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

[jeffwarne]

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.

Absolutely the LEAST of the USGA's blunders at regulating the game.
Belly putting hasn't changed the playing fields.
Drivers and balls have

[Steve Lang]

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 a traditional method of shooting a basketball?

I think guys who have a chase move with their head have an unnatural swing that produces straighter, better shots. I think it should be banned....

Bunny Levitt made the underhand free throw more than traditional.. he made it rock solid  (saw him once... a chicago boy too!)

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=14165037

[Garland Bayley]

A.G.,

You are barking up the wrong tree. I made no comment on the way forward, and whether or not we should go forward. I simply pointed out Dave's mistake in underhanded shooting not being "traditional" or as I interpreted it, at the origins of the game. After all Dave challenged people to challenge that.

[Carl Johnson]

Snarky comment: Why not require that, in American football, extra points and field goals be played with the drop-kick?  Who started this thing with some guy holding the ball on ground for you, anyway?

[Bob_Huntley]

A few years ago I was on the putting green adjacent to the first tee of the Old Course. Alongside me was Michael Bonallack who as Secretary of the R&A was seriously anti the Long putter.

I went back the following year and he was the two-ball in front of me. Again we practiced our fluent strokes  but with a difference, he was using the Long tool with devastating effect.

I think the club is here to stay.

Bob

[Patrick_Mucci]

AG & Shivas,

In the 50's underhand foul shooting was quite common, as was the two handed "set" shot.

The one handed "jump" shot was probably popularized by Paul Arizin in the 50's.

Rick Barry played against us in high school and I believe he went on to be one of the top long drivers in the Remax Senior division a few years ago.

I'm now using a long putter and think they should be banned

[Wayne_Kozun]

In 1968 the USGA had the cojones to ban a non-traditional golf stroke, which was Sam Snead's croquet putting style.  They no longer seem to have the will to take such action with the belly putter or the broomstick.

[Brent Hutto]

I recall an article quoting one of the R&A guys in the final days before the rules accommodation of laser rangefinders was introduced. By that point he was down to admitting that the most fundamental objection was "We don't' like the way it looks". I think this is the root of the long putter kerfuffle.

P.S. To be perfectly fair, this is basically the root of my own objection to the "cheater line". I don't like watching people fidget with lining up a silly mark on the ball when they're supposed to be playing golf.

[PThomas]

I'm now using a long putter and think they should be banned

Hi Patrick...would love to hear you expound on the above, thx

[JMEvensky]

In 1968 the USGA had the cojones to ban a non-traditional golf stroke, which was Sam Snead's croquet putting style.  They no longer seem to have the will to take such action with the belly putter or the broomstick.

I always wonder if the USGA would've banned croquet style if someone other than Snead was doing it successfully.

[George Pazin]

I've never really understood why so many are so vehemently against long putters, belly putters, whatever. I've had many entertaining arguments with Shiv over the years over many different topics, but this time (and it's not the only time!) I think he's dead right: don't scrape, spoon, drag, whatever, just hit it in the hole in your own way.

For every problem that these putters "cure", they create new ones. You can't tell me that your body won't move at all when you have something anchored against it, that's just an added complication, offsetting the advantage of removing the hands. I personally feel like I need the feeling of my hands swinging freely, I know the putter against me would bother me. And you'll never convince me that spending time practicing anchored putting doesn't adversely affect feel for other shots around the green. Much like a golfer has to make adjustments when putting or chipping from off the green, the lack of anchoring presents another complication in that equation.

It's just different, it's not wrong or illegal.

I do kinda wonder if they would have even developed if there weren't the drive for perfectly manicured greens that roll like billiards tables, but that's a thread for another day...

[JMEvensky]

I think the argument against long/belly putters is more for the elite players.At their level,one can make the case that putting nerves are part of the equation and anchored putters seem to alleviate the problem.

I'm not saying they do or don't--that's just the argument.

[Brent Hutto]

...one can make the case that putting nerves are part of the equation and anchored putters seem to alleviate the problem....

I think "seem" is the operative word.

For most of the guys who benefit from changing to an anchored putter, I suspect that any (legal) way of putting in some manner totally different than what they've done since age 3 or so would have the same effect.

One explanation of the yips is that the emotional reaction generated by making a bad putting stroke has caused some "wiring" in your brain to start triggering before you even start the stroke in anticipation of that jolt of emotion from screwing up. To the extent that is true, all that's really required is to putt in a way that uses some other brain circuitry that doesn't have that negative flinch response burned into its wiring.

But I guess other than croquest, some sort of arm-clenching address position or one of the anchoring things there aren't too many options totally different from just plain old putting. As they eliminate options, the choice starts getting pretty bleak for those afflicted.

[JMEvensky]

At that level,if something seems to work,it works.It doesn't matter how or why or even if it's true.

[George Pazin]

I think the argument against long/belly putters is more for the elite players.At their level,one can make the case that putting nerves are part of the equation and anchored putters seem to alleviate the problem.

I'm not saying they do or don't--that's just the argument.

I guess that's part of it. I think most of it is just bunk - people who struggle with other parts of their game are jealous that a good ball striker who struggles putting can seemingly buy a cure.

Two-ball putters help those with alignment issues. I'm sure one of our equipment gurus on here can explain the differences between face balanced putters, putters with the shaft in the middle versus the end, whatever. That's the essence of putter design - correct things you were doing wrong with your stroke. Likewise, hybrids help those who can't hit long irons, something I do ok, bizarre considering my level of golf.

The switch from those eeensy weeensy teeeeeny tiiiiiiny wooden head drivers to ever growing (until recently) metal head drivers induced changes well beyond anything anyone could do with a putter, save maybe Al Czervik's special putter...

