Europro tour bans belly putters

First topic message reminder :

This was mentioned last night during the Solheim Cup coverage. The announcement mentions belly putters, one can only assume this also includes broomhandles.

Interesting, I know there has been talk for years about unfair advantage etc but to date, there has been no ban imposed. I wonder if this is the tip of the iceberg or a unilateral decision.

http://geckoeuroprotour.com/latest-rules-update/

Progress is fine as long as it stays within the rules of the game, just look at ball technology, what we do not want to see is new ideas being introduced, that are not within the rules, or are what you would call borderline on whether they would conform or not

The putters in question are well within the rules and have been around for a generation.

oldparwin wrote:Progress is fine as long as it stays within the rules of the game, just look at ball technology, what we do not want to see is new ideas being introduced, that are not within the rules, or are what you would call borderline on whether they would conform or not

That would mean the belly and long putter are fine then as they are allowed within the rules of the game and are not banned. Whether something is borderline also doesn't make it outside of the rules just makes it something those adverse to progress frown upon.

The belly putter nor long putter gives any guarantees that someone will become a better putter in anyway, does the ridiculously short putter Garrigus uses give him and advantage as he's closer to ball, no it's just his preference still has to get the ball in the hole. Does having custom fit on my clubs compared to my opponents non custom fit mean I have unfair advantage NO. If we want to get nitpicky about whats fair and unfair or within the spirit of the game theirs a lot more needs looking at than just length of a putter

Maverick wrote:...If we want to get nitpicky about whats fair and unfair or within the spirit of the game theirs a lot more needs looking at than just length of a putter

Definitely. However, that's not really a good reason to ignore whether these putters should be outlawed.

Mav

The R&A and the PGA are fuffing about, and cannot agree on anything, this is now becoming detrimental to the sport.
We need 1 body to make the rules, and get everyone else to abide by them.
I believe that the PGA are in the mentality of "if there is money in it for us then its legal" and the R&A are are trying to protect the more traditional aspects of the sport.

Golf has moved on, with all the improvements in the sport, that the old traditional courses that were a severe challeng in there days are not long or challenging enough today, so things like belly putters are no worse than mallet putting between the legs, that the R&A banned, that was before the PGA was as powerful as it is today.

Why both the R&A and the PGA sit down and look at thing like belly putters and make some decision on them, this indecision, will in the end give manufactures a field day, and we might even see a lot worse than belly putters

NBS:

Definitely. However, that's not really a good reason to ignore whether these putters should be outlawed.

I'm not saying we should ignore it, but I also don't believe they should be outlawed. They're damn ugly and would I use one, no never but still don't advocate banning them

OP

We need 1 body to make the rules, and get everyone else to abide by them.

I've thought and said that for a long time we need 1 official worldwide ruling body and handicap system, but the powers on bothsides wont agree to combine and certainly the R&A won't want to leave their home...

Golf has moved on, with all the improvements in the sport, that the old traditional courses that were a severe challeng in there days are not long or challenging enough today,

Thats progress, those same course would become obselete anyway with the atheletic advances in sport even with older equipment the long guys would still be longer than others. Thats why course set up now needs to be tightened and done to make a bomber realise hitting it so far can be an issue, not hard to reigh these guys in with the right set up and long grass

OP,
Can you explain how belly putters make money for the PGA?

It is not the same as croquet putting at all. I fail to see how these things are detrimental to the sport. You talk as if they make a laughing stock out of greens, pin position etc. If they guaranteed you holed 50% more putts with them I would agree, but they are just another way of getting the ball in the hole which is no more effective than any other.

If modern courses were not a challenge OP, when was the last time you broke par Gross?

super_realist wrote:OP,
Can you explain how belly putters make money for the PGA?

It is not the same as croquet putting at all. I fail to see how these things are detrimental to the sport. You talk as if they make a laughing stock out of greens, pin position etc. If they guaranteed you holed 50% more putts with them I would agree, but they are just another way of getting the ball in the hole which is no more effective than any other.

If modern courses were not a challenge OP, when was the last time you broke par Gross?

Exactly, I'm starting to worry with amount of times i'm agreeing with you of late SR considering on old 606 we always seemed to disagree, but of late I would say we're certainly on the same wavelength either that or we both actaully sing from the same song sheet!

