It's official: USGA, R&A propose anchor ban

[cardoustie]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1354130457' post='5990723']
[quote name='cardoustie' timestamp='1354130226' post='5990703']
i can see it now .. guys with back surgeries etc suing to go long putter due to a proven serious medical condition ... Casey Martin ruling pops into my mind
[/quote]

Another ill informed member who apparently hasn't taken the time to read the rule. They can still use a long putter. I appreciate that everyone has an opinion and am happy we have a place to share them, but they announced the rule. The end of the speculation is at hand. We know what's going to happen, so maybe know what you're speaking on before posting.
[/quote]

That is a lovely reply ... thx. I assure you I have read and fully understand the rule

Think about the concept vs what I said verbatim ... And get of the high horse w the comments, I am trying to present flaws in the proposal .. A proposal by the way .. Not a rule yet as you are clearly ill informed

For example, Are the back issues due to a birth defect and the only way to putt for this person is from a very upright stance where a broomstick is anchored to the chin?

[smoky25]

[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354148327' post='5992317']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

From what I got from Davis and Dawson on golf channel today, they say that after the surge in popularity over the last couple years, especially this past year, they have developed much concern over the anchoring method becoming mainstream. What with young kids now getting in the game and starting off with anchoring as their putting technique. So basically for the past 30-40 years it seems they didn't think anyone really thought it was any credible way of getting the job done unless you were at the end of the rope in the putting department and needed some last ditch effort to get the ball in the hole. Now with this new found popularity and some teachers teaching it as a better way of getting the job done, they felt the need to finally step in and clarify the rules and define what is a swing.

This is just what I got from listening from them today on tv.

Side note, was watching at my parents, and my mother, who doesn't really know much about golf says out of the blue "It looks like they're cheating". I thought that was interesting coming from a non-golfer.
[/quote]

Sorry, but where in the rule book is this popularity clause? I don't remember the part that says, "It's ok to bend the rules as long as the bending doesn't get too widespread." And thanks for adding the opinion of someone "who doesn't really know much about golf." I suppose it would have looked like cheating to her decades ago when it first was used too.

[fore]

I'm glad the R&A and the USGA have resisted bifurcation.

[rockinar]

Well the controversy is over. All the belly putters will just switch to broomstick putters and not anchor it. Problem solved.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]
Um, procrastination.
Same reason I waited too long to take a pooper scooper to the backyard.
Yeah. My wife told me over and over that it needed to be done. But I didn't feel like it. I was too busy watching golf on tv or playing myself.
Then one day, I walked outside and went "Dammit. I gotta do something about this s#!t."

I'm sure there's plenty of stuff you waited too long to address, too.
It happens.

[mkc]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354149012' post='5992379']
[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354148327' post='5992317']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

From what I got from Davis and Dawson on golf channel today, they say that after the surge in popularity over the last couple years, especially this past year, they have developed much concern over the anchoring method becoming mainstream. What with young kids now getting in the game and starting off with anchoring as their putting technique. So basically for the past 30-40 years it seems they didn't think anyone really thought it was any credible way of getting the job done unless you were at the end of the rope in the putting department and needed some last ditch effort to get the ball in the hole. Now with this new found popularity and some teachers teaching it as a better way of getting the job done, they felt the need to finally step in and clarify the rules and define what is a swing.

This is just what I got from listening from them today on tv.

Side note, was watching at my parents, and my mother, who doesn't really know much about golf says out of the blue "It looks like they're cheating". I thought that was interesting coming from a non-golfer.
[/quote]

Sorry, but where in the rule book is this popularity clause? I don't remember the part that says, "It's ok to bend the rules as long as the bending doesn't get too widespread." And thanks for adding the opinion of someone "who doesn't really know much about golf." I suppose it would have looked like cheating to her decades ago when it first was used too.
[/quote]

Who's talking about bending rules? Isn't it legal? I'm pretty sure it's legal, right now. And has been all along. I think Davis/Dawson even said that today. Their response to anchored putting seems to be about defining a stroke and what it is to swing the club. So what I understood them to be saying was that with the surge in popularity, something which was an esoteric part of the game which could be tolerated all of a sudden is becoming this thing which is making people ask the question: what is a golf swing? So they answered that question for everyone today, because that's their job.

