Twitter: GeoffShac
  • The 1997 Masters: My Story
    The 1997 Masters: My Story
    by Tiger Woods
  • The First Major: The Inside Story of the 2016 Ryder Cup
    The First Major: The Inside Story of the 2016 Ryder Cup
    by John Feinstein
  • Tommy's Honor: The Story of Old Tom Morris and Young Tom Morris, Golf's Founding Father and Son
    Tommy's Honor: The Story of Old Tom Morris and Young Tom Morris, Golf's Founding Father and Son
    by Kevin Cook
  • Playing Through: Modern Golf's Most Iconic Players and Moments
    Playing Through: Modern Golf's Most Iconic Players and Moments
    by Jim Moriarty
  • His Ownself: A Semi-Memoir (Anchor Sports)
    His Ownself: A Semi-Memoir (Anchor Sports)
    by Dan Jenkins
  • The Captain Myth: The Ryder Cup and Sport's Great Leadership Delusion
    The Captain Myth: The Ryder Cup and Sport's Great Leadership Delusion
    by Richard Gillis
  • The Ryder Cup: Golf's Grandest Event – A Complete History
    The Ryder Cup: Golf's Grandest Event – A Complete History
    by Martin Davis
  • Harvey Penick: The Life and Wisdom of the Man Who Wrote the Book on Golf
    Harvey Penick: The Life and Wisdom of the Man Who Wrote the Book on Golf
    by Kevin Robbins
  • Grounds for Golf: The History and Fundamentals of Golf Course Design
    Grounds for Golf: The History and Fundamentals of Golf Course Design
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • The Art of Golf Design
    The Art of Golf Design
    by Michael Miller, Geoff Shackelford
  • The Future of Golf: How Golf Lost Its Way and How to Get It Back
    The Future of Golf: How Golf Lost Its Way and How to Get It Back
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • Lines of Charm: Brilliant and Irreverent Quotes, Notes, and Anecdotes from Golf's Golden Age Architects
    Lines of Charm: Brilliant and Irreverent Quotes, Notes, and Anecdotes from Golf's Golden Age Architects
    Sports Media Group
  • Alister MacKenzie's Cypress Point Club
    Alister MacKenzie's Cypress Point Club
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • The Golden Age of Golf Design
    The Golden Age of Golf Design
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • Masters of the Links: Essays on the Art of Golf and Course Design
    Masters of the Links: Essays on the Art of Golf and Course Design
    Sleeping Bear Press
  • The Good Doctor Returns: A Novel
    The Good Doctor Returns: A Novel
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • The Captain: George C. Thomas Jr. and His Golf Architecture
    The Captain: George C. Thomas Jr. and His Golf Architecture
    by Geoff Shackelford
« R&A Trims A Few Open Exemptions; Protects Key Qualifying Spots | Main | Video: Oosthuizen's 500-Yard, 120-Second Cart Path Drive »

USGA's Davis: Anchoring Decision Still Coming This Spring!

Mike Davis was on Morning Drive Monday and had no update on a specific proposed anchoring ban announcement following the 90-day "great process" comment period. Instead, he's sticking with the original "spring" assessment.

Ryan Lavner points out that the last day of spring is June 20.

But as he mentioned in November and reiterated again Monday on Golf Channel’s “Morning Drive,” Davis said the governing bodies (USGA and R&A) hope to make an official announcement sometime this spring, though no specific date was mentioned.

I watched the appearance and Davis suggested that both the R&A and USGA are still assimilating all of the comments. He didn't seem particularly thrilled about the question either.

By the way, love the coordination between the USGA and R&A to have Open media days on the same day. Or maybe it was on purpose to talk about an anchoring ban that was to have been announced already?

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (34)

Anchoring Police said the decree would be ratified this week didn't they?

I feel a 12th Condition comin' 'round the bend :)
04.29.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
I sure hope Davis and Dawson don't go all wobbly and extend the deadline to 2020 or some such nonsense.

2016 is ample enough time. In fact, it should be 2014.