Makes me laugh when I see and hear people saying the games getting to easy, yet the average handicap hasn't changed in the past 10 years nor has the average scoring in amateur golf improved yet this game is getting so easy with technology

Super

Can you tell me how much golf manufactures pay the PGA????

No I didnt think so, so how come this is the most wealthiest tour, someone is pumping money it from somewhere, and my guess would be its the club manufactures.

If you dissagree with me then prove me wrong!!

Mav, I've lightened up a bit I think and have become more reasonable.

I hear a lot of people complain about 60degree wedges too. While I think thats too much for me, I can open up or close my 52 or 58 degree between 40-75 degrees and still make a shot out of it.
I don't see the big deal, people are acting as if golf has become easy, but when was the last time a club golfer hit 18 greens in regulation and single putted them all? Never.

OP, Are you suggesting that the club manufacturers are paying the R&A and PGA to stop them changing the Rule on belly putters?
It's not as if belly putters are a cash cow is it? How many people do you see using them, and even if they were banned the same players would still need a legal type of putter. Seems a bit odd to me.
If they had that much influence I'm sure they'd make a lot more money by making sure rules on drivers/balls were lax enough that every year they could convince punters to part with more cash for the latest driver which added 5% more distance, but you say they are more concerned with keeping belly putters in play?

I thought that the rules on drivers are that slack that each year, they can all bring out a new one, that amazingly comply.

Super you and Mav might be singing to the same song sheet, but amazingly it is not mine, I get the distinct feeling that you are taken turn about, ready to jump on my every word, I thought as a golf forum we all had a chance to express our views, but why do I feel that if I express my veiw or comment on something, both of you jump in with 2 feet to try and belittle my opinion, now this does not upset me, but it does not show both of you up in a good light.

Both appear to try an be the dictators of this forum and people with opinions you dissagree with, then it becomes shooting season with, so all I can say is SHOOT AWAY, but my opinion is as important as yours, so slag me of all you want, I could not care less

Op, its called debate, but just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean we're not out to get you:laugh:
What I mean about the drivers is that if the companies were paying off the pga, then they would make sure that they were getting a technological advantage by changing conforming rules and not just cosmetic upgrades, however these rules are set by the r and a and are pretty rigid, the club testing facility is about 10 miles from my house and every prototype is robotically tested to check it conforms.

Rest assured though op, we just like debating with you, nothing more sinister than that.

OP I'm far from being a dictator and disagreeing with your every word, in fact if you read back over this thread and many others there are some points on which I agree with you and others which I do not, that is just debate and personal opinion
If we all agreed all the time what would be the point to this forum.

I can see you side of this argument against banning these putters by I simply don't agree if that's what you class as being shot at then your being far too sensistive.

I dissagree with a lot of comments on here and I am willing to put down my views, in a gentlemanly manner, but then that's my generation who respect people even though we might dissagree with their opinions.

I shall continue to post, and state my opinion, no matter what, so you can be as nasty as you want.

On a side note, why does the PGA and the R&A allow all these new drivers every year, they could very easily protect the amateur golfers from being ripped off, by barring them from bringing out a new one each year, and only allow each company to bring one out every 3 years.

Why do new drivers cost so much, when after 18 months after their launch they cost less than 3rd of the actual launch price.

My theory is that they have to fund the PGA and the R&A, so they have to launch new product each year at extortionate prices, in order to make their contribution to the governing bodies,(note I did not say sport)

OP, The R&A and PGA cannot tell companies to restrict the number of clubs/models they produce. All they stipulate is that they meet conforming criteria for use in their sanctioned tournaments and what can be used in amateur competition. They only set the standard that clubs have to conform to, they don't have a say in the amount produced (how could they?)
I''m a little confused as to why you think the R&A can influence the number produced, providing they meet the criteria set out by the PGA and R&A what does it matter if they produce 1 or 1 billion examples? Nobody is forcing anyone to buy the latest models as far as I can see.


So if as you suggest club manufacturers have the governing bodies of the sport on the payroll do you not think they'd use this influence to elicit continual changes to the conforming standards so that those clubs they produced each year offered something other than cosmetic upgrades, effectively making their previous models obsolete, instead of just last years colours.
I sincerely doubt that OEM's are paying the governing bodies money to NOT change the putting rule on long putters.

