Jump to content
IGNORED

You Should Watch Your Partner's Putts Roll to a Stop


boil3rmak3r
Note: This thread is 3545 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

No, it is not dropping any faster.

Acceleration (gravity) is distance/time^2.

I'm not addressing your conclusion, but isn't d=(1/2)at^2 the correct formula?

Which would make a=2d/t^2  ?

No?

The "a" due to gravity is a constant, 32 ft/sec/sec, so yes you're right 32=2d/t^2 but usually you put the dependent variable on the left of the equation, so if you're trying to find the time it takes an object to drop it's t=(d/16)^.5. if your're trying to determine the distance traveled over a time it's d=16*t^2. All this is assuming that the object was initially at rest.

Bob

WITB

Driver:                         Ping I25 10.5 PWR65 stiff Flex

Fairway Woods:          Ping TiSi Tec 3, 5 and 7 graphite Cushin stiff flex

Irons:                         Pinhawk SL 5-PW 37.25 inches 

Wedges:                     Reid Lockhart 52 and 60 quad bounce, 56 dual bounce 

Putter:                        Boccieri Heavy Putter B3-M (250 gram back weight)

Ball:                            MG C4 / Wilson Duo

Grips:                         Winn DriTac midsize Blue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Administrator
I'm not addressing your conclusion, but isn't d=(1/2)at^2 the correct formula?

Which would make a=2d/t^2  ?

No?

No, I was just pointing out that the units are of the type distance/time^2.

Whether that's meters per second squared or feet per millisecond squared or whatever you want to say, the units are "distance" per "time squared."

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

No, I was just pointing out that the units are of the type distance/time^2.

Whether that's meters per second squared or feet per millisecond squared or whatever you want to say, the units are "distance" per "time squared."

Ah, I see.  You didn't say you were limiting your statement to the units not the value, hence the confusion.  But it is cleared up now, I think.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Let's consider a certain 20-foot putt that breaks 32 inches. Of that 32 inches, 6 inches of break occur in the last 5 feet. In other words, five feet out from the hole, the ball is traveling at a spot six inches from the center of the cup.

So the last 25% of the putt's distance accounts for less than 19% of the putt's break.

Did my point about how the last 25% of a 20-foot putt accounted for less than 19% of the break not get any responses? Did you read it, @boil3rmak3r? The last inch tells you nothing. The last six inches barely tell you anything at all.

Does the putt you are talking about have more slope in the first 75% and less slope in the last 25%?  If so, then you are stacking the deck a bit against the OP.  If not, then what you and I seem to understand about gravity and time does not hold true, or am I missing something?

He's not wrong, but neither are you. Gravity is a constant (at least, within reason, given the variations in height of a putting green, the mass of the earth and the golf ball, etc.).

Gravity affects putts at the end of the putt "more" because you're both using different ways of measuring things.

The first five feet of a 30-foot putt are affected by gravity LESS than the last five feet because of the difference in TIME. The ball will go through the first five feet in a much shorter period of time.

It's not really on topic, though.

While OP may have overstated his case, this seems to support the notion that you are going to learn more from looking at the last few feet of someones putt rather than the first few feet.

:mizuno: MP-52 5-PW, :cobra: King Snake 4 i 
:tmade: R11 Driver, 3 W & 5 W, :vokey: 52, 56 & 60 wedges
:seemore: putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Does the putt you are talking about have more slope in the first 75% and less slope in the last 25%?  If so, then you are stacking the deck a bit against the OP.  If not, then what you and I seem to understand about gravity and time does not hold true, or am I missing something? While OP may have overstated his case, this seems to support the notion that you are going to learn more from looking at the last few feet of someones putt rather than the first few feet.

+1. Thanks for posting. I agree that the "lumpy doughnut" makes my last inch comment wrong, but I'm really surprised that folks are saying that watching an actual ball roll near the hole is not that important. @iacas, I would ask you this. Would you make more 8' putts if you watched other balls roll toward the hole, or if you just used Aimpoint?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
Does the putt you are talking about have more slope in the first 75% and less slope in the last 25%?  If so, then you are stacking the deck a bit against the OP.  If not, then what you and I seem to understand about gravity and time does not hold true, or am I missing something?

You're missing something, and you should take an AimPoint class to learn a bit of it. The putt(s) I cited had the same exact amount of slope throughout the entire putt.

While OP may have overstated his case, this seems to support the notion that you are going to learn more from looking at the last few feet of someones putt rather than the first few feet.

I don't think anyone has suggested you look at the first few feet of a putt.

