Ban Belly Putters?

[NEOHMark]

Originally Posted by iacas

They don't use lead tape. They just put a little foam around some brass-like weights and shove them down the shaft (or leave them close to the butt end) as required. We have the capability to do this with our Edel fitting system, for example.

FWIW,  Mickelson uses lead tape on the back and sole of his blade putter:

http://blogs.golf.com/equipment/2010/04/phil-mickelson-odyssey-blade-putter-masters.html

Regarding belly putters, I think speed and face alignment still are two huge variables that anchoring the butt of the club won't 'fix'.  Yeah, it's probably easier to achieve a true pendulum swing arc with the bp, but I don't think it's any magic bullet to create the perfect putting stroke.  I don't think I'd ever use one, but I don't necessarily think they should be banned.

Edit -  my bad, I think.  Rereading the original post, I think you guys were talking about adding weight at the top of the shaft.....still, a cool pic of Phil's putter head.

[tristanhilton85]

Great post ND Fan, this is probably the biggest reason that players turn to the long putter... just a few points of my own...

Most of the "anti" belly/long putter advocates on here (at least the ones that make any sense) have said that they don't think that they give you an advantage.  I think after 7 pages in this thread ALL of us can agree on that.  It may help some people putt better than they were before (like ND Fan) but not anybody switching will get better.  Anybody who makes the argument that they give an advantage, especially an unfair one, needs to stop.

I also wouldn't say that their opinion is mute... this is how things get done; people talking and exchanging ideas, the fact that you don't like or agree with their opinion doesn't make it any less valid than your own.

And finally, I really don't see the comparison with using old woods or blade irons.  The new, larger drivers of today and the forgiving cavity backed irons are simply advancements in technology.  To me, and if you think about it I'm sure you'll agree, that this is more like the development of a mallet putter or "roll" technology you see on putters like the Method and those like the ones made by Rife.  All of those clubs are still swung, regardless of their larger size or increased forgiveness... the issue with long putters is that they are not swung but instead anchored.  Like I said in my previous post, I myself don't really have an issue with this but some do, and it is a valid argument.  There is a difference in using old, out-dated clubs and upholding tradition.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by tristanhilton85

Great post ND Fan, this is probably the biggest reason that players turn to the long putter... just a few points of my own...

Most of the "anti" belly/long putter advocates on here (at least the ones that make any sense) have said that they don't think that they give you an advantage.  I think after 7 pages in this thread ALL of us can agree on that.  It may help some people putt better than they were before (like ND Fan) but not anybody switching will get better.  Anybody who makes the argument that they give an advantage, especially an unfair one, needs to stop.

I also wouldn't say that their opinion is mute... this is how things get done; people talking and exchanging ideas, the fact that you don't like or agree with their opinion doesn't make it any less valid than your own.

And finally, I really don't see the comparison with using old woods or blade irons.  The new, larger drivers of today and the forgiving cavity backed irons are simply advancements in technology.  To me, and if you think about it I'm sure you'll agree, that this is more like the development of a mallet putter or "roll" technology you see on putters like the Method and those like the ones made by Rife.  All of those clubs are still swung, regardless of their larger size or increased forgiveness... the issue with long putters is that they are not swung but instead anchored.  Like I said in my previous post, I myself don't really have an issue with this but some do, and it is a valid argument.  There is a difference in using old, out-dated clubs and upholding tradition.

The only sport where I think it should be illegal to straddle the ball before hitting it is baseball. As far as anchoring the club, people can say that's not a traditional way to swing and maybe that's true, but to say it's "not the way golf was meant to be played", is kind of bold thing to say about a game started by people hitting rocks with a curved stick. A curved stick much longer than current broomstick putters.

[tristanhilton85]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

The only sport where I think it should be illegal to straddle the ball before hitting it is baseball. As far as anchoring the club, people can say that's not a traditional way to swing and maybe that's true, but to say it's "not the way golf was meant to be played", is kind of bold thing to say about a game started by people hitting rocks with a curved stick. A curved stick much longer than current broomstick putters.

That's a great point, and is one of the reasons why I'm not for the ban.  My point was that people get to worked up about things and don't really look at what the other side is saying.  The argument that long putters aren't swung is a good one in my opinion.  And I think I should point out that even those old guys hitting rocks with long curved sticks were making swings; they didn't anchor those agains their body.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by ND Fan

How many of you use persimmon woods just for the tradition of the game?  I held out on even metal woods until the early 90's.  I didn't need the distance then and I loved my stock pile of old MacGregor drivers.  Don't pretend you're somehow a bastion of tradition when you step up with your $400 Titanium Driver.

With all due respect, I don't recall really seeing this argument being made much. It's a straw man.

Originally Posted by NEOHMark

FWIW,  Mickelson uses lead tape on the back and sole of his blade putter:

Edit -  my bad, I think.  Rereading the original post, I think you guys were talking about adding weight at the top of the shaft.....still, a cool pic of Phil's putter head.

