Belly/broomstick/long putter legal, anchoring not...

[Socrates]

I choose to anchor the putter (and anchor is a poor word as it is only lightly resting on my chest) because it allows me to make a better stroke. If it were against the Rules I would have to chose whether to continue to do so or find another method to putt better. As it is not against the Rules, I will continue on.

Unless they make a new ruling or definition they currently cannot ban the "anchoring" of a club against the body since there is nothing in the Rules about what is "natural" or "traditional". The Rules only deal with the definition of a Stroke and Unusual equipment and Unusual Use. Currently a long putter is neither unusual equipment nor being used unusually. Rule 14-3 makes it within their right to make that change, but I think - as do others - that they will have a hard time agreeing as to what that would be. They need to get past personal viewpoints and look at it objectively to see what is best for all golfers. Right now, the few people that have done some testing, have stated that there is no measurable advantage to using a long putter. If that holds true, then the Ruling Bodies, if they decided to make a change, would need to rule based on their personal opinions rather than fact. It seems that they already have made up their mind to - they just need to find a way to justify it.

[Socrates]

Look at pictures of Bobby Jones putting with Calamity Jane. Sure looks like he has it anchored on his left hip socket.

You don't even have to go that far back. Look at many of the strokes from the 40's, 50's and 60's. They have their hands resting on their crotch or thighs and all they did was move their wrists. Quite obvious to me that these are anchored strokes, but it was what everyone did at the time and was as natural as apple pie. Damn cheaters

[cardoustie]

RookieBlue 7 ... You are a little over the top .. we get it .. you want a ban. I do like the conviction though, but all good debaters can see both sides of an argument

I use a 43" putter but use the long method. I am a better putter from inside 30 feet with a long putter, I admit it freely. To clarify, I do not have a pure pendulum stroke, there is an arc there .. but I do like the way it helps me release. And to be clear you can still push and pull putts.

FWIW, I am simply awful with a belly putter, 2 x worse than a std length. And I have read others say this as well. Can you accept that using a belly putter could be a disadvantage? My good friend uses a belly and still yips it BADLY, so from my personal experiences ... long/belly methods automatically improves your putting is a fallacy. In fact, I can't even make a stroke with a 48" or 50" long putter .. explain that to me.

Anyways, like Kev says, it won't happen. Too many variables. Impossible to define anchoring. My left hand is against my chest .. not the end of the putter. Is that anchoring?

How about Langher's fixing his right hand to his left forearm with a short putter? How about Johnny Miller long putter anchoring up to his left armpit 30 yrs ago, that Kuchar now emulates (good way to putt BTW). Langher won a major anchoring can be easily argued. There is a long history of putting styles that were never questioned. How can you suddenly now focus on a method simply because it has risen in popularity of late?

A few other random thoughts:

- why the hoopla over "anchoring?" How about inserts like AGSI and YES that scientifically aid in overspin and less skidding? Weights for toes of putters to help with pulls etc etc
- the guy above that said he used a long putter to stabilize himself in wind .. by doing what? Leaning on the putter? I have never heard this before and how do you putt then? If anything, long putters are worse in the wind as you stand taller
- long putters are a definite disadvantage from off the green

My personal opinion is guys loaded up with 2-6 iron hybrids instead of long irons have a greater advantage vs any alternative putting methods. But once again, it doesn't work for everyone

As others have stated, examples abound in the equipment sector
- 64* wedges aren't for everyone
- shank proof F2 wedges
- heavy putters of std length
- deep faced fwy woods aren't for everyone that's for sure

The ability to tweak your 14 sticks to best score with your own game's strengths and weaknesses is part of the HISTORY and FUN of the game.

Long putters are a godsend for bad backs, that is the truth right there.

[demo190]

I use a belly putter and I feel like I can make a better "natural" stroke with one than without. My regular putting stroke could be considered very "unnatural" at times. Due I feel like I gain a significant advantage, I'm just not sure about that. Like said earlier if it was so great why isn't everyone doing it. Well everyone can elect to use one if they like, it is a matter of personal choice. As far as using it as a crutch, I don't ground my putter anyway, so that arguement is subjecitve. I think this rule was addressed so they can say they have, well addressed it. Just my 2 cents.

[MrMulligan]

this is a 2 prong issue.

