Why Webb's win was the USGA's worst nightmare

[Matthew Essig]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1227722-why-webb-simpsons-us-open-win-was-the-usgas-worst-nightmare

Do you think Webb's win will actually cause the USGA to ban anchored putters?

[John Kavanaugh]

I bet I've hit over a dozen wedges to difficult targets since Sunday evening and haven't pulled one left of the green dead.  The USGA needs to get ahead of the curve and ban anchored wedges before Furyk and Harrington figure out why they lost the tournament.

[Tom_Doak]

I've hoped for years that the belly putter (or even just really long putters) would be banned.

But, I've also thought that they had to make the ban BEFORE players started winning major championships with them.  Now that the cat's out of the bag, it will be doubly hard to go back and change the rule -- because it just looks like sour grapes, and because you are denying a guy part of the game that made him national champion.

[Dan Kelly]

I'm pretty sure that if were facing a 4-foot putt to win the U.S. Open, my belly, too, would be shaking. Not to mention my shoulders.

Shivas -- Are you prepared to to argue that *anything* in golf is "natural"?

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I believe they will ban Shivas' cheater line before they ban any type of putters.
I would not be surprised to see that soon.

[JMEvensky]

I've hoped for years that the belly putter (or even just really long putters) would be banned.

But, I've also thought that they had to make the ban BEFORE players started winning major championships with them.  Now that the cat's out of the bag, it will be doubly hard to go back and change the rule -- because it just looks like sour grapes, and because you are denying a guy part of the game that made him national champion.

Agreed.I think the last thing the USGA wants is to look reactionary.

Would they have to put asterisks by Simpson's and Bradley's names?

[Matthew Essig]

Tom: what about anchoring makes it an unnatural golf motion other that the fact that prior generations of dimbumbs simply hadn't thought of it yet? Might as well ban the Fosbury Flop and the spinning-around shot put from track and field, the forward pass from football or the jump shot from basketball. Besides, nobody banned Rick Barry from shooting free throws underhand...anybody want to claim that's not an unnatural method of shooting a basketball?

The reason none of those techniques (or whatever you want to call them) were banned is most likely because it was harder to do them even though they were more successful while the anchored putter is easier.

[Ash Towe]

The USGA needs to address the ball and other aspects of equipment first.  These issues are far more detrimental to the game. For example making some courses obsolete and the increase in maintenance costs for longer holes.

[Garland Bayley]

... Besides, nobody banned Rick Barry from shooting free throws underhand...anybody want to claim that's a traditional method of shooting a basketball?
...

My, my, my, you sure like to put easy ones out there don't you? Every kid on the basketball court at a young age quickly discovers that is the easiest way to get the ball to the hoop. Not only is it easy, it was used long before modern shooting techniques were refined. In many ways it is the most traditional method of shooting a basketball. Rick Barry was going back to the roots of basketball, not inventing something new.

[A.G._Crockett]

... Besides, nobody banned Rick Barry from shooting free throws underhand...anybody want to claim that's a traditional method of shooting a basketball?
...

My, my, my, you sure like to put easy ones out there don't you? Every kid on the basketball court at a young age quickly discovers that is the easiest way to get the ball to the hoop. Not only is it easy, it was used long before modern shooting techniques were refined. In many ways it is the most traditional method of shooting a basketball. Rick Barry was going back to the roots of basketball, not inventing something new.

Garland,
This coming year will be my 39th as a high school basketball coach.  I can assure you that if shooting the ball underhand was better, I not only teach it, I would DEMAND it!  You could not be more mistaken.  

Rick Barry was an outlier, and you would do well to never cite him as other than that.

Shooting the ball with two hands that have to perform exactly equally for the ball to go straight is vastly inferior to shooting with one hand; that's the main (though not the only) reason that the jump shot replaced the two-hand set shot.  On top of that, shooting underhand requires the player to practice two completely separate motions instead of one; that is NOT an efficient use of practice time.

As to the long and belly putter, I truly don't believe that they are "easier" or better, all other things equal.  I think anchored putting helps reduce what can go wrong in the stroke due to nerves or the like.  Simpson and Bradley obviously think it helps, but those putters are still best for old guys (like me!) who have the yips.

