Bryson Dechambeau vs. USGA

[upanddown52]

Did not see this coming... :fishing1:

[MtlJeff]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

[Hawkeye77]

I don't know how they can ban side-saddle, it's basically just a really open stance. So you would have to ban an open stance while putting? ...How open?

 

What's more realistic is banning the arm-lock style in general. They will have to bust Kuchar also.

 

The open stance part is from an article and no, they aren't banning side saddle or anything else about his putting style. See article above celebrating it.

 

Simply about one particular putter.

[BenHoganSlam1953]

here it is

 

http://www.golfwrx.c...non-conforming/

 

 

 

and to do it a day before he is to play in a tournament... said they would DQ him if he showed... Hell.. i would show up and make them do it ... just to make the Media s*** storm start!

 

They were never going to DQ him as they gave him a "duration of competition" ruling, the article you are referring to is accidentally ( ) being misleading readers .... as to why the USGA will not comment on the specifics - they have no choice or they would get sued by the OEM manufacturers as they have signed confidentiality agreements with the OEMS for obvious reasons. As to whether they like or dislike the player in question - who knows.

[Evolved]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

Why do them need to tell you anything? Bryson knows why, that's all that matters.

[BenHoganSlam1953]

I don't know how they can ban side-saddle, it's basically just a really open stance. So you would have to ban an open stance while putting? ...How open?

 

What's more realistic is banning the arm-lock style in general. They will have to bust Kuchar also.

 

I would call it broom sweeping ... I tried it before when I was having issues last few seasons at times with 1-2 footers, but it felt just to alien to be worth it. Instead I just take one leg out of the equation and make my normal putting stroke.

[Hawkeye77]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

 

They said they have existing confidentiality agreements in place with manufacturers that I could see being mostly in the manufacturers' self interest insofar as not giving away technical information on clubs they have in the works that involve their trade secrets and specs, secrecy about new models, etc.

 

That's my guess.

[MtlJeff]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

Why do them need to tell you anything? Bryson knows why, that's all that matters.

 

They've spent a few years telling us they make rules decisions regarding equipment that are in the best interest of the millions of people who play the game, they said this for the groove rule and the anchored putter rule. I think they should say why an unconventional new style of putting/putter is not legal

[upanddown52]

Its a matter of degree and the week of the trade show is an interesting time to bring it to a head.

[MtlJeff]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

 

They said they have existing confidentiality agreements in place with manufacturers that I could see being mostly in the manufacturers' self interest insofar as not giving away technical information on clubs they have in the works that involve their trade secrets and specs, secrecy about new models, etc.

 

That's my guess.

 

If something is non-conforming, that must mean that there is a list of guidelines something must follow to be conforming, materials used, angles of shaft, training aids on putter whatever i'm just using examples....just let us know which one was violated, i mean there's a lot of small putter designers out there, i just ordered from one. I imagine they might want to know about stuff like this

[Mr. Herbert]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

 

They said they have existing confidentiality agreements in place with manufacturers that I could see being mostly in the manufacturers' self interest insofar as not giving away technical information on clubs they have in the works that involve their trade secrets and specs, secrecy about new models, etc.

 

That's my guess.

 

If something is non-conforming, that must mean that there is a list of guidelines something must follow to be conforming, materials used, angles of shaft, training aids on putter whatever i'm just using examples....just let us know which one was violated, i mean there's a lot of small putter designers out there, i just ordered from one. I imagine they might want to know about stuff like this

 

I imagine a small putter designer would get approval of his design before he started selling it.

