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

[ssp]

I think they should remove the names off every trophy that a player used a metal head driver, cavity backed iron, irons with square grooves, heal/toe weighted putter, used a golf glove, or even used a golf tee.



There ... I said it.


The game evolves ... I don't think there is enough proof that says the integrity of the game is compromised at this point.I don't think that the evolution I mention above has compromised the integrity of the game ... do you?

[KYMAR]

[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]
I don't know what else i can say in regards to this argument. If you swing a blade and then a GI iron from the same spot in a fairway and strike them equally poorly, the sgi will likely get you closer to your target. however, nothing about that club enabled you to ELIMINATE any part of the skill necessary to hit the shot. An anchored putter is 100% designed to accomplish just that.
There are basic mental and physical demands performed on every golf shot to achieve your desired result. Much of those requirements in putting are negated if not eliminated using an anchored putter. You can keep coming up with varying ways to frame this argument, but i will always answer the same way. SGI clubs help once the ball is played, an anchored putter is designed to eliminate much of the skill of putting, before the shot is made.

[golfnut-2X]

agree, they are beginning to get their but wipped and now they are taking ball and going home and don't want anyone else use it great analogy but very accurate.

[onafriday]

I use a 47 inch putter broomstick style.

With a short putter, I suck. I play to a 6 so it's relative, but i'm an incredibly poor putter for a 6.

The long putter has made the game so much more fun for me.

Normally, i'm complimented on my length off the tee.

Last weekend, as a walkon, my three partners complimented my putting. That's never happened (i've heard 'if you could only putt' a LOT).

Thing is, I find belly's more uncomfortable than shorties.

And, i know a lot of guys that would really suck with broomsticks.

Where I get lost in the argument is that if they're legal for everyone, what's the big deal?

It's not like there are any truly great long putters out there. Scott? Please. Haas? He won fedex with his wedge!

[nbg352]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1328654396' post='4233355']
[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]
I don't know what else i can say in regards to this argument. If you swing a blade and then a GI iron from the same spot in a fairway and strike them equally poorly, the sgi will likely get you closer to your target. however, nothing about that club enabled you to ELIMINATE any part of the skill necessary to hit the shot. An anchored putter is 100% designed to accomplish just that.
There are basic mental and physical demands performed on every golf shot to achieve your desired result. Much of those requirements in putting are negated if not eliminated using an anchored putter. You can keep coming up with varying ways to frame this argument, but i will always answer the same way. SGI clubs help once the ball is played, an anchored putter is designed to eliminate much of the skill of putting, before the shot is made.
[/quote]

You still have to make a coordinated stroke at the ball, in the right direction with the proper weight after having made a correct read. And if you think that just anyone can make a coordinated shoulder/body stroke that looks anything like a pendulum, while getting all those other things right, well I have this piece of land.........

[KDMullins]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1328654396' post='4233355']
[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]
I don't know what else i can say in regards to this argument. [b]If you swing a blade and then a GI iron from the same spot in a fairway and strike them equally poorly, the sgi will likely get you closer to your target. however, nothing about that club enabled you to ELIMINATE any part of the skill necessary to hit the shot.[/b] An anchored putter is 100% designed to accomplish just that.
There are basic mental and physical demands performed on every golf shot to achieve your desired result. Much of those requirements in putting are negated if not eliminated using an anchored putter. You can keep coming up with varying ways to frame this argument, but i will always answer the same way. SGI clubs help once the ball is played, an anchored putter is designed to eliminate much of the skill of putting, before the shot is made.
[/quote]

I don't understand how you can say this with a straight face. It's a distinction you've created, but the practical effect is you put the same swing on the ball and get different results...which frankly, is even worse (or more of an "advantage") than what you're complaining about with the long putter.

[nbg352]

[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1328658082' post='4233777']
[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1328654396' post='4233355']
[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]
I don't know what else i can say in regards to this argument. [b]If you swing a blade and then a GI iron from the same spot in a fairway and strike them equally poorly, the sgi will likely get you closer to your target. however, nothing about that club enabled you to ELIMINATE any part of the skill necessary to hit the shot.[/b] An anchored putter is 100% designed to accomplish just that.
There are basic mental and physical demands performed on every golf shot to achieve your desired result. Much of those requirements in putting are negated if not eliminated using an anchored putter. You can keep coming up with varying ways to frame this argument, but i will always answer the same way. SGI clubs help once the ball is played, an anchored putter is designed to eliminate much of the skill of putting, before the shot is made.
[/quote]

I don't understand how you can say this with a straight face. It's a distinction you've created, but the practical effect is you put the same swing on the ball and get different results...which frankly, is even worse (or more of an "advantage") than what you're complaining about with the long putter.
[/quote]

Yep, agreed.

