Coming soon: decision on long putters

"The day after the 2012 British Open concluded, Peter Dawson, chief executive of the Royal & Ancient, which governs the rules of golf along with the United States Golf Association, said the two organizations were going to come to a decision on the permissibility of long putters this fall.

“The subject is firmly on our radar, and we need to clarify the position as soon as possible,” Dawson said".

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/sports/golf/golf-pros-line-up-to-debate-use-of-long-putters.html

Looks like this issue will finally be addressed. The tone of Dawson's comments suggest they will be banned. As mentioned on another thread, Keegan Bradley's pressure putting has been a joy to watch over the past year, is this down to the belly putter he uses? We may find out if he is forced to use a short putter.

Banned next year possibly but isn't 2016 the earliest the ban can come into affect anyway so still plenty of time for the debate to continue to run.

I think it will be "anchoring" not the long/belly putters that are actually banned.

Webb Simpson gave his 2 cents worth on the subject yesterday

"Do I think they should be banned? No, and here's why," he said. "You take a wooden driver compared with the 460cc's titanium, and to me that's a lot bigger difference than a 35-inch putter to a 45-inch putter."

He also said no one from among the top 20 in the PGA Tour's new "strokes gained" statistic used a long putter.

"To me, to change something that big and to cost manufacturers millions of dollars, you've got to have some pretty good facts," Simpson said. "Just because some of us are winning majors or winning tournaments with the belly putter, I don't think that's a good reason to say, 'Hey, we're going to take them away.' So that's my real take."

McDowell on the other side of the fence.

"They feel their research has shown that putting under pressure down the stretch on the back nine on Sunday, when you can anchor the putter to a part of your body, that just takes one extraneous movement out of the putting stroke. Putting under pressure with that type of putter is easier. ... But having said that, if it was so easy, everyone would be using one, you know? They have their advantages and disadvantages. It just so happens that a lot of very good players in the world now are using long putts.

"Let's level the playing field again," McDowell said. "Let's get everyone with a short putter back in the bag as the game is meant to be played."

Pains me to say it, but I agree with the bible thumper.

I've seen no evidence that a long putter makes anyone hole more putts.

Conehead wrote:Banned next year possibly but isn't 2016 the earliest the ban can come into affect anyway so still plenty of time for the debate to continue to run.

Apologies Conehead you are correct, it was an assumption on my part that they might be banned for next season.
So the likes of Matt Kuchar will be ok while the Webbs and Keegans will have to adapt...

Perhaps they can ban God from helping players too. It's totally unfair on the atheists.

There may be no evidence to suggest they offer an advantage, although mic doo seems to suggest there is, but the rules of golf are clearly not based on evidence and experiment. They are loosely based on the spirit of the game and some original principles of how the game should be played (along with newer additions based on slowing the game down and getting the players hand on the ball).

So it is very fair for the governing bodies to introduce a rule which keeps the lineage of the way the game is played in tact. We just have to accept that a putting stroke is only a putting stroke if made with a short shafted club not anchored to the body. What is so hard to accept about that? There needn’t be any justification other than that’s how it should be done.

It is a mistake, that the likes of super seems fooled into making, to compare changes in technology and changes to what constitutes striking the ball. As much as I think technology should be wound back it is clear that protecting the action of striking the ball is vital. This action along with the land we play on may prove to be the only constant in the game.

I don't know if it might be possible for the tours to ban them ahead of the 2016 rule book? Certainly there's a precedent, with 'hot-faced' clubs, and of course the new groove rules.

Good god Mac, you really are a dinosaur. The rules of golf stipulate that only a stroke is made, there is nothing about attachment to the body in there.

I don't see how a long putter contravenes the "spirit" of the game as there is no evidence they are gaining an advantage, so how can it be seen as unsporting.

If for example a putter was as long as a lampost, but wasn't anchored to the body, would that be ok?

I agree SR. The stats simply do not exist that they are gaining an advantage

Nobody seemed to care that much when they weren't winning with them. A few high profile wins and now they are seen as the devils incarnate. Seems a bit of an over reaction to a problem that wasn't really that significant until a Major was won using one.

i think we are only just starting to see the real advantages of the long putters.
in years gone by it has helped poor putters become average and eradicate a weakness to some extent(Langer, Torrance,VJ, even Adam Scott),
we are now only seeing the new era of college grads coming on tour who have been using long putters since they started playing ther game.... ie good putters being made even better.
Webb Simson, Bill Hass, keegan Bradley are just the sign of things to come.