+1. Thanks for posting. I agree that the "lumpy doughnut" makes my last inch comment wrong, but I'm really surprised that folks are saying that watching an actual ball roll near the hole is not that important.

It isn't "that" important, no. Is it at least a little important? Yes. But please define "that" as used above. Get my point? We're all using words that have a certain meaning or strength to us. I demonstrated in numbers that the last 25% of a putt accounted for < 19% of the putt's break. So that's how I'm defining "that" when used to modify "important" in this particular case.

@iacas, I would ask you this. Would you make more 8' putts if you watched other balls roll toward the hole, or if you just used Aimpoint?

I'll take AimPoint.

The middle of the putt matters quite a bit more than you seem to be giving credit. It's easier to see the ball CURVING toward the end, because it's moving slower, but the middle of the putt matters quite a bit.

You don't seem to have read my post above: a ball does not always break down the fall line. Only putts hit from very close to the fall line will end up going down the fall line at the end of their roll. Putts hit from more than a small angle to straight will still likely be going at a different angle than straight downhill.

Phil watches a short putt go by the hole because it's covering virtually the same ground he's going to have to putt over on his come-backer.

I use AimPoint, and I watch others putt, too. Without getting into detail, it sometimes helps me determine something, one of the AimPoint inputs. But I really, really don't care about the end of their putts - just their initial starting direction, and where the ball ended up (i.e. total break). I can basically "reverse engineer" their putt to pull out some of the "inputs."

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

You're missing something, and you should take an AimPoint class to learn a bit of it. The putt(s) I cited had the same exact amount of slope throughout the entire putt. I don't think anyone has suggested you look at the first few feet of a putt. It isn't "that" important, no. Is it at least a little important? Yes. But please define "that" as used above. Get my point? We're all using words that have a certain meaning or strength to us. I demonstrated in numbers that the last 25% of a putt accounted for < 19% of the putt's break. So that's how I'm defining "that" when used to modify "important" in this particular case.   I'll take AimPoint. The middle of the putt matters quite a bit more than you seem to be giving credit. It's easier to see the ball CURVING toward the end, because it's moving slower, but the middle of the putt matters quite a bit. You don't seem to have read my post above: a ball does not always break down the fall line. Only putts hit from very close to the fall line will end up going down the fall line at the end of their roll. Putts hit from more than a small angle to straight will still likely be going at a different angle than straight downhill. Phil watches a short putt go by the hole because it's covering virtually the same ground he's going to have to putt over on his come-backer. I use AimPoint, and I watch others putt, too. Without getting into detail, it sometimes helps me determine something, one of the AimPoint inputs. But I really, really don't care about the end of their putts - just their initial starting direction, and where the ball ended up (i.e. total break). I can basically "reverse engineer" their putt to pull out some of the "inputs."

I haven't taken the class but I daresay even Adam Scott would prefer to see a ball roll on his line from 8' than use Aimpoint. Definitely think you're in the minority here. No better way to determine how a putt will behave than to actually watch one.

In my Bag: Driver: Titelist 913 D3 9.5 deg. 3W: TaylorMade RBZ 14.5 3H: TaylorMade RBZ 18.5 4I - SW: TaylorMade R7 TP LW: Titelist Vokey 60 Putter: Odyssey 2-Ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

I haven't taken the class but I daresay even Adam Scott would prefer to see a ball roll on his line from 8' than use Aimpoint. Definitely think you're in the minority here. No better way to determine how a putt will behave than to actually watch one.

If you get to watch the same exact putt, yes. If you get to watch some other random putt hit from some other random direction at who knows what speed… then less can be determined.

I was given the choice between the two. I'd choose the entire AimPoint method of reading putts over just watching a putt approach the hole from some random direction because I can get a pretty precise read almost all the time with AimPoint, and considerably less information watching a putt roll to the hole from some direction and at some varying pace.

If I got to watch a putt hit toward the hole from very close to my putt's location and with close to my speed, I'd choose that, if for no other reason than it lets me be lazy.

P.S. I know a fair bit more about AimPoint than Adam Scott.

P.P.S. I also don't care about the "minority" argument. The majority of golfers haven't taken AimPoint, and "majority" isn't always a great indicator of what is correct. The old ball flight laws are a great example of that. There was a time - and we may still be living in it - when the majority would have said the ball started in the direction of the path.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

If you get to watch the same exact putt, yes. If you get to watch some other random putt hit from some other random direction at who knows what speed… then less can be determined. I was given the choice between the two. I'd choose the entire AimPoint method of reading putts over just watching a putt approach the hole from some random direction because I can get a pretty precise read almost all the time with AimPoint, and considerably less information watching a putt roll to the hole from some direction and at some varying pace. If I got to watch a putt hit toward the hole from very close to my putt's location and with close to my speed, I'd choose that, if for no other reason than it lets me be lazy. P.S. I know a fair bit more about AimPoint than Adam Scott. P.P.S. I also don't care about the "minority" argument. The majority of golfers haven't taken AimPoint, and "majority" isn't always a great indicator of what is correct. The old ball flight laws are a great example of that. There was a time - and we may still be living in it - when the majority would have said the ball started in the direction of the path.

