[Tony_Muldoon]

I’m with Mark on this.  Not only is there no scientific evidence but expectations today are different. Big drivers lead to people trying to whack the s+++ out of the ball instead of learning how to slow their swing for good contact.  After 18 months trying the newbie realises he’s not hitting it the promised 300 yards and the frustration sets in. He perceives the game as too hard and the third new driver he’s bought is not solving the problem. Then he starts to notice how long he’s out there with maybe only one or two shots that provide fun.

I wish I could prove it but my feeling is 25 years ago the average British course had two sets of tees for men at about 6200 (medals only) and daily at 5700.  Now its 6500/6200 and the course has been narrowed at the insistence of the low cappers.   It’s a lot easier to top your way round 5700 yards and score a few pars than it is to repeatedly slice (into woods) and hope to score at 6200. A lot quicker too.

[BCrosby]

What Mark says.

[Sean_A]

I could care less about huge drivers, long putters and funky putting strokes, but it is irksome to hear guys whine about the damage these things do to courses/the game when they use them -  I have no time for this sort of hypocrisy.  The equipment side of the rules should be seen as the max allowed and it is the one area of the game where there is substantial latitude offered to golfers.  Guys don't have to go for the max; they can choose to tone it down, but its apparent that trying to be ultra competitive in the weekly £2 Nassau is more important than supposedly strongly held beliefs about how bad new equipment is for golf.  Its especially irksome to hear about how a putting stroke is damaging to the game.  A little evidence on this matter would be most welcome.  This is a classic storm in a tea pot and certainly not an issue for the USGA to draw a line in the sand by trying to strong arm the professional bodies.  I hope the USGA gets a bloody nose over this because they need a dose of reality.  This entire deal is a joke.

Ciao   

[Mike_Trenham]

Pros that anchor should boycott the US Open if their concern is the good of the game.

[Jon Wiggett]

well the pga tour and pga of america is made up it's members who want to use the equipment..  seems silly that they would support a ban of something their members want to use. 

The PGA of America and PGA Tour could allow its use in their tournaments so wheres the problem

Jon

[Tom Kelly]

Mike Davis and Peter Dawson must have turned off Season 5 when McNulty started faking the serial killer, and missed the part about how eventually the guy who owns all the territory figures out how to set up his connections without the co-op's help. Once that happens, it's just a matter of time before Chris or Snoop shows up.

My guess is that Davis and Dawson back down and Tim Finchem has Chris and Snoop stand down for the moment. But this won't be the last time the co-op talks about digging into Finchem's pockets or compromising his product/constituency. It's just a matter of time before Chris and Snoop get the call. I'm betting that Chris takes Davis and Snoop takes Dawson (which will be almost as funny as the Home Depot scene), and it'll probably happen in about two years. The co-op will fall, and Finchem will be running Baltimore.

After all, white tees and foreclosed clubhouses are full of boys that wore the crown.

Brilliant.

[Mark Pearce]

I could care less about huge drivers, long putters and funky putting strokes, but it is irksome to hear guys whine about the damage these things do to courses/the game when they use them -  I have no time for this sort of hypocrisy.  The equipment side of the rules should be seen as the max allowed and it is the one area of the game where there is substantial latitude offered to golfers.  Guys don't have to go for the max; they can choose to tone it down, but its apparent that trying to be ultra competitive in the weekly £2 Nassau is more important than supposedly strongly held beliefs about how bad new equipment is for golf.  Its especially irksome to hear about how a putting stroke is damaging to the game.  A little evidence on this matter would be most welcome.  This is a classic storm in a tea pot and certainly not an issue for the USGA to draw a line in the sand by trying to strong arm the professional bodies.  I hope the USGA gets a bloody nose over this because they need a dose of reality.  This entire deal is a joke.

Ciao   

Spot on. All of it.

With respect to my friend Mr Arble, it's rubbish, actually.  His way leads to 450 yard drives, 9000 yard course for the pros and average golfers simply giving up the game.  Still, for a while Titleistand Taylor Made will make giood money.