[PowderedToastMan]

Having Bryson on staff would be a nightmare. Not only is he overly involved in the club building aspect, but he's constantly coming up with insane ideas. I'll bet every time he steps in the cobra van, most of the guys duck and/or jump out the window to avoid him. "Oh sure Bryson, I'll build you a double shafted putter with an obscure metal only found in the remote corners of the Amazon. Oh sure, I'll make sure the lie angle is appropriate so as to effectively stroke a putt backwards. Oh sure, I'll make sure one of the shaft frequencies at 8.2 and the other at 4.9. Yes, I'll make sure the grips are coated in copper. And yes, here's the driver you requested with an A1 swing weight. What's that, you now believe the secret to the swing is a driver with an E9 swing weight? Great, right on it Bryson." Then the conversation ends when another worker bludgeons Bryson on the head with a loft/lie machine.

[bladehunter]

There is a lot of stuff at

http://www.usga.org/...tml#!rule-14617

Go to Appendix II, 1d.

 

 

They are obviously trying to make it harder to have a putter that is capable of being used in a long putter fashion. The way I read it, the Ping B90 would not be legal. I think I emailed them last year about it, but did not hear back.

This doesnt make sense, they have two players using the long putter on the senior tour.

 

 

exactly my point... its OK for the "champions" to do it ...but up and comer decides to ride the rules thin and is a no go..... The Hypocritical grey areas are what gripes me .. not whether Bryson can use this style or not

[bladehunter]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

 

They said they have existing confidentiality agreements in place with manufacturers that I could see being mostly in the manufacturers' self interest insofar as not giving away technical information on clubs they have in the works that involve their trade secrets and specs, secrecy about new models, etc.

 

That's my guess.

 

If something is non-conforming, that must mean that there is a list of guidelines something must follow to be conforming, materials used, angles of shaft, training aids on putter whatever i'm just using examples....just let us know which one was violated, i mean there's a lot of small putter designers out there, i just ordered from one. I imagine they might want to know about stuff like this

 

I imagine a small putter designer would get approval of his design before he started selling it.

 

 

 

why are the parameters a secret ?? only answer could be that there arent any parameters.... yet...

[Mr. Herbert]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

 

They said they have existing confidentiality agreements in place with manufacturers that I could see being mostly in the manufacturers' self interest insofar as not giving away technical information on clubs they have in the works that involve their trade secrets and specs, secrecy about new models, etc.

 

That's my guess.

 

If something is non-conforming, that must mean that there is a list of guidelines something must follow to be conforming, materials used, angles of shaft, training aids on putter whatever i'm just using examples....just let us know which one was violated, i mean there's a lot of small putter designers out there, i just ordered from one. I imagine they might want to know about stuff like this

 

I imagine a small putter designer would get approval of his design before he started selling it.

 

 

 

why are the parameters a secret ?? only answer could be that there arent any parameters.... yet...

 

Which part of "confidentiality agreement" do you not understand?

[MtlJeff]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

 

They said they have existing confidentiality agreements in place with manufacturers that I could see being mostly in the manufacturers' self interest insofar as not giving away technical information on clubs they have in the works that involve their trade secrets and specs, secrecy about new models, etc.

 

That's my guess.

 

If something is non-conforming, that must mean that there is a list of guidelines something must follow to be conforming, materials used, angles of shaft, training aids on putter whatever i'm just using examples....just let us know which one was violated, i mean there's a lot of small putter designers out there, i just ordered from one. I imagine they might want to know about stuff like this

 

I imagine a small putter designer would get approval of his design before he started selling it.

 

I guess Edel really dropped the ball then! Because it doesn't seem they did in this case

 

I honestly don't see what's the big deal. You have a new unconventional style of putting, that might spawn new putter design ideas, that could become the next "thing" like belly putters or whatever, which the USGA did not like....I just think it would be nice to know what is legal and what isn't about the style and the putters

[Mr. Herbert]

There is a lot of stuff at

http://www.usga.org/...tml#!rule-14617

Go to Appendix II, 1d.

 

 

They are obviously trying to make it harder to have a putter that is capable of being used in a long putter fashion. The way I read it, the Ping B90 would not be legal. I think I emailed them last year about it, but did not hear back.

This doesnt make sense, they have two players using the long putter on the senior tour.