Well if they were that good everyone would use them, but they don't so they aren't.

my point is that if you were picking up a club for the first time and used it for 10 years the long putter might be easier... its not necesarily easier if its not the way you were taught as a nipper

The "might be easier" is the key point though.Nobody can prove either way. Webb Simpson and Keegan Bradley may just be a very good putters. When they were both learning they had a choice of different putters and nobody seemed to care. Now they are both being successful people are starting to moan?

My question is - would this even be an issue if people weren't winning by using them?

If that is a no then I really disagree with the ban. In affect people would be saying 'we didn't really pay attention before but now people are winning we now care'

I never heard people call Langer a cheat and go on about the spirit of the game? I would be very aggreived if I was Bradley or Simpson as it feels like they are being punished or singled out for being successful.

I do remember people questioning these things when Langer started using them. I think Peter Dawson highlighted the main difference now when he said that it's no longer the just case that people who can no longer putt conventionally go to these as a matter of last resort, it's now becoming commonplace for people to choose to use them who haven't had putting problems. If that's the case, that person must perceive an advantage to using an anchored putter as opposed to a conventional one. Hence, they're considering whether the act of anchoring is one they should ban.

Don't really see how it's any different to any other club. I might be more comfortable using a 9 deg driver than a 10 deg one, or a 44 inch driver to a 46 inch one.

I don't think there is anything in the rules that says that you shouldn't have the clubs that you feel most comfrotable with.

Seems like sour grapes.

Cheat stick, I dont have any joy in seeing anyone who uses one winning. If Donald won a major with one Id be be pretty gutted to be honest. Its really an aesthetic thing as much as anything, just looks so ugly and wrong.
Personally I hope they are banned, the sooner the better.

super- the fact it's anchored to the body is the main issue.

Graeme sums up the issue perfectly imo: “When you can anchor the putter to a part of your body, that just takes one extraneous movement out of the putting stroke and that makes putting under pressure with that type of putter easier,” McDowell said. “It’s just kind of a physical fact. A change is coming. Let’s get everyone with a short putter back in the bag as the game is meant to be played.”

If there is a ban, I'd be interested to see what definition is applied. It seems from where I'm sitting that most detractors object to the "anchoring" of a club to the body. However, not everyone who has a long putter uses it in this way (e.g. Martin Laird uses a belly putter without it contacting his body; some people who use the ultra-long broom handles hang it somewhere around their chest or chin without anchoring).

I could also see some merit in limiting the shaft length of a putter (as e.g. those with broom handles clearly have an unfair advantage when measuring 1 or 2 club lengths for a drop)... but would that mean lead to a load of basketball players being forced to give up the sport?!?

"If that's the case, that person must perceive an advantage to using an anchored putter as opposed to a conventional one."

You could say the same about someone like KJ Choi choosing to hit Hybrids all the way up to 6 iron instead of conventional irons.

If KJ or someone else with a bag full of Hybrids starts winning majors will the powers that be start looking into banning them? A quite ridiculous example but thats how it feels with the long putter as well.

The new Rules came in this year without anyone crying out about why long putter hadn't been banned. In fact I don't even think they were on the agenda. Simpson and Bradley (plus Els now I guess) have some big wins and now everyone is against them.

The voices didn't seem to be that loud until these two came along and started winning?

that makes putting under pressure with that type of putter easier,” McDowell said

I think Adam Scott on the 16th at Lytham proved this isn't always true.

Conehead wrote:that makes putting under pressure with that type of putter easier,” McDowell said

I think Adam Scott on the 16th at Lytham proved this isn't always true.

I think the way that Scotts putting fell apart with the short putter he would never have been in the position he was in at the Open without the switch to the anchored long putter.
People using all sorts of putter fall apart under pressure in a major, that doesnt really prove anything, but he went from being shocking to being good using a long putter.

and i'm pretty sure Els melted down with a couple of short putts that cost him a place at The Masters early this year as well though so it's not like Scott's misses were a one off. Bradley and Simpson miss short putts as well it's not like people who using long putters are bulletproof from 5 foot and in.

Scott has benefitted from the long putter but nobody seemed to care that much when he first changed and was only just making cuts.

Conehead wrote:"If that's the case, that person must perceive an advantage to using an anchored putter as opposed to a conventional one."

You could say the same about someone like KJ Choi choosing to hit Hybrids all the way up to 6 iron instead of conventional irons.

If KJ or someone else with a bag full of Hybrids starts winning majors will the powers that be start looking into banning them? A quite ridiculous example but thats how it feels with the long putter as well.