Drivers cost so much because people are prepared to pay for them, there are enough gullible people about who will buy the latest model thinking its a magic bullet. Just look at the crud that The GOlf Channel used to market. Sold by the truckload but total propaganda.

Have you any proof that OEM's pay money to the governing bodies?
Companies produce new models frequently because surprise surprise they are a business and are in direct competition with their competitors. It's a bit of a leap that they produce so many models because they have to fund the R&A. That's a bit of a tin foil hat assumption.
Golf also has a ready supply of customers , with a macho characteristic to satisfy and who have disposable income and are gullible enough to swallow advertising guff that latest driver is the longest, straightest club yet? (their first one must have been rubbish then)
Strangely enough, I've yet to see an advert which advocates the belly putter as the solution to all your putting woes.

Neither Mav or I are being unpleasant, we are merely responding to your opinions as you have many times to us. It's sensible, yet sometimes robust debate which keeps the forum interesting.

OP.

As I've said i;m not being dictartorial or trying to disagree with you for the sake of it, it's simply my opinion that they should not be banned as despite the fact they are anchored to the body I fail to see how they by that alone they make someone a better putter.

As for posting, I would hope you do continue to post on here as your a valuable member ofthe forum and have some good points to discuss further and if you feel i'm having a go in anyway then that couldn't be further from what i'm actually doing but would take this opportunity to offer apology to you if thats how its made you feel and i'm certainly not being nasty.

So to your other point, i;d agree whole heartedly we see far too many new drivers and irons on the market each year in an attempt to get money out of the public with new claims of longest, straightest and best yet etc. I even raised the point on another thead recently about the amount of current offerings I saw in a shop the other dayfrom Taylor Made, I think the count was something like 9 current sets of irons and countless options on their range of drivers.

I think there should be some sort of Caveat as to how much they can flood the markets with and that the progression of clubs should slowed down as there really taking the art of working the ball out of the equation now as everything has such a large sweet spot as is design to reduce the amount of spin you can impart to add draw spin or cut spin to a shot.

As for paying the R&A and USGA that i'm not sute of and wouldn't wish to get embroiled in a debate about something I know nothing of but would hazard a guess they must surely face certain criteria from testers from both organisations to pass muster though some rules do seem a little lax!

OP

You only have to look at the extortionate amounts paid to some of the pros to see why you and I pay through the nose for our latest shiny equipment. I'm not convinced that year on year there is much improvement in the new equipment, it's all a ploy to get us to part with cash.

I'd love to know how much Nike have paid to a certain golfer over the course of his career. Estimates of Woods becoming sport's first billionaire but only a small percentage of that will be prizemoney

drive4show wrote:OP

You only have to look at the extortionate amounts paid to some of the pros to see why you and I pay through the nose for our latest shiny equipment. I'm not convinced that year on year there is much improvement in the new equipment, it's all a ploy to get us to part with cash.

I'd love to know how much Nike have paid to a certain golfer over the course of his career. Estimates of Woods becoming sport's first billionaire but only a small percentage of that will be prizemoney

D4S hits the nail firmly on the head here, and a way to prove that is to compare manufacturers and 2 good examples would be Nike v's MD Golf.

Nike Pays out millions upon millions each year to its sponsored stars e.g Woods, Schwartzl, F Molinari, Glover, Dyson to name but a few, it then piles huge amounts of cash into merchandising its varying offers for the current season. So therefore it has to recoup the money somewhere and that is in the price charged to the punters. Hence £250 for the VR Pro Driver or over £500 for a set of irons

MD Pays out £0 to players for sponsorship, does a limited amount of marketing on their own website, is reliant on word of mouth from player to player to advertise the quality of their products, andI can assure you they are quality. In fact the shafts and composite materials in their clubs is of equal if not better quality then NIKE, TM etc but by pure fact of £0 outgoing on fluff they charge such low comparitive prices to the over mechandised brands.

The bigger brands know that general public will fall for the latest drivel despite minimal change to equipment that they will always get away with it

Why should long putters be banned?

They should be banned because pros that are decent putters with the short stick are now feeling at a disadvantage over those that use the long putters (belly or chin etc) and are considering changing or have actually changed. Phil has changed. There was an article in the local press this week that Paul Laurie has been practicing with the long putter and would have changed this week if the greens at the Dunhill courses were not so big. How many other pros will be practicing with the long putters this winter?

