USGA Statement On PGA Tour Anchoring Stance
I requested a statement from the USGA following PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem's comments during the WGC Accenture Match Play, here's what they say:
“The 90-day comment period remains a very good process. We continue to listen to varying points of view, and have had many productive conversations across the golf community, which is a reminder of just how much people care about the game – regardless of their position on this issue."
"As we consider the various perspectives on this issue, it has always been our position that Rule 14-1b aims to clarify and preserve the traditional and essential nature of the golf stroke, which has helped to make golf a unique and enjoyable game of skill and challenge.
"It is our plan to take final action on the proposed rule in the spring.”
Sunday, February 24, 2013 at 02:21 PM
Reader Comments (28)
Okay, but if that's the case, why didn't you ban anchoring 35 years ago? The old-schooler and idealist in me wants to see it banned. But the realist (who has listened to both sides for weeks) thinks it would create more problems than necessary if that happened.
"Game over man, GAME OVER!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY
Instead they waited, looked at which way the wind blew, and complained.
the pros (touring and club) haven't said "we will defy you" they've said "we'll blame you".
No better time two groups of amateurs, with no financial stake in the game, to do what is right. Then Jim Furyk and Ogilvie and the other geniuses can tell Keegan etc., "Hey, we tried--its not our fault"
Why would anyone trust the usga? They ruined the game, didn't they?
See what I did there?
What about the PGA of America and NGCOA? Why do the opinions of those organizations carry no weight?
For better or worse, the days of the USGA and R&A dictating are coming to a close.
They couldn’t have handled the situation much worse and now they, and the game, are paying for it.
And for all you guys who believe that this is the first act in a usga play that will culminate in the rollback of the golfball..... forget it. The usga and the r and a proved they can't order lunch without screwing up.
Remember, Wally ulhein is a lot smarter than Timmy and has lots more money and better lawyers.
For all the anti belly people, why do you not like it now, where wore you 10 years ago when they became a little more mainstream.
But I still want a real reason from the usga, Davis told us in 2011 that there was no reason to ban an anchored stroke. Than both open's are won with belly putters and now that is all we talk about. Not slow play, the cost, the ball, the big drivers or falling numbers. I feel Bobb Jones rose from the dead and told the usga again that he doesn't like how someone is playing the game again. Than you got side saddle, witch looks even worse. I wonder what we will get next and how long it will be legal.
Even though I am against the ban, I would go to the dark side if the usga would make round in the us open stay under 4 hours.
He Said:
''You know the best things in life are free;
but you can give' em to the birds and bees-
I want MONEY
(that's what I want)
Lots of money ,child
That's what I want
That's what I want.
Let's see: no transparency when it comes to suspensions, no effort to enforce pace of play on a regular and understandable basis, unwilling to punish players who use a product that is on the 'banned substance' list, testing for banned substance abuse is haphazard at best (Tiger saying he's only been tested once...not to pick on Tiger, but he has been around for a few years) when beta-blockers were some players best friend back in the 90s, and now this position on the use of the long putter! No wonder I'm getting tired of watching these pampered whiny brats.
Those that play competitive golf for a living are supposed to be the best. Period. As such, they must conform to the rules of the game and those rules are established by the governing bodies, not the Tour. If they cannot compete and succeed playing under the rules of golf then they are not the best and maybe it's time to find a new career. This pandering to the needs of those who cannot control their putting stroke is absurd, let those who play the game by the rules take the place of those who cannot.
I brought up the narrow/WIDE/narrow paddle grip in an earlier post. This particular grip first showed up in the 1920's. It was made popular in the 1940's when John Reuter Jr designed his Bulls Eye putter. Johnny Miller shot 63 the last day of the 73 US OPEN and won with a Bulls Eye. Lanny Wadkins had his share of success with this putter, as did many - many others. Bob Mandrella at Wilson Sporting Goods designed the first 8802 Wilson Staff putter in 1961, then the Designed by Arnold Palmer version in 1962, both of Bob's versions incorporated the paddle grip, waist and bulge grip. Ben Crenshaw made this putter so popular that they named his putter little ben. For 60 something years this putter grip was in conforming use. I successfully completed the 1989 PGA Tour qualifying school (early December at TPC Woodlands) putting with my favorite putter, an 8802. On January 1st, 1990 I had to cut this grip off my favorite putter and find a new conforming grip before my first event, the Tucson Open.
Interesting enough, this 1990 rules change was crushing to put it mildly. Yes, when you've grown up with something and perfected it to a certain degree how do you all of a sudden change? Well, you do, and we all did. I didn't see Crenshaw and others running around threatening to sue the USGA. I didn't see veterans in press room voicing their opinions about the grip decision. I didn't see the PGA Tour policy board and pac board holding meetings about the grip change. I didn't see Deane Beman getting on national television explaining how the PGA Tour was against such a ban. Instead what I saw happening were guys like Ben Crenshaw sucking it up and moving on while respecting the USGA's ruling. Believe me, none of us were happy.
