The Anchoring Ban

[blugold]

Apples to oranges. Those polymer filled grooves dont make it easier to make a proper stroke. Next!

I will give you that an anchored stroke is not anywhere close to a standard putter's stroke. No argument.

But what does it hurt for the 99.99% of golfers in this country to anchor their putter?

Likewise, I used an anchored putter for a few months last year. I hated it. It did nothing for me but ruin my putting stats. I switch putters to Seemore offerings and have putted better. I am not saying that the strokes are the same, I am saying that an anchored putter is not an unfair advantage.

 

[blugold]

I know what you're saying but not one of those advancements in materials or design have fundamentally changed the way a club is swung. That is all :bomb:

Do you think golf swings are the same today as they were 400 years ago?

 

[Hawk]

You've had guys win with all kinds of abberations when it comes to equipment that helps them perform as an individual. It doesn't make it unfair. Of course it's advantageous to play whatever it is that maximizes your potential, but singling out the anchor?

Why not modern clubs that are scientifically proven to perform better than traditional clubs on mis-hits?. Drivers are built to offset vertical and horizontal misses from the gear effect. Perimeter weighting allows irons to resist twisting and maintain ball speeds. I could go on and on.

To me, that's the most apparent thing I can ever think of that gives an advantage to people performing less than perfectly, but no - the anchor is the real problem we're talkign about. Does that not sound completely hyprocritical to you? This is one tiny thing on a huge list that has been an accepted part of the game for years or decades.

 

[blugold]

You've had guys win with all kinds of abberations when it comes to equipment that helps them perform as an individual. It doesn't make it unfair. Of course it's advantageous to play whatever it is that maximizes your potential, but singling out the anchor?

Why not modern clubs that are scientifically proven to perform better than traditional clubs on mis-hits?. Drivers are built to offset vertical and horizontal misses by imparting gear effect. Perimeter weighting allows irons to resist twisting and maintain ball speeds.

To me, that's the most apparent thing I can ever think of that gives an advantage to people performing less than perfectly, but no - the anchor is the real problem we're talkign about. Does that not sound completely hyprocritical to you? This is one tiny thing on a huge list that has been an accepted part of the game for years or decades.

Don't forget that oversized taperless grips make it more difficult for the wrists to be rolled over through the stroke. They have changed how stroke is made but the USGA has gotten their delicates in a wad over those.

 

[Smallville]

You've had guys win with all kinds of abberations when it comes to equipment that helps them perform as an individual. It doesn't make it unfair. Of course it's advantageous to play whatever it is that maximizes your potential, but singling out the anchor?

Why not modern clubs that are scientifically proven to perform better than traditional clubs on mis-hits?. Drivers are built to offset vertical and horizontal misses by imparting gear effect. Perimeter weighting allows irons to resist twisting and maintain ball speeds.

To me, that's the most apparent thing I can ever think of that gives an advantage to people performing less than perfectly, but no - the anchor is the real problem we're talkign about. Does that not sound completely hyprocritical to you? This is one tiny thing on a huge list that has been an accepted part of the game for years or decades.

But not everyone can use those.

Oh wait . . .

 

[Hawk]

Of course, that's all beside the point since it's only about tradition, according to the alliance.

 

[blugold]

Of course, that's all beside the point since it's only about tradition, according to the alliance.

Imagine if autoracing was governed like golf.

 

[Smallville]

Imagine if autoracing was governed like golf.

That's one thing we can be thankful for. They could have changed the rule in the middle of the season.

 

[blugold]

That's one thing we can be thankful for. They could have changed the rule in the middle of the season.

The Daytona Horse Drawn Carriage 500 would sure be boring to watch.

 

[Fourputt]

That's pretty much it - and why the ban passed. There's no way to argue that, at least from a logical standpoint. I don't have the energy to debate tradition, but I will say that I think crying tradition today is hypocritical when we look at the massive changes we've seen in the last century, all of which were alllowed under the USGA/R&A's watch.

How do you feel about blue jeans on the course? Cargo shorts? T-shirts? There is nothing wrong with any of them except that they lack tradition. But then we aren't wearing a wool jacket, shirt and tie, and plus fours either are we? Nothing traditional about microfiber slacks and polo shirt, yet they are now "proper" attire. Tradition is dictated by a combination of time and popular acceptance. Neither factor applies to the anchored stroke, while both apply to the traditional stroke (which is sort of why it's called "traditional" ). The anchored stroke also goes in the face of the basic principle of freely swinging the club. It falls in line with the recent ruling banning the scraping stroke. In neither case was the club being swung in the traditional sense, so both methods were deemed to be contrary to the good of the game. Both reduced the skill required to strike the ball.

 

[blugold]

In neither case was the club being swung in the traditional sense, so both methods were deemed to be contrary to the good of the game. Both reduced the skill required to strike the ball.

But my question, why does the game have to get harder? Instead of polling tour pros or looking at leaderboards on Sundays, the USGA should have asked PGA instructors and course operators if the anchored stroke made the game worse off for the people paying to keep golf alive.

 

[Hawk]

I'd argue that 40 years and use among young, popular players would constitute both the time and popular acceptance criteria.

