technique. Works for some, doesn’t work for others.

A technique that has been determined to be different enough that it will be forbidden in the near future.

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

The players that don’t use it simply want a leg up by eliminating the anchored putter competition.

I'd prefer that you not simply make crap up, please.

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

Tiger is even more self-serving in this regard. He wanted putters to be no longer than a sand wedge. Ironically, he uses a putter no longer than a sand wedge.

Uhm, yeah. That was his idea on how to change the rule. Most people who use traditional length putters have putters shorter than their sand wedge. You can name most of the ones who haven't - Ray Floyd is the only one that springs to mind (longer putter used in a very standard method).

So if you have nothing legitimate to add to the conversation and instead are going to just speculate and outright make stuff up, just stop posting.

[JerseyThursday]

Originally Posted by dave67az

Ernie Els.

Before he switched to it, he played around with it, saw that it gave an advantage, and came out publicly to say that this was exactly why it should be banned in his opinion.  He said that nerves were part of the game and the anchored putter eliminated a fundamental part of the game.

Since then, he realized that if others were using it and getting that advantage, he needed to switch in order to even the playing field.  Only recently has he come out supporting it after years of opposing the anchored stroke.

We see the same thing in other sports with PEDs.  They speak out against it, and then many give in because they need to in order to compete.

That’s hardly saying he won’t use it based on principle. More like saying he doesn’t have any principles.

You do know seven of the top ten putters in the world don’t anchor.

[Valleygolfer]

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

My personal opinion was that they looked stupid.

Well, that’s a sensible reason.

I like your pathetic nit pick of my total comment. I still stand by the statement and the rest of the actual post that you didn't quote. I think those little chipper clubs look stupid too but at least they aren't anchored.

[dave67az]

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

That’s hardly saying he won’t use it based on principle. More like saying he doesn’t have any principles.

You do know seven of the top ten putters in the world don’t anchor.

He changed his principles in order to compete.

The point is, you asked for an example of someone who said they wouldn't use them even though it gave an advantage and I provided one.

Don't change the conditions of your argument just because you were presented with a fact you can't explain away.

Yeah, he changed his mind, but as far as I'm concerned that only proves even more that HE believed it gave someone an advantage.  But since he failed in getting them banned, he was left with what he felt was his only choice in order to compete...give in to pressure and start using one.

And if they don't give an advantage, would you care to explain how the percentage of players in the top-ten who use them (30%) is far higher than the overall percentage of PGA pros that use them?  Seems to me if it didn't provide any significant advantage then the percentages should be about equal, right?

[JerseyThursday]

Originally Posted by dave67az

He changed his principles in order to compete.

The point is, you asked for an example of someone who said they wouldn't use them even though it gave an advantage and I provided one.

Don't change the conditions of your argument just because you were presented with a fact you can't explain away.

Yeah, he changed his mind, but as far as I'm concerned that only proves even more that HE believed it gave someone an advantage.  But since he failed in getting them banned, he was left with what he felt was his only choice in order to compete...give in to pressure and start using one.

That’s called being a hypocrite

[JerseyThursday]

Originally Posted by dave67az

And if they don't give an advantage, would you care to explain how the percentage of players in the top-ten who use them (30%) is far higher than the overall percentage of PGA pros that use them?  Seems to me if it didn't provide any significant advantage then the percentages should be about equal, right?

By that pretzel logic, the 70% that don’t use them would be even better if they switched.

[dave67az]

Originally Posted by JerseyThursday

By that pretzel logic, the 70% that don’t use them would be even better if they switched.

It's called "statistics".

It's only "pretzel logic" to someone who doesn't understand how math works.