If they'd banned it back in 75 or 80 it might be different. I would point out the USGA banning the paddle grip in 1990 after 60 something years. Yes, many different generations, including mine grew up with that grip. And No, the USGA did not provide us with imperial evidence that the paddle grip provided an unfair advantage, they made a decision concerning the Rules and we all lived by them. What the USGA did say at the time was they felt players could mold their hands onto that grip making it easier to control the putter. That's what we were told as to why after 60 someting years, so the USGA decided to clarify a rule, and that's their right.
If the USGA came to the conclusion in 1990 (after 60 years) that molding your hands on the paddle grip made controling the putter easier should we really be questioning the time frame of the USGA looking at long putters and belly putters? If the USGA said the paddle grip made controlling the putter to easy, would it be far fetched to believe the USGA views anchoring the putter even "easier"? Subjectively speaking, anchoring is a brace that provides stability, where as conventional style putting is one taking on the skill level required to control your hands during a stroke when there's lots riding on it. Putting conventional style requires skill and nerves, which is what every other club in the bag requires. The argument can be made that anchored style putting is not even a stroke in that the club has not been swung. The grip is part of the club, and in fact is not swung in a long putter, belly putter anchored motions. Technically speaking, regarding the current rules, these two examples can't constitute a stroke being taken in my subjective opinion, as the grip isn't moving from where its anchored. As I read the rules, you have to swing the club at the ball. To me the club being swung would include seeing the grip being swung, since the grip makes up a part of the club. The grip in these two anchored motions is not being swung, therefor the club hasn't been swung. So how could these two anchored motions constitute a stroke being taken?
The one precedent that can't be set is a constituted time frame. In such a world the USGA might never be able to make a rules revision. The sport has been around since the 15th century. Golf has evolved from the feathery and gutta percha to titanium, graphite, and solid core golf balls. If the USGA were to take on any of these new materials in the future I'd hate to see the argument made that "it" existed for x number of years therefor you USGA can't change that rule. NO, timeframes would be a poor precedent to establish and the USGA would be handcuffed from making rules revisions concerning any rules revisions in the future.
Define what swinging the club means and lets all move on.
I tried to post a verse, but it has not appeared--I guess the spam filter is worried about the copyright on a 50 year old song----
but he said...
"give me money....
that's what I want''
Lets think about a few things....
- There's one thing we know for sure, Finchem wants what Finchem wants -- this is not open to debate.
- I bet I would get zero pushback saying Finchem wants what Finchem wants, regardless of what players think. Yes?
- We also know Finchem is an inside the beltway trained political operative.
So, let's say that deep down Finchem is against anchoring and would prefer to see it banned...however, he's smart enough to realize he can't just cram down an anchoring ban without going though the motions...what to do?
Here's how it looks...
On the sly Flinchum gives Mike Davis a wink and says "I got this one, have your response ready". He then lets the information gathering process run its course and duly accepts the PAC board recommendation. In turn he delivers the result and talks about it on TV a little. In less time than it takes 2 PGA Tour players to play 3 holes the USGA puts out their press release/response.
In another 60 days the USGA will either ban anchoring, or not. Lets presume they do, now what?
If Flinchum is personally in favor of the ban I can absolutely see him cramming it down regardless of how further player polling turns out. Flinchum- "sorry fellas, we tried our best, gotta take one for the team here, long putters are out".
By the time 2016 rolls around he will only have 1 or 2 more years left in the saddle so what does he care about how an anchoring ban may or may not affect the tour broadly?
before 1990?
I'm not being argumentative, I thought there was a rule and somehow the paddle grip
slipped through, until Silhouette Grips came out. These had a waist and were made for clubs
other than putters. When they were to be outlawed, I seem to remember that the company tried to
use the paddle grip as part of defense, which ended with the USGA outlawing that grip as well.
Now, this was a long time ago, and I too was a paddle grip guy (still miss it). My memory may be shady,
it's been known to happen, but it's how I remember the USGA screwing my putting up for years!! hahaa
before 1990?
I'm not being argumentative, I thought there was a rule and somehow the paddle grip
slipped through, until Silhouette Grips came out. These had a waist and were made for clubs
other than putters. When they were to be outlawed, I seem to remember that the company tried to
use the paddle grip as part of defense, which ended with the USGA outlawing that grip as well.
Now, this was a long time ago, and I too was a paddle grip guy (still miss it). My memory may be shady,
it's been known to happen, but it's how I remember the USGA screwing my putting up for years!! hahaa
Don't know why it keeps double posting