Should Arm Lock be made illegal?

[b.helts]

10 hours ago, Shilgy said:

As  @Augster just noted it’s allowed because the full club is free swinging. Armlock is just a grip that some do not seem to like.

 

My bet is if it had originally been named the “forearm press” there would be no problems. Folks hear “lock” and they think anchored.

The argument is NOT whether it’s allowed. Sheesh

 

It’s whether it should be allowed or if the ruling bodies should look at its efficacy a little closer. 
 

As I see it, the crux is whether it makes putting easier. I don’t have the answer, but is the answer even worth searching for?

[Shilgy]

8 minutes ago, b.helts said:

The argument is NOT whether it’s allowed. Sheesh

 

It’s whether it should be allowed or if the ruling bodies should look at its efficacy a little closer. 
 

As I see it, the crux is whether it makes putting easier. I don’t have the answer, but is the answer even worth searching for?

For many who post here the legality is the issue. They are calling it anchored. But that aside....

Doesn’t every odd grip make putting “easier” for that particular user?  Isn’t that the purpose of trying different styles? Claw seems to help many. Ban it?  And on and on.....

[b.helts]

17 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

For many who post here the legality is the issue. They are calling it anchored. But that aside....

Doesn’t every odd grip make putting “easier” for that particular user?  Isn’t that the purpose of trying different styles? Claw seems to help many. Ban it?  And on and on.....

 

Despite a quick relapse into definitions, now we're talking.

 

You're right, so where does it stop? Do we limit the strength or weakness of a grip? Of course not. If two hands are on the end of the grip, I think that has to be allowed, no matter the configuration of those two hands.

 

But that isn't what we're talking about. We are talking about running the grip up a forearm (I almost typed lead forearm but Kuchar ruined that :))

 

The claw, saw, pencil grip etc does not affect whether the clubface can open or close. Does armlock do that?

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, b.helts said:

 

Despite a quick relapse into definitions, now we're talking.

 

You're right, so where does it stop? Do we limit the strength or weakness of a grip? Of course not. If two hands are on the end of the grip, I think that has to be allowed, no matter the configuration of those two hands.

 

But that isn't what we're talking about. We are talking about running the grip up a forearm (I almost typed lead forearm but Kuchar ruined that :))

 

The claw, saw, pencil grip etc does not affect whether the clubface can open or close. Does armlock do that?

If it did every pro would be using it. 

[b.helts]

10 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

If it did every pro would be using it. 

Why?

[Halebopp]

2 hours ago, b.helts said:

 

Despite a quick relapse into definitions, now we're talking.

 

You're right, so where does it stop? Do we limit the strength or weakness of a grip? Of course not. If two hands are on the end of the grip, I think that has to be allowed, no matter the configuration of those two hands.

 

But that isn't what we're talking about. We are talking about running the grip up a forearm (I almost typed lead forearm but Kuchar ruined that :))

 

The claw, saw, pencil grip etc does not affect whether the clubface can open or close. Does armlock do that?

 

So you would only allow "anchoring" against a hand?

[b.helts]

12 minutes ago, Halebopp said:

 

So you would only allow "anchoring" against a hand?

 

To be clear, I haven't made a decision on this. I'm just enjoying the conversation and feel that getting bogged down in definitions is counterproductive.

 

I would not consider gripping the club as "anchoring" and I don't consider armlock as "anchoring" either. To me, your question is a non-starter.

[Mr. Bean]

5 hours ago, Dpavs said:

 

While I'm not convinced that the arm lock style of gripping a club is not "anchoring" per se... it is abundantly clear is that it is an exception to the rule and is allowed.

 

b. Anchoring the Club

In making a stroke, the player must not anchor the club, either:

• Directly, by holding the club or a gripping hand against any part of the body (except that the player may hold the club or a gripping hand against a hand or forearm)...

 

Update- Let me clarify to avoid confusion about what I am saying here. Using the arm lock style is technically a form of "anchoring a club"... "against any part of the body" as defined by the rule but it is also clearly noted and excepted by the rule so it is in essence a permissible form of anchoring a club. In short, it is anchoring but it is an allowed form of anchoring.

 

This is a good example of a clarifying text often added in a Rule. It does not reinforce nor weaken the Rule itself but merely makes it easier to understand for the reader.

 

Thus the 'except' part does not mean that those exceptions were also anchored and yet allowed, but the text gives the reader the idea what kind of gripping is allowed AND is not anchoring.

 

As already explained a multitude of times, anchoring from the Rules point of view means using a fixed point hindering swinging a club freely. Apparently  for some people that concept is not easy to understand.

[b.helts]

Putting croquet style is not anchoring. So, for those of you that are pro-armlock, why was croquet style putting prohibited? Or, to avoid the inevitable response, why is straddling your line while making a stroke prohibited?