As for the clothing, I don't care what people wear when they golf.

 

[JF]

I still fail to see where there's any issue with anchored strokes. It makes the game more fun for those who like to use them. But I guess talking away the fun in the game for some people is cool now.


THPing on Tapatalk

 

[Fourputt]

But my question, why does the game have to get harder? Instead of polling tour pros or looking at leaderboards on Sundays, the USGA should have asked PGA instructors and course operators if the anchored stroke made the game worse off for the people paying to keep golf alive.

Where do you get the idea that it's gotten harder by this ruling? This doesn't change what the game of golf has traditionally been. It just maintains the status quo.

 

[Hawk]

I think the fact that anchoring has been around for longer than many of us have been alive (and for at least 1/2 to 2/3's the lifetime of most of our forum members) would indicate a different status quo than you're suggesting.

 

[blugold]

Where do you get the idea that it's gotten harder by this ruling? This doesn't change what the game of golf has traditionally been. It just maintains the status quo.

But status quos are not always a good thing. Sometimes, to make things more enjoyable, status quos need to be bucked.

Again, unless PGA Instructors and course operators said that the anchored stroke was hurting the game then the USGA massively flubbed this.

 

[wadesworld]

But my question, why does the game have to get harder? Instead of polling tour pros or looking at leaderboards on Sundays, the USGA should have asked PGA instructors and course operators if the anchored stroke made the game worse off for the people paying to keep golf alive.

I'm confused. How can the game get harder if the anchored stroke is not an advantage?

You have to draw the line somewhere. Let's say that people start attaching lasers to their putters as an alignment aid. That will certainly make the game easier for a lot of people and you can bet a LOT of people would buy them. Therefore, the USGA should allow it because it's popular with those who pay to keep golf alive?

 

[blugold]

I'm confused. How can the game get harder if the anchored stroke is not an advantage?

You have to draw the line somewhere. Let's say that people start attaching lasers to their putters as an alignment aid. That will certainly make the game easier for a lot of people and you can bet a LOT of people would buy them. Therefore, the USGA should allow it because it's popular with those who pay to keep golf alive?

But laser attachments are against the rules and have been for some time. The game got easier for some people. Because some people found the game more fun and easier doesn't make the anchored stroke an unfair advantage.

 

[SharkHat]

I'm confused. How can the game get harder if the anchored stroke is not an advantage?

You have to draw the line somewhere. Let's say that people start attaching lasers to their putters as an alignment aid. That will certainly make the game easier for a lot of people and you can bet a LOT of people would buy them. Therefore, the USGA should allow it because it's popular with those who pay to keep golf alive?

Already exists

 

[wadesworld]

Already exists

I realize that. My hypothetical situation was based on their popular acceptance though. In the real world, that's not possible since there's already a rule against them. My point was, just because something makes the game easier and is utilized by lots of golfers is not automatic criteria for its acceptance, nor should it be.

 

[blugold]

I realize that. My hypothetical situation was based on their popular acceptance though. In the real world, that's not possible since there's already a rule against them. My point was, just because something makes the game easier and is utilized by lots of golfers is not automatic criteria for its acceptance, nor should it be.

Agreed.

But, for me, an anchored putter does no harm to the integrity of the game.

Let me also add - low spin, long launching golf balls do not hurt the game's integrity either.

 

[Hawk]

I realize that. My hypothetical situation was based on their popular acceptance though. In the real world, that's not possible since there's already a rule against them. My point was, just because something makes the game easier and is utilized by lots of golfers is not automatic criteria for its acceptance, nor should it be.

So, should we be playing any modern equipment wade? You keep passing up the comment that there is a plethora of options available to mitigate personal weaknesses that are accepted parts of the game, anchoring being one of them. Some have been around for less time than anchoring. They affect everything from putting to long irons to driving.

Hell, sometimes a simple switch to a bargain bin Yes! putter will win you a FedEx Cup.

 

[SharkHat]

Any player switching from one putter to another and then improving their putting statistics (and potentially even winning on Tour) is only evidence that the putter that they switched to worked better for them than the other putter did. This is true whether it be from standard to anchored or blade to mallet or any switch you can imagine. They gained an advantage over themselves with the other putter. Note that I said advantage, not unfair advantage.

The only way one can gain an unfair advantage over anybody else is to be using something (whether that be equipment, drugs, or knowledge) that is not equally accessible to that other person.

 

[JaxGolfer1]

So, does Vijay Singh wait until December 31, 2015 to sue the USGA and R&A regarding the anchor ban?

 

[blugold]

Any player switching from one putter to another and then improving their putting statistics (and potentially even winning on Tour) is only evidence that the putter that they switched to worked better for them than the other putter did. This is true whether it be from standard to anchored or blade to mallet or any switch you can imagine. They gained an advantage over themselves with the other putter. Note that I said advantage, not unfair advantage.

The only way one can gain an unfair advantage over anybody else is to be using something (whether that be equipment, drugs, or knowledge) that is not equally accessible to that other person.

But putters weren't anchored for 400 years. Just because they are now means that things have to change!!! Dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!