I gotcha and would agree. I understood the OP's original point but when he offered that challenge, I interpreted it to mean on the same line, same distance, in essence, the same putt. Couldn't imagine anyone not opting for that in favor of reading the green. But sure, coming from 90° different direction, I wouldn't rely on it very much at all.

In my Bag: Driver: Titelist 913 D3 9.5 deg. 3W: TaylorMade RBZ 14.5 3H: TaylorMade RBZ 18.5 4I - SW: TaylorMade R7 TP LW: Titelist Vokey 60 Putter: Odyssey 2-Ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I gotcha and would agree. I understood the OP's original point but when he offered that challenge, I interpreted it to mean on the same line, same distance, in essence, the same putt. Couldn't imagine anyone not opting for that in favor of reading the green. But sure, coming from 90° different direction, I wouldn't rely on it very much at all.

I don't know. Ever see two guys hit the ball OB left, and then the third guy hits a huge push or slice right? Just saying, I rather not watch a putt not go in. Also, if the guy misses high, lets say a good 6 inch miss-read. I don't think that would help many people. Most people would remember the path the ball took. So, yea, I rather just read my own putts.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I don't know. Ever see two guys hit the ball OB left, and then the third guy hits a huge push or slice right? Just saying, I rather not watch a putt not go in. Also, if the guy misses high, lets say a good 6 inch miss-read. I don't think that would help many people. Most people would remember the path the ball took. So, yea, I rather just read my own putts.

Interesting take but putts a bit different than other shots since you're trying to read what the golf course will do to your ball. I guess to some degree that's true with other shots as well, I.e., which way it'll bounce or spin upon landing. I'll always watch for that putt on my line and hope they hit a good one. If they push an 8' putt 3' off line or hit it 5' past, then yes, I'd have to study it a bit more.

In my Bag: Driver: Titelist 913 D3 9.5 deg. 3W: TaylorMade RBZ 14.5 3H: TaylorMade RBZ 18.5 4I - SW: TaylorMade R7 TP LW: Titelist Vokey 60 Putter: Odyssey 2-Ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I gotcha and would agree. I understood the OP's original point but when he offered that challenge, I interpreted it to mean on the same line, same distance, in essence, the same putt. Couldn't imagine anyone not opting for that in favor of reading the green. But sure, coming from 90° different direction, I wouldn't rely on it very much at all.

Doesn't even have to be that drastic. Consider two putts that are the same length (say 10') and only 3 or 4 feet apart. There might be only about 30 degrees difference, but if the fall line happens to be between the two putts, they will break in opposite directions. You see his putt break 3" left so you aim just outside right ... And miss 4" right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

No argument -- I assumed happy path: same putt, good putt. I'd much prefer to get my read from that than try to read the green without that knowledge.

In my Bag: Driver: Titelist 913 D3 9.5 deg. 3W: TaylorMade RBZ 14.5 3H: TaylorMade RBZ 18.5 4I - SW: TaylorMade R7 TP LW: Titelist Vokey 60 Putter: Odyssey 2-Ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Doesn't even have to be that drastic. Consider two putts that are the same length (say 10') and only 3 or 4 feet apart. There might be only about 30 degrees difference, but if the fall line happens to be between the two putts, they will break in opposite directions. You see his putt break 3" left so you aim just outside right ... And miss 4" right.

No argument -- I assumed happy path: same putt, good putt. I'd much prefer to get my read from that than try to read the green without that knowledge.

That's a pretty rare occurrence, though.

Dan

:tmade: R11s 10.5*, Adila RIP Phenom 60g Stiff
:ping: G20 3W
:callaway: Diablo 3H
:ping:
i20 4-U, KBS Tour Stiff
:vokey: Vokey SM4 54.14 
:vokey: Vokey :) 58.11

:scotty_cameron: Newport 2
:sunmountain: Four 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Sure; my post really was only in the context of the challenge @Boil3rmak3r made to @Iacas. My interpretation of said challenge was that @iacas had 2 choices: 1. Watch 8' putts from the spot he would putt or use Aimpoint sans the benefit of that read. I was surprised that @iacas would opt for Aimpoint. I believe I misinterpreted the options.