Yeah, exactly. Plus I was specifically talking about adding that much weight, which would be tough to do with lead tape. But anyway, OT, so back to it...

Originally Posted by tristanhilton85

I also wouldn't say that their opinion is mute... this is how things get done; people talking and exchanging ideas, the fact that you don't like or agree with their opinion doesn't make it any less valid than your own.

If everyone had to shut up, there wouldn't be much point in having a forum or discussing things. Nobody here is probably truly expects this to change any time soon... but that doesn't mean we can't have opinions. Especially when you mislabel them and group them with persimmon heads.

Originally Posted by sean_miller

A curved stick much longer than current broomstick putters.

Got proof of that? Rhetorical question... kinda OT.

[ND Fan]

Who's is to say that long putters are not a technological advancement. I don't anchor the club to anything but my hands. No part of that club touches my body. It works for me and I'll continue to use it. one argument was "ban them because they're not how golf is meant to be played." Was golf meant to be played with woods made of any other material? It's a stretch, I know but I am just sayin' I do agree that a club should not have three points of contact, if that rule is changed I would be on board with that. The fact that several players on tour have used them for the past many years I doubt any further official debate will be had on the subject that will effect any of us.

By the way, this site likes to re format any spaces I used for separation is that an issue with firefox?

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by iacas

Got proof of that? Rhetorical question... kinda OT.

I was joking - a shepherds crook is rumoured to be the first golf club, but I anytime I see old golf photos or diagrams, the clubs seem to be even shorter than ours.

[zeg]

While it's not correct to describe a long putter as a technological advance directly akin to metal woods, etc, I do think there's relevance.  The game and the equipment we use to play it has evolved and will continue to evolve.  Arguments that various equipment should be banned need to be made very carefully to avoid "it's different so I hate it" decision making.

When the technique or equipment in question does not give a clear advantage to the user one should be especially vigilant about this.  It's one thing to say that we're not going to allow drivers with a COR greater than x to limit driving distances to prevent run-away course lengths.  It's different to argue that a style of swinging a club should be against the rules just because it's against the spirit of the rules.

Of course, golf IS golf, so some seemingly arbitrary limits on how you can play the game can be expected.  The rules as they stand require that the club be swing and the ball be fairly struck.  Using the shaft of the club as a pool cue obviously violates this, but a long putter, even one held against your body, is still being swung.  The ball is still being fairly struck.  You still have to read the line, you still have to swing back and through, judging the distance, etc.  This is, of course, just restating what we all seem to agree: there's no inherent advantage to that style of putting.  It's not clear to me why the spirit of the rules says or should say anything about whether you're holding the shaft against your body.

Thus, I think it's simply incorrect to argue that a belly putter ban is preserving something inherent to the game.  It would also not be the same as a rule limiting the performance of a club to protect the challenge of current course designs.  To me, it seems a purely aesthetic decision, and I don't think that's appropriate or necessary.

(Two notes: 1) I think the same applies to the croquet putting ban, I don't see the need for that.  2) While there are limits on the length of other clubs, notably the driver, that is directly tied to limiting driving distance.  The same would not be true of a limit on putter length.)

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zeg

(Two notes: 1) I think the same applies to the croquet putting ban, I don't see the need for that.  2) While there are limits on the length of other clubs, notably the driver, that is directly tied to limiting driving distance.  The same would not be true of a limit on putter length.)

FWIW, I think the croquet ruling was more about the intent to keep the game one played "to the side" of the ball. Right or wrong, I think that's a big part of that ruling. Sam Snead kinda found a work-around, but not really - he was still to the side of the ball, just with a really open stance. ;-)

[haapamaki]

not a true golf swing. ban belly putters...

[CowtownGrinder]

Originally Posted by iacas

That's your opinion.

I disagree. Must we keep going around on this? I am done trying to change your mind (not that I've started - I've simply stated my opinion a few times). We have thousands and thousands of other threads. I'm glad you've joined, but explore - post in some of 'em.

Erik,

Round and round you go apparently !  You must really dislike the "look" of long putting (the crux of your argument)-enough apparently to draw up proposed rules to outlaw them.  When you never get summoned by the USGA or R&A; on this matter, will you tell the panel: "guys it just looks bad, and it's not how it's done, I know it doesn't help anyone"?  I can't believe you're sticking with this-seriously dude ! ?  Anyway, you're right, people are entitled to their opinions.  To this end, can you please not censor me on this one?  Thanks, have a great day.

[tristanhilton85]

Originally Posted by CowtownGrinder

Erik,

Round and round you go apparently!  You must really dislike the "look" of long putting (the crux of your argument)-enough apparently to draw up proposed rules to outlaw them.  When you never get summoned by the USGA or R&A; on this matter, will you tell the panel: "guys it just looks bad, and it's not how it's done, I know it doesn't help anyone"?  I can't believe you're sticking with this-seriously dude! ?  Anyway, you're right, people are entitled to their opinions.  To this end, can you please not censor me on this one?  Thanks, have a great day.