1) define not being a natural stroke. last time i checked, altering grips and hand position can be considered not a natural stroke as well.
2) define anchoring. Some people actually stick it in their belly buttom while some just lean it against their stomach, thanks not anchoring it as the top still has the ability to move. Will bellys just be the issue, or long putters. you could also argue that anchoring a putter could be done with the long as well.

and lastly, if it was such a marked difference, pros would be throwing their 33-35 inchers away as fast as shaft companies could make 44" shafts.

[KevCarter]

[quote name='CARDY' timestamp='1328634906' post='4230885']
RookieBlue 7 ... You are a little over the top .. we get it .. you want a ban. I do like the conviction though, but all good debaters can see both sides of an argument

I use a 43" putter but use the long method. I am a better putter from inside 30 feet with a long putter, I admit it freely. To clarify, I do not have a pure pendulum stroke, there is an arc there .. but I do like the way it helps me release. And to be clear you can still push and pull putts.

FWIW, I am simply awful with a belly putter, 2 x worse than a std length. And I have read others say this as well. Can you accept that using a belly putter could be a disadvantage? My good friend uses a belly and still yips it BADLY, so from my personal experiences ... long/belly methods automatically improves your putting is a fallacy. In fact, I can't even make a stroke with a 48" or 50" long putter .. explain that to me.

Anyways, like Kev says, it won't happen. Too many variables. Impossible to define anchoring. My left hand is against my chest .. not the end of the putter. Is that anchoring?

How about Langher's fixing his right hand to his left forearm with a short putter? How about Johnny Miller long putter anchoring up to his left armpit 30 yrs ago, that Kuchar now emulates (good way to putt BTW). Langher won a major anchoring can be easily argued. There is a long history of putting styles that were never questioned. How can you suddenly now focus on a method simply because it has risen in popularity of late?

A few other random thoughts:

- why the hoopla over "anchoring?" How about inserts like AGSI and YES that scientifically aid in overspin and less skidding? Weights for toes of putters to help with pulls etc etc
- the guy above that said he used a long putter to stabilize himself in wind .. by doing what? Leaning on the putter? I have never heard this before and how do you putt then? If anything, long putters are worse in the wind as you stand taller
- long putters are a definite disadvantage from off the green

My personal opinion is guys loaded up with 2-6 iron hybrids instead of long irons have a greater advantage vs any alternative putting methods. But once again, it doesn't work for everyone

As others have stated, examples abound in the equipment sector
- 64* wedges aren't for everyone
- shank proof F2 wedges
- heavy putters of std length
- deep faced fwy woods aren't for everyone that's for sure

The ability to tweak your 14 sticks to best score with your own game's strengths and weaknesses is part of the HISTORY and FUN of the game.

Long putters are a godsend for bad backs, that is the truth right there.
[/quote]

Many solid points Sir. I thought of Langers style of anchoring to the left arm as well. Whether or not that would be considered anchoring to the body would be an interesting discussion. I would love to be a fly on the wall for these meetings.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the ruling bodies decide to allow long putters along with anchoring, and the tours don't. Bifurcation of the rules. Could happen, and although not a big deal, I wouldn't care for that local rule being instituted, just because... :-)

Kevin

[golfnut-2X]

[quote name='powerfade_maller' timestamp='1328633278' post='4230703']
[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1328591210' post='4228645']
[color="#222222"][size="1"]"It is something we have taken a fresh look at. More players are using it, both on the elite level and the recreational level. We want to be sure that we are looking at all the angles and thinking about what is in the [/size][b][size="1"]best interests both of the traditions of the game, the history of the game, and what [/size][size="2"]we[/size][size="1"] think would be good for the game."[/size][/b][/color]
[color="#222222"][size="1"]"The R&A do not like the fact that golfers can steady themselves by using a putter as a crutch in windy, rainy or cold weather," the source said. "In essence, they are steadying themselves with the putter. This was never intended under the Rules of Golf. They are using the putter for [b]something other than a traditional stroke[/b]."[/size][/color]
[color="#222222"][size="1"][b]Peter Dawson, R&A chief executive, has expressed his personal dislike of anchoring[/b]. [/size][/color]
[color="#222222"][color="#474747"]
[b][size="2"]14-1. Ball to be Fairly Struck At[/size][/b]
[color="#7f7f7f"][size="1"]The ball must be fairly struck at with the head of the club and must not be pushed, scraped or spooned.[/size][/color]
[/color][/color][color="#474747"]
[b][size="2"]14-3. Artificial Devices, Unusual Equipment and Unusual Use of Equipment[/size][/b]
[color="#7f7f7f"][size="1"]The USGA reserves the right, at any time, to change the [/size][i][url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Definitions/#Rule-Or-Rules"]Rules[/url][/i][size="1"] relating to artificial devices, unusual [/size][i][url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Definitions/#Equipment"]equipment[/url][/i][size="1"] and the [/size][b][size="2"]unusual use of[/size][/b] [i][url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Definitions/#Equipment"]equipment[/url][/i][size="1"], and to make or change the interpretations relating to these [/size][i][url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Definitions/#Rule-Or-Rules"]Rule[/url][size="2"]s.[/size][/i][/color]
________________________
[/color]
[size="2"][color="#222222"]There are a couple of things that stick out from the article in Golfweek. One is that the Ruling bodies seem to be putting their personal opinions out there and implying that since they think they are right, there needs to be a change in the current Rules. The other is that they seem to believe that the traditional stroke is one where the club has never been anchored to the body. One would wonder if there are examples in the past (going way back) where players putted in a manner other than what they consider traditional?[/color][/size][color="#474747"][color="#7f7f7f"][i] [/i][/color]