[Rich Goodale]

The only "problem" with belly putters is that anybody who uses them looks like a complete doofus, and that is their problem, not mine.  There is nothing in the Rule of of Golf that prohibits a player looking like a doofus (otherwise how would the game have even gotten off the ground what with players wearing red coats and being accompanied by dwarf slaves ("cadets") being "de rigeur?").  I know for a fact that I will hardly ever miss a 3-5 footer if allowed to lie along the ground and "putt" with the end of any of my clubs a la pool or snoooker.  The R&A/USGA would allow this sort of approach if Michael Bollanack or some other equally hono(u)red toff had adopted it, but even if they had I would never do it other than for fun, because I would look like a complete doofus.  Some so-called players of the game of golf are not shamed by playing ~50% of their shots like a doofus, but I am not one of them (please do not insert any sort of smiley face here)....

[Kalen Braley]

George,

I think you partially hit on what some people have issue with...and I must admit, even I did for a time.

Going to wedges for bunker play benefited everyone.
Going to better balls benefited everyone, short hitters and long hitters alike benfit
Going to bigger club heads benefited everyone, short hitters and long hitters.
Introducing hybrids both pros and hacks alike benefited

But going to a long putter/belly putter only benefits the poor putters.  The good putters have no need to use one.  Putting is the best part of my game and I couldn't imagine fixing something that ain't broke.

I'm damn mad cause I want a club that benefits my crappy driving that won't make the long ballers even longer.  

[George Pazin]

George,

I think you partially hit on what some people have issue with...and I must admit, even I did for a time.

Going to wedges for bunker play benefited everyone.
Going to better balls benefited everyone, short hitters and long hitters alike benfit
Going to bigger club heads benefited everyone, short hitters and long hitters.
Introducing hybrids both pros and hacks alike benefited

But going to a long putter/belly putter only benefits the poor putters.  The good putters have no need to use one.  Putting is the best part of my game and I couldn't imagine fixing something that ain't broke.

I'm damn mad cause I want a club that benefits my crappy driving that won't make the long ballers even longer.  

If you think making wedges, drivers, and other clubs easier didn't hurt already superior ball strikers, you are kidding yourself. Someone who could control the driver well with a wooden driver saw much of his advantage curtailed with drivers that are much easier to hit straight. Likewise with balls that go straighter, or even something as seemingly benign as driver optimization - something that some did naturally could now be purchased by a lot more people.

Everyone may have benefited, but everyone didn't benefit equally. People rarely apply the same logic to their own situations that they apply to others'.

[JMEvensky]

Kalen,what George said.

[Tim Leahy]

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.

+1   

The USGA should worry about guys hitting 6 irons 240 yds and 670 yd par 5's being reached in two before long putters.

[Rich Goodale]

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.

+1  

The USGA should worry about guys hitting 6 irons 240 yds and 670 yd par 5's being reached in two before long putters.

Hey, the geezer who almost won the tunamint couldn't even hit the reduced-to-570 yard par 5 in three when it counted, even witho9ut a long putter!

[Kalen Braley]

You guys still miss the point.  If they didn't offer a benefit to said accurate player, then they would still be using their small wooden-head clubs equipment.

But this is not the case with putters...I will never use a long putter.  Not tommorow, not next week, not next year, not in 10 years.  The same just isn't so with better balls, wedges, drivers, etc., even the already good players will still migrate to them because they also benefit from using them over thier current equipment.

That's the point!

[George Pazin]

You guys still miss the point.  If they didn't offer a benefit to said accurate player, then they would still be using their small wooden-head clubs equipment.

But this is not the case with putters...I will never use a long putter.  Not tomorrow, not next week, not next year, not in 10 years.  The same just isn't so with better balls, wedges, drivers, etc., even the already good players will still migrate to them because they also benefit from using them over thier current equipment.

That's the point!

They offered a benefit, but not nearly as great a benefit. They closed the gap between very good ball strikers and mediocre ball strikers - just as long putters close the gap between lesser putters and better putters.

Same thing, regardless of your choice not to use one.

[Kalen Braley]

You guys still miss the point.  If they didn't offer a benefit to said accurate player, then they would still be using their small wooden-head clubs equipment.

But this is not the case with putters...I will never use a long putter.  Not tomorrow, not next week, not next year, not in 10 years.  The same just isn't so with better balls, wedges, drivers, etc., even the already good players will still migrate to them because they also benefit from using them over thier current equipment.

That's the point!

They offered a benefit, but not nearly as great a benefit. They closed the gap between very good ball strikers and mediocre ball strikers - just as long putters close the gap between lesser putters and better putters.

Same thing, regardless of your choice not to use one.

I agree the benefit they got was perhaps marginally "less" than what someone else may have gained, but in the end they too benefited from the technology and were able to improve their game and partially if not mostly offset the gain of others.  Take for example the new R11.  I've tried hitting it a few times and noticed maybe 10 yards of extra length, but my buddy who is a 3 says he's gained 15-20.  So if anything, I've lost in that deal even though I've personally "gained".

We've had several threads on GCA.com that have shown links to support this, that good players have gained far more with equipment improvements than have hacks like me and the average weekend joe.

Now with the long putter, I lose again. 

[JMEvensky]

Kalen,you're trying to draw comparisons between high handicappers and good players.It doesn't work.

When any club is made easier to hit,it benefits the lesser player and vitiates the skill acquired by the better player.If Tom Kite spent hours on the practice tee learning to hit a 70's era 2-iron in the club face,think he was happy when perimeter weighted irons were introduced?

Sure,TK can play shovels if he wants,but I'd bet he'd prefer perimeter weighting had never been introduced in the first place.

Marginally offsetting another's gain is equal to losing ground.