[Dpavs]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

This is a good example of a clarifying text often added in a Rule. It does not reinforce nor weaken the Rule itself but merely makes it easier to understand for the reader.

 

Thus the 'except' part does not mean that those exceptions were also anchored and yet allowed, but the text gives the reader the idea what kind of gripping is allowed AND is not anchoring.

 

As already explained a multitude of times, anchoring from the Rules point of view means using a fixed point hindering swinging a club freely. Apparently  for some people that concept is not easy to understand.

 

"This is a good example of a clarifying text often added in a Rule. It does not reinforce nor weaken the Rule itself but merely makes it easier to understand for the reader."

 

Adding an exception most certainly doesn't weaken a rule, it simply provides instances where the rule is not applicable.

 

"Thus the 'except' part does not mean that those exceptions were also anchored and yet allowed, but the text gives the reader the idea what kind of gripping is allowed AND is not anchoring."

 

I obviously disagree here. I think it most definitely was included to make sure that it was clear that even though fixing or anchoring the putter grip against the forearm is a type of anchoring in general, it is an exception to the rule and specifically allowed.

 

"As already explained a multitude of times, anchoring from the Rules point of view means using a fixed point hindering swinging a club freely. Apparently  for some people that concept is not easy to understand."

 

What I believe you are referring to is the extrapolation of the USGA's statement as recited below.

"'Rule 14-1b protects one of the important challenges in the game – the free swing of the entire club. The traditional stroke involves swinging the club with both the club and gripping hands held away from the body, requiring the player to direct and control the movement of the entire club. Anchoring is different:  Intentionally securing one end of the club against the body, and creating a point of physical attachment around which the club is swung, is a substantial departure from that traditional free swing."

(USGA Statement pertaining to the adoption of Rule 14-1b)

 

The statement itself does not add definition to what anchoring is or isn't, it simply clarifies what prohibited anchoring is.  For example simply having both forearms pressed against the hips is a form of indirect anchoring but because both hands swing freely it is not a prohibited form of indirect anchoring. The USGA clarified this in the "Information for Players, Club Officials and Tournament Administrators on the IMPLEMENTATIONOF RULE 14-1b" guide by citing the specific example below. Thus clarifying that it is the creation of an "anchor point" where the hands are separated and working independently of on another which is prohibited and not indirect anchoring per se.

 

"For example, the following image shows a player holding
his forearms against his side in a permissible manner
under Rule 14-1b; because his hands are not separated
and working independently of one another, he has not
created an “anchor point” (see previous question)."

 

 

I actually can envision other forms of prohibited or allowed ways of gripping and swinging the club that have not yet been used or addressed yet, so to me these distinctions are important.

 

All that said, I think we agree in spirit but may differ as to semantics 🙂

 

 

 

 

[Shilgy]

6 hours ago, b.helts said:

 

To be clear, I haven't made a decision on this. I'm just enjoying the conversation and feel that getting bogged down in definitions is counterproductive.

 

I would not consider gripping the club as "anchoring" and I don't consider armlock as "anchoring" either. To me, your question is a non-starter.

So pretty much you’re just participating to yank chains. Good to know for future threads.

 

6 hours ago, b.helts said:

Why?

If there was a putting style that was truly point and shoot you don’t think all pros would use it? Just get alignment correct and the stroke can’t be open or shut?

 

But upon further review you’re not really asking question your just a pita.

[b.helts]

10 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

So pretty much you’re just participating to yank chains. Good to know for future threads.

 

If there was a putting style that was truly point and shoot you don’t think all pros would use it? Just get alignment correct and the stroke can’t be open or shut?

 

But upon further review you’re not really asking question your just a pita.

 

 

I just like to get to the heart of someone's stance. And if the heart is "I just believe what the ruling bodies believe" then I'm ok with that.

 

Whether I'm a pita or not is up to you and is neither here nor there.

 

I definitely think the ruling bodies will be looking at armlock a bit closer in the future, but honestly don't know where I'll fall when that time comes.

 

With regard to the question you asked me: Yes, if there was a point and shoot method all pros would eventually use it. But I don't believe that armlock is "point and shoot" nor is that what I said. In fact, not even close. So, while I may be a 'pita', you're being disingenuous, prevaricating, and flat out fabricating. 

[b.helts]

22 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

So pretty much you’re just participating to yank chains. Good to know for future threads.

 

No. I speak my mind clearly. I like people to know just where I stand on any issue. I expect the same from people I interact with. Sometimes they let me down, which is ok. I harbor no illusions about chatting on the Internet.