And as for what a non-golfer's opinion means? I think it says a lot about the technique. The point being, it doesn't look like golf, it looks like cheating.

[smoky25]

[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354149810' post='5992443']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]
Um, procrastination.
Same reason I waited too long to take a pooper scooper to the backyard.
Yeah. My wife told me over and over that it needed to be done. But I didn't feel like it. I was too busy watching golf on tv or playing myself.
Then one day, I walked outside and went "Dammit. I gotta do something about this s#!t."

I'm sure there's plenty of stuff you waited too long to address, too.
It happens.
[/quote]

I believe they ruled it legal back in the late 80's. So, an issue already dealt with is not an example of procrastination.

[cardoustie]

[quote name='Floratine' timestamp='1354144285' post='5992009']
[quote name='TRoc9892' timestamp='1354119691' post='5989733']
[quote name='Floratine' timestamp='1354118004' post='5989535']
I'll admit that I'm more than a little pissed. Like some of you I didn't change to a long putter because I couldn't putt, I switched because I have a bad back and couldn't practice. Bending over to practice with a short putter killed my lower back and the long putter and even belly, my belly putter is too long for me which allows me to bend over less, relieved the pressure in my lower back. This allowed me to practice putting which in turn allowed me to make more putts, practice allowed me to not the putter!

Now I know they didn't ban them completely so I can use but not anchor. However, I'm not a tour pro who has 14 hours a day to practice a new stroke. This was far and away my best putting year and I've been using the long putter for 5 years, so I guess 5 years from now I'll see success with the new method. Utterly retarded by the USGA.
[/quote]
Is there something that makes your back completely unable to practice putter for longer amounts of time? Because that completely unnaturaly position of the normal putting stance hurts everyone's back. Instead of just concluding that you can't putt normally, strengthen your back. Do excercises or stretches.
[/quote]

Thank you for that. Some guys don't know what it means to have a really bad back. I have had two microdiscectomy's and a laminectomy and still have issues like yours .. Bad disks are touch and go

[color=#FF0000][b][size=5]Why thank you for that fantastic advice!!! I had never thought about exercising or stretching to strengthen my back, my God I feel like an idiot for not thinking of that!![/size][/b][/color]

I've had back problems since i was 13 and I'm now 33. I've been to more specialist than I can count and the consensus is I need a 2 level fusion or disc replacement. I have stenosis of the L5S1, a blown L4/L5 with a central tear to the L5/S1 that affects my sciatic nerve. The L4/L5 has a bunch of little cracks and its their opinion that nerve endings have grown into some of these cracks and because of that every little compression is amplified. Not only can I not practice with a short putter I don't pound balls on the range, I hit maybe 10 balls with a driver on the range this entire season. My practice consist of some wedges on a short range and putting, nothing else. I stretch for an entire hour prior to every round of golf, I wear a thermocare heat pad for every round even in 95* temps, I workout 5-6 days a week, 3 of those days with a personal trainer to ensure proper form. Part of my exercises are golf specific to give me the best chance of having my back hold up. With all of that my last round was October 10 because I was sick of my back aching and decided to take an extended winter break. The fact I'm a scratch golfer with my back, without being able to practice is amazing to some people. I'm sure my size doesn't help being 5'8" and 130Ibs while having 110mph ss is surely hard on my back. The problem is I love the game and the belly and long putter increased that love as it allowed me to practice at least 1 aspect of the game. I'll figure this out, I have no doubt.