The new Rules came in this year without anyone crying out about why long putter hadn't been banned. In fact I don't even think they were on the agenda. Simpson and Bradley (plus Els now I guess) have some big wins and now everyone is against them.

The voices didn't seem to be that loud until these two came along and started winning?

Can only speak for myself, but posting on here and on the old 606 I'm pretty sure people (the same people) have been going on about them for years.

Conehead wrote:"If that's the case, that person must perceive an advantage to using an anchored putter as opposed to a conventional one."

You could say the same about someone like KJ Choi choosing to hit Hybrids all the way up to 6 iron instead of conventional irons.

No, you couldn't. Hybrids are used in exactly the same way fairway woods or irons are. The stroke made with them is not fundamentally different, whereas one made with an anchored putter is demonstrably different to a conventional stroke. The issue isn't with the clubs themselves but with the anchored nature of the stroke.

Is the stroke different though?

The blade goes back, hits the ball and follows through.

The technique may be different but both result in the ball being hit the same way.

Exactly, you've still got to get the line and weight right.

But the line is pretty much guaranteed because you're anchoring the top of the club. Any movement away from or towards your body will be almost automatically eliminated.

SmithersJones wrote:But the line is pretty much guaranteed because you're anchoring the top of the club. Any movement away from or towards your body will be almost automatically eliminated.

But again that cannot be proved. (and if anything high profile misses by Scott and Els this season would suggest anchoring gurantees nothing)

What can be proved is nobody in the top 20 strokes gained from putting stat uses a long putter and golfers with long putter miss from a few feet just as regualr as those with smaller putters.

If it was that helpful from short distances you would have some pro's sacrifcing a wedge and carrying a short and long putter.

I think it has taken to long, for them to ban these putters, should have been banned over 10 years ago, you see more and more juniors using them now than ever before.

I would say ban them in the pro game, as from 2016, but due to the cost of putters in general, gives amateurs till 2020 till they are banned from amateur game.

Yeah, people really need 8 years to save up for a new putter

If we're going to ban things with no basis in fact then let's ban those tees which give you an extra three yards and bracelets that make you calm

I think it will be cleared with the manufacturers.

I have no data to back this up but just from my own observations out on the course it does not seem like many club golfers use longer putters. If this is indeed the case I cant imagine the manufacturers will mind too much.

Super

Dont be so derisive about other peoples finances, who are you to cast judgement on someone for whom buying a putter might be substantial monetary outlay?

super_realist wrote:and bracelets that make you calm

Don't ban those, just lock up anyone who believes they work, clearly not safe to be out on their own.

Super
Lots of innovation brought into golf have been banned, to try and keep the game, the way it was designed to be played.
In the 1930s various types of putting strokes, we're banned (putting between the legs like a polo shot) etc etc.
The spring head loaded driver was banned several years ago and recently, the types of groves on iron clubs.

The long handed putter is another of these innovations, that are against how the game was designed to be played, and I agree that they should be banned.

Maybe as another generation takes over and runs the game long handed putters, and spring headed drivers will be allowed, just hope I am not around to see it.

PS
(allowing amateur golfers time to get used to short putters, is to ensure that their handicaps can be maintained during the transformation period, and I do not think that 8 years is to long)

I am no rules expert, which is why me and my friends take generous drops when we lose a ball... but what in the rules of golf states that you cannot anchor the club to a part of your body? Is it a clear rule, or is it a guideline open to interpretation...like F1 regulations.

It's not a clear rule at all Beninho, that's the issue. People are getting their knickers in a twist because they think it's "against the spirit"


As defined by who exactly?

The rules make it quite simple for long putters to be banned;

14-1 - Ball to be Fairly Struck At

The ball must be fairly struck at with the head of the club and must not be pushed, scraped or spooned.

It could easily be argued that by anchoring the club is being spooned or at least not fairly struck at.


14-3 - Artificial Devices, Unusual Equipment and Unusual Use of Equipment

The R&A reserves the right, at any time, to change the Rules relating to artificial devices, unusual equipment and the unusual use of equipment, and to make or change the interpretations relating to these Rules.

So it is pretty clear the R and A can alter equipment rules as they please.




A further point, why are people using the argument that because long putters were initially thought to be ok, we cannot change our minds and reassess the suitability of their use?

It is becoming clear that they are an unusual club not in keeping with how the game was designed to be played. By strike you think of making a free swing at something, not guiding something anchored to your body.