[Obee]

4 hours ago, b.helts said:

Putting croquet style is not anchoring. So, for those of you that are pro-armlock, why was croquet style putting prohibited? Or, to avoid the inevitable response, why is straddling your line while making a stroke prohibited?

 

"Croquet" is ONLY disallowed if straddling the line. It's straddling the line that is illegal, not the "face-on" style.

[Obee]

1 minute ago, Obee said:

 

"Croquet" is ONLY disallowed if straddling the line. It's straddling the line that is illegal, not the "face-on" style.

 

Brian Helton, don't you laugh at me!!!!

[b.helts]

Just now, Obee said:

 

"Croquet" is ONLY disallowed if straddling the line. It's straddling the line that is illegal, not the "face-on" style.

 

 

Does anyone play croquet and not swing the mallet between their legs?

[b.helts]

1 minute ago, Obee said:

 

Brian Helton, don't you laugh at me!!!!

 

LOL! It's like you only read half my post and then went ahead and posted despite me trying to protect myself against exactly the type of post you posted.

 

It's almost as if ..... as if ...... You're messing with me. Maybe it's because I'm a pita.

[Obee]

3 minutes ago, b.helts said:

 

 

Does anyone play croquet and not swing the mallet between their legs?

 

That's a good question. Pretty sure you don't have to, but not sure. I'm not a phocking dweeb, so I don't play croquet...

[Obee]

So, @b.helts, should armlock be legal or no?

 

Swear to god, if anyone ever says the claw should be banned, I'll have to be put down like a rabid coyote!!!

 

[Obee]

6 minutes ago, b.helts said:

 

LOL! It's like you only read half my post and then went ahead and posted despite me trying to protect myself against exactly the type of post you posted.

 

It's almost as if ..... as if ...... You're messing with me. Maybe it's because I'm a pita.

[Obee]

11 minutes ago, b.helts said:

 

 

Does anyone play croquet and not swing the mallet between their legs?

 

I believe you owe me an apology, sir ....

 

[BIG STU]

18 minutes ago, Obee said:

So, @b.helts, should armlock be legal or no?

 

Swear to god, if anyone ever says the claw should be banned, I'll have to be put down like a rabid coyote!!!

 

You and me both old buddy. If it was not for the claw grip I would have quit playing golf now

[b.helts]

9 minutes ago, Obee said:

 

I believe you owe me an apology, sir ....

 

I honestly had no idea. I appreciate your dedication to uncovering the truth and putting in me in my place. I’m sorry. 

[Obee]

Just now, b.helts said:

I honestly had no idea. I appreciate your dedication to uncovering the truth and putting in me in my place. I’m sorry. 

 

You are still young, oh mighty and cocksure, b.helts. You will learn as you grow old....

[Soloman1]

I think the USGA will determine the legality of it by trying it out.

If they make more 10 footers, it's gotta be illegal.

If they make the same or less, it's legal.

 

Everything is legal until it isn't.

I think it's ok and don't see a reason to ban it.

[phil75070]

The AC joint at the top of the shoulder functions as a pivot point. Although the butt end of the putter is not directly connected to a pivot point as was the long putter or belly putter, the fact that it is held against the forearm it extends up to the pivot point created by the AC joint. If the arm lock putter is held against the forearm is it freely swinging? 🙂

 

Like the debate over free relief from divot holes in the fairway, the Rules are the Rules until they are changed regardless of what anyone outside of the ruling bodies thinks. 

 

 

[Mr. Bean]

14 hours ago, b.helts said:

 

 

Does anyone play croquet and not swing the mallet between their legs?

 

I do.

[caniac6]

I've picked up arm lock putters at golf shops, and I can't set up and aim them. There are a bunch of things I'd try before using an arm lock. I'd get a long putter, and putt like Langer before using an arm lock.

[VariedFerrules]

I have to chime in on this one. Where has it ever been said that the golf club must only be put in the hands?  Why is that considered the "rule" that we all need to follow?  I have been, what many would consider arm lock, for about a couple of years now, and have never enjoyed the game more.  I have never practiced more and enjoyed my time more on the golf course more than when using an arm lock putter.  Why do we want to regulate that out of the game?

Plus, this all gets really fuzzy, should we not allow the putter to be anchored against the body, or not allow certain types of strokes, or not allow other parts of the body to come in contact with another during a stroke?  For example, I hold the putter against my forearm with my right hand, never does the grip or any part of the club come into contact with any part of my arm or body, I am still holding it in my hands.  Here is the best example of the grip that I can come up with: 

[Mr. Bean]

2 hours ago, VariedFerrules said:

I have to chime in on this one. Where has it ever been said that the golf club must only be put in the hands?  Why is that considered the "rule" that we all need to follow? 

 

 

Well, if you play golf, you play it by the Rules of Golf.

 

Anything else you wish to know?