next »

[Patrick_Mucci]

Forget the prohibition against anchoring the grip to the body,
Forget the prohibition against a split grip.
Forget placing a specific length limit on the club

Don't worry about manufacturer's law suits
Don't worry about rule violations and enforcement.

The simplest method for banning the long putter or croquette method is to require that the putter be the shortest club in the golfer's bag.

Why didn't I think of that ...... earlier  ?

It's the most effective method of disposing of long putters, which some claim are non-traditional and/or a croquette style of putting.

It avoids rules interpretations with respect to use, it avoids manufacturer's law suits, etc. etc..

Wouldn't this be the simplest solution if you wanted to rid the game of those things they used to use to churn butter ?

[Garland Bayley]

My recollection of croquet mallets is that they are as short or shorter than the typical putter.

[Dschmidt]

I've got a better idea:

let's ban all center-shafter and/or heel-toe weighted putters.

That's effectively ban all long putters and it would come with the side-benefit of outing all the hypocrites that think their goofy-looking, high-tech, non-traditional putting contraption is any different or better than any other goofy-looking, high-tech, non-traditional putting contraption.

[wsmorrison]

Sorry, Jamie, et al.  I think the long putter should be banned.  

I don't care how the ruling is accomplished, the manufacturers are still going to be pissed off.  Why would the manufacturers not consider a lawsuit just because the rule is that the putter must be the shortest club in the bag?  In fact, a rule that restricts the club being only held in the hands and to swing the club freely, is less invasive since you are regulating the swing itself and not the club.  Anything that regulates the club length itself is likely to be opposed.  However, there are regulations on head size...so maybe that isn't so bad. To me, it is an easier sell to the lawyers that might get involved if the club cannot be anchored.  That is not a golf swing by my definition so it should not be allowed.  

[Jim Sullivan]

Tell me again...why are we banning these things?

[Bob_Huntley]

Pat,

I related this story some years ago relating to hearing Michael Bonallack advocating that the way to get rid of the long puter. His suggestion was that the hands must be contiguous to one another whilst putting. One cannot use a long putter without splitting the hands.

The really funny thing about it all was that just a few years later at the Autumn Meeting, while putting on the practice green adjacent to the first tee of TOC, who should be using the long putter, why, Michael Bonallack.

Bob  

[Dschmidt]

Bob, that's nuthin!

Go to any GCA event and all you see in the bags of GCAers who bemoan technology all day, every day is the latest high-tech gizmos -- 460cc's and square groove wedges and $400 putters and kryptonite shafts everywhere....

[Michael_Hendren]

I'm okay with the long putter - it's still a stick and a ball.  They should not, however, be available for use under any two-club rule.

Mike

[George Pazin]

What Jim said.

[wsmorrison]

Bob,

I may be wrong, but doesn't Vijay Singh and other golfers use two hands together with a belly putter?

David,

The difference between high tech belly and long putters and the technology in big drivers, wedges and the other high tech gizmos you cite is that the long putter is anchored and does not swing freely.  All other clubs swing freely and that should be the essence of a golf swing and the clubs allowed.

[Garland Bayley]

I prefer a rule that says if you anchor one club in your belly or chest when you use it, you must do the same for all clubs. That doesn't outlaw any clubs, but makes Shivas look silly swinging the other 13 clubs. Which, of course is the whole motivation for the rule.  

[Mike Benham]

I've got a better idea:

let's ban all center-shafter and/or heel-toe weighted putters.

Putters should abide by the same definition as "regular" clubs, irons and woods.

Heel shafted putters where the shaft is straight will be the only option.

[Dschmidt]

That doesn't outlaw any clubs, but makes Shivas look silly swinging the other 13 clubs.

And that would change the status quo...how?  

[Michael_Hendren]

After your opponent has stiffed it on the first hole is there anything better than watching him pull out the long putter right when you were ready to concede the putt?  Come on, these folks are to be pitied, not penalized.