[/color]
[size="2"][color="#222222"]After how many years of use does it become traditional? We are talking of almost 40 years of use in the modern era and who knows of how many years it has been used prior to this. Is 40 long enough or are they going to drag us back to the days of Old Tom Morris to try and win their argument?[/color][/size]

[size="2"][color="#222222"]Rule 14-3 leaves room for them to change the interpretation of 'unusual' which would seem to be the only thing that they can use in their favor in changing the use of a club since it meets the definition of a stroke and doesn't violate 14-1. They obviously can do what they like (they don't have to ask anyones opinion to invoke a Rule change), but I hope that they can get past their own personal opinions to make a proper decision (not much hope in that though).[/color][/size]
[/quote]

Look at pictures of Bobby Jones putting with Calamity Jane. Sure looks like he has it anchored on his left hip socket.
[/quote]


now that would be interesting finding a picture of bobby jones anchoring his putter

i think we would need to remove his name from trophies and shut down the masters.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328628950' post='4230249']
[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1328628565' post='4230213']
[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328585553' post='4227909']
[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1328585138' post='4227867']
great debate. curious to hear from the definitive side of "banning" this...


Are you using any of the radical equipment changes since the founding of golf below? If so do you find it hypocritical to say this change is not golf but all the changes below are good for golf? What are the rational differences for this putter / putting style that clearly articilate this change is BAD but all these other radical game changes are GOOD?

funny hearing people claim that its not the way golf was meant to be played BUT you have the same exact people that switched from golf's original equipment from hickory, to persimmon (sp?), steel shaft, graphite shafts, metal woods, sand wedges with bounce, gutta purcha (sp? big change from feathery), prov1 (major distance change), 5 layered balls, 4 wedges, 460cc driver heads, hot / high cor faces, super game improvement perimeter weighted from the old butter knifes blades, hybrids, green speeds above 4 stimp, non links courses, stymies, putter heads (mallets, face balanced, high MOI, variable face materials), AND THE LIST GOES ON.


if you are still using the feathery and handmade wood clubs and still symie your oppoents in your matches then I would say you have an argument and you are a purist. if you are using the radical game changes above then its hard not to sound hypocritical.
[/quote]

Fundamentally flawed argument. Why? You don't understand what the ban is for. It's not to ban the clubs. They don't care about the clubs, only the manner in which they're used. They care about the fact that the club is anchored to one's body to improve the pendulum motion and remove the skill of syncing one's hands, arms and shoulders. They don't care if you use the putters, only that you don't anchor them. That's the point. Not one single technological advancement you listed improved or alters the manner in which equipment is used, not the manner in which the club is attached to the body, nor the manner in which the swing takes place. The long putters change the manner in which the stroke is made by removing a skill variable. That's what the rule aimed at [b]anchoring[/b] and anchoring alone are aimed at. They don't care about the clubs, and you'll still be able to use them, you just won't be able to cram them in your sternum or your gut and use them. That's all they're removing, the ability to anchor and alter the stroke.
[/quote]


so it sounds like the core of the argument is that it seems to remove some skill from putting? on lag putts it actually is harder skill to get the distance compared to a short stick where you get to use your wrists. short putts opposite.


some other examples of technology that removed the skill of specific shots but were not banned...