I have a very strong core and back. This does not help me avoid pain! IN the second round of club championship this year I made a practice swing with a 3 wood and dropped to my knees, done, over, couldn't move. This has nothing to do with strength, its a nerve issue and bending over to practice with a short putter exacerbates the problem.
[/quote]

[spooky]

[quote name='307golf' timestamp='1354143517' post='5991965']
[quote] I don't believe for one second that people cannot see the difference between a stroke where the butt is anchored in one place and the way Kuchar putts...[/quote]

Both techniques are designed to reduce variables, namely the movement of the hands and wrists. Both techniques accomplish this goal, though slightly differently. Is the "Kuchar style" of putting in the best interest of the game? Why is one strategy legal, while the other is not, given that both are quite outside the traditional swing of the golf club including contact through the hands.
[/quote]
Maybe look at the pictures they so helpfully provided? Anchoring the butt - creating a fixed pivot point... anchoring doesn't just reduce the movement of the wrists. It's mechanically obvious. I still don't believe for one second that people genuinely cannot see the difference.

Anyway, the important thing is that the USGA and the R & A have at last done the right thing.

[spooky]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

I was under the impression that they had ruled the equipment as not being illegal - I hadn't ever heard them rule that anchoring was ok. I don't see a reversal of a previous decision.

[Awsi Dooger]

[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354144632' post='5992033']
They don't want to hear that. Romney was right. 47% just want to have their putts handed to them. [/quote]

The demographics of the country have changed. Not among the golf rules making organizations. It's still Simplistic Angry (white) Males, desperate for something to be scared of, so they can overreact to it and dictate to others. That's what SAMs do. That's all today was.

[smoky25]

[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354150064' post='5992467']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354149012' post='5992379']
[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354148327' post='5992317']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

From what I got from Davis and Dawson on golf channel today, they say that after the surge in popularity over the last couple years, especially this past year, they have developed much concern over the anchoring method becoming mainstream. What with young kids now getting in the game and starting off with anchoring as their putting technique. So basically for the past 30-40 years it seems they didn't think anyone really thought it was any credible way of getting the job done unless you were at the end of the rope in the putting department and needed some last ditch effort to get the ball in the hole. Now with this new found popularity and some teachers teaching it as a better way of getting the job done, they felt the need to finally step in and clarify the rules and define what is a swing.

This is just what I got from listening from them today on tv.

Side note, was watching at my parents, and my mother, who doesn't really know much about golf says out of the blue "It looks like they're cheating". I thought that was interesting coming from a non-golfer.
[/quote]

Sorry, but where in the rule book is this popularity clause? I don't remember the part that says, "It's ok to bend the rules as long as the bending doesn't get too widespread." And thanks for adding the opinion of someone "who doesn't really know much about golf." I suppose it would have looked like cheating to her decades ago when it first was used too.
[/quote]

Who's talking about bending rules? Isn't it legal? I'm pretty sure it's legal, right now. And has been all along. I think Davis/Dawson even said that today. Their response to anchored putting seems to be about defining a stroke and what it is to swing the club. So what I understood them to be saying was that with the surge in popularity, something which was an esoteric part of the game which could be tolerated all of a sudden is becoming this thing which is making people ask the question: what is a golf swing? So they answered that question for everyone today, because that's their job.

And as for what a non-golfer's opinion means? I think it says a lot about the technique. The point being, it doesn't look like golf, it looks like cheating.
[/quote]

Again, popularity doesn't make something illegal. It took them about a year to ban Snead's croquet method, and I believe he was the only one using it. It certainly wasn't a popular method. Tolerating something implies that they knew it was wrong, but since it wasn't popular, they just looked the other way. Otherwise known as a failure of duty. And now they are attempting to ban the method claiming unfair advantage which they cannot prove, and the end result of their failure to do their duty decades ago will disadvantage golfers who followed and honored the rules in the intervening years. And thanks for crossing out "Mr. Smartypants." Otherwise, i might have gotten my little feelings hurt.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='Awsi Dooger' timestamp='1354151722' post='5992617']
[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354144632' post='5992033']
They don't want to hear that. Romney was right. 47% just want to have their putts handed to them. [/quote]

The demographics of the country have changed. Not among the golf rules making organizations. It's still Simplistic Angry (white) Males, desperate for something to be scared of, so they can overreact to it and dictate to others. That's what SAMs do. That's all today was.
[/quote]
Yawn. But less offensive than the guy who compared this to the Holocaust.