When long putters first came out they were the last option for those with the yips and nobody felt they gave an advantage, probably becuase the users were near the end of their careers and their nerves were already shot.

Do they give an advantage? In theory fixing the end of the putter to the body is an advantage and becuase the pros practice and perfect some are now taking advantage. Apparently there is an advantage with short and meduim putts but a disadvantage on long putts, but overall a net advantage.

Would the pros take the risk of changing from a short stick to a long putter to gain a small advantage? I say yes. Look at the time they now spend in the gym and on their diets and consider the extra money Luke Donald would have earned if he had been 1 shot better at the weekend.

I for one do not want long putters to become the norm. Golf was created to be played by holding the golf club in your hands. Simples. Tradition is a big part of the game for most of us and allowing the club to be fixed against the core of the body is not in the spirit of the game.

We need a rule to limit body contact with the putter to arms only. This would allow Langer's method of fixing the shaft to the left forearm but belly, chin etc techniques would be banned. Perhaps the rule should be hand only.

Why are the governing bodies unable to introduce a rule change. One reason may be that they are divided on the issue, but the main reason is that they are concerned about pros and pros management groups taking them to court, especially in the US. I do not think the issue is with the manufacturers as long putters is a small part of their turnover and golfers putting badly will always buy another putter even if long putters are banned. The recent square grooves / PING rule change was similar but distictly different. In that case the governing bodies negotiated a deal with the manufacturer and the risk of a player taking them to court was minimal.

If long putters had been introduced in the 20's or 30's I am certain they would have been banned within a few years because in those days the governing bodies actually had control over the game.

Scottie ... given the game extended pretty much only to the USA and GB&I with a sprinkling of 'other' global courses thrown in, the game was much, much easier to govern back then.

The simple fact is that it is not yet possible to determine if belly putters offer an unfair advantage to free-swinging ones. The evidence for this can be seen via those pros who flit between belly and free-swinging putters (as Paul Lawrie has done).

You are also being very selective in what you deem to be acceptable. How is anchoring a putter with an arm any more acceptable than the belly. If you're going to spout "spirit of the game" cliches to support your argument then surerly the only way to hold a putter is with the hands only?

I am personally against the banning of such putters on the basis that the R&A and USGA have to consider the needs of the ordinary club golfer as well. The simple fact is that banning them would mean some club golfers probably having to leave the game altogether. At the end of the day, golf is just a game.

Bifurcation is a possible solution but would forever put an asterisk against Keegan Bradley's PGA win.

I think a lot of folk miss the point of long clubs.

They can't ban long putters without a massive change to the games rules.

What it the difference between a 46' driver and as 46' putter. Pros/manufacturers will just make very upright 46' 'drivers'.

gaelgowfer wrote:Scottie ... given the game extended pretty much only to the USA and GB&I with a sprinkling of 'other' global courses thrown in, the game was much, much easier to govern back then.

The simple fact is that it is not yet possible to determine if belly putters offer an unfair advantage to free-swinging ones. The evidence for this can be seen via those pros who flit between belly and free-swinging putters (as Paul Lawrie has done).

You are also being very selective in what you deem to be acceptable. How is anchoring a putter with an arm any more acceptable than the belly. If you're going to spout "spirit of the game" cliches to support your argument then surerly the only way to hold a putter is with the hands only?

I am personally against the banning of such putters on the basis that the R&A and USGA have to consider the needs of the ordinary club golfer as well. The simple fact is that banning them would mean some club golfers probably having to leave the game altogether. At the end of the day, golf is just a game.

Bifurcation is a possible solution but would forever put an asterisk against Keegan Bradley's PGA win.

Couldn't have put it better myself, you cannot simply ban something because you do not like it, on days of old such things as custom fit could have been taken out of spirit of the game as well as it may give one an advantage over someone who doesn't have custom fit but then there's no proof in that as someone could equally play as well with something off the shelf.

Well said Gael

Mav
They have always had custom fit.

How many pros bellies are actually hard enough to properly anchor the putter anyway? Phil's certainly isnt! Maybe that's why a lot of the young guys use them...

Personally I think you can still yip a belly putter. It might not affect the direction so much but surely you could still yip and be off with the pace?

