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

[Body_Visions]

[quote name='BirdieBob' timestamp='1354123383' post='5990111']
Q. For a long putter that I use to anchor to my upper chest........ [b]If I anchor my upper hand to my loose shirt that I pull down tight around my neck, is that ok? This is then anchored to my shirt, NOT my body![/b]
[/quote]


Quiet please!

[SheriffBooth]

[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
[quote name='ElVerde' timestamp='1354128981' post='5990579']
I don't really understand the comments saying "ban the Pro V1, ban the 460cc driver." Well, I mean, I understand the comments, I just don't see how it's relevant to THIS discussion.

This is not an equipment rule, this is a technique rule. If you'd like your putter to be made of pure diamond, coated in manatee oil, and be the size of a dinner plate with a 16 foot shaft, FINE! This rule is banning a type of stroke, and has nothing to do with any equipment.
[/quote]

If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]

I was certainly hoping that the USGA and R&A were going to come up with something better than the "essence" of golf as their reason.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='daoldguy' timestamp='1354135886' post='5991269']
Don't worry be happy, they will not have the lawsuits that will surely follow as sure as day follows night settled by 2016. If this is the best that the USGA can do they need serious help. They have no empirical evidence and went off half cocked on this ruling. And, by the way, I donot use a long or belly putter.
[/quote]
I'm sorry. Lets scale this back. They don't need empirical evidence to make a rule. None. They are a rules making body.
They are Not a "Rules Making Only With Empirical Evidence" body.

And let's be honest. Despite the very vocal opposition, they ruled on this ban with a great deal of support. Besides, data would not make a difference to proponents of anchoring. They already understand the concepts but argue anyway.

[Swoosh-Thud]

I'm surprised at how long they actually allowed the long putters. Shoulda nipped it in the bud earlier. As far as those modern current player whiners is concerned. Sic "I knew Sam Snead, he was a friend of mine........you (insert Bradley, [i]et al) are [/i]no Sam Snead...." so stop whining like a little girl.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']

If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]
You're aware there are already rules about conforming and non-conforming equipment right?
Balls...Driver size.... These have all been determined already. You know this right? You are also aware they didn't BAN EQUIPMENT right?

They banned an action. You can file this with putting side saddle or improving ones lie.

[Cyd]

[quote name='SheriffBooth' timestamp='1354138709' post='5991531']
[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
[quote name='ElVerde' timestamp='1354128981' post='5990579']
I don't really understand the comments saying "ban the Pro V1, ban the 460cc driver." Well, I mean, I understand the comments, I just don't see how it's relevant to THIS discussion.

This is not an equipment rule, this is a technique rule. If you'd like your putter to be made of pure diamond, coated in manatee oil, and be the size of a dinner plate with a 16 foot shaft, FINE! This rule is banning a type of stroke, and has nothing to do with any equipment.
[/quote]

If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]

I was certainly hoping that the USGA and R&A were going to come up with something better than the "essence" of golf as their reason.
[/quote]

They should have simply stated that anchoring provides an unfair advantage and is no longer allowed. Anchoring is already against the rules and going forward the rule against anchoring of any type will be enforced.

Its really as simple as that.

Now if they really cared about the integrity of the game and its traditions they would look in to other areas that are contributing to desroying the traditional game of golf as well.

[Socrates]

I would hate to be a Tour player using any of the soon to be banned techniques. Most won't say anything, but everyone will be thinking it. You will have a ton of alcohol fuelled jarheads though who will resort to yelling out less than kind things at events. I can see it happening as soon as tomorrow. The Tours will likely have to create a CC rule implementing it right away to stop labelling their product as a bunch of cheaters.

[wobgon]

I know this is a technique ruling, but i would say that the way equipment development is going right now, when the year 2016 comes around, the belly putter will seem as dangerous to the spirit of the game as the flat brimmed hat seems now.

[BirdieBob]

[quote name='Body_Visions' timestamp='1354138624' post='5991525']
[quote name='BirdieBob' timestamp='1354123383' post='5990111']
Q. For a long putter that I use to anchor to my upper chest........ [b]If I anchor my upper hand to my loose shirt that I pull down tight around my neck, is that ok? This is then anchored to my shirt, NOT my body![/b]
[/quote]


Quiet please!
[/quote]


Not to worry as it is also illegal to do that!