[Dschmidt]

Yes, in fact there is, Mike....watching him agonize over whether to use the long putter or the short putter for this one.....  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

Evidently, you've never played "leather" against a long putter  

[Mike_Cirba]

Bob, that's nuthin!

Go to any GCA event and all you see in the bags of GCAers who bemoan technology all day, every day is the latest high-tech gizmos -- 460cc's and square groove wedges and $400 putters and kryptonite shafts everywhere....

Shivas,

That's really funny but totally true.  

Unfortunately, I haven't kept up in the latest Arms Race and I'd be a complete illiterate on bombsquadgolf.com, where some of my best GCA friends like to hang.

The highest tech club in my bag is the Titleist 975D driver I purchased from Dr. Childs a few years back.

This past weekend, whilst standing on the first tee with my playing companions (who shall go unnamed), each of us were holding our drivers on the ground, and I suddenly felt like the "short" man in the locker room.    

Those guys not only had LONGER drivers, the massive heads on them absolutely dwarfed my little piddly one   , and I never did recover from the instant inferiority complex that day.

But, at least I did have a built in excuse for being constantly outdriven.  

[Brad Swanson]

I'm with Mike on this one.  Since my semi-retirement from the game, I really notice how out of date my gear looks on my once/twice a year round(s).  Yes, I do have an Odyssey 2 ball putter (those are so 3-4 years ago) and a knock off cheapo driver with a decent sized-head.  However, my Mizuno blades 2-PW and Cleveland wedges (gap and sand) are all that I play beyond the driver to the green.  So once I'm off the tee, its blades all the way (no hybrids or anything of the like).  Hell, I can hardly afford greens fees on a regular basis, and the cost to get my gear up to spec with the latest "Arms Race" will keep me in semi-retirement for the forseeable future.

Staying on O/T, I like Pat's idea, but have been known to utelize once forbidden technology to gain yardage info, so I'll drop my stones and go back in my glass house.

Cheers,
Brad

[Rick Shefchik]

It's about competition, nothing else.

I play in two leagues, I'm in two season-long tournaments at my club, and there are a few member-guest and club championship events on my schedule each summer. I wouldn't consider paying current prices for up-to-date equipment if my golf were limited to recreational rounds with my wife and friends.

Nevertheless, I play with 15-year-old irons and I'm giving away about 50 CCs with my driver, I haven't yet found a hybrid I like, and my new $150 putter (bought on sale for $29 at a Golf Galaxy grand opening) doesn't work any better than my old putter.

I will gradually replace all these antiques, as I can afford to, but only because it isn't fair to my teammates and partners to keep giving up yards and spin to the players who always have the newest stuff.

Or maybe I'll just quit competing, and become that old guy with the canvas-and-leather bag, the Haig Ultras and the persimmon 3-wood.  

[Mike Benham]

... the Haig Ultras ...

If you ever want to rid yourself of those Haigs, let me know.

[Bob_Huntley]

... the Haig Ultras ...

If you ever want to rid yourself of those Haigs, let me know.

Mike,

The first set of clubs I owned were Henry Cottons. Heavy and not terribly attractive. I then saw some Haig Ultras and was beguiled. I had to have them. After a couple of ivory bracelets and a crocodile bag for my then wife, I stepped up to the plate and bought them. It was love at first sight and I thought that I played infinitely better because of them. When checking my win/loss record thereafter I realized that, as always with new equipment, I was kidding myself. But the Haigs were very beautiful.

Bob

[Doug Siebert]

Bob, that's nuthin!

Go to any GCA event and all you see in the bags of GCAers who bemoan technology all day, every day is the latest high-tech gizmos -- 460cc's and square groove wedges and $400 putters and kryptonite shafts everywhere....

Heh, I need to come out to one sometime so you can look in my bag and see my irons that are so old they were made back when V grooves were all there was, and my even older T-line blade putter.  I always check out those fancy weird looking new putters but everytime I think about buying one my putter starts working better for a few rounds and I realize its my putting stroke sucking that causes my putting woes, not my putter!

