Does anchoring help grow the game?

[William_G]

I don't think making putting easier for some folks helps grow the game, and as such banning anchoring will not hurt growth of the game.

You can still use a long putter w/o anchoring for a bad back to keep you in the game.

But, for a teen to start anchoring can only be seen as a game changer for that golfer.

http://espn.go.com/golf/story/_/id/8592149/guan-tianlang-14-headed-masters-asia-pacific-amateur-championship-win

Congrats Quan!

[JESII]

I doubt anchoring, itself, will grow the game in any measurable way...but...one risk I see is appearing that the ruling bodies can, and do, arbitrarily create a rule because they don't like something.

I personally think anchoring the belly putters changes the fundamental act of putting so in my view a ban has merit. Will that be part of the writing? Even if so, will it change the perception?

[BCrosby]

Jim -

Not sure I follow. Do you think that the USGA will ban anchoring without an explanation of their actions?

Are you worried that if they ban it, they won't say why? If so, you've got better things to worry about. In fact, they'll probably give something close to the reason you give.  It "changes the fundamental act of putting". 

Bob

[JESII]

Nope, I'm sure they'll explain themselves.

I was really just trying to answer how the ruling could potentially impact growth/participation. Not sure how allowing anchoring helps growth and don't think eliminating it will hurt, other than the potential for appearing petty by eliminating a style that works and was previously allowed...until it wasn't...

[Dan Byrnes]

The number of golfers who try golf with a long or belly putter from day one must be close to zero.  That equipment is just not what is typically available.  Certainly banning long or belly may cause a few folks to leave the game but as far as the game itself and the growth or decline the anchoring thing seems like a non event.  Similar to the COR thing a few years back.  Impact very few.

Dan

[Mike_Trenham]

No most people that anchor are very avid players, they may play less but they will not quit the game.

[Mark Johnson]

I can name at leaxst 6 older peopl at my club who are staying in the game because of anchored putters.

[David_Tepper]

"I can name at leaxst 6 older peopl at my club who are staying in the game because of anchored putters."

Mark Johnson is right. While anchoring might not attract new players to the game, there is no doubt in my mind it does keep older players, many of them very highly skilled, in the game and it allows them to compete at a highly competitive level.

One of the reasons Sam Snead was able to compete on the PGA Tour well into his 50's was that he found a way to putt decently by abandoning the traditional style of putting. I certainly feel the best interests of the game were served by having Sam Snead remain competitive and playing in front of the public when he was in his 50's, 60's & 70's.

Is there any doubt that having Fred Couples in the hunt at the Masters over the past few years has been good for the game, regardless of whether he was using a belly putter? Would the Champions Tour be as interesting if Langer, Kite, O'Meara, etc. were not competing on it?      

While anchoring may not "grow" the game, it does keep it from shrinking.

[Rich Goodale]

"I can name at leaxst 6 older peopl at my club who are staying in the game because of anchored putters."

Mark Johnson is right. While anchoring might not attract new players to the game, there is no doubt in my mind it does keep older players, many of them very highly skilled, in the game and it allows them to compete at a highly competitive level.

One of the reasons Sam Snead was able to compete on the PGA Tour well into his 50's was that he found a way to putt decently by abandoning the traditional style of putting. I certainly feel the best interests of the game were served by having Sam Snead remain competitive and playing in front of the public when he was in his 50's, 60's & 70's.

Is there any doubt that having Fred Couples in the hunt at the Masters over the past few years has been good for the game, regardless of whether he was using a belly putter? Would the Champions Tour be as interesting if Langer, Kite, O'Meara, etc. were not competing on it?      

While anchoring may not "grow" the game, it does keep it from shrinking.

BS, David (with all due respect)

I play a lot of my competitive golf against very competitive seniors (age 50+, handicap +2 up to , and less than 5% of them use belly putters.  Alternatively, when I spent a week partly watching some of the best young amateurs play in the cottish Amateur, probably 15-20% of the competitors used belly putters.  It is a cancer on the game.

If the USGA/R&A lose there cojones again over this one, next year I'm going to putt with a snooker cue, and dare them to stop me!

[Mark Pearce]

These old guys with putting problems managed to find a way to cope before long handled putters.  If they are banned they'll find another way.

