Modified grips

[naval2006]

Last week I played a casual quick nine with a guy who had his grips modified in a way I'd never seen before.  He'd glued thick rubber caps on the butt of his grips.  The caps were way thicker than the grip ends.  He even told me that modification helped him secure his left hand through the swing.  I was a bit puzzled when I saw all this and I only asked him if he checked that these modified grips conform the rules. 

To further clarify, the caps looked a bit like those rubber ball retrievers you put at the end of the putter.  They were like 1 inch long and noticeably thicker at the bottom, like 0.2 inches and the top diameter was nearly 2 inches.  

 

I believe that modification implies a great advantage because it supports the side of the left hand and somehow locks it through the swing therefore making it against the rules.  But I need the rules officials to chime in.  Thanks. 

 

 

 

    

[Newby]

The following suggest it is OK

 

https://www.usga.org/equipment-standards/equipment-rules-2019/equipment-rules/equipment-rules.html#!ruletype=er&section=rule&partnum=2&rulenum=4

 

https://www.usga.org/equipment-standards/equipment-rules-2019/equipment-rules/equipment-rules.html#!ruletype=interp&section=rule&partnum=2&rulenum=4

[davep043]

1 hour ago, naval2006 said:

They were like 1 inch long and noticeably thicker at the bottom, like 0.2 inches and the top diameter was nearly 2 inches. 

 

45 minutes ago, Newby said:

The following suggest it is OK

I wonder if this significant enlargement of the top few inches would fit the definition of a "bulge", which isn't allowed.  It's certainly not a "waist" as shown in the illustration in the Rule.  

[rogolf]

Based on the description, I would consider the grip non-conforming due to a bulge or waist. It also sounds like it is an “attachment “. 

[davep043]

25 minutes ago, rogolf said:

Based on the description, I would consider the grip non-conforming due to a bulge or waist. It also sounds like it is an “attachment “. 

This was my thought as well.  Attachments to the butt end of the club may be permitted, as long as:

"the outer diameter of the item is less than or equal to the outer
diameter of the butt end of the grip and the item does not extend
beyond the butt end of the grip by more than 2 inches"

It sounds like the attachment is substantially larger than the end of the grip.  

source is pp 13-14 of https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Equipment/Equipment Rules 2020 v2.pdf

 

[Newby]

Although the 'rubber cap' is being used for a different purpose, it reminds me that the R&A gave permission for an attachment to the grip end for 'ball retrievers'. These were either in the form of claws or a sucker. This was on 'traditional grounds' (much like tees attached by a string).

 

But those were attachments, I'm not sure these are integral to the grip or are attached. But I can't picture them as a waist.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Newby

[rogolf]

10 minutes ago, davep043 said:

This was my thought as well.  Attachments to the butt end of the club may be permitted, as long as:

"the outer diameter of the item is less than or equal to the outer
diameter of the butt end of the grip and the item does not extend
beyond the butt end of the grip by more than 2 inches"

It sounds like the attachment is substantially larger than the end of the grip.  

source is pp 13-14 of https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Equipment/Equipment Rules 2020 v2.pdf

 

It really sounds like an attachment that is similar to the “knob” at the end of a baseball bat. 

[naval2006]

33 minutes ago, rogolf said:

It really sounds like an attachment that is similar to the “knob” at the end of a baseball bat. 

Sorry for my English. This is the best description to it. 

[Newby]

A couple of further thoughts.

1) The words in the book "If a certain feature on the grip enables the player to place his or her hands in exactly the same position every time, solely by feel, then it must be determined whether that feature renders the grip 'moulded for the hands'." seem to be relevant.

2) My wife used to use a ball retriever but she just pointed out the 'sucker' type was banned (she thought) and the gripper type satisfied the dimensions in Davep043's post above.

[Colin L]

The  purpose of this modification makes me uncomfortable.   

[rogolf]

3 hours ago, Colin L said:

The  purpose of this modification makes me uncomfortable.   

Newby seems to have become soft.  IMO, the answer to this is easy, it's non-conforming.

[sui generis]

2 hours ago, rogolf said:

Newby seems to have become soft.

 

It's the Theakstons. 😉

[Colin L]

M

3 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

It's the Theakstons. 😉

With Newby it's more likely to be Rioja.  😉

[Newby]

Hardly. Just returned from holiday and have been told to steer clear of the Rioja for a few days (but only a few). It had affected my INR.

I don't drink Theakston's, my pint is Wainwrights.

 

But I hasten to add I'm not an alcoholic. hic! 🍷