[TexasAg]

I like how the R&A is protecting the integrity of the game from evil anchoring and while hoping that nobody notices them having their way with the Old Course. Is it too cynical of me to think that the timing of all of this is too convenient?

[color=#333333]"St. Andrews differs from others in that it has always been deemed a sacrilege to interfere with its natural beauties, and it has been left almost untouched for centuries." ALISTER MACKENZIE[/color]

[Cyd]

[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354139069' post='5991565']
[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]
You're aware there are already rules about conforming and non-conforming equipment right?
Balls...Driver size.... These have all been determined already. You know this right? You are also aware they didn't BAN EQUIPMENT right?

They banned an action. You can file this with putting side saddle or improving ones lie.
[/quote]

Yes I'm aware.

It should be noted that the drivers and the balls, legal or not have made some great old courses obsolete and are no longer in the rotation for majors or tournaments.

The changes at Augusta National also come to mind as well. Bobby Jones and Alister MacKenzie designed Agusta to be played a certain way. Now that course is no longer played the same way because the ball flies too far.

And I must point out that you apparently missed my point about the hypocricy of the whole thing.

[TexasAg]

[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354134723' post='5991133']
Wow some pretty ludicrous "arguments" being made here.. Someone said what if the governing bodies decide they don't like red numbers? Or black ppl!? What are you smoking and pass it this way?!
[/quote]

Doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. The R&A doesn't allow women to be members after all...

[gators78]

[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354139069' post='5991565']
[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]
You're aware there are already rules about conforming and non-conforming equipment right?
Balls...Driver size.... These have all been determined already. You know this right? You are also aware they didn't BAN EQUIPMENT right?

They banned an action. You can file this with putting side saddle or improving ones lie.
[/quote]

Side saddle isn't banned.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354139451' post='5991619']
[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354139069' post='5991565']
[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]
You're aware there are already rules about conforming and non-conforming equipment right?
Balls...Driver size.... These have all been determined already. You know this right? You are also aware they didn't BAN EQUIPMENT right?

They banned an action. You can file this with putting side saddle or improving ones lie.
[/quote]

Yes I'm aware.

[b]It should be noted that the drivers and the balls, legal or not have made some great old courses obsolete and are no longer in the rotation for majors or tournaments.[/b]

The changes at Augusta National also come to mind as well. Bobby Jones and Alister MacKenzie designed Agusta to be played a certain way. Now that course is no longer played the same way because the ball flies too far.

And I must point out that you apparently missed my point about the hypocricy of the whole thing.
[/quote]
I didn't miss your point. The point is incorrect.
There is no hypocrisy.
They make the rules. They made a rule. Just like I can't use a swing aid while playing, I can't construct a putting aid while playing.
It's that simple.
All you've pointed out is that some courses are easier to score at. Where's the hypocrisy? The reality is, they could still use those courses. For some reason, people don't like Birdie Fests. I don't mind them occasionally. If Rory shoots -31 and beats Lee at -30. I'm fine with that. It's not like I'm gonna shoot 30 under.
Anyway, no point made. No point missed.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='gators78' timestamp='1354139706' post='5991645']
[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354139069' post='5991565']
[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]
You're aware there are already rules about conforming and non-conforming equipment right?
Balls...Driver size.... These have all been determined already. You know this right? You are also aware they didn't BAN EQUIPMENT right?

They banned an action. You can file this with putting side saddle or improving ones lie.
[/quote]

Side saddle isn't banned.
[/quote]Sorry. I was thinking specifically the Snead Rule Croquet Style.

[Jamboy72]

This was an advance copy of the transcript from this morning....