OK, so I do have a 460cc driver, but the shaft was only $16

[Tony Ristola]

Bob,

Contiguous? Would the hands actually have to touch, or just be close? If touching, that'd be a tough one, and would make Hubert Green, the stroke I picked up from Ed Merrins and the one advocated by Paul Runyan illegal.

As far as a rule, I think Pat's idea is simple and workable.

[Steve Lang]

 

Graet .. all we need is more dissscourse and legal opinoooons fillin up dem back decisions pages of the rule book.. would yee feel betr if teh rules said yah get ta cooount less than a stroke if da puter was teh shortest klub?


Sean, you'll find much of the BSG experience is unscientific, specification lust run amok.. interspersed with some good info.. cheers.. TXSeve

[Adam Clayman]

There should be as much dictation, on a swing, in the rules, as the designer has on the canvas. None!

Anchoring; Red herring. Every club is anchored to your hands on every swing. How about the shot with the ball well above the feet and the club has to be gripped way down on the shaft. Don't you anchor the grip against ones forearm?

[TEPaul]

"The simplest method for banning the long putter or croquette method is to require that the putter be the shortest club in the golfer's bag."

Patrick:

I don't know why it would be necessary to require that a putter must be the shortest club in any player's bag. Probably the simplest thing to do would be to put a maximum length on any conforming golf club, such as 50 inches. That would most certainly solve the "relief" problems and inequities that were created by the long putter.

Don't worry, Patrick, I fully expect you to defend to the death your initial recommendation on this thread no matter what anyone else says----since I can't recall a single time in the history of GOLFCLUBATLAS.com when you haven't done that.  

[Dschmidt]

Here are the original Leith Rules:

Articles & Laws in Playing at Golf - 7th March 1744.  

You must Tee your Ball within a Club's length of the Hole.

Your Tee must be upon the Ground.

You are not to change the Ball which you Strike off the Tee.

You are not to remove, Stones, Bones or any Break Club, for the sake of playing your Ball, Except upon the fair Green & that only within a Club's length of your Ball.

If your Ball comes among Watter or any wattery filth, you are at liberty to take out your Ball & bringing it behind the hazard and Teeing it you may play it with any Club and allow your Adversary a Stroke for so getting out your Ball.

If your Balls be found any where touching one another, You are to lift the first Ball, till you play the last.

At Holling, you are to play your Ball honestly for the Hole, and, not to play upon your Adversary's Ball not lying in your way to the Hole.

If you should lose your Ball, by it's being taken up, or any other way, you are to go back to the Spot where you struck last, & drop another Ball, And allow your adversary a Stroke for the misfortune.

No man at Holling his Ball, is to be allowed, to mark his way to the Hole with his Club, or anything else.

If a Ball be stopp'd by any person, Horse, Dog, or any thing else, The Ball so stop'd must be play'd, where it lyes.

If you draw your Club in order to Strike & proceed so far in the Stroke as to be bringing down your Club; If then, your Club shall, break, in any way, it is to be Accounted a Stroke.

He, whose Ball lyes farthest from the Hole is obliged to play first.

Neither Trench, Ditch or Dyke, made for the Preservation of the Links, nor the Scholar's Holes or the Soldier's Lines, shall be accounted a Hazard; But the Ball is to be taken out / Teed / and play'd with any Iron Club.

John Rattray, Capt

I will just make this one, simple point:

Besides the obvious (that the cheater line is dirty, rotten cheatin' a' gawf ), I will only note that there is NOTHING in the Leith Rules even hinting at club design or restrictions on how to swing.  Nothing.  So anybody who bemoans the long putter as being "contrary to the spirit or original intent of the game" or "untraditional" is basically blowing nothing but hot air, in my view.  

I was asked on the Cheater Line thread how I could be for the long putter and against the cheater line.  This is why.
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

You might be surprised to learn that the idea has already been discussed in Far Hills.

Sean Arble,

Noone is worrying about what other guys are doing.
Golf is golf, not croquette.

