Where's the Beef? Governing Bodies Don't Show Statistical Proof Backing Anchoring Ban

Where's the Beef? Governing Bodies Don't Show Statistical Proof Backing Anchoring Ban











Ryan Ballengee May 21, 2013 11:16 AM


COMMENTARY | I support the anchoring ban. I don't support the lack of data to support the rationale of it.



The USGA and R&A, golf's governing bodies, simultaneously announced Tuesday they would move forward with a ban of the anchored stroke they proposed in November 2012. A new rule, known as Rule 14-1b, will be enacted starting Jan. 1, 2016, barring any player
from anchoring a golf club directly against the body or by creating a pivot point attached to the body.





It's the right thing to do.



Anchoring offers a decided advantage on the greens as compared to the traditional style of putting. Any player -- though admittedly a small sample size of the broader number I've played with over the years -- that I've teed it up with that anchors has admitted as much. Players who anchor their putter tend to pace their putts better and have more confidence to swing the putter freely (which is ironic) on shorter putts.



What has informed my opinion, however, is not what should inform a far-reaching decision made by the game's governing bodies. Their decision should be backed by longitudinal studies with statistical data that suggest proof of the advantage most traditionalists claim the anchored stroke offers. It isn't.



On Tuesday, USGA president Glen Nager said data was and is irrelevant to the discussion. The governing bodies were very coy to enact this ban as a playing rule, not an equipment rule.



Playing rules are not subject to the statistical sandbox the governing bodies have created for equipment manufacturers. Golf equipment can only be so long, hit the ball so far, transfer so much energy and so forth. Statistics, albeit a dubious set of them, guided the decision to adopt new regulations on grooves in 2008.



Playing rules, instead, are dictated by the idea of passing the smell test of what is golf. It's the game's equivalent of constitutional law. The USGA and R&A are the Supreme Court. They have their guiding document, the Rules of Golf, and create new playing rules -- amendments -- when they interpret a need to amend and clarify what that document says. That's a cop-out.



The governing bodies should have proposed this ban armed with data that could silence critics that claim there's no true advantage in anchoring the putter, or any club. It would have made the PGA Tour and PGA of America look foolish in opposing a ban that will level the playing field. It would have made Webb Simpson's protestations look goofy.



Here's some data, courtesy of writer Matt Cooper, that helps the case of the governing bodies. Look at the case of Adam Scott.



The Masters champion began using the broomstick he wields now at the 2011 WGC-Accenture Match Play Championship. He has since played 42 stroke-play events with the long putter. In that span, he averages 29.3 putts per round. In the 42 events before the switch? Scott took 30.6 putts. In a four-round tournament, that's five strokes. Five.



In professional golf, five strokes is a lot. It makes a cut. It wins a tournament. It wins a major. Five strokes at Augusta? Angel Cabrera has a third major if Adam Scott doesn't save a handful of shots.



But that's just one guy. The governing bodies had to pursue long-term statistical data to garner broad-base support for this decision. They didn't, probably because it would take too long and cost too much money. Naysayers, however, will put on their tin-foil hats and claim there is no supporting data.



Webb Simpson, the reigning U.S. Open champion and one of the most vocal defenders of the anchored stroke, has been using the long putter for more than half his life, long before his PGA Tour days. No one could study Guan Tianlang, the 14-year-old Chinese amateur who made history by making the cut at the Masters in April, because he has anchored the putter from the beginning.



Speaking of the Masters, Augusta National has not definitively weighed in on the anchoring ban. They are ade facto governing body and, at this point, a proverbial kingmaker on this rule. The USGA and R&A, representing two majors, obviously support the ban. The PGA of America does not. Neither does the PGA Tour which, while it does not have a major, runs every non-major tournament of significance. Does the Masters support the ban?



Four of the last six majors have been won by players using the anchored stroke. Three of those four winners took their first major title using that stroke. That was enough for the governing bodies to examine and now implement a ban of the putting stroke they used to achieve major glory. That, however, is not enough to convince the 26 million golfing Americans to coalesce around this ban. And that might lead to bifurcation of the Rules of Golf, which is a consequence the USGA and R&A don't want.



Ryan Ballengee is a Washington, D.C.-based golf writer. His work has appeared on multiple digital outlets, including NBC Sports and Golf Channel. Follow him on Twitter @RyanBallengee.