And BTW, I don't use 'em anymore, but I don't really care who else wants to.  Still have to roll the ball and get it in the hole, as Shivas says.

[Kalen Braley]

Even though I don't particulary like long putters and I hate to admit it....

...but I can't find any fault in Shivas' logic.  Sports have indeed evolved over the years, and just because it evolves doesn't means its bad.

The ball has evolved
The clothing has evolved
The shoes have evolved
The clubs have evolved
The raw materials have evolved
The green keeping methods have evolved
Hell, even the grass itself has evolved.

...all that have made the game better/easier/more enjoyable to play and score.

So unless you only play with old featheries, wool suits with shirt and tie, slick leather bottom soled shoes, hickories with no wedges, and on sheep maintained courses, its pretty hard to claim any high ground to draw the line in the sand.

[Garland Bayley]

... Besides, nobody banned Rick Barry from shooting free throws underhand...anybody want to claim that's a traditional method of shooting a basketball?
...

My, my, my, you sure like to put easy ones out there don't you? Every kid on the basketball court at a young age quickly discovers that is the easiest way to get the ball to the hoop. Not only is it easy, it was used long before modern shooting techniques were refined. In many ways it is the most traditional method of shooting a basketball. Rick Barry was going back to the roots of basketball, not inventing something new.

And how do you know that nobody tried anchoring the club in the 15th or 16th century?  Answer: you don't.  So stop wasting people's time with your ill-thought out pronouncements.

I see. So we went from anchoring the putter, to not anchoring the putter, back to anchoring the putter. Got it!
Sorry I didn't see that.

[A.G._Crockett]

... Besides, nobody banned Rick Barry from shooting free throws underhand...anybody want to claim that's a traditional method of shooting a basketball?
...

My, my, my, you sure like to put easy ones out there don't you? Every kid on the basketball court at a young age quickly discovers that is the easiest way to get the ball to the hoop. Not only is it easy, it was used long before modern shooting techniques were refined. In many ways it is the most traditional method of shooting a basketball. Rick Barry was going back to the roots of basketball, not inventing something new.

And how do you know that nobody tried anchoring the club in the 15th or 16th century?  Answer: you don't.  So stop wasting people's time with your ill-thought out pronouncements.

I see. So we went from anchoring the putter, to not anchoring the putter, back to anchoring the putter. Got it!
Sorry I didn't see that.

C'mon Garland; play fair.  That's not what he said and you know it.  He pointed out, correctly, that you have no idea when anchoring was first tried.  It's a valid point; just concede it and don't be difficult.

[JMEvensky]

Guys like Simpson and Bradley are the ones going back to the "roots of the game" because they don't give a damn what it looks like. They just want to get the ball in the hole in the fewest possible, LEGAL strokes, no matter how goofy other people might think it looks. That IS the roots of the game, and has always been the roots of the game, since the first shepherd grabbed a stick and whacked a sheep turd.

You may be right but not even Mucci is old enough to have played with shepherds.The question now is whether the USGA is more or less inclined to ban long/anchored putters.

I have no idea if they were thinking about banning them last week but my guess is they're less inclined now.

[Garland Bayley]

... Besides, nobody banned Rick Barry from shooting free throws underhand...anybody want to claim that's a traditional method of shooting a basketball?
...

My, my, my, you sure like to put easy ones out there don't you? Every kid on the basketball court at a young age quickly discovers that is the easiest way to get the ball to the hoop. Not only is it easy, it was used long before modern shooting techniques were refined. In many ways it is the most traditional method of shooting a basketball. Rick Barry was going back to the roots of basketball, not inventing something new.

Garland,
This coming year will be my 39th as a high school basketball coach.  I can assure you that if shooting the ball underhand was better, I not only teach it, I would DEMAND it!  You could not be more mistaken.  

Rick Barry was an outlier, and you would do well to never cite him as other than that.

Shooting the ball with two hands that have to perform exactly equally for the ball to go straight is vastly inferior to shooting with one hand; that's the main (though not the only) reason that the jump shot replaced the two-hand set shot.  On top of that, shooting underhand requires the player to practice two completely separate motions instead of one; that is NOT an efficient use of practice time.
...