McLaren wrote:It could easily be argued that by anchoring the club is being spooned or at least not fairly struck at.

No it can't.

McLaren wrote:The R&A reserves the right, at any time, to change the Rules relating to artificial devices, unusual equipment and the unusual use of equipment, and to make or change the interpretations relating to these Rules.

These putters aren't unusual anymore, they are commonplace.

McLaren wrote:

A further point, why are people using the argument that because long putters were initially thought to be ok, we cannot change our minds and reassess the suitability of their use?

My gripe is that the only reason people seem to be changing their minds is because a few golfers have had success using these type of putters. They were "initially thought to be ok" is a bit misleading as well because they've been around for over 20 years. The changing of minds and reassessing of suitability would not be an issue if the likes of Bradley and Simpson hadn't won a load of tournaments.

If these 2 golfers don't exisit we wouldn't even be having this debate and certainly not to the extent that The R and A feel that they need to comment and address the situation.

For me it's a classic knee jerk reaction to a few years success. Over the course of the long putters existence short putters have ruled supreme. A few victories for the long putter and now everyone wants it banned? I have no particular strong feelings for or against the long putter/anchoring etc.... I'm just not keen on seeing success being punished when mediocrity was easily accepted.

But they do exist and have highlighted an issue that was always going to surface at some point. The issue being these putters should never have been allowed. Why refuse to ban them over some notion that a mistake should not be rectified?

I just don't see what actual damage they are causing to the game of golf?

They have existed for over 20 years nearly 100 Majors and I really can't see the future of golf being affected if they were to stay - it will just punish a handful of players (unfairly in my opinion)

I accept that a ban is likely as the bandwagon seems out of control and I'm aware i'm in a huge minority by sticking up for the long putters by it just doesn't sit right with me that a change is coming about because of golfers being successful with them.

Whether they stay or not the impact on the actual game of golf will be so minimal I just think it seems a tad spiteful to take them away from players who benefit from them. If they exisited and everyone was useless with them a ban wouldn't need to come into place.

As i've said before, to punish success when failure was tolerated (when using them) seems more against the spirit of the game than using them in the first place.

Conehead- the challenge of golf must be maintained. Long putters, like box grooves, reduce the challenge and should be banned.

incontinentia wrote:Long putters, .......reduce the challenge and should be banned.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, where is the proof that the challenge of putting is reduced? As stated before golfers with long putters miss just as much as those using short putters and if anything the current top 20 golfers in the strokes gained by putting stat ALL use a short putter?

Go figure? If the challenge was reduced it would have taken less than the 80 or so majors that long putters have been around for before someone won using one.

The assumptions that long putters help you putt better are based on opinions not hard facts. If someone has stats that prove otherwise I'd love to see them. If they were out there my opinion would differ greatly but I don't think anyone has successfully proved that a long putter benefits a golfer more than a short one?

Adam Scott stated when he changed to a long putter that it was almost too easy and felt like cheating.

Thank god the people who know more about golf than anyone on here will make the decision.

I can see that no matter what decision they make will not go down well with everyone, but at least we should have a decision, and not the way it's now all up in the air.

To me long putters are much more of an advantage than square grooves or high COR drivers. Yes high COR faces gave extra distance (for what that is worth), square grooves allowed in many cases a bit of bite out of the rough and more spin generally (although that still has to be harnessed/controlled).

A long putter (with an anchoring point) however fundamentally alters the stroke and DOES make it easier...if players still contrive to have poor putting stats with the broome handle then that's an issue for them and should not alter the argument. Most that go to the belly/Broome handle do it because their conventional putting stroke has gone and as we know much of the putting game is played out in the 6 inches between the ears so it would be no surprise that after a honeymoon period, mental frailty returns to a point with some of the Belly/Broom boys.

Consider this...if you go to putt out, you lift the flag out and tap in. If the flag isn't touching the ground, no penalty. If it is it's a penalty stroke, why? because you are deemed to be getting help by using the flagstick to assist you anchor/stabilize yourself. A bit of a nonsense perhaps but where do you draw the line? ...and the whole issue with the belly putter is...it's ANCHORED to a stable part of the body to help stabilize the stroke, why should it be allowed when other methods of stabilizing yourself are not??

Well said Jas

To add insult to injury saw fatty Petterson use his cheat stick to measure a drop. Talk about a double cheat. That's an easy rule to change, all drops measured with a wedge. Level playing field again in an instant.

Nearly everyone on this thread is talking about banning long putters when the issue is anchoring. Long putters will not be banned