R&A, USGA to ban anchored putters by 2016

R&A, USGA to ban anchored putters by 2016










The Sports Xchange May 21, 2013 12:00 PMThe SportsXchange


Golf's governing body officially approved a rules change that will outlaw the use of putters anchored to the body beginning in 2016.

The hotly-debated issue has divided the golf community for the past few years, especially with four of the past six major championship winners using long putters that were anchored to their bodies -- effectively creating a hinge.

The Royal & Ancient Golf Club and the U.S. Golf Association (USGA) said Rule 14-1b would take effect in 2016. It wouldn't ban long putters commonly referred to as "belly putters," but would prevent golfers from anchoring them to their belly or chest.

"We recognize this has been a divisive issue, but after thorough consideration, we remain convinced that this is the right decision for golf," R&A chief executive Peter Dawson said.

Masters champion Adam Scott, reigning U.S. Open champion Webb Simpson and 2011 PGA Championship winner Keegan Bradley all use belly putters, and Ernie Els used one while winning last year's British Open.

Bradley and other professional golfers, including Tim Clark and Carl Pettersson, have been vocal in their opposition belly putter ban, while Tiger Woods has been a strong proponent of the rules change along with Brandt Snedeker and Steve Stricker.

"I hope they go with the ban," Woods said this week. "Anchoring should not be a part of the game. It should be mandatory to have to swing all 14 clubs. And as far as the PGA Tour, I hope they do (ban) it as soon as possible to be honest with you. I've always said that. I've always felt that golf you should have to control your nerves and swing all 14 clubs, not just 13."

The PGA Tour now must decide whether to establish its own criteria or align with the new rule. Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem said in February that a ban on belly putters by golf's governing bodies would be a "mistake," although he favors everyone playing by the same rules.

In a statement Tuesday, the Tour said: "We would like to thank the USGA for providing the opportunity for input and suggestions relative to Rule 14-1b over the last several months. During that time, various questions were raised and issues discussed.


"We will now begin our process to ascertain whether the various provisions of Rule 14-1b will be implemented in our competitions and, if so, examine the process for implementation.

"In this regard, over the next month, we will engage in discussions with our Player Advisory Council and Policy Board members.

"We will announce our position regarding the application of Rule 14-1b to our competitions upon conclusion of our process, and will have no further comment on the matter until that time."

The Tour statement references the 90-window the R&A and USGA provided for commentary on the proposed rule change.

"We strongly believe that this rule is for the betterment of the game," USGA president Glen Nager said. "Rule 14-1b protects one of the important challenges in the game -- the free swing of the entire club."

Opponents of the ruling fear the ban will have a far-reaching impact through the amateur levels of the game -- turning off golfers who have turned to belly putters for increased enjoyment. However, the game's governing bodies have determined that anchoring a putter to the body is a departure from how golf was intended to be played.

"Intentionally securing one end of the club against the body, and creating a point of physical attachment around which the club is swung, is a substantial departure from that traditional free swing," Nager said. "Anchoring creates potential advantages, such as making the stroke simpler and more repeatable, restricting the movement and rotation of the hands, arms and clubface, creating a fixed pivot point, and creating extra support and stability that may diminish the effects of nerves and pressure."

Clark is one of a handful of golfers who have used belly putters since joining the PGA Tour, and rose to the forefront of the debate with a speech during a players-only meeting. However, the debate hasn't been nearly as divisive on the European Tour and other tours around the world.

While Clark and Scott have argued players using belly putters win due to thousands of hours of practice rather than the use of a belly putter, the issue for players including Snedeker is the "anchoring" of a club.

"I feel like they should be banned," Snedeker, who led the Tour in strokes gained putting and was second in total putting while using a conventional putter in 2012, said in November.

"I've got no problem with longer putters if you want to make sure they're not anchored; I've just got a problem with anchoring.

"There's a reason why guys that have belly putters use them -- they work," he continued. "If they didn't work, they wouldn't use them."

"The understandable objections of these relative few cannot prevent adoption of a rule that will serve the best interests of the entire game going forward," Nager said. "Indeed rather than being too late, now is actually a necessary time to act, before even larger numbers begin to anchor and before anchoring takes firm root globally."

In a statement, the LPGA announced it will abide by the rules set by the USGA and the R&A.

