Jump to content
IGNORED

Green Reading Books to Be Banned?


Recommended Posts

Jim Stracka makes green-reading books. Here’s his case against a ban | Golf News and Tour Information | GolfDigest.com

Quote

“People don’t read greens—they hit putts based on memory. We all know how much easier it is to hit a putt when your competitor just hit one on the same line. Green-reading is more memory. They move so much earth around today that you can’t rely on the visuals. Your mind will play tricks on you. If you’re good enough and use Aimpoint [the green-reading technique] to read them with your feet, great. But when they say it’s a necessary skill, I say that’s baloney. Green-reading is more memory. We all know how well we read greens when we play a course on a regular basis. You remember a point, and that’s what you rely on.”

This is probably true to some extent. We do pattern recognition, and golf course designers mess with that. I played a course in Orlando, FL where half the greens looked flat. They were not very elevated, and the bunkers were not pushed up near the green. So the breaks were subtle. I just learned Aimpoint then, and putted the best out of our group. The greens confused the crap out of my friends who used their eyes to read greens. 

About it causing play to slow down, the article above sad it sped up college players by 15 minutes. So, if true, then yay for that. 

I can understand the argument that it takes skill out of green reading. Honestly, I don't think it's that big of a deal. They still have to aim their putt, and hit the speed. There is still skill in putting. I think most PGA Tour players are halfway decent at green reading anyways. I wonder how many strokes gained there is in green reading from the worst to the best on the PGA Tour? 

  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

So with this coming from the players, I'm guessing this isnt pace of play related, as I dont see them caring about that. Or is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I don’t think anything they do will make a meaningful impact on pace of play except keeping players on the clock and enforcing it. Without books they may just spend more time reading the green since they don’t have anything to help them. I just don’t see where players would get the incentive to play faster if they think spending their allot time will help them score better. Many players play fast and enjoy keeping a good pace, but with 125 players out there, there will always be many that take their time.

The Masters has banned books, so some players already has some experience with it. Do they play faster there? The greens at Augusta are difficult and it’s a special tournament, so maybe they spend their time even without books. Perhaps not the best tournament to compare with.

I came across this article:

https://www.golfchannel.com/news/2021-us-open-rory-mcilroy-thinks-green-reading-books-should-be-outlawed-greater-good-game

Quote

I'd like to get rid of them,” said McIlroy, who also noted that he uses the green-reading books. “I think everyone is in the same boat, most guys on Tour are in the same boat, that if it's going to be available to us and it helps us, people are going to use it, but I think for the greater good of the game, I'd like to see them be outlawed.”

“Honestly, I think it's made everyone lazier. People don't put in the time to prepare the way they used to,” he said. “That's why you see so many more players at Augusta, for example, take their time around the greens, hit so many more putts, it's because they have to. It's because there is no greens book at Augusta.”

In an effort to speed up play, the Tour has taken a closer look at ways that players can trim time off of rounds. Both officials and players consider green-reading books an obvious option.

There seems to be a combination of reasons behind the idea, rather than one. I’d maybe think the for-the-greater-good thoughts like Rory’s are more common than pace of play, but also a combination.

I like the thoughts about the greater good of the game, and wouldn’t object to the books being outlawed. It puts more focus on reading greens and trusting what you see rather than consult a book. As Erik said, if they don’t putt better today than before the books, is there a reason to keep them?

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

If the majority of players want to see them banned, then I support their collective decision for the good of the game. I do hope they justify this with an official position.  

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zeph said:

As Erik said, if they don’t putt better today than before the books, is there a reason to keep them?

That is a good point. 

I don't think its a pace of play issue. 

To me, its about what golf should be about. 

I wouldn't mind green reading material less information. No numbers. Nothing specific toward pin locations. Like, you can't have book that shows the pin and the putting lines. Just a general green, with contours arrows is fine with me. They still have to determine the amount of break they want to play. If it lets them know which way it breaks, fine. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 6/17/2021 at 10:27 AM, iacas said:

They are all saying it's about the skill, not the time.

If it was about skill, and if the green reading books made bad putters better than they otherwise would perform, we'd see the worst putters on tour being closer to the best putters because there is less of a skill gap between the two.

Instead we see that the gap between the best and the worst at putting has only grown larger since the widespread introduction of green reading books. This means they have not had any measurable impact on a player's ability to putt well, because it isn't allowing the worst putters on tour to keep up with the best like you would see if some part of the game took less skill suddenly.

I ignored the skill issue because claiming it's a matter of skill is patently ridiculous, and provably false. They can say whatever they like, doesn't mean a word of it is true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
1 hour ago, Pretzel said:

I ignored the skill issue because claiming it's a matter of skill is patently ridiculous, and provably false.

I’m not disagreeing in general, but that’s not true because the samples are different and SG:P is relative.

And my point was that it’s what they are saying, not that it’s the actual reason.