[Sean_A]

I could care less about huge drivers, long putters and funky putting strokes, but it is irksome to hear guys whine about the damage these things do to courses/the game when they use them -  I have no time for this sort of hypocrisy.  The equipment side of the rules should be seen as the max allowed and it is the one area of the game where there is substantial latitude offered to golfers.  Guys don't have to go for the max; they can choose to tone it down, but its apparent that trying to be ultra competitive in the weekly £2 Nassau is more important than supposedly strongly held beliefs about how bad new equipment is for golf.  Its especially irksome to hear about how a putting stroke is damaging to the game.  A little evidence on this matter would be most welcome.  This is a classic storm in a tea pot and certainly not an issue for the USGA to draw a line in the sand by trying to strong arm the professional bodies.  I hope the USGA gets a bloody nose over this because they need a dose of reality.  This entire deal is a joke.

Ciao   

Spot on. All of it.

With respect to my friend Mr Arble, it's rubbish, actually.  His way leads to 450 yard drives, 9000 yard course for the pros and average golfers simply giving up the game.  Still, for a while Titleistand Taylor Made will make giood money.

Mark

With respect, its not my way.  Its the way of consumers who purchase the offending equipment. At some point, and if the doom sayers such as yourself are correct, it better be sooner than later, consumers with opinions against offending equipment have to stop purchasing offending equipment.  Its quite simple really.  If the ruling bodies aren't getting the job done - take alternative action.  This is where the rubber hits the road and we find out where golfers really stand.  At the moment, I have to believe the vast majority of golfers are all for max equipment - even those who profess not to be.   

Ciao

[Jud_T]

Sean,

That's kind of a silly argument.  Within the rules most want to perform to the best of their abilities legally.  Sure some guys play with hickories, but they keep separate handicaps and play within the guidelines of hickory competitions.  Why aren't you playing with long nose clubs and featheries?

[Mark Pearce]

Sean,

As I think you know, the problem is that most golfers aren't even aware of the issue.  They'll buy whatever club the advertisers tell them will lower their score and won't think to draw the link next time their round on a 7,000 yard course (from the yellows) takes 5 hours and they decide they have better things to do than waste their time playing golf.  Those that do get the issue then have a choice of buying old equipment but if, like many UK club golfers (and like me in particular) they're competitive then they know that their principles reduce their competitiveness.  I know you disagree but this is one where only the governing bodies can make a real difference.  If the manufacturers want to make absurdly long clubs and balls then fine, Joe Public who doesn't carry a handicap and just plays for fun with his mates can use them, on the 6,700 yard courses that handicap golfers play on with their conforming clubs but it's up to the R&A and USGA to sort out the distance the pros hit the ball.

As to long putters, they should have been banned when introduced.  They weren't but the proposed ban on anchoring is better late than never.  Is it as important as the ball, or drivers, or utilities?  No, of course not, and they were wrong to pick this fight rather than a more important one but that doesn't mean they would be right to back down.

[Sean_A]

Jud

I don't play with very old equipment because I don't buy the argument that equipment changes courses.  Last I checked, owners and memberships are the ones in charge of courses, not the manufacturers.  People always have a choice.  Golfers can choose to tone it down and owners can choose not to respond in a knee jerk fashion to equipment changes that only a very small percentage of golfers can take proper advantage of.  Worry about that which you control and let the rest take care of itself.  

Mark

where only the governing bodies can make a real difference

This line is the crux of our differing opinions.  

Ciao

[Mark Pearce]

Mark

where only the governing bodies can make a real difference

This line is the crux of our differing opinions.  

Ciao

Hence the fact that I prefaced those words with the words:

I know you disagree

Realistically, I don't know how you expect a minority of golfers using Titleist Profeesionals, blades and persimmon drivers will make anyone change anything whilst the majority are happy to buy whatever over-priced over developed stuff comes out of the lab.

[Nigel Islam]

Pros that anchor should boycott the US Open if their concern is the good of the game.

Mike this is what concerns me. Watered down US Open fields are not good for the game. The Opens already have the weakest fields due to the difficulty of qualifying. Imagine if the reigning Masters champion (and I bet Augusta National comes out against the ban) skipping the US Open. I am not opposed to the ban, but as always the USGA is out of touch with reality. You can't anchor a putter, but Gary Nicklaus (who finished second in a tour event) is an amateur. Huh?

[Neil Davis]

If the R&A/USGA back down and lose this battle we can pretty much give up hope for any realistic length restrictions in the next couple of decades.