"The LPGA has consistently conducted our official events in accordance with the Rules of Golf as established by the USGA and the R&A. We recognize the need for an independent governing body to maintain the rules of the game," the statement read. "We trust in the ability and expertise of both the USGA and R&A to make the decisions that are in the best interests of the game.

"The USGA provided ample time and opportunity for us to not only educate our players, but also to solicit input, concerns and feedback surrounding Rule 14-1b. While we know that not every one of our members is in favor of the rule change, the LPGA will continue to respect and follow the Rules of Golf which includes the implementation of Rule 14-1b in January of 2016."

How much impact the ruling will have exactly will play out over the next two-plus years. Scott, for one, has no intention of ditching his long putter.

"I don't think there will be much for me to change,' he told the Daily Mail earlier this month. 'If I have to separate the putter a millimeter from my chest, then I will do that.

"Tomorrow would be enough time for me (to change). I don't see myself putting any different looks-wise."

Three Issues More Important Than Anchored Putting

Three Issues More Important Than Anchored Putting
The Anchored Putting Stroke Ban Is a Huge Issue in Golf, but It Is Just the Tip of the Iceberg











Adam Fonseca May 21, 2013 12:19 PM




COMMENTARY | On the morning of May 21, the United States Gol
f Association (USGA) and the Royal & Ancient Golf Club (R&A) did exactly what everyone thought they were going to do: officially ban the anchored putting stroke.





While the ban won't go into effect until January 1, 2016 -- when the Rules of Golf will be updated with new rule 14-1b -- golfers on the professional circuit have already begun making their gradual change back to a traditional putter.

A handful of players and opponents to the anchoring ban -- most notably U.S. Open champion Webb Simpson, PGA champion Keegan Bradley, PGA of America president Ted Bishop and PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem -- have already expressed their displeasure in various public forums. Lawsuits may or may not be filed by various "anchorers" on both the PGA and European tours. Some players may even feel like their livelihoods have been threatened by the Powers That Be.

Still, regardless of one's stance on the anchored stoke debate, I can't help but wonder if this will all be much adieu about nothing. Surely there are more pressing issues in professional golf that require as much -- if not more -- attention.

Here are three examples off the top of my head, in no particular order:

1) Slow play - Over the past two years, perhaps the only topic discussed and debated more frequently than an anchored putting stroke is slow play on any tour. Golf fans are sure to remember the drama surroundingPGA Tour pro Kevin Na. Formerly the poster child for anxiety-crippled swing thoughts, watching Na play a round of golf was akin to watching a snail cross the Brooklyn Bridge. The same could be said about Ben Crane, whose painstakingly slow attention to detail routinely stretched golf rounds over the five-hour mark.

Then there was the curious case of Tianlang Guan at this year's Masters. While Guan's situation was handled exactly how it should have been (believe it or not), many fans questioned the Augusta National officials' tact in penalizing the 14-year-old in his second round. "What was Augusta trying to prove?" wondered fans and players alike. Consistency in slow-play penalty enforcement remains a topic that must be addressed.

2) Golf ball technology - Perhaps the biggest issue that remains unaddressed while hiding in plain sight is how far golf balls are flying these days. We've all been led to believe that 460 cc drivers and spring-like clubhead faces are to blame for drives over 350 yards, but let's not overlook the multi-layered technology buried in the golf ball's core.

The world's best golf courses are being shrunk by a little white -- or sometimes florescent yellow -- object built to easily fly over fairway bunkers and cut yards off difficult doglegs. Restricting the flight on golf balls will have a much greater impact than what any anchored putting stroke could hope to match.

3) Drug testing - It is definitely the elephant in the clubhouse thanks to the recent Vijay Singh debacle, and professional golf has officially entered the performance-enhancing drug era. This topic remains the most polarizing in that many pundits remain unconvinced that PEDs have any impact on a professional golfer's talents. That's not the point. The fact that there is no comprehensive policy on drug testing in pro golf -- at least to the standard defined by America's four major sports -- is the biggest area of concern.

Even if there is absolutely no issue with PED use on tour, the governing bodies should be inclined to establish a steadfast policy to make sure it stays that way. Anything less keeps the proverbial door wide open for speculation and accusations to run rampant among players.