What about this contradicts anything I wrote? You can call Rick Barry an outlier, which may be true. I think throwback would be more accurate. You go back far enough in basketball instruction books, and you will find they do teach two-hand shots. Everyone knows the one-hand shots have replaced them as better.

[Carl Nichols]

I can't believe I'm about to write this, but you guys are unfairly portraying what Garland said.  Dave's argument was that innovation happens in all sports, and he used as an example Rick Barry.  Garland simply responded that that example of innovation in sports didn't work because underhanded free throws have been around a long time.  he didn't say anything one way or the other about belly putters in 17th century Scotland.

[Mike_Clayton]

If you think the short putter is an important part of the game ban the long one.If you don't then don't. But don't complain when in 20 years they are the predominant putter. Don't think it will happen? Did anyone have any idea 20 years ago that today's game would look the way it does now?

[A.G._Crockett]

I can't believe I'm about to write this, but you guys are unfairly portraying what Garland said.  Dave's argument was that innovation happens in all sports, and he used as an example Rick Barry.  Garland simply responded that that example of innovation in sports didn't work because underhanded free throws have been around a long time.  he didn't say anything one way or the other about belly putters in 17th century Scotland.

Garland wrote that shooting the ball underhanded is the "easiest way to get the ball to the hoop" which IS true if you are 4 yrs. old with no shoulder strength.  It is an argument that has no relevance to the topic at hand, because essentially nobody shoots that way after they are potty trained.

He also claimed that it is "in many ways the most traditional method of shooting a basketball."  In addition to the fact that Garland has NO idea what percentage of players in the early days of basketball shot free throws underhanded, in ANY case shooting underhanded would ONLY have been used for free throws and would never have been the dominant way that the game was played.  There is no way it is "the most traditional way of shooting a basketball" and it is pointless to argue otherwise.

[JMEvensky]

If you think the short putter is an important part of the game ban the long one.If you don't then don't. But don't complain when in 20 years they are the predominant putter. Don't think it will happen? Did anyone have any idea 20 years ago that today's game would look the way it does now?

Since your guess would be a good one,does Adam Scott worry about long putters being banned?

[Carl Nichols]

I can't believe I'm about to write this, but you guys are unfairly portraying what Garland said.  Dave's argument was that innovation happens in all sports, and he used as an example Rick Barry.  Garland simply responded that that example of innovation in sports didn't work because underhanded free throws have been around a long time.  he didn't say anything one way or the other about belly putters in 17th century Scotland.

Garland wrote that shooting the ball underhanded is the "easiest way to get the ball to the hoop" which IS true if you are 4 yrs. old with no shoulder strength.  It is an argument that has no relevance to the topic at hand, because essentially nobody shoots that way after they are potty trained.

He also claimed that it is "in many ways the most traditional method of shooting a basketball."  In addition to the fact that Garland has NO idea what percentage of players in the early days of basketball shot free throws underhanded, in ANY case shooting underhanded would ONLY have been used for free throws and would never have been the dominant way that the game was played.  There is no way it is "the most traditional way of shooting a basketball" and it is pointless to argue otherwise.

So Dave and Garland are both wrong -- I'm fine with that. I was reading Garland's post to refute Dave's point that Rick Barry was an innovator -- which I assume  you would disagree with also.   

[Garland Bayley]

I can't believe I'm about to write this, but you guys are unfairly portraying what Garland said.  Dave's argument was that innovation happens in all sports, and he used as an example Rick Barry.  Garland simply responded that that example of innovation in sports didn't work because underhanded free throws have been around a long time.  he didn't say anything one way or the other about belly putters in 17th century Scotland.

Garland wrote that shooting the ball underhanded is the "easiest way to get the ball to the hoop" which IS true if you are 4 yrs. old with no shoulder strength.  It is an argument that has no relevance to the topic at hand, because essentially nobody shoots that way after they are potty trained.