sand wedges - weren't around when the game got started and certainly not part of the original thoughts on equipment. clearly changes how we swing from sand and makes the skill a whole lot easier using bounce versus no bounce. this technology changed how we swing the club in sand and removes some skill.


hybrids - weren't around when the game started. clearly removes the skill of hitting the 1, 2, and 3 irons. started similar way, some people started using because it didn't require as much skill or precisino and now most of the tour is using hybrids.


perimeter weight / game improvement irons - wow do these remove the skill from hitting pure shots with precise swings especially for longer irons. alot of the tour guys are no longer using pure blades in their long irons since these require less skill.

mallets / high moi putters - same story. i have used blade like putter for a while but when you switch to a heavier mallet or putter with very high moi head its almost like cheating compared to using putters from 50 years ago especially on long lags if you don't get the sweet spot exact.

460cc driver heads with super hot faces / adjustable weights / super high MOI / with multi layered juiced up balls - clearly changed how we swing and how we play (target / shaping less important than grip it wrip it and hit it country mile). removed a lot of skill from hitting a very tiny driver head precisely otherwise no distance and no high MOI to cover up the damage.


all examples on how technology removed the skill from golf and changed how we play the game but are allowed. it just seems hypocritical.
[/quote]

How did any of your examples change the way the stroke is performed? They didn't, the clubs connection to the body still remains via the hands, coupled with movement of the arms and shoulders and a balancing act. Long putters remove that skill from the equation.

Do you swing a 460 driver differently than you do a 220cc one? The same can be said about every other technological advancement listed. None changed the fundamental manner in which the club is swung.
[/quote]

You keep asking this same question as if it's something ground breaking that nobody has thought of. First, until there is something in the rules consistent with YOUR interpretation, I don't understand how you can expect anyone to agree with you. Second, at least to my way of thinking, anchoring the club is not fundamentally different than any of the examples that have been cited to you. You don't agree (and that's fine), but you still have to grip the club, swing it and hit the ball. There is no change to the way the stoke is performed. From a down the line view, it's sometimes impossible to tell whether somebody is using a belly or not.

[golfnut-2X]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328628950' post='4230249']
[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1328628565' post='4230213']
[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328585553' post='4227909']
[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1328585138' post='4227867']
great debate. curious to hear from the definitive side of "banning" this...


Are you using any of the radical equipment changes since the founding of golf below? If so do you find it hypocritical to say this change is not golf but all the changes below are good for golf? What are the rational differences for this putter / putting style that clearly articilate this change is BAD but all these other radical game changes are GOOD?

funny hearing people claim that its not the way golf was meant to be played BUT you have the same exact people that switched from golf's original equipment from hickory, to persimmon (sp?), steel shaft, graphite shafts, metal woods, sand wedges with bounce, gutta purcha (sp? big change from feathery), prov1 (major distance change), 5 layered balls, 4 wedges, 460cc driver heads, hot / high cor faces, super game improvement perimeter weighted from the old butter knifes blades, hybrids, green speeds above 4 stimp, non links courses, stymies, putter heads (mallets, face balanced, high MOI, variable face materials), AND THE LIST GOES ON.


if you are still using the feathery and handmade wood clubs and still symie your oppoents in your matches then I would say you have an argument and you are a purist. if you are using the radical game changes above then its hard not to sound hypocritical.
[/quote]

Fundamentally flawed argument. Why? You don't understand what the ban is for. It's not to ban the clubs. They don't care about the clubs, only the manner in which they're used. They care about the fact that the club is anchored to one's body to improve the pendulum motion and remove the skill of syncing one's hands, arms and shoulders. They don't care if you use the putters, only that you don't anchor them. That's the point. Not one single technological advancement you listed improved or alters the manner in which equipment is used, not the manner in which the club is attached to the body, nor the manner in which the swing takes place. The long putters change the manner in which the stroke is made by removing a skill variable. That's what the rule aimed at [b]anchoring[/b] and anchoring alone are aimed at. They don't care about the clubs, and you'll still be able to use them, you just won't be able to cram them in your sternum or your gut and use them. That's all they're removing, the ability to anchor and alter the stroke.
[/quote]


so it sounds like the core of the argument is that it seems to remove some skill from putting? on lag putts it actually is harder skill to get the distance compared to a short stick where you get to use your wrists. short putts opposite.


some other examples of technology that removed the skill of specific shots but were not banned...

sand wedges - weren't around when the game got started and certainly not part of the original thoughts on equipment. clearly changes how we swing from sand and makes the skill a whole lot easier using bounce versus no bounce. this technology changed how we swing the club in sand and removes some skill.