Adam Fonseca has been writing and blogging about golf since 2005. His work can be found on numerous digital outlets including the Back9Network and SB Nation. He currently lives in Chicago with his wife. Follow Adam on Twitter @chicagoduffer.

Adoption of Anchoring Ban a Matter of Stroke Integrity, Not Advantage

Adoption of Anchoring Ban a Matter of Stroke Integrity, Not Advantage
As the Hammer Drops on Anchoring, the Misconception Remains











Chris Chaney May 21, 2013 12:49 PM




COMMENTARY | The hammer has come down on the anchor, but do
we even understand why?



Ask the biggest opposers of the inclusion of Rule 14-1b -- the Keegan Bradleys, Webb Simpsons, Tim Clarks and Carl Petterssons of the world -- why they feel the ban is unjust and they spring into advantage-speak.

"Do I think they should be banned? No, and here's why,"Simpson said last year at the PGA Championship at Kiawah Island when asked about the anchored stroke. "You take a wooden driver compared to a 460 cc titanium, and to me that's a lot bigger difference than a 35-inch putt to a 45-inch putter.

"Last year, the strokes-gained putting, nobody in the top-20 used a belly putter or a long putter. If anybody says it's an advantage, I think you've got to look at the stats and the facts."

The jury remains out on the factual side of the anchoring ban. As Simpson noted, there is no statistical evidence that points to an advantage being gained by sticking a club into your belly or sternum. The problem with their argument is that the ruling bodies proposing the ban are not disputing whether an advantage is gained by anchoring a putter.

The entire ban is based around the use of an anchor point and, thus, the legitimacy of the stroke itself.

"Throughout the 600-year history of golf, the essence of playing the game has been to grip the club with the hands and swing it freely at the ball," USGA Executive Director Mike Davis said when the ban was proposed in late November of 2012.



"The player's challenge is to control the movement of the entire club in striking the ball, and anchoring the club alters the nature of that challenge. Our conclusion is that the Rules of Golf should be amended to preserve the traditional character of the golf swing by eliminating the growing practice of anchoring the club."

The touring pros fighting the ban and the governing bodies attempting to enforce it are comparing apples to oranges. There will be no winner in the debate because they are arguing different presumptions as to why the ban would be introduced.

The question of the advantage an anchored stroke does or does not provide is a matter of personal opinion, and one that is interesting when taken into perspective.

If this anchoring stroke provides no advantage as Simpson and others have argued, then why do they use it? For guys playing for upwards of a million dollars a week, you'd think that they would use the equipment that gives them the best opportunity to win.

There is little doubt that the timing of the inquisition into the anchored stroke's legality is a matter of recent history. Incorporated into the game some 25-30 years ago, the procedure was deemed passable, almost pitied by those in power as a fading pro's last grasp at calming a balky putter.

However, with four of the six last major championship winners yielding anchored putters, purists have called for a revisiting of the putter's legality. The run of major championships won by players with anchored putters also conjures ideas that despite claims to the contrary, anchored strokes take some of the nerves out of putting.

After all, on the biggest stages in the game when the pressure is compounded the most on Sunday afternoons, players who use the so-called "cheat-sticks" are taking home more trophies than players using traditional putters.

While the ban was approved early on May 21, the debate will not die an easy death. Both the PGA of America and the PGA Tour have voiced their oppositions to the proposed ban, bringing bifurcation -- a division of two sets of rules, one for the professionals and one for amateur golfers -- into the mix.

Despite the decision to enact the ban, we must remember that this is not about the advantage the anchored putter does or does not provide -- it's about the legality and legitimacy of the stroke.

The governing bodies have decided that anchoring a stroke takes away from the integrity of the swing, not that it gives players an advantage. The argument of the latter is moot.

The next step is how and where the ban will be enforced. How will the PGA Tour and PGA of America react to the approval of 14-1b, and what affect will it have on all levels of golf?

One thing has been crystal clear in this murky pool of rules, this debate will not end today, tomorrow or a year from now. Expect to hear about anchoring the putter until the rule becomes law on January 1, 2016.

Chris Chaney is a Cincinnati, Ohio-based sportswriter. He has written for multiple outlets including WrongFairway.com, Hoopville.com, The Cincinnati (OH) Enquirer and The Clermont (OH) Sun.

Follow him on Twitter @Wrong_Fairway.