 

 

exactly my point... its OK for the "champions" to do it ...but up and comer decides to ride the rules thin and is a no go..... The Hypocritical grey areas are what gripes me .. not whether Bryson can use this style or not

 

You're just making things up. See post 26 for the most likely reason it wasn't conforming. Probably nothing to do with the length.

[bscinstnct]

Here's my guess. Shaft angle relative to the ground can't exceed 80 degrees when you're in the address position. Because this putter is center shafted, the angle is too upright. Essentially it hangs virtually straight down. Putting the shaft in the rear position would alter the angle and get it within the rule.

 

It's the manufacturer's responsibility to get the club approved. The timeline I saw showed that they gave him a preliminary 'No' within a week of submission. That seems like a pretty reasonable time period to me.

 

All the USGA did here was protect the field.

 

I don't for a second believe DeChambeau's "aw shucks, they didn't tell me why and I'm plum confused" comment. He knows exactly what the problem is. They gave him some sort of explanation and he'd rather not pass it along.

 

Ahhhh, well done, ggr ; )

 

I had no idea what the heck was going on.

[bladehunter]

So we are now speculating that this putter holds some sort of trade secrets? good grief

[Mr. Herbert]

Would it be so bad for the USGA to say why something is non conforming though especially when it comes to odd rulings like this one? When it comes to equipment i just think transparency would be nice since they have changed two rules recently. I remember there being some mixups when the groove rule was first changed.

 

Where's that moron that penalized Dustin Johnson at the US Open? He loved getting in front of the camera and flexing his muscles. Someone ask him!

 

They said they have existing confidentiality agreements in place with manufacturers that I could see being mostly in the manufacturers' self interest insofar as not giving away technical information on clubs they have in the works that involve their trade secrets and specs, secrecy about new models, etc.

 

That's my guess.

 

If something is non-conforming, that must mean that there is a list of guidelines something must follow to be conforming, materials used, angles of shaft, training aids on putter whatever i'm just using examples....just let us know which one was violated, i mean there's a lot of small putter designers out there, i just ordered from one. I imagine they might want to know about stuff like this

 

I imagine a small putter designer would get approval of his design before he started selling it.

 

I guess Edel really dropped the ball then! Because it doesn't seem they did in this case

 

I honestly don't see what's the big deal. You have a new unconventional style of putting, that might spawn new putter design ideas, that could become the next "thing" like belly putters or whatever, which the USGA did not like....I just think it would be nice to know what is legal and what isn't about the style and the putters

 

Read the Schupak article. It says BD submitted several putters for approval, and only one was deemed non- conforming. I don't think these have been marketed to the public. I think these are designs that BD has come up with. For all we know, Edel may have told him it wouldn't pass.

[Mr. Herbert]

So we are now speculating that this putter holds some sort of trade secrets? good grief

 

I haven't seen anyone speculate that.

[nova6868]

I think a Centre shafted putter, meaning the axis of the shaft through the COG and not necessarily through the geometric centre, also has the advantage of not tending to twist under acceleration. This means it's easier to deliver a square clubface vs a heel shafted putter or otherwise.

 

But wouldn't this apply to any center-shafted putter?

 

I see the likely problem with Bryson's though, if the shaft angle was too close to 90 degrees.

[bladehunter]

So we are now speculating that this putter holds some sort of trade secrets? good grief

 

I haven't seen anyone speculate that.

 

then why the confidentiality agreement ? when wilson screwed the pooch on their driver it sure wasnt secret ..what is different now ?

[edresnick]

Here's my guess. Shaft angle relative to the ground can't exceed 80 degrees when you're in the address position. Because this putter is center shafted, the angle is too upright. Essentially it hangs virtually straight down. Putting the shaft in the rear position would alter the angle and get it within the rule.

 

It's the manufacturer's responsibility to get the club approved. The timeline I saw showed that they gave him a preliminary 'No' within a week of submission. That seems like a pretty reasonable time period to me.