Dawson is right. It is never too late to right a wrong.
04.29.2013 | Unregistered Commenterfyg
So lets assume that the "Condition of Competition" idea come to fruition, although hopefully it doesn't, as honestly I think it makes no sense to equate such relatively minor issues as how to play and embedded ball and the nature of what constitutes a legal stroke . Anyway, lets say it does. So what happens ? Anchoring is allowed in essentially only PGA Tour sponsored events, and possibly the PGA Championships (Regular and Senior) ? And I get how in that instance, technically speaking all are playing by the same set of "rules", but it sure won't seem that way. Jr and College Golf would presumably not allow anchoring, and so it would remain for Pro golfers to basically take it up for limited use ? 3 Majors and the WGC events presumably would not allow it - TBD I guess about Ryder Cup. At that point, how could the Tour claim their resistance is to "grow the game ?" Do they think individual golf clubs and/or local events would sort of opt in or opt out depending on who is in charge ? What a mess. Agree with @FYG, don't get wobbly now, and this thing can be put to rest for once and for all.
04.29.2013 | Unregistered CommenterBrianS
World Championships are so PGA Tour controlled, that they would likely allow
If the PGA Tour allows anchored putting, I believe college would also,
which would lead to AJGA (college recruiting minor league) accepting as well.

What if the R&A and USGA said "qualifiers for the Open, will be based on World ranking
points, and money earned. Events NOT using condition 12, will not count"
04.29.2013 | Unregistered Commenterhypaucrit
Spot on hypaucrit. The Euro Tour cannot afford to disengage from the teat of the cash cow that is the PGA Tour. Whatever rules Finchem puts into play are the rules the Euro Tour will play. Same for the Asian Tour if they want to continue to have co-sanctioned events with the PGA Tour. The PGA Tour has the gold, their rules will prevail.
04.29.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Being a local club pro, most if not all will allow anchored strokes for men's stag, men's and women's guests days, and invitationals just to keep the numbers up. Remember most of us club pros allowed distance measuring before the local rule allowed it and a lot of clubs allowed layers to tap down spike marks in the 90's. our club will allow anchored strokes if the rule goes into effect, we can't afford to lose any players in our club events and we can't watch all our long putter and belly putters to see if they anchor. If players are allowed to call this rule on their opponents or fellow competitors we should also be allowed to wack them with a slow play penalty
04.29.2013 | Unregistered CommenterMark
What about handicaps? It sounds as if you will allow anchorers to post scores which, according to the USGA, would render their handicap invalid. What happens when one of your anchorer members wants to play in another club's member guest? Are you going to have a gentleman's agreement with the other club pro? What if he/she is for the ban? Sticky issues indeed...
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterShady golf
Shady, not 100% sure but think Mark is referencing how they would proceed under Glenn Nager's 12th Condition solution. Mark's golfers would be in compliance.
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
"Glen Nager's 12th Condition"??????????????????????
I'm sure you'll get the news from last month, next month....
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Better still DTF ... why don't you put up a link?
What if the various parties agree to a COMPROMISE "Condition of Competition" that all Federation sanctioned professional tours will not allow anchoring? And, that other elite non-handicap competitions (professional and amateur) can - and likely will - also sign on to this new C of C? On the other hand, most (or all) handicap competitions will likely not invoke this C of C and future handicaps will simply reflect whatever kind of putter (anchored or not) that each individual uses.

Is this a possible workable compromise?
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterSGarrett
c&c, if you seriously are not aware of what I am referring to it's probably a good idea that you abstain from commenting until you get up to speed (a development for which I hold little hope).
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
SGarrett, the PGA Tour has already given you an answer to that one. Then there's this quote from Dawson: " The negotiating table is no place for rule-making."

If Nager's 12th Condition is adopted it will be across the board and Federation sanctioned tours will be included...that's the way I see it anyway.
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
I have spoken to many club pros about this and most (not all) are not aware of the 12th condition. They simply want to do what's best for their members and not alienate the few that anchor. I asked the same questions above to one pro and he was completely caught off guard - "Never thought of that" was his reply.
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterShady golf
Del, I'm confused by your statement. My first sentence suggested an across the board adoption of a C of C rule by all Federation Tours. You responded: "If Nager's 12th Condition is adopted it will be across the board and Federation sanctioned tours will be included...that's the way I see it anyway."

Are you - in addition to acceptance of the C of C by all Federation Tours - suggesting that every other golfer in the world will also be subject to the same C of C?

If so, what is the difference between a C of C that is enforced across the board and a normal rule as proposed by USGA and R&A?