[Neil White]

Is this a more common problem in the US than here in the UK?

My home course membership is in the region of 500 and I reckon no more than 5 to 10 use an anchored putter.  Our Pro intermittently uses one but always reverts back to a regular length putter.

As for youngsters, I know none who use or indeed have tried an anchored putter.

Neil.

[Jud_T]

  It is a cancer on the game.

If the USGA/R&A lose there cojones again over this one, next year I'm going to putt with a snooker cue, and dare them to stop me!

 

[jeffwarne]

"I can name at leaxst 6 older peopl at my club who are staying in the game because of anchored putters."

Mark Johnson is right. While anchoring might not attract new players to the game, there is no doubt in my mind it does keep older players, many of them very highly skilled, in the game and it allows them to compete at a highly competitive level.

One of the reasons Sam Snead was able to compete on the PGA Tour well into his 50's was that he found a way to putt decently by abandoning the traditional style of putting. I certainly feel the best interests of the game were served by having Sam Snead remain competitive and playing in front of the public when he was in his 50's, 60's & 70's.

Is there any doubt that having Fred Couples in the hunt at the Masters over the past few years has been good for the game, regardless of whether he was using a belly putter? Would the Champions Tour be as interesting if Langer, Kite, O'Meara, etc. were not competing on it?      

While anchoring may not "grow" the game, it does keep it from shrinking.

BS, David (with all due respect)

I play a lot of my competitive golf against very competitive seniors (age 50+, handicap +2 up to , and less than 5% of them use belly putters.  Alternatively, when I spent a week partly watching some of the best young amateurs play in the cottish Amateur, probably 15-20% of the competitors used belly putters.  It is a cancer on the game.

If the USGA/R&A lose there cojones again over this one, next year I'm going to putt with a snooker cue, and dare them to stop me!

Rich,
I've never putted with a belly putter, and don't really care how they rule on them.
But can you explain why you feel "it's a cancer on the game"?
Are they disfiguring greens or courses because of them?

My only criticism is that they are disfiguring courses because of hot balls and clubs, and the USGA has chosen to attack grooves and belly putters

I guess I should just be glad the USGA has shown they have any cajones at all........

[Adam Clayman]

I'll be shocked if they use the term anchoring.

It makes no sense, unless they define it, specifically.

Won't banning a method, that some people find successful, further slow down the game ?

[William_G]

"I can name at leaxst 6 older peopl at my club who are staying in the game because of anchored putters."

Mark Johnson is right. While anchoring might not attract new players to the game, there is no doubt in my mind it does keep older players, many of them very highly skilled, in the game and it allows them to compete at a highly competitive level.

One of the reasons Sam Snead was able to compete on the PGA Tour well into his 50's was that he found a way to putt decently by abandoning the traditional style of putting. I certainly feel the best interests of the game were served by having Sam Snead remain competitive and playing in front of the public when he was in his 50's, 60's & 70's.

Is there any doubt that having Fred Couples in the hunt at the Masters over the past few years has been good for the game, regardless of whether he was using a belly putter? Would the Champions Tour be as interesting if Langer, Kite, O'Meara, etc. were not competing on it?      

While anchoring may not "grow" the game, it does keep it from shrinking.

well said, but I don't think preserving some folks on the Champions Tour via anchoring is entertaining or good for the game

shrinkage is prevented by Viagra, that's what she said

[jeffwarne]

"I can name at leaxst 6 older peopl at my club who are staying in the game because of anchored putters."

Mark Johnson is right. While anchoring might not attract new players to the game, there is no doubt in my mind it does keep older players, many of them very highly skilled, in the game and it allows them to compete at a highly competitive level.

One of the reasons Sam Snead was able to compete on the PGA Tour well into his 50's was that he found a way to putt decently by abandoning the traditional style of putting. I certainly feel the best interests of the game were served by having Sam Snead remain competitive and playing in front of the public when he was in his 50's, 60's & 70's.

Is there any doubt that having Fred Couples in the hunt at the Masters over the past few years has been good for the game, regardless of whether he was using a belly putter? Would the Champions Tour be as interesting if Langer, Kite, O'Meara, etc. were not competing on it?      