 

All the USGA did here was protect the field.

 

I don't for a second believe DeChambeau's "aw shucks, they didn't tell me why and I'm plum confused" comment. He knows exactly what the problem is. They gave him some sort of explanation and he'd rather not pass it along.

 

 

I think a Centre shafted putter, meaning the axis of the shaft through the COG and not necessarily through the geometric centre, also has the advantage of not tending to twist under acceleration. This means it's easier to deliver a square clubface vs a heel shafted putter or otherwise.

 

I think these two figured it out.

 

Isn't Zach Johnson's See Moore putter center shafted through the COG?

[Socrates]

If something is non-conforming, that must mean that there is a list of guidelines something must follow to be conforming, materials used, angles of shaft, training aids on putter whatever i'm just using examples....just let us know which one was violated, i mean there's a lot of small putter designers out there, i just ordered from one. I imagine they might want to know about stuff like this

It would be incumbent on the club designer to read about the Rules, specifically the section on Equipment Rules. Read them carefully as the information is there. The part I have included (especially right at the bottom) likely is where the putter went wrong. There is a lot of this that is subjective and I'm not going to pretend that the USGA doesn't have a bone to pick here and there is plenty of room here for them to forward their own agenda.

 

 

When the club is in its normal address position the shaft must be so aligned that:

 

(i) the projection of the straight part of the shaft on to the vertical plane through the toe and heel must diverge from the vertical by at least 10 degrees. If the overall design of the club is such that the player can effectively use the club in a vertical or close-to-vertical position, the shaft may be required to diverge from the vertical in this plane by as much as 25 degrees;

 

(ii) the projection of the straight part of the shaft on to the vertical plane along the intended line of play must not diverge from the vertical by more than 20 degrees forward or 10 degrees backward.

 

This Rule is particularly relevant to putters, and it exists mainly as a means for disallowing croquet or vertical-pendulum style putters (with vertical shafts) and shuffle-board style strokes, as well as designs which facilitate such strokes (see Figure 4).

 

 

For most putters, the "normal address position" is determined by the geometry of the head. The head would be placed on a horizontal flat surface, with the sole touching that surface at a point directly below the center of the face. The shaft angle is measured with the head in this position (see Figure 5).

 

 

If the putter head shape or weight distribution is very asymmetric, it may be necessary to make a subjective judgment as to where the effective center of the face is, and then to sole the club directly below that point. The position of the head in this instance may not always be the position that was intended by design. Nonetheless, in some cases, a judgment must be made based on how the club could feasibly and effectively be used (see Figure 6).

 

 

The same subjectivity may also be needed when confronted with a putter which has a very curved sole (see Figure 7). As before, the Equipment Standards Committee takes into account not only the manner in which the putter is designed to be used, but also the way it could feasibly and effectively be used, given the geometry of the head as well as other unique characteristics of the overall design. This interpretation is particularly relevant to long-shafted putters with very curved or multi-planed soles - however, standard-length putters of approximately 34 to 38 inches may also be subjected to this assessment.

 

 

It should be noted that all putters can usually be positioned in such a way that the shaft diverges from the vertical by less than 10 degrees or even to a position where the shaft itself is vertical. Also, it is unusual for the sole of a putter to be completely flat all the way from heel to toe. When faced with a ruling of this kind, the decision should not be based on whether a player uses the putter with the shaft in a position of less than 10 degrees - but whether the putter design facilitates a player placing the shaft in a position of less than 10 degrees (see Figure 8).