You lost me.
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterSGarrett
SGarrett, my apologies, possibly I misunderstood your post.

My interpretation of what you wrote was that a 12th Condition "compromise" would simply be (i) Federation Tours (PGA Tour, EURO Tour, JAPAN Tour, AUS/ASIA Tour and Sunshine Tour) would agree to ban anchoring for their events, (ii) other elite professional tours (LPGA? etc...) would follow suit and (iii) the amateurs would continue to allow. Hope I got this correct.

My reaction is that if the 12th Condition itself IS the compromise, and then each entity would make their own decisions. The PGA Tour has said they are against the ban, I think they'd stick with this. As for what the other tours will do, we shall see....but seems to me the Euro Tour has huge financial incentives to remain in partnership with the PGA Tour on co-sanctioning WGC's and such (let's face it, Finchem controls those). As for the amateurs, their lot would be determined by whatever the organizing association or committee in their area deemed acceptable for the event they are running.

That clear it up at all?

I noticed Denis Pugh and the following tweet: Denis Pugh ‏@Dpugh54 7h -- Whilst on the back burner bubbles the "anchor ruling". What I am hearing rumours of solution will make your hair curl!

Wonder what that's all about?!?
04.30.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
DTF ... All I'm asking is that you put up a link to a direct quote from Glen Nager suggesting a C of C. All I can find are quotes from Ted Bishop claiming that Glen Nager had suggested a C of C to allow anchoring. Is that really asking too much?
c&c, why don't you put up a direct quote from Nager that denying what he said to Bishop?

SGarrett, wrote you a response yesterday that didn't seem to make it through. My interpretation of your post is that as a compromise the PGA Tour would join with the other four Federation Tours and agree to ban anchoring on their tours, and other elite professional tours would join them (LPGA?, Nationwide? Senior Tour?). The amateurs and handicap oriented events would be exempt from the anchoring ban.

My thought is that the 12 Condition IS the compromise, and then the various tours/associations/committees will make their own decisions. I believe the PGA Tour will allow anchored putting, and given the financial pressures they are feeling the Euro Tour, and other tours who want to continue co-sanctioning events with Finchem, will use the same rules as the PGA Tour. Who knows what the LPGA will do and the various amateur groups/organizers would make their decisions individually.

Have you see Denis Pugh's tweet on the topic -- very curious!
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
DTF ... so you can't. As I thought.

Nevertheless, you've raised a point which, as the days go by, I too have been wondering about. Why indeed hasn't Nager issued a denial? More to the point, if he did make this suggestion to Bishop, did he get clearance to do so from a) his own ctte and b) did he even bother to consult with the R&A?

Indeed, why bother proposing a ban at all with such a condition attached? At the end of the day, the governing bodies would likely end up being isolated by being the only two ctts who would not include such a condition in their events ergo it simply doesn't make any sense for the governing bodies to support such a condition.
Never said I could!

We do however know that Bishop put it in writing, and in detail. Gave the time and place the conversation took place, and named names. Specifically said the idea was Nager's.

I too believe that if the information was anything other than perfectly accurate Nager would have requested that Bishop withdraw or modify the the quote. I suspect that Nager is one of the foremost experts in the world on proper "procedure" (the Supreme Court is long on procedure) so I doubt he slipped up there...but who knows.

Do you know who Denis Pugh is? He has a tweet out there that's very interesting. If his information is any good it would suggest that the proposed anti-anchoring decree will not be ratified as was presented way back when. Check it out.

971 days to go if the proposed ban is ratified!
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Thanks for the elaboration Del. You are correct in your interpretation of my position. IMO, for a C of C "Compromise" to be workable, it will need to be accepted by all the major tours so that pros which play multiple tours are not subject to different rules at different events. I can't imagine that USGA and R&A would settle for anything less if they agree to any kind of C of C "Compromise" at all, rather than the "new rule" that they initially proposed.

I think it would be workable to have elite (non-handicap) events play by the new rule (via a C of C) and have most every handicap amateur player play in events that did not enforce that C of C. The rule makers would get most of what they want by removing the image of pros playing with anchored strokes - which will theoretically reduce adoption of anchored strokes by youth who want to emulate the pros - but would also calm the apparent fears of PGA of America that taking the anchored stroke away from older yippy players will cause a significant proportion of them to abandon the game altogether.
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterSGarrett
Del, is this what you are referring to?

