More From Clark & Scott...
Jim McCabe goes into more depth on the media sitdown with anchorers Adam Scott and Tim Clark, and as McCabe lays out it there is a little more desperation in their voices. And I do sympathize with some of their points. Still, there is one major question not addressed: what exactly is being taken from you besides anchoring the putter against your chest?
The piece is well worth reading from beginning to end, but a few comments worth noting...
“Statements are thrown out like, ‘They’re good players, they’ll be all right.’ Well, hang on a second. Tim has spent thousands of hours practicing a method that is allowed. Keegan Bradley has spent thousands of hours practicing, rehearsing this method that’s been allowed. How do you just cut the legs out from us over your view that you don’t like seeing a junior putt (by anchoring)?”
Thousands of hours practicing? Might want go with hundreds there Tim!
He decided to try the long putter and practiced with various grips and stances for months until he settled on a method that suited him. He concedes that it felt a bit awkward, that because very few people used the technique he was “self-conscious” about it, but there were two over-riding aspects. One, it felt better on his arms, and two, it was clearly within the rules and no one raised an issue with it.
And again, the same grip and putter can still be used, so what's the big deal?
“We have a great game,” Scott said. “As professionals, we have great tours, and we should be working together on this. I’m shocked that they went ahead and proposed the ban before getting Tim Finchem’s point of view. Why would they want to rock the boat like this? I just don’t think golf is at a point where it needs a shake-up.”
Interesting that Scott is under the impression that Tim Finchem's and the tour's perspective was not known to the governing bodies when they made this decision.
Thursday, March 7, 2013 at 08:52 AM
Reader Comments (30)
"And again, the same grip and putter can still be used, so what's the big deal?" - That's not really true, now, is it? That statement is a bit of a cop out. Yes, while it would still be within the (proposed) rules to use that same putter, that's not practically the case. To wield a broomstick without anchoring is essentially impossible. If the rule goes through, Scott and Tim would most certainly be forced to change their equipment, even if not explicitly spelled out in the rule. Many other points they are making are certainly very debatable, but I absolutely do believe them when they say that they would have to switch equipment.
One other note though - the idea that all the time practicing with the long putter would be for drought, if they had to switch, doesn't really ring true. I actually think it's a great practice aid. After using one for a while, I felt that I had a much better feel for release point, squaring the face, etc. It's definitely made me better with the short putter.
Clark was an All-American in college using a short putter.
And he claims an abnormality prevents him from putting that way.
Wow, what brass.
I liked TIm Clark and Adam Scott but everytime they open their mouth I lose respect for them more and more.
Sad
As to the issue of anchoring has been available for years, I thought people were saying that because the tours didn't take action on balls and clubs soon enough, we are having problems now. Well the tour is taking action now on this matter before it becomes troublesome later.
As to the issue of isn't there more important things to take car of like balls and slow pace of play - true, but we all deal with multiple things all the time, be it in the home or at work. It's not like they're not doing anything on the balls but maybe they're just building their case with the balls. That doesn't preclude them from dealing with anchoring now does it?
On the matter of banning anchoring will not grow the game, I don't see anchoring much in the 80s and 90s and the game still grew. The game has been flat for 5-8 years now, well before the anchoring and is perhaps due to the economy. True, it MAY help grow the game but something like cheaper equipments, cheaper course fee, quicker pace, more welcoming to women and children, are likely to help the game grow more. Growing the game involve people new to golf, and anchoring is not a natural movement whereas traditional putting style is. Now if you're saying anchorers will stop playing the game and the game will shrink, well, I know enough about the addictive nature of golf and the people that quit because they can't anchor isn't significant.
Lastly, I see amateurs not playing to the rule all the time (drop the ball next to the OB stakes and play to quicken play, pick up and gimmes, mulligans, etc.) so banning anchoring at the competition levels (amateur competition, second tier tours, pro tours, college, even private tournaments) does NOT mean regular golfers can't use anchoring. It's just that if you want to compete, you can't use it. You can anchor all you want on your weekend plays, and that, may mean not as many people will quite the game as people think.
Not following how you have arrived at being "on the fence" after supporting the ban. Could you explain? Based on the results of your personal observational experiment, that change in position doesn't follow logically to me, but maybe I'm missing something?
Or, maybe you're kidding.
Sounds like a comment by someone not good enough to do it
Anchoring was banned long ago and we dropped the ball by not enforcing it. But I suspect several of the long putters knew that anchoring was not in the spirit of the rules and continued to pursue it regardless. The governing bodies bare alot of responsibility for this minor mess but the players also should have called their own "penalty" in this case as well. Just don't think the rules are unclear on this one. Sorry.
While I feel some sympathy towards them because the governing bodies didn't do the right thing years ago, we cannot change the rules of golf because of a few sad stories.
10 hours a week practicing his anchoring 52 weeks a year? Please.
Again. those that can, play (and practice)
Those that can't, take shots from their pedestal
And those frustrated, take shots from behind their curtains
That's an interesting and humanistic approach to thinking about it. But I am not aware of any game whose inherent rules take into consideration the physical limitations of those who play. Not sure it's golf's place to be the first.
18 = years Tim Clark has used an anchored putter.
2000/18 = 111 hours per year of putting practice.
111/52 = 2.14 hours putting practice per week (128 minutes).
128/5 = 26 minutes of putting practice per day, 5 days per week.
"Thousands of hours" seems entirely plausible to me.
Bobby D, last 2 days at Los Verdes, 0 belly putters, 0 long putters, 1 Kuchar style putter.
As for the 1" of separation to eliminate the anchoring, how much of a difference do those in favor of the ban really think this will make? (really only 1/8th of an inch is required)
45 minutes per day, 5 days per week for 8 years would get him over 1500 hours.
If his putting declines, there's his statistical proof that it provides an advantage. If it doesn't change, he has no reason to complain.
Or he can simply answer the question, "why can't you just hold the club a few inches away from your body?"