I mean this is still a game right?
It's not like they did away with the $200 bucks you get for passing "Go."

[Ogre41]

What is the reason for removal? A double spelling error, a horrible attempt at humor at the expense of white belts that was both vague and also not funny, and the putting method I enjoyed MAY have been legal, but the putter was not (sole shape and lie angle). In short, the elusive triple fail that had to be removed to prevent the dumbing down of the thread and the site as a whole. My apologies.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='Ogre41' timestamp='1354152202' post='5992669']
The whole argument that it "looks" rediculous is rediculous. Who is to judge that? Honestly, I think white belts are look weird, but that's just my opinion. I will continue to use mine because it allows me to see the line much better. Will I change, probably, but I may look into getting a putter bent way upright to see the line better. But, while using my broomstick, I will of corse wear two gloves and a massive sun hat with a pirate feather. If I am going to be judged by how my putting style (non anchored) looks, I may as well go all in.
[/quote]your white belt helps you see the line better?
I need to make a stop at Macy's, I guess. Or Men's Wearhouse maybe.

[FairwaysToHeaven]

if a 'pro' can't putt with a short putter they don't deserve to be a pro. no problem with amateurs using an anchor, but i really doubt anyone is giving up the game because they can't stick the putter in their gut. its not going to stop people from deciding to play. this isn't going to affect the 'growth' of the game. this is just added drama by talking heads in the media. everyone wants to act as if there aren't any facts to prove anchoring is better. if it isn't easier to calm nerves, guys won't have a problem going back to the correct way to putt.

i hate seeing the trend of all levels of competitive golf going to the anchor. i hate that a guy wins a major and all anyone talks about is whether he could win it putting the 'right' way. yes, it took way to long to ban, hopefully the suits will get it together and not take quite as long fixing the real pressing issues in golf, cost and the distance of the ball

[spooky]

[quote name='Ogre41' timestamp='1354152202' post='5992669']
The whole argument that it "looks" rediculous is rediculous. Who is to judge that? Honestly, I think white belts are look weird, but that's just my opinion. I will continue to use mine because it allows me to see the line much better. Will I change, probably, but I may look into getting a putter bent way upright to see the line better. But, while using my broomstick, I will of corse wear two gloves and a massive sun hat with a pirate feather. If I am going to be judged by how my putting style (non anchored) looks, I may as well go all in.
[/quote]

Careful how upright you have it.

I never understood what was wrong with grabbing a putter and learning to use it instead of trying to find some artificial way to overcome the inherent difficulty. I am also sure that all the people in favour of anchoring will be fine without - don't forget that there is no data proving an advantage to the technique.

[bscinstnct]

Adam, Keegan and Webb

They just told you that you are losers!

Anyway,

Make no mistake

More Tiger Woods hand prints on this than a Pancake House waitresess.

Way to go Tiger!

The children would have been figuring out how to putt with an iPhone app if this line was not drawn

Across this line you will not cross!

Dude

[KYMAR]

[quote name='Ogre41' timestamp='1354152202' post='5992669']
The whole argument that it "looks" rediculous is rediculous. Who is to judge that? Honestly, I think white belts are look weird, but that's just my opinion. I will continue to use mine because it allows me to see the line much better. Will I change, probably, but I may look into getting a putter bent way upright to see the line better. But, while using my broomstick, I will of corse wear two gloves and a massive sun hat with a pirate feather. If I am going to be judged by how my putting style (non anchored) looks, I may as well go all in.
[/quote]

And even that argument is less ridiculous than spelling ridiculous, rediculous. No one at the press conference I watched stated anywhere in their list of reasons for this rule is because of how it looks. It was about [i]the stroke [/i]and how it should be made. If they were concerned so much about appearances they would have banned IJPs wardrobe a decade ago. Loudmouth Daly's too.

[KYMAR]

[quote name='bscinstnct' timestamp='1354153700' post='5992793']
Adam, Keegan and Webb

They just told you that you are losers!

Anyway,

Make no mistake

More Tiger Woods hand prints on this than a Pancake House waitresess.

Way to go Tiger!