Denis Pugh ‏@Dpugh54 16h
Whilst on the back burner bubbles the "anchor ruling". What I am hearing rumours of solution will make your hair curl! #evenmine!
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterSGarrett
That's the one.
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
DTF ... it didn't stop you from claiming that Nager did say it though ... did it? It doesn't matter how you slice it up ... it's still hearsay.

Might be a good idea if you looked out your passport together with locating a dodgy off-shore bank to stash your cash before Nager comes after you!(lol)

Incidentally, I noticed you tip-toed past my second paragraph. Quelle surprise.
Hmm ... had it occurred to you DTF that Denis Pugh could have been referring to aforementioned "hearsay"?
I attributed the idea of the 12th Condition to Nager for sure but I certainly did not Quoted him "saying" anything. I am perfectly comfortable with Bishop's recitation of the facts and as we previously discussed if said facts were incorrect it sure seems like Nager would have forced Bishop to modify the blog post -- this has not happened. If he was going to go after anyone it would be Bishop, not me. Be careful with the "hearsay" nonsense, that could really come back to haunt you -- I'm gonna give you one free pass this time ;)

Specifically what are you referring to in your 2nd paragraph? Let's hash it out in detail....

Possibly Pugh is referringto the 12th Condition, personally I hope so. I bet you know someone who knows him, go get a little hearsay for us ;)
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Are you still here DTF?

Therein lies YOUR problem. You couldn't quote him because he has thusfar said nothing on the subject of a C of C ... in so far as I am aware. All that has been said at this juncture is merely hearsay from Ted Bishop. I want to hear it from the horse's mouth before I believe it.

As for my second para ... it was simple enough ... answer the point ... if you can.
c&c...stop deluding yourself, he said it.
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF

On 11.2.2012 you said: "Mike Davis is on record as stating the only reason they haven't been banned long before now is because these putters tended only to be used by extremely yippy old farts and they didn't want to take away a method which allowed them to continue to play the game with some degree of comfort."

digger and I pushed you to produce the "on the record" quote. Not only did you never produce anything of the sort, you tried to justify it with this gem!

"Strewth digsouth ... I was paraphrasing Mike Davis. Go back and check the first time I used that phrase and you will note that I did not use quote marks. They came later when quoting myself.

Just for the record though, I do believe it was on this site that I first read of Mike Davis's reluctance to ban long putters."


As for Nager/Bishop, here's the exact quote from Bishop's blog article:

Call this Bishop’s Last Stand if you will. I am going to offer a simple solution to this whole mess. Listen up Mike Davis because this idea was not mine. It was Glen Nager’s, the current USGA President. Glen and I spent a couple of days together in late February at Augusta National Golf Club. We stayed together. I knocked his glasses off as we got out of a van for dinner. But, we teamed up the following day and won our friendly competition among the USGA, the PGA and our great hosts at The Masters.

You heard it here first. Nager and Bishop bonded (at least I thought we did). I have been intrigued by a concept that Nager presented to me on our flight from Atlanta to Augusta. Nager is a guy who has taken 13 cases to the Supreme Court of the United States. I respect him greatly and I want to take his idea to another level.

If the USGA would drop the proposed Rule 14-1b and instead, make the ban on anchoring a Condition of Competition in the Rule Book, all entities in golf could handle it the way they want. Rule 33-1 provides, “The Committee must establish conditions under which a competition is to be played.”

c&c, you've accidentally stumbled into the Championship Flight....toddle on back over to the 8th flight where you belong.
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Del- it is perfectly acceptable to disagree with someone but there's no need to be disagreeable.Lets be honest your own record on predictions hasn't been too wonderful until this VJ fiasco!!
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterChico
chico, nothing would suit me more than for us to all have healthy debate and never make it personal. In this case she kept asking for it so I gave it to her.

Now, as for my record....please bring me up to date ;0)
05.1.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Chico, thanks but didnae fash yersel ... I just thought it would be fun to give Del The Punk a taste of his own medicine.

He still hasn't addressed my question about why I believe including a C of C would be a non-starter though. (lol)
c&c, what's your question? I'd be happy to address it.

Hey, how you feeling about "hearsay" today?
05.2.2013 | Unregistered CommenterDTF

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.