It doesn't appear to me that you've been censored... I know quite clearly what your opinion on the subject is just as I know Erik's... and if you would take a second to read the posts he put up, it has nothing to do with the "look" of them at all... all he has said is that golf is not a game played with the club anchored to your body and putting shouldn't be an exception... the fact that it may or may not look bad or weird or whatever has nothing to do with it.  Obviously long putters aren't for everybody, Erik is apparently one of those people; why don't you just let the guy have his opinion and you have yours... if you have a good reason why they shouldn't be banned let us hear it (please note, I'm not for the ban either), otherwise I'd appreciate it if you'd stop repeating yourself as everytime I think there maybe something new to this thread I read the same old crap again...

[max power]

This goes both ways.  If Erik has the right to constantly state his opinion and why he disagrees with someone, then so does this guy.

Originally Posted by tristanhilton85

It doesn't appear to me that you've been censored... I know quite clearly what your opinion on the subject is just as I know Erik's... and if you would take a second to read the posts he put up, it has nothing to do with the "look" of them at all... all he has said is that golf is not a game played with the club anchored to your body and putting shouldn't be an exception... the fact that it may or may not look bad or weird or whatever has nothing to do with it.  Obviously long putters aren't for everybody, Erik is apparently one of those people; why don't you just let the guy have his opinion and you have yours... if you have a good reason why they shouldn't be banned let us hear it (please note, I'm not for the ban either), otherwise I'd appreciate it if you'd stop repeating yourself as everytime I think there maybe something new to this thread I read the same old crap again...

[iacas]

Originally Posted by max power

This goes both ways.  If Erik has the right to constantly state his opinion and why he disagrees with someone, then so does this guy.

How about we just stick to the topic, and part of that is this: if you have nothing new to say, and people aren't misrepresenting things you've said and addressing questions to you (or me), stop posting in this thread.

Now, back to the playoffs. None of the last few posts are really on topic. So, back to the topic, with new thoughts or no thoughts. For all. Me too.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by iacas

FWIW, I think the croquet ruling was more about the intent to keep the game one played "to the side" of the ball. Right or wrong, I think that's a big part of that ruling. Sam Snead kinda found a work-around, but not really - he was still to the side of the ball, just with a really open stance. ;-)

Yeah, I think you're right about that being the intention.  It sort of makes sense, although even that rule has the exception to allow incidental ("inadvertent") straddling of the line for tap-ins when you're avoiding other players' lines.

But, just thinking about this more, I think there are a lot of cases of "non-golf" techniques that are generally accepted.  One-handed tap-ins, various contortions and unusual swings to hit a ball lying against a fence, etc.  Is belly-putting really different enough to warrant special rules against it?

If so, I think one should try to identify what it is that makes it rule-worthy.  For example, is it different because it's a customary method rather than a technique only used in exceptional (and desperate) circumstances?  If that's it, how prevalent does something have to become before we ask whether it's really golf?

Alternatively, is it because it uses somewhat nonstandard equipment?  This is tricky to define because of differences in body size (and, heck, that tall guy with a 33" putter could always belly-putt with it from his knees...).  But, still, it seems that the "broomstick" putter has something to do with the distaste expressed for the method by some here.

So, if we're going to ban belly putters, what *else* should we be thinking about banning, too?

[Kieran123]

WTF, Westwood uses a belly putter now? I had never seen this....apparently he used it at Augusta too....

[inthehole]

ban them - for no other reason that it gives the appearance of someone trying to gain an unfair advantage over standard length putters - not the image of sportsmanship that I think the sport should promote.      If this is or is not true isn't the arguement, it's undeniable that it does give the appearance of attempting to use the rulebook to their advantage ... it is a different type of hardware for the job, and we all should have to use the same piece of hardware on the greens.

[Phil McGleno]

Originally Posted by zeg

But, just thinking about this more, I think there are a lot of cases of "non-golf" techniques that are generally accepted.  One-handed tap-ins, various contortions and unusual swings to hit a ball lying against a fence, etc.  Is belly-putting really different enough to warrant special rules against it?

None of those things are not "swinging." You don't pendulum those things. If you want to swing one-handed you're still "swinging" the club and it's not anchored into you. Swinging isn't the same as anchoring.

Kinda like the judge who said he couldn't define porn but he knew it when he sees it. An anchored putter still "swings" but it's not "swung" in my opinion. Like others pointed out you can't putt croquet-style and the argument could be made that the putter is still "swung" there - maybe even more than an anchored putter.

We have the rule about the minimum lie angle (10 degrees from vertical) for this reason - the croquet style - plus a specific ban on putting that way.