hybrids - weren't around when the game started. clearly removes the skill of hitting the 1, 2, and 3 irons. started similar way, some people started using because it didn't require as much skill or precisino and now most of the tour is using hybrids.


perimeter weight / game improvement irons - wow do these remove the skill from hitting pure shots with precise swings especially for longer irons. alot of the tour guys are no longer using pure blades in their long irons since these require less skill.

mallets / high moi putters - same story. i have used blade like putter for a while but when you switch to a heavier mallet or putter with very high moi head its almost like cheating compared to using putters from 50 years ago especially on long lags if you don't get the sweet spot exact.

460cc driver heads with super hot faces / adjustable weights / super high MOI / with multi layered juiced up balls - clearly changed how we swing and how we play (target / shaping less important than grip it wrip it and hit it country mile). removed a lot of skill from hitting a very tiny driver head precisely otherwise no distance and no high MOI to cover up the damage.


all examples on how technology removed the skill from golf and changed how we play the game but are allowed. it just seems hypocritical.
[/quote]

How did any of your examples change the way the stroke is performed? They didn't, the clubs connection to the body still remains via the hands, coupled with movement of the arms and shoulders and a balancing act. Long putters remove that skill from the equation.

Do you swing a 460 driver differently than you do a 220cc one? The same can be said about every other technological advancement listed. None changed the fundamental manner in which the club is swung.
[/quote]




there are some of us that do swing the 460cc deep faced drivers differently than the old days if we had a tiny spoon at the end of the stick with the sweet spot the size of a dime. if i had the tiny spoon i would tee it low and do everything possible to make contact. with the 460cc 4 inch deep faced drivers we can tee the ball up 4 inches high, put it off our front toe, tilt back, swing as hard as we can with an angle of attack of 7 degrees and with the deep faces we won't miss the ball and precise contact doesn't matter as much but now with the 7 degrees of AoA with the same speed we can get an extra 30 yards. if the ball turns over to much because we are going at it with everything then just adjust the weights and the adjusteable lie angle.

to me that is fundamentally changing how we swing the club.



keep in mind i use a short putter and believe the short putter with slight wrists is a clear advantage on long lag putts and off the green. i just can't see the difference of why some of these changes throughout history are acceptable and this is not. as someone said above it seems like the ruling body are letting their own personal opinions weigh into this.

after letting drivers get as big as 460cc and allowing multi layer balls that go a country mile while spinning on the wedges along with the recent grooves and now changing a putting method that has been done for decades because they don't like it i am starting to lose confidence of the people that are in the positions of the ruling bodies.

[Chef Otto]

I think they should ban Jim Furyk because he does not have a natural stroke.

[golfnut-2X]

Chef Otto - like the picture of the little guy:) Very cool.

Furyk, Like the guy, his game, and spirit but wow you are right that looks so unnatural - banned.

Come to think of Zac Johnson putts with his hands behind the club head with a reverse backward press - that is a completely unnatural stroke and should be added to the list. Forget about decades of use, nobody has ever deliberately putted like that before - banned.

Look at the link below with a classic picture of palmer putting. This is the King we are talking about. Wait, he is anchoring his knees and thighs together which looks completely unnatural and must give an unfair advantage by keeping him steady in the wind / rain and most importantly I can't do it that well. Hard to tell from this picture but the putter grip looks awfully close to his sweater and his triceps / elbows might be touching his body to steady his pop stroke - I think we need to pull out the rule book and check the definition of anchoring for a ruling. Maybe that's why he is crunched over to hide the anchor from public. Sneaky. Banned for anchoring knees / thies and toeing in, potential slight anchor with triceps / elbows and grip, and most of all looks very unnatural to me and I can't do it as well as him - banned.
[url="http://atruegolfer.com/2010/02/the-evolution-of-the-putting-stance/"][size="3"][color="#0000ff"]http://atruegolfer.com/2010/02/the-evolution-of-the-putting-stance/[/color][/size][/url]

[size="3"][/size]

[RookieBlue7]

Since the long putter is a natural stroke, how can you swing it with only your shoulders with no arms or hands at all. The bottom hand is a guide only. Case in point: http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=wAdR4FIFwlo

[KDMullins]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328645708' post='4232341']
Since the long putter is a natural stroke, how can you swing it with only your shoulders with no arms or hands at all. The bottom hand is a guide only. Case in point: http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=wAdR4FIFwlo
[/quote]