It's Official:

The USGA (aka kid-sister to the R&A) in an effort to redefine idiocy have not only reached their goal, they have surpassed it:

To paraphrase - We, at the behest of Mr. Dawson and without a great ability to think for ourselves propose the following: The method of anchoring a putter is no longer in the spirit of the game...it used to look like golf,(yeah, we know because we actually said that) but due to recent events, none of which have anything to do with our ruling or at the very least that we’re willing to admit to, this no longer looks like golf to us…I mean, to the Europeans…and therefore us as well…but trust us, this is in the best interest of everyone moving forward…

Please look at the graphics below to determine what will/won’t be allowed under this proposed rule:
Pay particular attention to the graphics where people appear to be anchoring the putter to their chin – this one is certainly out. Also pay particular attention to the graphics where people are gripping the putter with their hands, but the handle is secured to the forearm aka “The Kuchar” method…how this isn’t anchoring is beyond us, but we had to split hairs somewhere and more than anything we really want to see OEM’s create what we hope they’ll term “Popeye Putters” or “Langer Laggers”

Many of you are wondering how we reached this proposal without any evidence – We thought we were far enough removed from the scientific revolution and having read Gladwell’s “Blink” many times, we’re just going with our guts on this one. Furthermore, evidence should be reserved for serious decision makers like the judicial system and medical professionals.

While we know this may appear entirely subjective, trust us, this is in the best interest of the game moving forward – We can’t tell you why this is the case, but we’d ask you to consider the groove rule and all of the other decisions we’ve made in the best interest of the game, and trust us, that is all we’re concerned about. We think our track record really does speak for itself. None of us want to see people leave the game, but we really aren’t concerned with keeping people around either. In fact, truth be told, we’d really like to see Keegan go and unfortunately, nice guys like that big swede Carl are just collateral damage. Sorry Carl. Our deepest and most profound condolences.


Yes, there are many issues facing the game today and remember this is just a proposal. But it’s a unique kind of proposal in that we really don’t care what you think. The three month think is even more arbitrary than the ruling. See what we did there!

This doesn’t mean we don’t care about the other clearly obvious reasons people choose to leave the game. This is clearly back on our radar.

We have no statistical evidence to offer you on the putting issue, but we can tell you the people leaving the game are doing so because of two obvious and quantifiable factors: Cost and Time – At this point, we care deeply about these obvious and important issues, so much so in fact we’re doing some rather deep and meaningful studies which we’ll be getting back to in the very near future, if not sooner.

To reiterate, this proposal does not deem any equipment as non-conforming. What it does, is make it virtually impossible to use. That’s a huge, huge difference. We’re actually on the side of the OEM’s. To inspire and invoke in them a sense of creativity (really like the spinner shafts and now these Rotex faces, btw) we’re placing artificial hurdles to give the enginerds…I mean engineers something to do besides draw funny pictures on the tops of drivers). In fact, we’re certain people will continue to use long putters and we have the stats to prove it.

Rest assured, we’ve spent a great deal of time thinking about and debating this issue. Our extensive review, or as we like to call it, a conversation with Mr. Woods, was extensive and focused on reviewing all pertinent information, or as we like to call it, Mr. Wood’s opinions.

Speaking of stats, this recent upsurge in usage is now well beyond a comfortable level of 2% and is steadily approaching 10% and even 15% in some cases. This is clearly a dominant majority and again, many thanks to Mr. Gladwell and his text, “Tipping Point.” Anchoring is well on its way to going where Iphones and reverse mortgages in retirement communities have already gone and it’s vital we nip this issue in the bud. We don’t want to wait several decades and then make a decision. That would be foolish.

Finally, we never like to rush into anything and want to give people fair time to adjust and as such, will request that any changes be implemented for the 2016 rules cycle. This will give us plenty of time to settle lawsuits and label anyone choosing to use an anchoring method between now and then, cheaters.
Until then,

M. Davis

[Poser]

[quote name='Dillio187' timestamp='1354113589' post='5989113']
I don't use a long putter, but the USGA must be made up of politicians. You'd think they'd concentrate on real issues in the game like pace of play and golf ball technology, not something like this which has no statistical evidence to back up.
[/quote]

No they have better things to do than actually improve the game. Remember how the groove change was going to make scores go up..... Pace of play and ball technology get my vote too.

[StevenF]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1354135118' post='5991183']
I'm really torn here. On the professional level ban it (2016? Really? I don't care about some "rules cycle").

However...I have a friend, who like me is in his late 50s. He can't putt to save his life. The ball could be on the lip and he'd miss it. Recently he bought a belly putter, and now he can't miss (well, he's started making putts again). He's on cloud nine. Golf is [b]fun[/b] again.