[Fowler]

Yes, anchoring the putter may be "unconventional," but I think that it's actually good for the tour. It helps guys who's trouble has been putting. Where would Webb Simpson or Keegan Bradley be without them, and they made the Tour very interesting last year, and should make a big impact this year as well. Look at 2012 so far, all 4 winners (Stricker, Wagner, Wilson, Stanley) none of them use a belly putter. Plus look at tour stats so far this year. I'm getting these from ESPN.com, and guys in the top 10 include Sabbatini, Ben Crane, Michael Thompson, John Huh, and Snedeker. If they do ban it, only do it for the Tour, so weekend golfers can enjoy its benefits, but I think it should stay.

[RookieBlue7]

[quote name='Fowler' timestamp='1328660348' post='4234031']
Yes, anchoring the putter may be "unconventional," but I think that it's actually good for the tour. It helps guys who's trouble has been putting. Where would Webb Simpson or Keegan Bradley be without them, and they made the Tour very interesting last year, and should make a big impact this year as well. Look at 2012 so far, all 4 winners (Stricker, Wagner, Wilson, Stanley) none of them use a belly putter. Plus look at tour stats so far this year. I'm getting these from ESPN.com, and guys in the top 10 include Sabbatini, Ben Crane, Michael Thompson, John Huh, and Snedeker. If they do ban it, only do it for the Tour, so weekend golfers can enjoy its benefits, but I think it should stay.
[/quote]


It's like putting a band-aid on a severed limb. What ever happened to good old fashioned practice and determination to get better at your craft? They're paid how many million and can't afford to practice? I'm going to draw a parallel here, it's like an MMA guy that's just come out of college where he was a national champion wrestler but his striking sucks. He works on his striking and becomes one of the best strikers in his division. That doesn't happen one says, I'll give you a name to look up: Josh Koscheck. He worked on his craft and became really good at the area that hurt him. He's not making millions like these guys are. Instead of buying a crutch, why not take the time to practice and fix the area you're weak in?

[nbg352]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328663433' post='4234373']
[quote name='Fowler' timestamp='1328660348' post='4234031']
Yes, anchoring the putter may be "unconventional," but I think that it's actually good for the tour. It helps guys who's trouble has been putting. Where would Webb Simpson or Keegan Bradley be without them, and they made the Tour very interesting last year, and should make a big impact this year as well. Look at 2012 so far, all 4 winners (Stricker, Wagner, Wilson, Stanley) none of them use a belly putter. Plus look at tour stats so far this year. I'm getting these from ESPN.com, and guys in the top 10 include Sabbatini, Ben Crane, Michael Thompson, John Huh, and Snedeker. If they do ban it, only do it for the Tour, so weekend golfers can enjoy its benefits, but I think it should stay.
[/quote]


It's like putting a band-aid on a severed limb. What ever happened to good old fashioned practice and determination to get better at your craft? They're paid how many million and can't afford to practice? I'm going to draw a parallel here, it's like an MMA guy that's just come out of college where he was a national champion wrestler but his striking sucks. He works on his striking and becomes one of the best strikers in his division. That doesn't happen one says, I'll give you a name to look up: Josh Koscheck. He worked on his craft and became really good at the area that hurt him. He's not making millions like these guys are. Instead of buying a crutch, why not take the time to practice and fix the area you're weak in?
[/quote]

because, not all of us are or ever will be national champions, professionals or athletic adonis's like you, I guess. We practice hard, coach. Guess we just can't make your team....