Now, if you could really swing it without your hands, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

[RookieBlue7]

[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1328646483' post='4232441']
[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328645708' post='4232341']
Since the long putter is a natural stroke, how can you swing it with only your shoulders with no arms or hands at all. The bottom hand is a guide only. Case in point: http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=wAdR4FIFwlo
[/quote]

Now, if you could really swing it without your hands, I'd be inclined to agree with you.
[/quote]

He does just fine in the video doing it.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328646910' post='4232489']
[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1328646483' post='4232441']
[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328645708' post='4232341']
Since the long putter is a natural stroke, how can you swing it with only your shoulders with no arms or hands at all. The bottom hand is a guide only. Case in point: http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=wAdR4FIFwlo
[/quote]

Now, if you could really swing it without your hands, I'd be inclined to agree with you.
[/quote]

He does just fine in the video doing it.
[/quote]

It's not pulling up for me. What's he hold on to the club with?

[RookieBlue7]

He anchors the long putter in his chest with his left hand and holds it at the anchor point with only that hand and swings it back and through with no hands.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328648047' post='4232631']
He anchors the long putter in his chest with his left hand and holds it at the anchor point with only that hand and swings it back and through with no hands.
[/quote]

Could you not do that with a standard length putter? Sounds like generally the same concept as the claw grip.

[RookieBlue7]

And do nothing but move your shoulders up and down? I don't think so.

[KDMullins]

Put another way, holding the butt of the putter at a fixed point - whether it be in your left hand and against your chest or just in your left hand ala Chris Dimarco - and pulling the head back and through just doesn't seem that fundamentally different to me.

EDIT: The butt of the club does move when Dimarco putts, but that's just because that's the way he does it. The reason he grips it the way he does is the same principle you describe. As a technical matter, I don't think you'd have to move the butt of the club using the claw grip.

[KYMAR]

[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1328648525' post='4232691']
Put another way, holding the butt of the putter at a fixed point - whether it be in your left hand and against your chest or just in your left hand ala Chris Dimarco - and pulling the head back and through just doesn't seem that fundamentally different to me.

EDIT: The butt of the club does move when Dimarco putts, but that's just because that's the way he does it. The reason he grips it the way he does is the same principle you describe. As a technical matter, I don't think you'd have to move the butt of the club using the claw grip.
[/quote]

Come on KD that is the best visual description of what i am saying yet!. Dimarco STILL has to use his mental and physical abilities to execute a stroke and make the butt end of the club stay somewhat stationary. jamming the thing into your body and creating a fulcrum point explicitly, completely, and by design eliminates the need for any of those efforts. You don't even have to think about "loose" motion in the stroke.

And for those of you who have chimed in with "well all pros would play one" some don't because they feel the way I do. it's wrong on it's face. And for those that have said "well pros aren't calling for it to be banned" Tiger just did, if that means anything,

[KDMullins]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1328649847' post='4232801']
[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1328648525' post='4232691']
Put another way, holding the butt of the putter at a fixed point - whether it be in your left hand and against your chest or just in your left hand ala Chris Dimarco - and pulling the head back and through just doesn't seem that fundamentally different to me.

EDIT: The butt of the club does move when Dimarco putts, but that's just because that's the way he does it. The reason he grips it the way he does is the same principle you describe. As a technical matter, I don't think you'd have to move the butt of the club using the claw grip.
[/quote]

Come on KD that is the best visual description of what i am saying yet!. Dimarco STILL has to use his mental and physical abilities to execute a stroke and make the butt end of the club stay somewhat stationary. jamming the thing into your body and creating a fulcrum point explicitly, completely, and by design eliminates the need for any of those efforts. You don't even have to think about "loose" motion in the stroke.

And for those of you who have chimed in with "well all pros would play one" some don't because they feel the way I do. it's wrong on it's face. And for those that have said "well pros aren't calling for it to be banned" Tiger just did, if that means anything,
[/quote]

I hear you say that just like I've heard all the pro-banners say that, but I've never seen any empirical evidence to support your conclusion (that putting is easier), and further, my practical experience tell me it's just not accurate. I've tried broomsticks and bellies, and I've never walked away thinking, "Man, that's really alot easier." Different? Yes. Easier? No.

If it were as simple as you describe, heck, nobody using a belly or long putter would ever miss inside 10 feet, and we know that's just not the case.