Entirely seperately, I'm fed up to the back teeth of people justifying modern equipment with the "golf's too hard" line.  Golf used to be a whole lot harder and more people played.  What loses players to golf isn't the fact that the game is hard (in fact that's part of the attraction), it's 5 hour rounds, the absurd price of playing (both green fees/membership and equipment) and ridiculous snobbery.  Make it quicker, cheaper and more welcoming and go back to hickories and the number of players goes up, not down.  Long handled putters are part of the problem (in so far as the are absurdly expensive) not the solution.  I am yet to see any convincing evidence that a single player has stayed in the game when they would otherwise have quit because of a long putter, the Pro-V1 or a 460cc titanium driver.

This is spot on, in my opinion.  I think the tour players are feeding us the corporate sponsor line thinking that banning the long putter will turn people away for the game.  Honestely, I hardly know anyone who uses a long putter, and if they did we would make fun of them.  And the line about needing evidence that the long putter makes it easier to putt is a move the ball trick, it's not a fair stroke under the rules, plain and simple, and should be banned.  The fact that they should have banned it 30 years ago is an a discussion for a different day.   

I think the PGA and PGA Tour are being incrediably arrogant if they go against the rule.  I hope ANGC goes with the ban even if the PGA and PGA Tour does not, and the USGA is tough enough to declare any tournament that allows it does not count to qualify for the US Open.

[Jud_T]

There's zero chance that any of these guys would turn down a spot in the Open.  More whining from the guys who invented it.

[Garland Bayley]

Pros that anchor should boycott the US Open if their concern is the good of the game.

Mike this is what concerns me. Watered down US Open fields are not good for the game. The Opens already have the weakest fields due to the difficulty of qualifying. Imagine if the reigning Masters champion (and I bet Augusta National comes out against the ban) skipping the US Open. I am not opposed to the ban, but as always the USGA is out of touch with reality. You can't anchor a putter, but Gary Nicklaus (who finished second in a tour event) is an amateur. Huh?

With that post, we can all see who is out of touch with reality.

[Rick Shefchik]

My opinion about the anchored stroke ban -- and yours, too, in all probability -- is irrelevant. It will come down to money, and the PGA represents more monied interests than the USGA. The players, the equipment manufacturers and the Tour sponsors are a more formidable force than the traditionalists in their blazers. The USGA should not have picked this fight. I see a split of historic proportions on golf's horizon.

[Tom Kelly]

Sean,

As I think you know, the problem is that most golfers aren't even aware of the issue.  They'll buy whatever club the advertisers tell them will lower their score and won't think to draw the link next time their round on a 7,000 yard course (from the yellows) takes 5 hours and they decide they have better things to do than waste their time playing golf.  Those that do get the issue then have a choice of buying old equipment but if, like many UK club golfers (and like me in particular) they're competitive then they know that their principles reduce their competitiveness.  I know you disagree but this is one where only the governing bodies can make a real difference.  If the manufacturers want to make absurdly long clubs and balls then fine, Joe Public who doesn't carry a handicap and just plays for fun with his mates can use them, on the 6,700 yard courses that handicap golfers play on with their conforming clubs but it's up to the R&A and USGA to sort out the distance the pros hit the ball.

As to long putters, they should have been banned when introduced.  They weren't but the proposed ban on anchoring is better late than never.  Is it as important as the ball, or drivers, or utilities?  No, of course not, and they were wrong to pick this fight rather than a more important one but that doesn't mean they would be right to back down.

I completely agree.

[JMEvensky]

My opinion about the anchored stroke ban -- and yours, too, in all probability -- is irrelevant. It will come down to money, and the PGA represents more monied interests than the USGA. The players, the equipment manufacturers and the Tour sponsors are a more formidable force than the traditionalists in their blazers. The USGA should not have picked this fight. I see a split of historic proportions on golf's horizon.

Sad but probably true.Economic self interest is a powerful force.

But I disagree on the question of whether the USGA should have picked this fight. We can argue over the timing and/or the efficacy of the ban--but somebody has to start drawing a line in the sand somewhere.

[Sean_A]

Mark

where only the governing bodies can make a real difference

This line is the crux of our differing opinions.  