But I do think that many believe it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • Good for you, what course are you qualifying at?  Good luck.
    • Considering how many people he comes into contact with and how often he is flying, it is unfortunate but not a total surprise. You can catch Covid-19 again even with being vaccinated and previously infected. It just means that your infection is mild.
    • Or, he understands how it transfers, and he was only around his wife for two months. He didn't need to get tested… because in getting tested, maybe he would have gone out more than he did in isolating at home, perhaps? You are making a LOT of assumptions, as you often do, @Shorty. Cool it.
    • The Club at Lac La Belle - 6.5 I wasn't a big fan of this course. It was beautiful and well-maintained, but I found parts of it to be a little contrived. It's definitely a target golf course and for someone like me who is wild off the tee, it took all the fun of strategizing out of it because the risks were just too high. I did like that there was variety in the course layout with a good mix of short/long, right/left, uphill/downhill holes. I'm not sure I'd make a trip out to this one again if I'm ever back in the area for golf, but it's less than 10 minutes away from a delicious French bakery with the best croissants I have ever had, so that bumps up the score a little  I'd go back just for the croissants. The Sandbox - 7.0 This little 17 hole par 3 course was just fun. It gave you different looks and a variety of options for play. I really liked it and tried a bunch of different things I normally wouldn't have on a regular course. A 7.0 is probably the most I'd give to a par 3 course, though. Lawsonia Links - 7.5 I really enjoyed this course. Overall I found the layout to be good. There were plenty of places to miss, but you still needed to hit good golf shots to play well. I liked the way the mounds and bunkers were designed to play with the shape of the holes visually. There were really only a couple of holes I didn't like - 13 in particular, even though I made par both times using completely different strategies. It's just bordering on too many blind shots for me, though. I'd definitely play this course again if I have the chance. Mammoth Dunes - 8.5 This course was spectacular to look at - absolutely visually stunning. The pictures don't do it justice because they fail to capture the scale of everything. The place is massive. I'll echo what the others have wrote above: it's a journey. You feel like you're not going out to play a round of golf, but rather that you're going on an adventure while hitting a golf ball on the way. I understand now how some other reviews I've read or seen describe a feeling of getting lost, or losing your bearings for a bit. I wasn't thinking about routing. I had no idea where the clubhouse was. I didn't really care about any of it because I was out in this beautiful landscape. The golf itself for me was just there. I would be perfectly happy spending an afternoon just walking the course without playing it. And that's a bit of a detriment, because at the end of the day, it is a golf course. As a golf course, I found it didn't really matter much how you played it as long as you hit decent shots. There was certainly an ideal way to play the course well, and I hit some awful shots and paid the price for them, but plenty of just okay shots I got away with because of the layout. In the end that's fine. I don't need every course I play to be a grueling test of my skills.  I'd make a return trip and play this course again. Sand Valley - 9.0 This one is a golf course first and a spectacular view second. Where Mammoth Dunes focuses on the adventure, Sand Valley focuses on the golf. It's still visually stunning, but just not quite on the grand scale that Mammoth Dunes is. And Sand Valley does not let you forget for even one second that you're out there to do one thing: to play golf. I don't remember having a single shot out there that didn't require my undivided attention. The course absolutely punished you for missing your spots. But the flip side of that coin is that it was extremely rewarding to hit good shots there. An example is #8 mentioned above - I don't think I have ever felt so pleased to hit a GW to 35' before in my life, and I might never again. The course is a challenge in the best way. It makes you want to rise up to face it. I want to go back and battle it again. I shot my best score of the week with an 87 at Lawsonia, but it's the 94 the second time playing Sand Valley that I'm most proud of. Like Mammoth Dunes above, I'd make a return trip specifically to play this course again. Bonus Stuff The facilities at Sand Valley Golf Resort were top notch. The prices at the pro shop were fair. The food and drinks were also reasonably priced and delicious. The food truck at The Sandbox had the best food in the whole complex, IMO. Lac La Belle I felt was fancy but overpriced. I bought a polo at the pro shop at Sand Valley, but a similar shirt at Lac La Belle was like 50% more expensive. The golf carts had beautiful leather seats, but I absolutely hate geo-mapping on the GPS systems. I don't know how many times it slowed me down to tell me not to drive in the fescue even though I was driving parallel to it 20 yards away. Lawsonia had an older clubhouse and it certainly had a quaint feeling to it. That's not a bad thing. I did not look to see the prices they were charging for their merchandise.
    • Every YouTube video should start with a 10- to 45-minute diagnosis to make sure the video you're about to watch applies to you. There are a LOT of reasons why someone hits a slice. YouTube videos do not start with a 45-minute "disclaimer" because nobody would get through it. They just want to stop slicing, but if the video shows a fix for something that the student doesn't do, the video is less than worthless — it may actually cause more damage. Don't watch YouTube videos unless they're just working on some fundamental things, or you're very confident that what they're going to show you actually applies to you.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Armando Araujo
      Armando Araujo
      (46 years old)
    2. chris3putt
      chris3putt
      (54 years old)
    3. CrazyHorsePete
      CrazyHorsePete
      (34 years old)
    4. DHak20
      DHak20
      (44 years old)

×
×
  • 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...