Has banning the anchor made a difference?

[pt73]

A few weeks ago I watched some Champions Tour event with an interview with McCarron and Langer on the practice green and a Tour rules official.

The subject was whether they have been anchoring or not, so there must have been some suspicion that it was happening.

Both players maintain they are not anchoring as their top hand is just "brushing" their shirt and not pressed against their chest.

The tour rules guy agreed that was legal.

[jimandr]

To go back to the original question asked, the answer is mainly no, but partly yes.

A few players no longer play (Kevin Stadler for one). No players have made the change to the long putter, or changed to a questionable style of putting since the new rule. A few others, such as Adam Scott, aren't quite as good as they were.

Is the game now a better game because nobody, or hardly anybody, anchors? Personally, I don't think so. The whole issue was a storm in a teacup, and it hasn't made golf a more popular sport than it was previously.

Apart from a few purists, nobody cared.

[goughy]

And will those purists now go after the ball, or drivers.... or will they be lost with nothing to complain about?

[Bitter]

To go back to the original question asked, the answer is mainly no, but partly yes.

A few players no longer play (Kevin Stadler for one). No players have made the change to the long putter, or changed to a questionable style of putting since the new rule. A few others, such as Adam Scott, aren't quite as good as they were.

Is the game now a better game because nobody, or hardly anybody, anchors? Personally, I don't think so. The whole issue was a storm in a teacup, and it hasn't made golf a more popular sport than it was previously.

Apart from a few purists, nobody cared.

. Yeah this thread did go a different to what I imagined but I have enjoyed it. I agree that it has not improved the game in any way.

[BUSHY]

And will those purists now go after the ball, or drivers.... or will they be lost with nothing to complain about?

The ball is definitely the real issue. Probably an even more difficult proposition to implement a change though.

[Yossarian]

It has made Bernhard a cheat.

[pt73]

The ball is definitely the real issue. Probably an even more difficult proposition to implement a change though.

According to a study by the USGA and R&A the ball isn't the issue:

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/new-...e-on-pro-tours

http://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga...ance-study.pdf

[3oneday]

It has made Bernhard a cheat.

a rich cheat.

[grandmasterb]

To go back to the original question asked, the answer is mainly no, but partly yes.

A few players no longer play (Kevin Stadler for one). No players have made the change to the long putter, or changed to a questionable style of putting since the new rule. A few others, such as Adam Scott, aren't quite as good as they were.

Is the game now a better game because nobody, or hardly anybody, anchors? Personally, I don't think so. The whole issue was a storm in a teacup, and it hasn't made golf a more popular sport than it was previously.

Apart from a few purists, nobody cared.

The thing I find funny throughout the entire "anchoring" saga is that there have been plenty of people to say they feel it is a form of "cheating" but only a handful of players actually had a now "banned" stroke and have made putter/stroke changes to adhere to the rules.

I've played with plenty of of people who use long putters over the years and hats off to them as I actually think it's bloody harder to putt like that personally. Has it made the game more interesting to watch/follow - HELL NO.

The problem with golf is a lot like other sports I follow in that the people making/changing the rules of the game these days don't participate in the sport at a high level anymore or NEVER did. They sit behind a desk coming up with ways to justify their employment!!!

Personally I think there is waaaaaaaaaaay too much money in sport these days which has ruined it and will mean that changes will continue so a select few continue to get rich.

[BUSHY]

According to a study by the USGA and R&A the ball isn't the issue:

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/new-...e-on-pro-tours

http://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga...ance-study.pdf

That is part of the problem. The law makers don't see an issue.

[Yossarian]

The thing I find funny throughout the entire "anchoring" saga is that there have been plenty of people to say they feel it is a form of "cheating" but only a handful of players actually had a now "banned" stroke and have made putter/stroke changes to adhere to the rules.

I've played with plenty of of people who use long putters over the years and hats off to them as I actually think it's bloody harder to putt like that personally. Has it made the game more interesting to watch/follow - HELL NO.

The problem with golf is a lot like other sports I follow in that the people making/changing the rules of the game these days don't participate in the sport at a high level anymore or NEVER did. They sit behind a desk coming up with ways to justify their employment!!!

Personally I think there is waaaaaaaaaaay too much money in sport these days which has ruined it and will mean that changes will continue so a select few continue to get rich.

How has the anchoring ban made a select few rich?

[benno_r]

How has the anchoring ban made a select few rich?

All the players Langer beats get under the table payouts to stop them from calling him on his cheating.

[3Puttpete]

That is part of the problem. The law makers don't see an issue.

Those idiots and their information.

They should listen to choppers watching on tv half a world away

[BUSHY]

Those idiots and their **flawed** information.

They should listen to choppers watching on tv half a world away

Fixed.

[3Puttpete]

Either way, I haven't heard a decent explanation as to why hitting the ball further is a problem

[Yossarian]

When combined the preoccupation with par as around 70 - 72, and old courses not being able to stack up they way they used to. There is a problem there at the higher levels. For most club golfers it is a non issue.