Mav, would love to try some MD stuff but never see it in any ranges or pro shops. The seve forged irons look well worth a go!

Until someone provides evidence that long putters actually provide a benefit to one's putting statistics I can see no reason why they ought to be banned.

If it is from a technique and stroke point of view as being different from the conventional then there may be a slight case.
It just seems a fuss over nothing to me, and a perfect example why golf is still very stuffy, fuddy and duddy.
Just enjoy your own game and don't worry about other people struggling with theirs.

Gaelgolfer,

I agree some club golfers may stop playing, but I don't want the majority of the pros (then club golfers) using long putters as this was not the original intent of the game. Fundamentally golf is a game played with a stick in your hands. Having different rules for pros and amateurs would not work.

In balance I would make the rule change but that's just my view and I think it probably won't happen for the reasons you give.

I agree an advantage has not yet been proved but I think the pros think there is an advantage for short putts. If a rule change is delayed and there is an advantage then in a few years the use of long putters will increase and it will then be too late to change the rule. I do personally think there is an advantage because the player is fixing the putter against his chin or chest rather than his hands.

Doon the Water,

I don't agree it would be a massive rule change.

The rule change is easy. All they need to do is limit the contact points between the club and the body and the rule can be applied to all clubs.

There are existing rules regarding the body contact points to the ground (remember Stadler missing a Ryder Cup spot because he got penalised for laying a towel on the ground then putting his knee on the towel - not allowed to hole out with flag in one hand and the flag touching the ground).

There are existing rules regarding the body contact points to the club (e.g. in the rain you can't wrap a cloth round the grip).

"... using long putters (as this) was not the original intent of the game."

Scottie ... I understand your frustration but I think you will struggle to find any rule that would even imply this.

Whilst I wouldn't like to see the game bifurcated either (although this may well be a moot point when taking into account the grooves fiasco!), I'm at a loss to understand why you are of the opinion that bifurcation "would not work"?

The only problem I have with long putters is when they are used as a measuring device. I'm specifically referring to the broom handle variety. Although there is a limit on the length of other clubs (48"), there is no such limit for putters. I think therefore that putters should not be allowed to be used as a measuring device. That way, the maximum length for taking relief can only ever be 48" per club length.

Now that Keegan Bradley has won a major using a belly putter, I would agree that it seems inevitable more golfers will at least try them which is why I think the governing bodies need to make some kind of announcement to cover any possible future ban. At the moment, I don't believe it's possible for them to pronounce on this when they don't as yet have sufficient data to prove one way or the other that the belly putter offers an unfair advantage and, of course, any change is not likely to happen before 2016 as the next rules revision is due next year.

Anyway, couldn't standing further away from the ball be deemed a disadvantage? And, I agree with Lairdy in that I think it's entirely possible to yip with a belly putter. Who knows, perhaps in 30 years or so, we (well not me personally as I will likely be divot material by then!) shall see Keegan Bradley trying out one these new-fangled short free-swinging putters as a means to rid himself of the yippy demons!!!

Maverick ...

Gaelgowfer,

After checking what bifurcation means I still can't see how this can work. If amateurs are allowed to use long putters and pros are not then what happens when the top amateurs turn pro. Amateurs with asperations of turning pro would have to stick to the short stick while low handicap amatuers who know they are not good enough to turn pro will have the advantage of chosing which type of putter to use.

I cannot see the rules changing, I just don't want to see the game change too much. It was acceptable when only a few used long putters but we may be entering an era when a significant number will. If this becomes the case then kids will start off with the long putter. Fixing the end of the club to the chin or stomach was not intended when the game was created. A rule change will be a problem for those that have the yips with the short stick, but there are many others who yip their chips ar can't play bunker shots. These guys have to make do so why should sensativity for those with putting yips prevent us from changing the rules to protect the integrety and traditions of the game.

Let me put it this way. If we knew what we know now when the long putter first arrived, would the governing bodies have banned it then. I think they would have.

Interesting fact after watching the US golf last night, a high perventage of the field. Were using the belly, none of those shown made a decent length putt, and the commentators showed the PGA's all around putting stats not a single user of the long wand within the top 20 putters on the PGA tour so does it make it easieri don't think so

Bottom line is that if long putters were so great we would all be using them.