If people want to play croquette I'm sure their are a number of courts nearby.

Do you believe that golfers should be allowed to kneel on the ground and use their putters as a pool cues ?

[George Pazin]

Further in support of Sir Shivas, how has the long putter changed the game?

I wonder what Old Tom would find more incongruous with today's equipment - the long putter or the 460cc square headed driver?

Sure looked like Arnie and Billy Casper anchored their arms whilst putting back in the 60s.

Much ado about nothing, to quote that guy Rich G favors.

[TEPaul]

Shivas:

If you are still under the impression that those early Rules implied that there must not be a line on a golf club or golf ball then you'd be just as wrong as you've always been on this "cheater line" thing of yours.

The Rules of Golf at NO TIME----NO TIME AT ALL ever implied a line on a club or ball in this prohibition of a line on the ground. You can continue to say it implies that to you but the point is it never has to the Rules of Golf.

But you are very right that the two organizations that have always written and interpreted the Rules of Golf, both the playing Rules and later including I&B Rules of Golf, did not get into regulating clubs and balls at all until the beginning of the 20th century. That included the types of clubs and balls used, the number of them etc.

Furthermore, Shivas, if you are going to try to cite various old Rules and such as analogies to the things you've been saying about what you, personally, would like to see the Rules of Golf ban, you really should get a bit more in tune with the spirit of golf and the Rules both then and now and stop using the word "cheater" in anything you say about the Rules or the golfers who play by the R&A/USGA Rules of Golf even if you personally may not like some of them or agree with some of them.

Those people using a line on a golf ball to indicate the line for putting are not cheating in the context of today's Rules or in the context of the Rules at any time, including the spirit of the Rules and the game.

And I don't care how many times or how often you mince words and talk in and around this subject, that's just a fact that you are never going to get around.

And furthermore, if for whatever reasons, the R&A and USGA decide to ban, in the future, a line on a club or ball for the purpose of indicating a line of putt this does not in any way necessarily mean this was something EVER implied or intended in any Rule of Golf from the very beginning until to date.
 

[Dschmidt]

I think I've heard this lecture before...  

[TEPaul]

"I think I've heard this lecture before...     "


Then maybe the time has finally come for you to both acknowledge the truth of it and stop claiming various things through direct statements or even implications that are contrary to it.

[A.G._Crockett]

Shivas,
There is no better way to start or end a day than with a top-shelf, tortured original intent argument by an good attorney.  

That you are able to argue simultaneously (not just on the same thread, mind you, but in the same post!) against drawing a tiny line with a sharpie on a golf ball, but in favor of a club that looks and is used completely differently than anything else in the history of golf transcends hilarity.  But that's what makes good attorneys good attorneys, I suppose...

Your reference to the 1744 rules never fails to inspire.  From now on, beginning this afternoon, I will tee off for the next hole within a club-length of the pin on the previous hole.  I, too, wish to remain within the spirit of the original intent of the Rules, and I'll have a copy ready for the super and the head pro at my club, should they question me about the divot on the green of #3.  You see, #4 is a par three that would normally be a 6 iron, but under the REAL rules from #3 green will only be a gap wedge for me, and I don't like to hit gap wedge off a tee.  Thanks for your help.

[Dschmidt]

Sorry to disappoint you, A.G, if you like 'em tortured.

So I promise that I'll try harder next time to give you an original intent argument that is actually tortured....  

[Doug Sobieski]

Am I missing something? Are people that putt with a long putter taking SOOOOOOOOOO many fewer putts that short putter people are getting mad? I probably hole on average slightly less than 18 putts per 18 hole round (an occasional holed shot from off the green lowers that below 18.00). Are short putter people (SPP) averaging over 18?  

I go back and forth between long and short just out of boredom. Any rule change isn't going to bother me. A shorter putter won't hurt my ability to read greens!  

By the way, my 46" putter doesn't touch any part of my body aside from my hands when I use it. How does that differ from every other club in my bag?