The children would have been figuring out how to putt with an iPhone app if this line was not drawn

Across this line you will not cross!

Dude
[/quote]

Even when i agree with you, you are completely Bizarre my man.

[502 to Right]

Davis and Dawson richly deserve the way history will remember them for driving people away from a game already having problems attracting new participants and keeping the ones they already have.

[bobfoster]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

Just my opinion, but thinking that any sports ruling bodies make decisions based purely on some sort of an objective criteria is perhaps just a [i]bit[/i] foolish?. [i]All [/i]of them (no matter what the sport) invariably make decisions based on the current state of evolution of their sports. It didn't take them "decades. For quite a long time virtually no one used long putters. In just the past few years, it seems that there has been an explosion of them ... though really, mostly amongst the pros ... about 1/3 of the PGA Tour uses them, but on regular public courses, I'd say its more like one out of every 15 or 20.

Thing is, sports are, at the end of the day, merely a form of entertainment, nothing more than movies or music. All ruling bodies have, as their primary interest, the development of the popularity (and [i]fans[/i]) of their sport. So as social attitudes and tactics and equipment changes, they have to walk a fine line between allowing and facilitating the changes that will make the game more exciting for fans, while making certain that they keep the sport within it's "traditional" look and feel.

Let me try to be more succinct, the primary goal of rules changes is virtually [i]never[/i] to please the fanatics of the sport (that generally have a universally predictable response: "We hate it, and who are you old fogeys?!" ... this argument here vastly pales in comparison to changes in other sports ... for instance, I remember when the DH rule hit baseball - for purists, it was very nearly blasphemy ... but for the average fan? Well, turns out most of them liked to see scoring, and groaned whenever a pitcher came to the plate - usually to bunt).

Point is, to the average golf fan (that may watch the majors, and a couple of other tourneys a year when they're stuck home watching the kids, but isn't really [i]into[/i] golf), and to the average weekender that plays just a few times a year, the long anchored putters really do look somehow funny, they just don't [i]feel[/i] right. They just do. No, it is not rational. But nothing in any form of entertainment is rational ("Gangnam Style" is the most downloaded YouTube music video in history, seriously?).

They were not really worth addressing when there were only a handful on tour, but as they have dramatically grown in numbers, they popped up on the radar screen. If I'm the USGA looking at the vast golf audience (a huge number of casual fans, and a very tiny number of fanatics), well, a significant number of casual fans very likely do not care at all, another (significant number) think they look weird and just somehow don't feel right, and the vast majority of weekenders do not play them. This is almost a no-brainer.

So then, I did not answer your question ... "... explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the spirit of the rules ..." ... because I do not think it is the right question. They simply did it for the same reason all sports ruling bodies do things ... because on the whole it is going make [i]far[/i] more fans happy than unhappy.

It is easy, on WRX, to forget what a hotbed of fanatics this is ... to forget that sometimes that makes us very far from the norm (in our tastes in equipment, numbers of rounds per year, and number of tournaments we watch). The USGA concerns itself with the 25 million or so people that played this year (many of them only a round or two), and the 50 million that watched golf this year (many who may have only seen a tourney or two, and don't even play).

Note: This is rather a heated conversation here - please don't be snarky ... . I'm not excusing or justifying or trying to argue for their decision, just trying to come up with what I think is the likely explanation for it. (I, personally, have no skin in the game ... I never have and never will use a long putter, but have also never cared if anyone else did).

[KYMAR]

[quote name='502 to Right' timestamp='1354154107' post='5992829']
Davis and Dawson richly deserve the way history will remember them for driving people away from a game already having problems attracting new participants and keeping the ones they already have.
[/quote]

I have seen no empirical evidence, statistical proof that this action is/will driving people from the game. Have you sold your clubs yet?

[spooky]

[quote name='502 to Right' timestamp='1354154107' post='5992829']
Davis and Dawson richly deserve the way history will remember them for driving people away from a game already having problems attracting new participants and keeping the ones they already have.
[/quote]
Have you quit the game yet?