Doon the Water wrote:Bottom line is that if long putters were so great we would all be using them.

Amen brother doon. Amen

Maverick wrote:Interesting fact after watching the US golf last night, a high perventage of the field. Were using the belly, none of those shown made a decent length putt, and the commentators showed the PGA's all around putting stats not a single user of the long wand within the top 20 putters on the PGA tour so does it make it easieri don't think so

Not sure that argument holds water Mav. The only stat that matters is if it improves the user of the putters game, not how it compares to others who may be better putters anyway.

Doon the Water wrote:Bottom line is that if long putters were so great we would all be using them.

If we could fit them in the boot of our cars that is!...

I don't want to see longer putters banned but i don't buy the argument that there's no advantage to those using them. I just don't think it's necessarily an unfair advantage.

Let's not kid ourselves though that they don't make a difference.

It's not a question of do they make putting easier. It's a question of, do they make putting easier for the person using them. They answer to that is clearly yes, or they wouldn't use it.

Golf is an individual game and nothing you can do, really, can affect anyone else's game. The only game you can affect is yours. So it's ok saying 'get on with your game' and 'what putter he's using doesn't affect me' but nothing he can do can affect you. In that you're playing with your score against the course versus his score against the course, anything he can do to improve his score is the maximum affect he can have on you, and that's what using a different putter is enabling him to do

Fuss over nothing. I feel that people are upset in regard to a long putter requiring a different set up and stroke than a traditional putter.

Throughout the length of this thread, i've still not seen any proof that a long putter has improved anyones putting.

super_realist wrote:Throughout the length of this thread, i've still not seen any proof that a long putter has improved anyones putting.

Nor have I.... Also some of the guys that seem to be using the belly putter bave a fair belly on them so looks like a disadvantage as there is nothing firm to hold it against

SR, so you think say Keegan Bradley would be as good a putter if he used a regular putter? Despite the fact that he obviously feels it improves him

Surely the proof is in the pudding. More and more players are using (and winning) with them.
I've not seen any proof that I couldn't hit wedge shots with a frying pan but you don't see anyone trying. The proof is in the pudding.

Diggers wrote:

Maverick wrote:Interesting fact after watching the US golf last night, a high perventage of the field. Were using the belly, none of those shown made a decent length putt, and the commentators showed the PGA's all around putting stats not a single user of the long wand within the top 20 putters on the PGA tour so does it make it easieri don't think so

Not sure that argument holds water Mav. The only stat that matters is if it improves the user of the putters game, not how it compares to others who may be better putters anyway.

Quite.

MustPuttBetter wrote:SR, so you think say Keegan Bradley would be as good a putter if he used a regular putter? Despite the fact that he obviously feels it improves him

Surely the proof is in the pudding. More and more players are using (and winning) with them.
I've not seen any proof that I couldn't hit wedge shots with a frying pan but you don't see anyone trying. The proof is in the pudding.

Well, it's not really MPB, I think it makes them more comfortable over the putter, but I don't necessarily think it makes them hole more putts.
In the same way that if I have a driver that I like the look of I'll feel more comfortable than with a driver i consider ugly. Doesn't mean I'll hit more fairways. Just means it feels more comfortable in my hands.

I don't think it makes them any better, it just doesn't make them any worse.


Would people be quite so vociferous if someone else cut the Driver down to say 40 inches, it would impart less sidepin and be easier to hit straight, yet would be within the rules. Would there still be crowds of foul play or would people realise that if they had to plumb to such depths it just means that they were poor drivers and those who used the conventional manner to good effect would be in a better position.

I just feel that for whatever reason - and you might be perfectly correct that for some it's nothing but feel - the guys that use them must in the main be better putters for it. Otherwise why bother.

I'm off to search for proof! :

And to groove my frying pan

ScottieD18 wrote:Gaelgowfer,

After checking what bifurcation means I still can't see how this can work. If amateurs are allowed to use long putters and pros are not then what happens when the top amateurs turn pro. Amateurs with asperations of turning pro would have to stick to the short stick while low handicap amatuers who know they are not good enough to turn pro will have the advantage of chosing which type of putter to use.