In my Bag: Driver: Titelist 913 D3 9.5 deg. 3W: TaylorMade RBZ 14.5 3H: TaylorMade RBZ 18.5 4I - SW: TaylorMade R7 TP LW: Titelist Vokey 60 Putter: Odyssey 2-Ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsc123

That's a pretty rare occurrence, though.

Sure; my post really was only in the context of the challenge @Boil3rmak3r made to @Iacas. My interpretation of said challenge was that @iacas had 2 choices: 1. Watch 8' putts from the spot he would putt or use Aimpoint sans the benefit of that read. I was surprised that @iacas would opt for Aimpoint. I believe I misinterpreted the options.

Or I did. But that's cleared up now.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Let's consider a certain 20-foot putt that breaks 32 inches. Of that 32 inches, 6 inches of break occur in the last 5 feet. In other words, five feet out from the hole, the ball is traveling at a spot six inches from the center of the cup.

So the last 25% of the putt's distance accounts for less than 19% of the putt's break.

You're missing something, and you should take an AimPoint class to learn a bit of it. The putt(s) I cited had the same exact amount of slope throughout the entire putt.

I don't think anyone has suggested you look at the first few feet of a putt.

It isn't "that" important, no. Is it at least a little important? Yes. But please define "that" as used above. Get my point? We're all using words that have a certain meaning or strength to us. I demonstrated in numbers that the last 25% of a putt accounted for < 19% of the putt's break. So that's how I'm defining "that" when used to modify "important" in this particular case.

So what is it that I am missing?  I see that you stated that the last 25% of "a certain" 20 foot putt accounted for only 6/32 of the break, but you really didn't give enough detail to prove (or even demonstrate in numbers) that this is so.  Is it because the first part of the putt has broken towards the fall line and the last part is more down the fall line than the first part?

:mizuno: MP-52 5-PW, :cobra: King Snake 4 i 
:tmade: R11 Driver, 3 W & 5 W, :vokey: 52, 56 & 60 wedges
:seemore: putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
So what is it that I am missing?  I see that you stated that the last 25% of "a certain" 20 foot putt accounted for only 6/32 of the break, but you really didn't give enough detail to prove (or even demonstrate in numbers) that this is so.  Is it because the first part of the putt has broken towards the fall line and the last part is more down the fall line than the first part?

It's a fact. The results of computer modeling that's dead on accurate. This particular putt is never within 80 degrees of the fall line. I don't know what you're missing. These numbers demonstrate fairly clearly that the last part of a putt isn't more important than other parts of the putt. Perhaps you are not considering that when a putt has already broken 26 inches the angle it is taking has changed and perceived break is larger than actual break. It would take far too long for me to explain all of the physics and math in this. Trust it, or don't. People are too wishy-washy about putting and treat it too much as an art form when green reading can really be resolved by learning and applying a few very simple skills.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3545 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Thanks for the feedback. @StuM, we are a "club without real estate" so no facilities or pro. We have a membership of around 185 players and we only play together as a group at our tournaments, which are held at public access courses. A group of us setup the tournaments, collect the money and dole out the prizes.
    • In general, granting free relief anywhere on the course isn't recommended.  Similarly, when marking GUR, the VSGA and MAPGA generally don't mark areas that are well away from the intended playing lines, no matter how poor the conditions.  If you hit it far enough offline, you don't necessarily deserve free relief.  And you don't have to damage clubs, take unplayable relief, take the stroke, and drop the ball in a better spot.
    • If it's not broken don't fix it. If you want to add grooves to it just because of looks that's your choice of course. Grooves are cut into putter faces to reduce skid, the roll faced putter is designed to do the same thing. I'm no expert but it seems counter productive to add grooves to the roll face. Maybe you can have it sand-blasted or something to clean up the face. Take a look at Tigers putter, its beat to hell but he still uses it.     
    • I get trying to limit relief to the fairway, but how many roots do you typically find in the fairway? Our local rule allows for relief from roots & rocks anywhere on the course (that is in play). My home course has quite a few 100 year old oaks that separate the fairways. Lift and move the ball no closer to the hole. None of us want to damage clubs.
    • Hello, I've been playing a Teardrop td17 F.C. putter for many years and love it. It still putts and feels as good or  better than any of the new putters I've tried and it's in excellent condition except the face has dings in it ever since I bought it used that kind of bother me. I was just wondering if it's possible to have some really shallow horizontal grooves milled into the face on a "roll face" putter. I think I would rather spend some money on it instead of trying to get used to a new putter.  Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...