[smoky25]

[quote name='spooky' timestamp='1354151203' post='5992575']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

I was under the impression that they had ruled the equipment as not being illegal - I hadn't ever heard them rule that anchoring was ok. I don't see a reversal of a previous decision.
[/quote]

Then that would be another instance of their failure to properly address the issue in a timely fashion. They just punted it down the road further, while more and more golfers, thinking that the ruling bodies had made their decision, began to use this legal method of putting. And now it seems a threshold of "popularity" has been reached which changes everything, including decades of precedent (set by the ruling bodies themselves). There is no new insight today that they didn't have years ago when the method first was used. If anchoring is a problem today it was a problem decades ago. The USGA/R&A have failed miserably in handling this issue, and now are compounding this failure by unfairly disadvantaging rules abiding golfers who use this method.

[spooky]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354154441' post='5992865']
[quote name='spooky' timestamp='1354151203' post='5992575']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

I was under the impression that they had ruled the equipment as not being illegal - I hadn't ever heard them rule that anchoring was ok. I don't see a reversal of a previous decision.
[/quote]

Then that would be another instance of their failure to properly address the issue in a timely fashion. They just punted it down the road further, while more and more golfers, thinking that the ruling bodies had made their decision, began to use this legal method of putting. And now it seems a threshold of "popularity" has been reached which changes everything, including decades of precedent (set by the ruling bodies themselves). There is no new insight today that they didn't have years ago when the method first was used. If anchoring is a problem today it was a problem decades ago. The USGA/R&A have failed miserably in handling this issue, and now are compounding this failure by unfairly disadvantaging rules abiding golfers who use this method.
[/quote]
But I thought there was never an unfair advantage, so how could this decision unfairly disadvantage anyone?

[Jamboy72]

[quote name='spooky' timestamp='1354154686' post='5992885']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354154441' post='5992865']
[quote name='spooky' timestamp='1354151203' post='5992575']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

I was under the impression that they had ruled the equipment as not being illegal - I hadn't ever heard them rule that anchoring was ok. I don't see a reversal of a previous decision.
[/quote]

Then that would be another instance of their failure to properly address the issue in a timely fashion. They just punted it down the road further, while more and more golfers, thinking that the ruling bodies had made their decision, began to use this legal method of putting. And now it seems a threshold of "popularity" has been reached which changes everything, including decades of precedent (set by the ruling bodies themselves). There is no new insight today that they didn't have years ago when the method first was used. If anchoring is a problem today it was a problem decades ago. The USGA/R&A have failed miserably in handling this issue, and now are compounding this failure by unfairly disadvantaging rules abiding golfers who use this method.
[/quote]
But I thought there was never an unfair advantage, so how could this decision unfairly disadvantage anyone?
[/quote]

Um, because it's two separate instances of "fairness" - Having a club/technique which is available to everyone is inherently fair...there is nothing unfair about this...however, taking away this technique without any element of reason and done solely for the sake of appearance is, in some people's estimation, quite unfair...

[mkc]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354151823' post='5992625']
[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354150064' post='5992467']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354149012' post='5992379']
[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354148327' post='5992317']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

From what I got from Davis and Dawson on golf channel today, they say that after the surge in popularity over the last couple years, especially this past year, they have developed much concern over the anchoring method becoming mainstream. What with young kids now getting in the game and starting off with anchoring as their putting technique. So basically for the past 30-40 years it seems they didn't think anyone really thought it was any credible way of getting the job done unless you were at the end of the rope in the putting department and needed some last ditch effort to get the ball in the hole. Now with this new found popularity and some teachers teaching it as a better way of getting the job done, they felt the need to finally step in and clarify the rules and define what is a swing.

This is just what I got from listening from them today on tv.