Ciao

Hence the fact that I prefaced those words with the words:

I know you disagree

Realistically, I don't know how you expect a minority of golfers using Titleist Profeesionals, blades and persimmon drivers will make anyone change anything whilst the majority are happy to buy whatever over-priced over developed stuff comes out of the lab.

Mark

What is the alternative?  Sit on yer arse and blame the USGA?  That has worked well for the past 100+ years - hasn't it?  Actions speak louder than words my friend.  If you want to see a roll back, start with yourself.  At the end of the day, I reckon a very significant percentage of top line equipment is purchased by the likes of you compared with Joe Bloggs down the muni.  Its people with money driving the consumerism in golf, bit the guy buying the £75 knock off club or waiting 3 years to pick up a £50 bargain.   

Ciao

[Pete Lavallee]

Sean,

Your argument makes as much sense as bringing a knife to a gun fight! Unfortunately competative golfers will not unilaterally disarm for the betterment of the game.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

Your argument makes as much sense as bringing a knife to a gun fight! Unfortunately competative golfers will not unilaterally disarm for the betterment of the game.

Pete

I am not surprised to hear that - which is why nobody should be surprised that I think the roll backers are in the main not worth my time in this discussion.  They want to be led like children by the USGA rather than take action in support of their beliefs - I don't have much time for that sort of conviction. 

Ciao

[Neil Davis]

Sean,

Your argument makes as much sense as bringing a knife to a gun fight! Unfortunately competative golfers will not unilaterally disarm for the betterment of the game.

Pete

I am not surprised to hear that - which is why nobody should be surprised that I think the roll backers are in the main not worth my time in this discussion.  They want to be led like children by the USGA rather than take action in support of their beliefs - I don't have much time for that sort of conviction. 

Ciao

This same line of thinking gets discussed over here from time to time when talking about whether taxes should be raised, and if you believe they should that you should voluntarily pay more.  It is usually dismissed because all you are doing is hurting yourself (I'm not playing my Saturday morning game with a reduced flight ball if my three oppoents are using Pro V1s), and until it is done collectively nothing will change.  Doesn't mean you can't think it is the right thing to do.  Same here, until a roll back is mandated no one is going to voluntarily use a reduced flight ball.  And I don't think not using a reduced flight ball when you think they might actually be a good idea, should preclude someone from engaging in a discussion about it. 

[Mike_Young]

I'm not saying the USGA is the cause or answer for many of the problems and I'm not saying they should not have picked a fight.  I'm saying I don't see a reason for 14000 of our courses to be a member of the USGA.  That is the problem they need to fix and then things will smooth out IMHO.

[David Bartman]

The nature of most amateur golfers that I have been around for 35 years has been to be as good as they can be.  New Equipment and advances in technology has helped players improve some.  I would say that moving from the Wooden “woods” and metal was the largest step in improving people’s golf games, followed closely by vast improvements of the golf ball.   The ability to play with what once was a distance ball and still maintains the ability to hold greens and spin the ball, if even by accident is huge.  Lastly, the invention of the utility iron has really increased the middle digits handicapper 10-18 ability to get the ball in the air from 165-200 yards.  ALL of these advancements are far more helpful to the average players score than anchoring the putter.
 
I think people need to ask themselves, what does the USGA do for the 28 million golfers in the United States?  They provide a handicap system that is easily duplicated and they provide the rules which most everyone fails to abide by each and every time they play golf. 
What does the PGA of America provide?  They provide a readily available liaison to many aspects of the golf game; rules, instruction, equipment and etiquette.  They are the link between everything the USGA writes down in their books and pamphlets and the actual golfers.
What does the PGA Tour provide?  They provide the heroes that inspire people to play golf.  They show all golfers how to play the game at its best.  They are walking endorsements for club companies.  They are golf role models like it or not.  They also give a lot of $$$ back to the communities that they visit. 

In my opinion,  A rule change not adopted by the PGA Tour and PGA of America would cause a disaster to the USGA.  The former two bodies are the link to average golfer, either at the course or on the Television. 
I tend to think that the ANGC will go whichever way the PGA Tour goes on the issue.  They know where they get their $$$ from and that is a partnership with the PGA Tour. 

GJ Bailey's comment about the Tea Party - is IMO, just plain absurd and has no place on this thread.  If you want to have a political debate, start a thread and let's have at it.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()