For the professionals golf is a PROFESSION. For the weekend golfer golf is a GAME. I sometimes wonder if there should be a rules bifurcation. The jury is still out though. But I can see it...
[/quote]

I was going to use the "fun" argument. Golf is a hard game and belly putters allow it to be more fun for people.

[Cyd]

If 7200 to 7600 yard courses are the new norm. Bashing a ball 350 in to a rough that is not penal to a bad shot, if technology and the spirit of the game mean nothing then why is anchoring any different? Whats next for courses, 8000 - 9000 yards?

Heck they already make and sell non conforming balls any way. What the heck, lets all go play with them.

What they hey, if I can make a ball and driver that will allow joe golfer to drive it straight as an arrow and 400 yards who cares, but my new stuff does conform to current rules, who cares. Right?

I will respectfully have to disagree with you about how technology has hurt the game.

As for anchoring, its just the hypocritical way in which they have approached the subject that bugs me. Again, it does not affect me one way or the other, I just think they should be honest about it. Come out and say we never should have allowed it to begin with and move forward. Instead they make insufferable justifications.

Just say we messed up and we're correcting something we should have addressed 20 years ago.

Pretty simple really.

[pingman1]

[quote name='gators78' timestamp='1354139706' post='5991645']
[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354139069' post='5991565']
[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
If you ban anchoring, because it provides an unfair advantage, would not the same logic apply to a ball that is manufactured to fly extremely straigh and far.

Would that same logic not apply to a 460CC driver that is manufactured to provide an advantage to strike a ball off the tee?

Again, one must apply the same logic to two and three ball putters.

The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?

To be truthful, I don't care either way. My point is to show the hypocrisy of it all.

And I have to agree with those who make the point that Richard "Cranium" Lerner is an insufferable boor!
[/quote]
You're aware there are already rules about conforming and non-conforming equipment right?
Balls...Driver size.... These have all been determined already. You know this right? You are also aware they didn't BAN EQUIPMENT right?

They banned an action. You can file this with putting side saddle or improving ones lie.
[/quote]

Side saddle isn't banned.
[/quote]

Exactly right, and wait until the pro's start putting side saddle with the long putter!!

[Cyd]

What topekareal said!

Good one!!!!

[HackerVance]

I have a suggestion as to where the USGA and R&A and all other arrogant, condescending, stuffy, miscreants with a god complex, can "anchor" their putters, and the sun doesn't shine there. I seldom use my belly putter, but, I will support those that do. They are available to everyone to use, not just a few. Chamblee fits very well in the category I discussed above. Refer to the famous quote about the Nazi take over of Germany:

First they came for the socialists
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't
a socialist.

Then they came for the trade
unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't
a trade unionist.

Then they came for the jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't
a jew.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for
me.

I'll keep using my belly putter if I want to.

[mkc]

[quote name='TexasAg' timestamp='1354139686' post='5991639']
[quote name='mkc' timestamp='1354134723' post='5991133']
Wow some pretty ludicrous "arguments" being made here.. Someone said what if the governing bodies decide they don't like red numbers? Or black ppl!? What are you smoking and pass it this way?!
[/quote]

Doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. The R&A doesn't allow women to be members after all...
[/quote]

It's pretty unreasonable to think that the R&A will all of a sudden decide that they don't want red numbers on golf balls or people of a certain skin color to play the game. Very unreasonable actually. Very very very unreasonable. Very.

[monkeynaut]

[quote name='HackerVance' timestamp='1354141005' post='5991785']
I have a suggestion as to where the USGA and R&A and all other arrogant, condescending, stuffy, miscreants with a god complex, can "anchor" their putters, and the sun doesn't shine there. I seldom use my belly putter, but, I will support those that do. They are available to everyone to use, not just a few. Chamblee fits very well in the category I discussed above. Refer to the famous quote about the Nazi take over of Germany:

First they came for the socialists
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't
a socialist.

Then they came for the trade
unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't
a trade unionist.

Then they came for the jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't
a jew.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for
me.

I'll keep using my belly putter if I want to.
[/quote]
I'm not thinking there us a Holocaust survivor in the world that would sympathize with that comparison. Much less think it was funny.