 

 

If the overall design of a putter is such that the player can achieve a "vertical-pendulum" style stroke (i.e., putt effectively with the shaft in a vertical or near-vertical position), it would be ruled contrary to Appendix II, 1d, even if the shaft angle does satisfy the 10-degree Rule when the putter is in its "normal address position." The shaft angle on such a putter could be required to be increased to as much as 25 degrees. In assessing whether a putter can be used effectively in a "vertical-pendulum" style manner, the combination of the following features should be considered:

• length of shaft
  
• position of shaft attachment to head
  
• angle of shaft in toe-to-heel plane and front-to-back plane
  
• shape and weight distribution of head
  
• curvature and shape of sole
  
• intent of the design
  

[MtlJeff]

^^^ thanks for all that info

 

Essentially you would hope the MFR (in this case Edel) knows the restrictions. Maybe they didn't and made something that clearly didn't meet the specs....or maybe they made something they thought was conforming and turned out not to be. The latter would be of interest to many i would think

 

But yeah, i don't see how it would violate confidentiality, especially again with a new and perhaps controversial style of putting, to just say "putter violated shaft angle rule"....

 

That's all i'm saying.

[Mr. Herbert]

So we are now speculating that this putter holds some sort of trade secrets? good grief

 

I haven't seen anyone speculate that.

 

then why the confidentiality agreement ? when wilson screwed the pooch on their driver it sure wasnt secret ..what is different now ?

 

Absolutely nothing is different now. The only info the USGA released about the Wilson Triton was that it was non-conforming. Wilson decided to release more info about it to clarify things. Just as DeChambeau or Edel could release more info if they wanted to.

[Mr. Herbert]

^^^ thanks for all that info

 

Essentially you would hope the MFR (in this case Edel) knows the restrictions. Maybe they didn't and made something that clearly didn't meet the specs....or maybe they made something they thought was conforming and turned out not to be. The latter would be of interest to many i would think

 

But yeah, i don't see how it would violate confidentiality, especially again with a new and perhaps controversial style of putting, to just say "putter violated shaft angle rule"....

 

That's all i'm saying.

 

You're right, 99 times out of 100 the USGA could probably release more info without any problem. But every once in a while they wouldn't be able to say without divulging proprietary info. Rather than take the risk of accidentally doing that, it's just safer to only say a club is conforming or non-conforming. This is likely the way the manufacturers want it.

[Short Pete]

Rule 4 Appendix II 1d Figures 6-8 and this excerpt from the rules

 

"If the overall design of a putter is such that the player can achieve a "vertical-pendulum" style stroke (i.e., putt effectively with the shaft in a vertical or near-vertical position), it would be ruled contrary to Appendix II, 1d, even if the shaft angle does satisfy the 10-degree Rule when the putter is in its "normal address position."

 

 

could be the answer. Dechambeau has his putter shaft vertical when he hits his putts. I would guess that the putter is built to work that way, he holds it vertical and does a pendulum motion. Maybe the putter is weighed in an iffy way or it has something else that puts it under this rule.

 

Three things seem a little bit strange to me:

 

1. Why is it possible to play with a club that's not been rated conforming to the rules? They should have told him to use a safely conforming putter as long as the ruling is pending. The dork has played in the Franklin, he could have gotten his ruling way earlier. He has no one to blame but himself!

2. Dechambeau is Mr. Know-It-All, why doesn't he know what a putter is supposed to look like? That's kind of ridiculous, there are several side saddle videos on the Tube where the problems with the shaft angle, the putter head and the pendulum motion are discussed. To go onto the biggest stage in golf and perform a publicly discussed putting method with a putter that is not confirmed legal semms completely stupid to me. When I saw his stroke for the first time I thought about the 10 degree rule at once, his putter didn't look all that legal.

3. The USGA has a short statement out that the details stay between them and Mr. Dechambeau, and the first thing he does is playing the Cry Baby, telling the world that the evil jesters of the USGA had told him they didn't like the way he putts. His only intention was to grow the game by making it more simple. Poor Boy Bryson:-( He should have kept his mouth shut, instead he plays the poor victimthat had nothing but good intentions. C'mon man! At the moment he is not growing any game, he is showing the world that his superior swing method combined with single length irons produces less than mediocre results on the Tour level.

[Scooterboy59]

USGA :angry:, leave the game alone before you mess it up!!!!!