I cannot see the rules changing, I just don't want to see the game change too much. It was acceptable when only a few used long putters but we may be entering an era when a significant number will. If this becomes the case then kids will start off with the long putter. Fixing the end of the club to the chin or stomach was not intended when the game was created. A rule change will be a problem for those that have the yips with the short stick, but there are many others who yip their chips ar can't play bunker shots. These guys have to make do so why should sensativity for those with putting yips prevent us from changing the rules to protect the integrety and traditions of the game.

Let me put it this way. If we knew what we know now when the long putter first arrived, would the governing bodies have banned it then. I think they would have.

Scottie

This wouldn't be any different from the current groove rules. Amateurs can use the old style grooves until 2024 (I think?) but they cannot be used in elite events ie. British amateur, Brabazon trophy, Lytham trophy etc. So, the top boys can use old style grroves for their monthly medals but then have to change their clubs when they tee it up in the top level stuff.


But regarding the original post, I think this is all a storm in a teacup. If you are going to start claiming unfair advantages for certain people (long putter users), where do you draw the line? Shall we ban electric trolleys, rangefinders and all the other contraptions that make the game easier?

As long as EVERYONE has access to the items then nobody has an unfair advantage.

super_realist wrote:Would people be quite so vociferous if someone else cut the Driver down to say 40 inches, it would impart less sidepin and be easier to hit straight, yet would be within the rules. Would there still be crowds of foul play or would people realise that if they had to plumb to such depths it just means that they were poor drivers and those who used the conventional manner to good effect would be in a better position.

I'm not screaming foul play, but yes the guy who amended his driver would presumably have improved his driving.
The same as with those using a long putter. That's fine. But we seem to be trying to kid ourselves that they make no difference.

MPB

Quick question for you.....

Do you use a long handle putter? And if not, why not?

MustPuttBetter wrote:Let's not kid ourselves though that they don't make a difference.

It's not a question of do they make putting easier. It's a question of, do they make putting easier for the person using them. They answer to that is clearly yes, or they wouldn't use it.

MPB,

You may have a point that it makes it easier for the person using it (or indeed, makes them think that it makes them better, a placebo if you will), however from that analogy (with respect to making it easier) should players be able to custom fit their clubs so much? DJ and Quiros consistantly drive well in excess of 330 yards plus, against say Luke Donalds 280-300. Clearly custom fitting enables them to execute their shots, gaining length and accuracy more easily.

Custom fitting as been around a hell of a long time.... as have the longer putters.

On an aside note, don't know if anyone has seen clips of Els putting with the belly putter, witnessed this yesterday first hand at Kingsbarns, if anyone thinks he is better with this than the conventional then they are insane.

MustPuttBetter wrote:

super_realist wrote:Would people be quite so vociferous if someone else cut the Driver down to say 40 inches, it would impart less sidepin and be easier to hit straight, yet would be within the rules. Would there still be crowds of foul play or would people realise that if they had to plumb to such depths it just means that they were poor drivers and those who used the conventional manner to good effect would be in a better position.

I'm not screaming foul play, but yes the guy who amended his driver would presumably have improved his driving.
The same as with those using a long putter. That's fine. But we seem to be trying to kid ourselves that they make no difference.

But he would pay for his improvement in accuracy by not being able to hit it as far due to the lack of length in the shaft.
Therefore, he's a straighter driver, but he's consoderably shorter. So no advantage over a peer who doesn't struggle with his driver. No competitive advantage gained.

I wonder whether there was all this fuss when things like mallets, and other putter head types emerged from the time when only Golden Goose type heads were available.

D4s, no I don't. Probably because I'm a lazy git! My clubs are not custom fit either. I'm thinning about trying one as I think it might help

SR, agreed he would. But he would presumably deem that to be an improvement and give him a competitive edge or he would revert back no?

Gareth, I've no problem with custom fitting just like I have no problem with long putters. I'm just saying let's not convince ourselves that those who use them aren't better putters for it. They are. It helps as does custom fitting

MustPuttBetter wrote:D4s, no I don't. Probably because I'm a lazy git! My clubs are not custom fit either. I'm thinning about trying one as I think it might help

If you do try one and it improves your putting then fair play to you, golf is about enjoyment not frustration. I suspect though that you may find no improvement over a standard putter.

I take my hat off to anyone that can control them, I find them totally unwieldy. I also notice that very few people stick with them on a permanent basis, they often end up back with a short putter.