Other than your opinion, what do you rely on to support the notion that long putters somehow give people an advantage?

[KYMAR]

Physics

[KDMullins]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1328650665' post='4232895']
Physics
[/quote]

Yeah, well, we don't play golf in a vacuum.

[KYMAR]

I also find the argument that "well if its such an advantage why don't people make everything the look at" is completely full of flawed logic. Simply because the artificial stability offered by the long putter exists does not in any way make success from 10 feet [i]necessarily [/i]more likely. Who turns to the belly putter for the most part? bad putters. There are any number of reasons for poor putting, poor green reading, poor distnce control, and a poor stroke. the belly putter clearly uses an artificial means to correct for[i] the errors [/i]in a poor putting stroke. Making it mechanically and more repeatable without the requisite for skill!. It certainly can't compensate for poor speed/distance control. No putter can read a green. I just disagree entirely that simply because player A doesn't get any better at putting must therefore mean that the belly putter, or rather the anchored putter, offers no artificial assistance. If a guy putts bad because he simply can't read a green to save his life, and his hands are all over the place during the backstroke, a belly putter will fix one issue entirely, and do nothing for the other issue. meaning, as a percentage, putts made won't necessarily go up from any given distance. That in no way means that eliminating the need to physically perform an accurate pass at the ball is just the same as holding the club with a claw grip, where the stroke, and all of it's pitfalls, are still present.

[golfnut-2X]

i don't think the tour players in today's world give 2 cents to ego and would forgo a paycheck just because they don't like a belly putter. they are not like the people at the club we all know who bash belly putters and play certain clubs in hope that other people think they play better than what they really do. pros play for money and feed their kids based on how they play. period. what ever legal equipment that helps them to get higher up on the board for a bigger paycheck they will play. you can be sure that a lot of them have tested it and have compared it without saying anything publicly. if they put better they switch. if they don't they don't switch. some don't and don't switch and call for a ban in an attempt to get a competitiv advantage.

i don't imaging a lot of older pros switching since they played all their life with a certain style and right or wrong once you go so long anything different feels wrong. i think you will see more and more younger players playing it.

not surprised to hear that tiger called for a ban. he wouldn't switch and he is getting his but kicked the last few years by the young guys a trend that will continue. one way to stop that is call for a ban. based on his history of lies i can't believe anything he would say now. i wouldn't be surprised now that he used performance enhancing drugs to bulk up quicklly then after he did go public with requesting drug testing be instituted. i digress.

[nbg352]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1328651689' post='4233035']
I also find the argument that "well if its such an advantage why don't people make everything the look at" is completely full of flawed logic. Simply because the artificial stability offered by the long putter exists does not in any way make success from 10 feet [i]necessarily [/i]more likely. Who turns to the belly putter for the most part? bad putters. There are any number of reasons for poor putting, poor green reading, poor distnce control, and a poor stroke. the belly putter clearly uses an artificial means to correct for[i] the errors [/i]in a poor putting stroke. Making it mechanically and more repeatable without the requisite for skill!. It certainly can't compensate for poor speed/distance control. No putter can read a green. I just disagree entirely that simply because player A doesn't get any better at putting must therefore mean that the belly putter, or rather the anchored putter, offers no artificial assistance. If a guy putts bad because he simply can't read a green to save his life, and his hands are all over the place during the backstroke, a belly putter will fix one issue entirely, and do nothing for the other issue. meaning, as a percentage, putts made won't necessarily go up from any given distance. That in no way means that eliminating the need to physically perform an accurate pass at the ball is just the same as holding the club with a claw grip, where the stroke, and all of it's pitfalls, are still present.
[/quote]

And SGI's make hitting the golf ball easier for someone with poor swing mechanics, too. How's that any different? The SGI golf club is significantly improving a golfers chances of success. So, perhaps, does the belly putter, somewhat. They should both be banned, based on your thinking, IMO.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1328651979' post='4233059']
i don't think the tour players in today's world give 2 cents to ego and would forgo a paycheck just because they don't like a belly putter. they are not like the people at the club we all know who bash belly putters and play certain clubs in hope that other people think they play better than what they really do. pros play for money and feed their kids based on how they play. period. what ever legal equipment that helps them to get higher up on the board for a bigger paycheck they will play. you can be sure that a lot of them have tested it and have compared it without saying anything publicly. if they put better they switch. [b]if they don't they don't switch. some don't and don't switch and call for a ban in an attempt to get a competitiv advantage.[/b]

i don't imaging a lot of older pros switching since they played all their life with a certain style and right or wrong once you go so long anything different feels wrong. i think you will see more and more younger players playing it.