[RookieBlue7]

[quote name='nbg352' timestamp='1328663766' post='4234415']
[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328663433' post='4234373']
[quote name='Fowler' timestamp='1328660348' post='4234031']
Yes, anchoring the putter may be "unconventional," but I think that it's actually good for the tour. It helps guys who's trouble has been putting. Where would Webb Simpson or Keegan Bradley be without them, and they made the Tour very interesting last year, and should make a big impact this year as well. Look at 2012 so far, all 4 winners (Stricker, Wagner, Wilson, Stanley) none of them use a belly putter. Plus look at tour stats so far this year. I'm getting these from ESPN.com, and guys in the top 10 include Sabbatini, Ben Crane, Michael Thompson, John Huh, and Snedeker. If they do ban it, only do it for the Tour, so weekend golfers can enjoy its benefits, but I think it should stay.
[/quote]


It's like putting a band-aid on a severed limb. What ever happened to good old fashioned practice and determination to get better at your craft? They're paid how many million and can't afford to practice? I'm going to draw a parallel here, it's like an MMA guy that's just come out of college where he was a national champion wrestler but his striking sucks. He works on his striking and becomes one of the best strikers in his division. That doesn't happen one says, I'll give you a name to look up: Josh Koscheck. He worked on his craft and became really good at the area that hurt him. He's not making millions like these guys are. Instead of buying a crutch, why not take the time to practice and fix the area you're weak in?
[/quote]

because, not all of us are or ever will be national champions, professionals or athletic adonis's like you, I guess. We practice hard, coach. Guess we just can't make your team....
[/quote]


It's a moot point at this point, because the ones that use the crutches are going to argue about it until they're blue in the face and refuse to admit anchoring corrects flaws in their stroke. It's okay, I understand. If I could find a driver that would allow me to cheat and hit the ball in the hole on every tee shot, you could call me Kim Jong Il, and I'd card an 18 every round.

[nbg352]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328665029' post='4234619']
[quote name='nbg352' timestamp='1328663766' post='4234415']
[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328663433' post='4234373']
[quote name='Fowler' timestamp='1328660348' post='4234031']
Yes, anchoring the putter may be "unconventional," but I think that it's actually good for the tour. It helps guys who's trouble has been putting. Where would Webb Simpson or Keegan Bradley be without them, and they made the Tour very interesting last year, and should make a big impact this year as well. Look at 2012 so far, all 4 winners (Stricker, Wagner, Wilson, Stanley) none of them use a belly putter. Plus look at tour stats so far this year. I'm getting these from ESPN.com, and guys in the top 10 include Sabbatini, Ben Crane, Michael Thompson, John Huh, and Snedeker. If they do ban it, only do it for the Tour, so weekend golfers can enjoy its benefits, but I think it should stay.
[/quote]


It's like putting a band-aid on a severed limb. What ever happened to good old fashioned practice and determination to get better at your craft? They're paid how many million and can't afford to practice? I'm going to draw a parallel here, it's like an MMA guy that's just come out of college where he was a national champion wrestler but his striking sucks. He works on his striking and becomes one of the best strikers in his division. That doesn't happen one says, I'll give you a name to look up: Josh Koscheck. He worked on his craft and became really good at the area that hurt him. He's not making millions like these guys are. Instead of buying a crutch, why not take the time to practice and fix the area you're weak in?
[/quote]

because, not all of us are or ever will be national champions, professionals or athletic adonis's like you, I guess. We practice hard, coach. Guess we just can't make your team....
[/quote]


It's a moot point at this point, because the ones that use the crutches are going to argue about it until they're blue in the face and refuse to admit anchoring corrects flaws in their stroke. It's okay, I understand. If I could find a driver that would allow me to cheat and hit the ball in the hole on every tee shot, you could call me Kim Jong Il, and I'd card an 18 every round.
[/quote]

Now, now, rookie, using a belly putter is not cheating. There is no rule that bans it. At least, not yet. If such a ruling is made, I'll quit using it and you can smugly smile to yourself.
Meantime, if you do find that driver and it conforms, I'd appreciate a pm, ok?

[golfnut-2X]

i still can't see how you call it a crutch in one sentence but you agree you use other crutches that help reduce the skill required to play with less practice? Just don't get it?

* 460cc driver hot deep faces

* hybrids

* cavity back / game improvements

* wedges with bounce for easier more enjoyable sand play

* high moi clubs heads including putter heads

* hot multi layered balls that fly a mile with driver yet spin more than a balata on wedges

[Peter K.]

I'm pretty sure that I've read every post in this thread and my conclusions are this:

1. I openly admit (again), that I am for banning of all anchored putters and/or putting methods; prefereably completely, but I'm not against bifurcation.