He also claimed that it is "in many ways the most traditional method of shooting a basketball."  In addition to the fact that Garland has NO idea what percentage of players in the early days of basketball shot free throws underhanded, in ANY case shooting underhanded would ONLY have been used for free throws and would never have been the dominant way that the game was played.  There is no way it is "the most traditional way of shooting a basketball" and it is pointless to argue otherwise.

A.G., you can rant and rave and twist my words all you want. The fact is that in 1935 my mother was playing high school basketball and shooting field goals two handed underhanded. And, she taught me the game years later. The best you can logically do is challenge "many ways" and say it should say "some ways". I would probably go along with that.

Can you or DS demonstrate a fact that in the past centuries anyone putted by anchoring their putter? I'm guessing you can't, because I read that anchored putters work best for shorter putts on fast greens. How fast were the greens centuries ago? Did they even have greens?

[JESII]

Regarding the USGA not wanting to appear reactive...most all of their equipment related rules seem to be reactive, no? My argument is that this should be a technique related rule but I don't know how they do that.

[Mike_Clayton]

JME,

I am not sure Adam worries about anything - and I don't know if he fears it being banned.I doubt it though.
My experience having used one for a few months was that I went back and putted really well with the short putter.I don't know - but suspect he would find the same.
I have not seen him play for a while but I wonder if he is putting any better with the long one.He did have that one great week at Augusta last year that got us excited.

[Chip Gaskins]

Would it diminish Simpson's win in the record books if they ban it in the future?

By the way, isn't the rule black and white...you can't anchor any part of the club to any part of your body to gain an advantage?  Just wondering...

Its kind of funny to see in action actually.  My 4 year old son who is just learning the techniques to play golf can't putt worth a lick when I get him to line up the "correct" way, but when I tell to do what every is easiest/comfortable he grabs the putter sidesaddle (Sam Snead) and makes everything....

[A.G._Crockett]

I can't believe I'm about to write this, but you guys are unfairly portraying what Garland said.  Dave's argument was that innovation happens in all sports, and he used as an example Rick Barry.  Garland simply responded that that example of innovation in sports didn't work because underhanded free throws have been around a long time.  he didn't say anything one way or the other about belly putters in 17th century Scotland.

Garland wrote that shooting the ball underhanded is the "easiest way to get the ball to the hoop" which IS true if you are 4 yrs. old with no shoulder strength.  It is an argument that has no relevance to the topic at hand, because essentially nobody shoots that way after they are potty trained.

He also claimed that it is "in many ways the most traditional method of shooting a basketball."  In addition to the fact that Garland has NO idea what percentage of players in the early days of basketball shot free throws underhanded, in ANY case shooting underhanded would ONLY have been used for free throws and would never have been the dominant way that the game was played.  There is no way it is "the most traditional way of shooting a basketball" and it is pointless to argue otherwise.

A.G., you can rant and rave and twist my words all you want. The fact is that in 1935 my mother was playing high school basketball and shooting field goals two handed underhanded. And, she taught me the game years later. The best you can logically do is challenge "many ways" and say it should say "some ways". I would probably go along with that.

Can you or DS demonstrate a fact that in the past centuries anyone putted by anchoring their putter? I'm guessing you can't, because I read that anchored putters work best for shorter putts on fast greens. How fast were the greens centuries ago? Did they even have greens?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/sports/ncaabasketball/03jumper.html?_r=2

If your mom was still shooting underhand from the field in 1935, she was already behind the curve, and I mean no disrespect.  Take a look at the above link.  In fact, if you want to take it a step farther, your mom was playing 3 on 3 in the half court, and nobody argues that we should go back to THAT in women's basketball, do they?

The original point was that innovation happens in every sport when somebody decides to do something a different way.  In that context, Rick Barry was an "innovator" because nobody (other that Wilt at the worst of his FT woes) was shooting that way.  The fact that somewhere beyond a half a century earlier some players shot that way is not relevant.  What IS relevant is that innovation WITHIN THE RULES is part of every sport.

I don't give a tinker's damn as to whether or not the USGA declares anchoring illegal.  But to argue that it should be illegal because of "tradition" is silly and not even necessarily correct, as Shivas has pointed out.