While anchoring may not "grow" the game, it does keep it from shrinking.

well said, but I don't think preserving some folks on the Champions Tour via anchoring is entertaining or good for the game

You don't think having the ability to see a Sam Snead,Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer, or Freddy Couples live is good for the game?
I guess I wasted all those years following the legends around Augusta well after their prime.
or are you just saying only the ones doing it via anchoring are not entertaining or good for the game

Surely Freddie isn't less entertaining simply because he anchors?

If you want to argue it's an unfair advantage so be it, but let's not say it's bad for the game or less entertaining having them around.

Hot Drivers rendered obsolete yearly that cost $500 and balls that cost 6$ each are bad for the growth of the game

[William_G]

Jeff,

hahaha, Jack and Arnie are not anchoring and that is good for the game.

Love Freddie, but not so much.

[Garland Bayley]

Without advances in agronomy there would be no anchoring. They are not going to outlaw advances in agronomy, so they best outlaw anchoring.

[Garland Bayley]

...

Hot Drivers rendered obsolete yearly that cost $500 and balls that cost 6$ each are bad for the growth of the game

Hot Drivers are not rendered obsolete yearly. People with more money than sense buy these things repeatedly. No one that is going to grow the game needs to pay more than $1 per ball. Once they buy their first group of balls there is little need to buy more as they can use the ones they find. Some of those they find will be $6 balls, because there are people with more money than sense.

If anything, pushing the concept that golf equipment has to be expensive to be good is bad for the game. There is plenty of perfectly good golf equipment that doesn't cost all that much.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Just a questtion for those with longer putters.


Can you still carry with one in the bag?  My 12 clubs are fine when the water bottle is full but less well balanced at the end of the round. At what length does the putter stick out to far to comfortably carry?






PS I should also declare that in my basement there's a 42" (I think) 2 ball than I used on a three wheel cart set up, one winter when my back wouldn't heal. So I do have some perspective on them having some place in golf.

[Sean_A]

...

Hot Drivers rendered obsolete yearly that cost $500 and balls that cost 6$ each are bad for the growth of the game

Hot Drivers are not rendered obsolete yearly. People with more money than sense buy these things repeatedly. No one that is going to grow the game needs to pay more than $1 per ball. Once they buy their first group of balls there is little need to buy more as they can use the ones they find. Some of those they find will be $6 balls, because there are people with more money than sense.

If anything, pushing the concept that golf equipment has to be expensive to be good is bad for the game. There is plenty of perfectly good golf equipment that doesn't cost all that much.

Si, the game is as cheap or expensive as one wants to make it.  Equipment is not at the heart of growing the game - love of the game is.  The entire talk of growth is cheap rhetoric from those hoping to make a living out of the game in some way.  It has nothing to do with what is good for golf.  What is good for golfers is good for golf.  Somebody please tell me what is bad for golfers before we talk about what is bad for golf.  So far as I can tell, there is a great diversity of courses in more places than ever and equipment at all price points to suit the market.  Tell me how is growing the game good fore golf?

Ciao

Ciao

[JMEvensky]

Tell me how is growing the game good fore golf?

 

+ a million.

What good has come from trying to grow the game? Unless you have a financial stake in it,why would any golfer want the game to grow?

[Kris Shreiner]

To the original question... hell no, it just helps bad putters ( unless you are handicapped in some way or have the yips.)

Cheers,
Kris

[Duncan Cheslett]

This 'anchoring' issue intrigues me.

I have recently adopted a new putting style which involves me taking a very open stance and 'anchoring' my right elbow against my side as a fulcrum. I find that this style enables me to make a very smooth and fluid putting stroke, making a huge difference to my game. I now expect to make any putt within about 15ft!

I consider my putting style to be completely legitimate yet it offers me all the advantages of a belly or broomhandle putter. By anchoring the fulcrum many variables are taken out of the stroke. Yet most onlookers would not realise I was doing anything out of the ordinary. 'Anchoring' alone cannot be the criterion that renders a particular style illegal.

[JESII]

Duncan,

Are you anchoring your elbow or the end of the putter?

If you're anchoring your elbow I would suggest that's wholly different than anchoring the club. Knee bone connected to the thigh bone and all that...