2. I'm more against anchoring than longer putters, but I don't like that long putter users can use their putters to measure clublengths for free and penalty drops.

3. I think implementing such a ban will be difficult, but I do think that the ruling bodies will try. I believe that the sort of precedent that they will invoke is that same that was used to ban "croquet-style" putting way back when.

4. Even if it isn't experienced by all, anchoring must provide an advantage; otherwise why do all the anchorers so vehemently defend their method? If it is for health/injury issues, that is specifically why I am not against bifurcation in this instance.

[mattuop]

I recently purchased a belly putter and love the thing. Maybe I'm better because of the anchor. Maybe I'm better because of psychological reasons. I don't care. I'm going to use it until I find something better no matter what rulings come down in the future. Unless you and I are playing for money or some kind of title, why should you care what I choose to putt with? Let's each just do our own thing and have a good time out on the course.

[Dead Solid Perfect]

Is this a discussion on belly putters or practice for the lawyers? All I know is I just coughed up 190 for a new belly putter if it gets banned then I'm not renewing my USGA membership. 2 weeks ago there was no discussion of this.

[golfnut-2X]

i am sure there will be a lot of people not renewing their usga memberships if they ban it. speaking of lawyers can somone who needs to use one in competition because of a disability with the back sue the usga for discrimination against the disabled??

[onafriday]

I recently purchased a belly putter and love the thing. Maybe I'm better because of the anchor. Maybe I'm better because of psychological reasons. I don't care. I'm going to use it until I find something better no matter what rulings come down in the future. Unless you and I are playing for money or some kind of title, why should you care what I choose to putt with? Let's each just do our own thing and have a good time out on the course.

 

^ this

[indyvai]

After stewing on the subject for the past few days... I have come to the following conclusion:

The USGA will not ban long putters or change the rules in any way.

The reason for this conclusion is simple... there would be a storm of lawsuits from equipment manufacturers and players should they decide to make a rules clarification after the fact. The cat is already out of the bag... and not even Tiger can put it back.

[Socrates]

[color="#1C2837"][size="2"]I get that people don't like the anchoring, but it's almost like 'Mom, they're not playing the way I want. I want to go home...'. The 'traditionalists' are upset that someone has found a way to putt better than them. Their only recourse is to outlaw the method under the guise that it isn't how the game was meant to be played. Last I checked, the object was to get the ball in the hole with as few strokes as possible. Also, the last time I checked, it has been legal under the Rules of Golf since they were written. Last night they showed on the GC, a picture of a guy (can't remember his name) from the UK who used an anchored belly putter in 'the old days' and is in their Hall of Fame. More examples that an anchored stroke has been used for quite a long time. Their going to have to come up with a better reason than 'that's not natural, traditional or how it was meant to be played'.[/size][/color]

[cardoustie]

Might I add we need to take away anything Billy Casper won. He anchored his putter to his left thigh !! Putted with a hinged motion

I do agree with a Rules Change that you shouldn't be allowed to use putters longer than 48" for relief. I think that is the driver length max.

I know you can borrow one for relief from a playing partner but if the guy in front of you has one and you don't he MAY get a slight advantage for a certain drop situation

Rookie, let me re-state as one recent poster said, you call the long/belly's a crutch that you want banned .. but you think all other golf equipment crutches are AOK? You still have to make a stroke with any putter

Your logic makes no sense to me. Putters have been anchored in numerous styles throughout history, they cannot rewind or hop in a time machine

One of my good friends has the chip yips and if he could find a club like the F2 or something else that solved that problem for him .. I'd be happy.

Let's all have some fun

[KevCarter]

[quote name='CARDY' timestamp='1328717568' post='4237853']
Might I add we need to take away anything Billy Casper won. He anchored his putter to his left thigh !! Putted with a hinged motion
[/quote]

How many guys who use long putters just grabbed a short one and tried that?



It works!!!



Kevin

[RookieBlue7]

[quote name='indyvai' timestamp='1328710877' post='4237213']
After stewing on the subject for the past few days... I have come to the following conclusion:

The USGA will not ban long putters or change the rules in any way.