Side note, was watching at my parents, and my mother, who doesn't really know much about golf says out of the blue "It looks like they're cheating". I thought that was interesting coming from a non-golfer.
[/quote]

Sorry, but where in the rule book is this popularity clause? I don't remember the part that says, "It's ok to bend the rules as long as the bending doesn't get too widespread." And thanks for adding the opinion of someone "who doesn't really know much about golf." I suppose it would have looked like cheating to her decades ago when it first was used too.
[/quote]

Who's talking about bending rules? Isn't it legal? I'm pretty sure it's legal, right now. And has been all along. I think Davis/Dawson even said that today. Their response to anchored putting seems to be about defining a stroke and what it is to swing the club. So what I understood them to be saying was that with the surge in popularity, something which was an esoteric part of the game which could be tolerated all of a sudden is becoming this thing which is making people ask the question: what is a golf swing? So they answered that question for everyone today, because that's their job.

And as for what a non-golfer's opinion means? I think it says a lot about the technique. The point being, it doesn't look like golf, it looks like cheating.
[/quote]

Again, popularity doesn't make something illegal. It took them about a year to ban Snead's croquet method, and I believe he was the only one using it. It certainly wasn't a popular method. Tolerating something implies that they knew it was wrong, but since it wasn't popular, they just looked the other way. Otherwise known as a failure of duty. And now they are attempting to ban the method claiming unfair advantage which they cannot prove, and the end result of their failure to do their duty decades ago will disadvantage golfers who followed and honored the rules in the intervening years. And thanks for crossing out "Mr. Smartypants." Otherwise, i might have gotten my little feelings hurt.
[/quote]

It's not about popularity making it illegal man, it's about a style or technique which the governing bodies believe is outside of the "grab it and swing it" roots of the game, popularity has only put it under the microscope. And yah I agree, maybe they did know it was wrong and just looked the other way, and are guilty of failing to act earlier. That's totally legit. But just because you have been making a mistake doesn't mean you can't decide that you should change your ways for the better. Also, I don't think I heard them say this was at all about an unfair advantage. And sorry for the smartpants jab, if you care to check I actually went back and edited it out of my post a minute or two after I put it up.

Again, this is just my understand of what I heard from Dawson/Davies on golf central today.

[spooky]

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1354154932' post='5992911']
Um, because it's two separate instances of "fairness" - Having a club/technique which is available to everyone is inherently fair...there is nothing unfair about this...however, taking away this technique without any element of reason and done solely for the sake of appearance is, in some people's estimation, quite unfair...
[/quote]
Solely for the sake of appearance? The short putter is available to everyone - totally fair and a nice level playing field.

Bradley has taken it far better than some here.

[bobfoster]

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1354154932' post='5992911']
[quote name='spooky' timestamp='1354154686' post='5992885']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354154441' post='5992865']
[quote name='spooky' timestamp='1354151203' post='5992575']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1354147324' post='5992231']
I would like someone who is pro-ban to explain to me why it has taken decades and a reversal of a previous ruling for the R&A/USGA to figure out that anchoring is against the "spirit of the rules." Careful, I am not a fool.
[/quote]

I was under the impression that they had ruled the equipment as not being illegal - I hadn't ever heard them rule that anchoring was ok. I don't see a reversal of a previous decision.
[/quote]

Then that would be another instance of their failure to properly address the issue in a timely fashion. They just punted it down the road further, while more and more golfers, thinking that the ruling bodies had made their decision, began to use this legal method of putting. And now it seems a threshold of "popularity" has been reached which changes everything, including decades of precedent (set by the ruling bodies themselves). There is no new insight today that they didn't have years ago when the method first was used. If anchoring is a problem today it was a problem decades ago. The USGA/R&A have failed miserably in handling this issue, and now are compounding this failure by unfairly disadvantaging rules abiding golfers who use this method.
[/quote]
But I thought there was never an unfair advantage, so how could this decision unfairly disadvantage anyone?
[/quote]

Um, because it's two separate instances of "fairness" - Having a club/technique which is available to everyone is inherently fair...there is nothing unfair about this...however, taking away this technique without any element of reason and done solely for the sake of appearance is, in some people's estimation, quite unfair...
[/quote]

Actually, fairness really has little to do with this issue (or most others in sports). Your driver can only be 460cc ... if it was 480cc, everyone could use one (i.e., it would be fair). Everyone on tour could use U grooves (it was fair), but they instituted the goove rule in 2010.