[4thand11]

There is a reason they are banning anchored putters as opposed to big drivers or distance balls... I think the reason is obvious but can sound like a snob saying it... comes down to aesthetics and what a golf stroke should look like... Rory still looks like Rory hitting a 350 yd drive, same as he would hitting a 270 yd drive with older equipment. Yes the course plays different and scores might be lower, but the swing itself is the same. It does not look any different than Ben Hogan etc. hitting a golf ball, except for the end result of added distance.

Putting with an anchored putter, on the other hand, looks ridiculous. It really does not even look like golf, more like some odd hybrid of cruise-ship shuffleboard and croquet. I realize that "ridiculous" is in the eye of the beholder, but I am almost 100% certain that it's a main reason for the ban. I think they realize that banning "anchoring" will effectively get rid of the long putters entirely, and that is a good thing because they see them as an embarrassment to the game.

That is not to knock anyone who uses one, simply my guess as to the real reason for the ban.

[4thand11]

Also I don't know the percentage but I rarely see long putters in recreational play, so I don't think the governing body is too worried about ticking off amateurs. Imagine they outlawed oversized drivers in order to make courses play longer.. would be a mutiny among recreational players for whom half the fun of the game is hitting the ball a long way with the driver.

[wobgon]

[quote name='stoverny' timestamp='1354141717' post='5991829']
There is a reason they are banning anchored putters as opposed to big drivers or distance balls... I think the reason is obvious but can sound like a snob saying it... comes down to aesthetics and what a golf stroke should look like... Rory still looks like Rory hitting a 350 yd drive, same as he would hitting a 270 yd drive with older equipment. Yes the course plays different and scores might be lower, but the swing itself is the same. It does not look any different than Ben Hogan etc. hitting a golf ball, except for the end result of added distance.

Putting with an anchored putter, on the other hand, looks ridiculous. It really does not even look like golf, more like some odd hybrid of cruise-ship shuffleboard and croquet. I realize that "ridiculous" is in the eye of the beholder, but I am almost 100% certain that it's a main reason for the ban. I think they realize that banning "anchoring" will effectively get rid of the long putters entirely, and that is a good thing because they see them as an embarrassment to the game.

That is not to knock anyone who uses one, simply my guess as to the real reason for the ban.
[/quote]
I think kucher stroke is way more rediculous looking than bradlys or simpsons.

[spooky]

[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354138002' post='5991463']
The same logic should be applied to any equipment that is manufactured that can give one an unfair advantage over others or most importantly the game

What am I missing?
[/quote]
Logic...

[quote name='Cyd' timestamp='1354139082' post='5991569']
Anchoring is already against the rules
[/quote]
It is?

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1354140337' post='5991723']
Also pay particular attention to the graphics where people are gripping the putter with their hands, but the handle is secured to the forearm aka “The Kuchar” method…how this isn’t anchoring is beyond us
[/quote]
Genius... *cough* 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... arguing for the sake of it. Don't get upset about it, just enjoy a tremendously sensible decision that really should be applauded.

Thankfully we can now move on from this issue, right?

[wick_dawg]

[quote name='monkeynaut' timestamp='1354130876' post='5990751']
[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1354130731' post='5990737']
[quote name='Dire Wolf' timestamp='1354130362' post='5990715']
[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]

An injury is not the same as a birth defect. Are we going to make rules protecting players from the effects of all injuries, now?
[/quote]

And even if the case could be made they are similar enough, if for nothing more than the sake of this conversation, what could the argument possibly be? I had back surgery, therefore I need to anchor the putter? That is why the ruling is directed at how a stroke is made, and what makes a legal stroke. It ends the whole idea of disadvantaging someone who can't bend over because they have a back disease (for the record, As i do) All but the most adamant supporters of anchoring would cringe at that suggestion.
[/quote] "MY BAD BACK WON'T LET ME PUTT! But for some reason I can drive the ball 300 yards...."
[/quote]

You have no idea what you're talking about. I have 2 herniated discs and a fractured vertebrae in my lower back.

As long as my form is good on a full swing, it's a very natural motion and I have no pain. If my form is off, my back let's me know about it. But I can let loose a 300 yard drive when everything comes together.

Standing over a 35" putter is a different story. That hurts far worse than a full swing as long as my form is good.

So yes, believe it when these players with bad backs can crank it 300 yards but experience pain whilst putting with a standard length putter.

I'm sure many golfers with bad backs will agree with me.

[307golf]

[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.