The reason for this conclusion is simple... there would be a storm of lawsuits from equipment manufacturers and players should they decide to make a rules clarification after the fact. The cat is already out of the bag... and not even Tiger can put it back.
[/quote]


They won't ban the long putters, again people are misunderstanding that. You will still be able to use them, just not anchor them. There's no way one could sue for it because they're not altering the fact that they can use the club, not making them illegal. Sure, removing the anchor will kill the clubs, but they'll still be legal to use, which means there's absolutely ZERO grounds for a lawsuit. That's what everyone is misunderstanding. They're not banning the clubs, they're making a method illegal, just like they did Sam Snead's croquet method of putting. He still used the exact same putter after that ruling, he just modified the method in which he used it (from croquet to sidesaddle).

[KDMullins]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328725768' post='4238671']
[quote name='indyvai' timestamp='1328710877' post='4237213']
After stewing on the subject for the past few days... I have come to the following conclusion:

The USGA will not ban long putters or change the rules in any way.

The reason for this conclusion is simple... there would be a storm of lawsuits from equipment manufacturers and players should they decide to make a rules clarification after the fact. The cat is already out of the bag... and not even Tiger can put it back.
[/quote]


[b]They won't ban the long putters, again people are misunderstanding that. You will still be able to use them, just not anchor them. [/b] There's no way one could sue for it because they're not altering the fact that they can use the club, not making them illegal. Sure, removing the anchor will kill the clubs, but they'll still be legal to use, which means there's absolutely ZERO grounds for a lawsuit. That's what everyone is misunderstanding. They're not banning the clubs, they're making a method illegal, just like they did Sam Snead's croquet method of putting. He still used the exact same putter after that ruling, he just modified the method in which he used it (from croquet to sidesaddle).
[/quote]

You keep saying this as if it's fact. Anchoring does not appear anywhere in the rules. What you're talking about is your opinion, and I don't think anybody is misunderstanding what you're saying. Why is it that you believe there is no grounds for a lawsuit because of the distinction you draw about the ban of anchoring versus the ban of putters beyond a certain length? I'm not trying to be an a$$, but again, you're stating your opinions as if they are facts.

[golfnut-2X]

I agree, RookieBlue, you are trying to play semantics or politition or lawyer. Everyone on the forum understands what you are saying. The net effect if you ban the stroke the club is not useable as desired. You keep reiterating the anchoring perspective but with the rules a few people posted doesn't seem like there is anything wrt to anchoring. It seems to come down with a definition of what is a "natural" stroke and people's opinion on selectively choosing certain advantances in the game to support that either help them (clearly support) or not (call for a ban).

[Jack Pearsall]

I think it is wrong, but hey, I am only Jack Pearsall.
I don't think anchoring the club to your torso is a natural stroke, not in the past two centuries anyway.
If it were up to me, there wouldn't be yardage markers, gps or rangefinders allowed either. Tees I allow.
All this stuff just distances a golfer from [i]the real[/i]...

[RookieBlue7]

[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1328726331' post='4238739']
[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328725768' post='4238671']
[quote name='indyvai' timestamp='1328710877' post='4237213']
After stewing on the subject for the past few days... I have come to the following conclusion:

The USGA will not ban long putters or change the rules in any way.

The reason for this conclusion is simple... there would be a storm of lawsuits from equipment manufacturers and players should they decide to make a rules clarification after the fact. The cat is already out of the bag... and not even Tiger can put it back.
[/quote]


[b]They won't ban the long putters, again people are misunderstanding that. You will still be able to use them, just not anchor them. [/b] There's no way one could sue for it because they're not altering the fact that they can use the club, not making them illegal. Sure, removing the anchor will kill the clubs, but they'll still be legal to use, which means there's absolutely ZERO grounds for a lawsuit. That's what everyone is misunderstanding. They're not banning the clubs, they're making a method illegal, just like they did Sam Snead's croquet method of putting. He still used the exact same putter after that ruling, he just modified the method in which he used it (from croquet to sidesaddle).
[/quote]

You keep saying this as if it's fact. Anchoring does not appear anywhere in the rules. What you're talking about is your opinion, and I don't think anybody is misunderstanding what you're saying. Why is it that you believe there is no grounds for a lawsuit because of the distinction you draw about the ban of anchoring versus the ban of putters beyond a certain length? I'm not trying to be an a$$, but again, you're stating your opinions as if they are facts.
[/quote]

No, I'm stating it from the fact of what is being discussed. No where in that article or any reference material I've seen on what the USGA and R&A are discussing have they mentioned banning the long putters (belly or broomstick). The only thing they're talking about doing away with is the ability to anchor the putter. If you can't anchor it, then the effectiveness of the club will be taken away, but the club itself won't be made illegal.