not surprised to hear that tiger called for a ban. he wouldn't switch and he is getting his but kicked the last few years by the young guys a trend that will continue. one way to stop that is call for a ban. based on his history of lies i can't believe anything he would say now. i wouldn't be surprised now that he used performance enhancing drugs to bulk up quicklly then after he did go public with requesting drug testing be instituted. i digress.
[/quote]

You know, I've struggled to find the words to describe what it is about the long putter debate that I find so distasteful, and you hit it right on the head with the bolded part above. That's exactly how I feel about it. We've got some guys that are upset because they don't get the benefit of the long putter that others seem to find (which doesn't really make sense if it's objectively so much easier). Because of that, they don't want anybody using it. Reminds me of the little boy on the playground who takes his ball and goes home because he's getting beat.

[nbg352]

[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1328652668' post='4233165']
[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1328651979' post='4233059']
i don't think the tour players in today's world give 2 cents to ego and would forgo a paycheck just because they don't like a belly putter. they are not like the people at the club we all know who bash belly putters and play certain clubs in hope that other people think they play better than what they really do. pros play for money and feed their kids based on how they play. period. what ever legal equipment that helps them to get higher up on the board for a bigger paycheck they will play. you can be sure that a lot of them have tested it and have compared it without saying anything publicly. if they put better they switch. [b]if they don't they don't switch. some don't and don't switch and call for a ban in an attempt to get a competitiv advantage.[/b]

i don't imaging a lot of older pros switching since they played all their life with a certain style and right or wrong once you go so long anything different feels wrong. i think you will see more and more younger players playing it.

not surprised to hear that tiger called for a ban. he wouldn't switch and he is getting his but kicked the last few years by the young guys a trend that will continue. one way to stop that is call for a ban. based on his history of lies i can't believe anything he would say now. i wouldn't be surprised now that he used performance enhancing drugs to bulk up quicklly then after he did go public with requesting drug testing be instituted. i digress.
[/quote]

You know, I've struggled to find the words to describe what it is about the long putter debate that I find so distasteful, and you hit it right on the head with the bolded part above. That's exactly how I feel about it. We've got some guys that are upset because they don't get the benefit of the long putter that others seem to find (which doesn't really make sense if it's objectively so much easier). Because of that, they don't want anybody using it. Reminds me of the little boy on the playground who takes his ball and goes home because he's getting beat.
[/quote]

Bingo! You hit the nail on the head! That's it!
I'm not foolin', I think you are absolutely right.

[RookieBlue7]

I've yet to be beaten by the guy in my normal foursome that uses one. That said in winning far less money off of him because he's making more putts.

[patty_13]

[quote name='nbg352' timestamp='1328652320' post='4233103']
[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1328651689' post='4233035']
I also find the argument that "well if its such an advantage why don't people make everything the look at" is completely full of flawed logic. Simply because the artificial stability offered by the long putter exists does not in any way make success from 10 feet [i]necessarily [/i]more likely. Who turns to the belly putter for the most part? bad putters. There are any number of reasons for poor putting, poor green reading, poor distnce control, and a poor stroke. the belly putter clearly uses an artificial means to correct for[i] the errors [/i]in a poor putting stroke. Making it mechanically and more repeatable without the requisite for skill!. It certainly can't compensate for poor speed/distance control. No putter can read a green. I just disagree entirely that simply because player A doesn't get any better at putting must therefore mean that the belly putter, or rather the anchored putter, offers no artificial assistance. If a guy putts bad because he simply can't read a green to save his life, and his hands are all over the place during the backstroke, a belly putter will fix one issue entirely, and do nothing for the other issue. meaning, as a percentage, putts made won't necessarily go up from any given distance. That in no way means that eliminating the need to physically perform an accurate pass at the ball is just the same as holding the club with a claw grip, where the stroke, and all of it's pitfalls, are still present.
[/quote]

And SGI's make hitting the golf ball easier for someone with poor swing mechanics, too. How's that any different? The SGI golf club is significantly improving a golfers chances of success. So, perhaps, does the belly putter, somewhat. They should both be banned, based on your thinking, IMO.
[/quote]

SGI's are equivalent to high MOI putters, they dont actually improve your swing or stroke, belly and long putters can do this.