[thecollective]

Either way, I haven't heard a decent explanation as to why hitting the ball further is a problem

3 words:
Scoring to PAR; we are obsessed with it and it pollutes the game in so many ways

One (stupid) way will be to eliminate Par 5's all together - but that would bring the PAR index down and that's an issue coz it screws with our perception

With the current setup of score the only way will be to wind back the ball - the days of pinnacle and B52's could become renaissance to the tour pros

Only problem is: @ what level do you bring in the 'tour' ball? just on the main tours? so then how do youngsters acclimatise to the difference in distance/ball flight/spin around the greens if they are raised on ProV1's knowing full well it will be Pinnacle in the years to come

*NOTE* not suggesting that Pinnacle will make the tour ball - just an analogy, chill

[3Puttpete]

The pros play stroke play almost exclusively, par is irrelevant. Get rid of it for them. Or change it. By definition it's an expectation of what they should be able to achieve, no more par 5s for pros.

Golf might be the only measured (against the clock, tape measure etc, not affected by your opponent) sport in which we don't want to see improvement. Maybe we should make Usain Bolt put on 20kg because he runs much faster than someone did 50 years ago.

Either that or wait 50 weeks for people to start bitching about how unfair the US Open course is and making them shoot even par is ridiculous.

[thecollective]

The pros play stroke play almost exclusively, par is irrelevant. Get rid of it for them. Or change it. By definition it's an expectation of what they should be able to achieve, no more par 5s for pros.

Golf might be the only measured (against the clock, tape measure etc, not affected by your opponent) sport in which we don't want to see improvement. Maybe we should make Usain Bolt put on 20kg because he runs much faster than someone did 50 years ago.

Either that or wait 50 weeks for people to start bitching about how unfair the US Open course is and making them shoot even par is ridiculous.

So how do you pitch tv coverage if your quoting full score instead of PAR number - will sound a bit odd don't you think, will also be confusing to follow

OR do we suck it up and let them score 36- to win; doesn't seem to be a problem at the opening event in Kapalua; the easiest course on tour (personally I love watching that event - who gives a toss)

[3Puttpete]

So how do you pitch tv coverage if your quoting full score instead of PAR number - will sound a bit odd don't you think, will also be confusing to follow OR do we suck it up and let them score 36- to win; doesn't seem to be a problem at the opening event in Kapalua; the easiest course on tour (personally I love watching that event - who gives a toss)

Seems to work well with F1 qualifying and cycling time trials. That's my point. The golfer with the lowest score wins. Who cares how far under or over par it is? If par for the 100m was 10 seconds would these same people complain Bolt is -0.5 and should have to put on 20kg?

[BUSHY]

Either way, I haven't heard a decent explanation as to why hitting the ball further is a problem

Generally at my level and even to elite amateur level I don't see an issue with the ball going further. My only concern is if left unchecked, in the near future the it wont be interesting to watch the Pro's play at places like The Old Course and we will end up seeing either extreme hard-and-fast or 8 inch rough as the only defence for classic courses.

There are courses out there where the design used to call for a long iron approach but with the distance increase in the last 30 years guys-even amateurs- are hitting short irons and wedges. Surely if the USGA and R&A are serious they will impose some form of restriction moving forward much like the COR and MOI of drivers was limited. This way they won't be caught out like they were when the ProV1 was released.
I don't believe in rolling it back and I definitely DON'T like the idea of bifurcation. I just want to see the future of the game protected. That's all.

Look at the peak below, between 92 and 06 we see a 30 yard increase. That IMO is what should be avoided in the future. In saying that the big uptick on the Web.com tour in 2015 goes against what the rule makers are saying. Will be interesting to see this in 5 years.

distance.jpg

[3Puttpete]

Generally at my level and even to elite amateur level I don't see an issue with the ball going further. My only concern is if left unchecked, in the near future the it wont be interesting to watch the Pro's play at places like The Old Course and we will end up seeing either extreme hard-and-fast or 8 inch rough as the only defence for classic courses.

There are courses out there where the design used to call for a long iron approach but with the distance increase in the last 30 years guys-even amateurs- are hitting short irons and wedges. Surely if the USGA and R&A are serious they will impose some form of restriction moving forward much like the COR and MOI of drivers was limited. This way they won't be caught out like they were when the ProV1 was released.
I don't believe in rolling it back and I definitely DON'T like the idea of bifurcation. I just want to see the future of the game protected. That's all.

Look at the peak below, between 92 and 06 we see a 30 yard increase. That IMO is what should be avoided in the future. In saying that the big uptick on the Web.com tour in 2015 goes against what the rule makers are saying. Will be interesting to see this in 5 years.

Attachment 45583

Youve just explained what's different, not why it's a problem.

[3oneday]

We'll be dead or old, it won't matter.

[BUSHY]

Youve just explained what's different, not why it's a problem.

You don't think classic courses being obsolete is a problem?

[3Puttpete]

You don't think classic courses being obsolete is a problem?

Again, no answer? I'll assume you haven't quite worked out what the problem is either. Let's try it another way. Will golf no longer be played on the old course if Rory hits his driver 10m further in 10 years? Why is it obsolete? Why does golf have to be played to the same level it was 300 years ago? Why does par have to be 72 or 71 or 70 or whatever? What if we make all the par 5s par 4s so the pros are shooting 16 shots higher relative to par every tournament? What if we just scream things are different and we don't like it? Not all things mind you, we're ok with not using rocks and sticks, with steel woods and graphite shafts, with GPS, pro tracer, tv coverage and watching a stream using wifi.