Why do I believe there's no lawsuit that's legitimate regarding that specific change in the rules? The equipment manufacturers will still be allowed to make these putters, and generate revenue from selling them. They will still be legal, and they won't be taken from anyone's hands. Kind of hard to sue someone for not making a product illegal.

Why will persons with disabilities not be able to sue based on them banning anchoring? Again, the equipment will not be illegal, the disability cases will still be able to use them just like they can now, they just can't anchor them. How does anchoring help with the disability? The disability doesn't involve not being able to still stand up and use a putter without having it anchored. It would involve the ability to use the equipment at all, which is what helps with the disability problem (bad back, knee, etc). Why do you need to anchor it to keep from making your back, knee, etc hurt? Can one not still use this club without anchoring it? Absolutely they can still use it, as the club is still functional, and one can hold the butt end and the club and still swing it without having it anchored at all.

So show me, where is there a lawsuit? How can one sue for [b]not[/b] being told they can't use this equipment? Will the equipment still be available? Absolutely. So how can you sue on them taking nothing away as far as being able to use it other than the fact that the person is anchoring with it currently? Last I checked, alleviating a medical condition doesn't involve a golf club being anchored, it's a posture discussion. How does it change one's being allowed to use those putters by saying that it can't be anchored?

[RookieBlue7]

[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1328727254' post='4238857']
I agree, RookieBlue, you are trying to play semantics or politition or lawyer. Everyone on the forum understands what you are saying. The net effect if you ban the stroke the club is not useable as desired. You keep reiterating the anchoring perspective but with the rules a few people posted doesn't seem like there is anything wrt to anchoring. It seems to come down with a definition of what is a "natural" stroke and people's opinion on selectively choosing certain advantances in the game to support that either help them (clearly support) or not (call for a ban).
[/quote]


You're right, there is currently nothing in the rules about anchoring. What is being discussed as the rule change? The ability to anchor. It's not politics, semantics, lawyering, etc. It's calling interpreting what you are reading that they are discussing. Why does the club need to be anchored to be used? Why does the club need to be anchored to be effective? I've yet to hear an answer to this question that's legitimate.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328727310' post='4238861']
So show me, where is there a lawsuit? How can one sue for [b]not[/b] being told they can't use this equipment? Will the equipment still be available? Absolutely. So how can you sue on them taking nothing away as far as being able to use it other than the fact that the person is anchoring with it currently? Last I checked, alleviating a medical condition doesn't involve a golf club being anchored, it's a posture discussion. How does it change one's being allowed to use those putters by saying that it can't be anchored?
[/quote]

I think a reasonable argument could be made on behalf of guys like Keegan Bradley and/or Webb Simpson that they started using the long putters, and they did so in reliance on the fact that they had been in use for over 20 years on professional golf tours and were legal. If the belly putter is taken away, and they can show that their career(s) has been damaged, they have relied to their detriment, and they would have a valid argument that the USGA and/or R&A intentionally and/or negligently interfered with their business, including their ability to make a living, enter into endorsement deals, etc. Such a claim could be worth millions.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='RookieBlue7' timestamp='1328727546' post='4238901']
You're right, there is currently nothing in the rules about anchoring. What is being discussed as the rule change? The ability to anchor. It's not politics, semantics, lawyering, etc. It's calling interpreting what you are reading that they are discussing. Why does the club need to be anchored to be used? Why does the club need to be anchored to be effective? I've yet to hear an answer to this question that's legitimate.
[/quote]

Maybe it's semantic, but I would not describe what's being discussed as a rule change. There currently is no rule that speaks this issue or otherwise makes long putters and/or anchoring anything but legal. That's been true since the beginning of the game of golf.

I don't think the club does need to be anchored. To the extent anchoring wasn't allowed, I'm sure guys would adjust their lie angles and work on some sort of modified claw grip that would have a similar effect...but why should anybody have to do that? Because guys are pissed off because they're getting beat? I really don't get it.

Why shouldn't guys be able to anchor long putters? I've yet to hear a valid argument that there really is a real-world advantage. Every study I've heard of concludes that all things considered, there really is no advantage. Are you aware of anything to the contrary?