Thoughts on Heads-Up Putting?

[iacas]

Thoughts?

And yes, try to watch the bulk of it…

[Chris Brooks]

Historically I've used heads up putting as a training / calibration aid when warming up on a green and focusing on distance control. I heard Sasho on a podcast a month or two ago so tried heads up for the next round or two. I then reverted back to heads down for some reason. I don't think that's because it wasn't working; honestly I think I've had a lot going through my head lately in all phases on my game (new putter, new grip, full swing thoughts, etc.) and my instincts were probably to eliminate one degree of change for a while.

What I'm thinking is this:

1. Refocus on fundamentals (grip, stance, swing), utilizing the skills you taught in the latest clinic plus the Utley book.
2. Once I feel that this is ingrained and I trust my swing (and hence ball contact), I think adopting heads up would likely make a positive difference

It wouldn't be a controlled experiment, but I should track my strokes gained putting for a month before and a month after to see if there's a noticeable difference.

[Chris Brooks]

• On 10/11/2021 at 11:47 AM, iacas said:

And yes, try to watch the bulk of it…

Some of my summary thoughts from his analysis:

• Face angle is much more important than swing path in terms of ball direction and error
• Green reading is important
• Speed control is very important
• When we look at the hole to calibrate our intended speed while we do practice swings, then address the ball to actually putt and keep our heads down, we can "forget" that intended speed more easily
• Surprisingly, quality of impact doesn't seem to degrade when we do heads up putting. Because putting strokes are easy (haha my simplification)

[klineka]

28 minutes ago, Chris Brooks said:

• Face angle is much more important than swing path in terms of ball direction and error
• Green reading is important
• Speed control is very important

All of those seem like no brainers honestly. 

[iacas]

3 hours ago, Chris Brooks said:

Some of my summary thoughts from his analysis:

• Face angle is much more important than swing path in terms of ball direction and error
• Green reading is important
• Speed control is very important
• When we look at the hole to calibrate our intended speed while we do practice swings, then address the ball to actually putt and keep our heads down, we can "forget" that intended speed more easily
• Surprisingly, quality of impact doesn't seem to degrade when we do heads up putting. Because putting strokes are easy (haha my simplification)

That's why I like to look at the ball (I still like to see the size of my stroke and the speed of my putter head and thus the ball) while I have a "picture in picture" view of the hole.

I take a picture of the hole, and when I'm looking down at the area where the ball/putter head are, I'm still "looking" at the hole because I am looking at that picture in my mind.

[coachjimsc]

I tried this at the practice green during lunch today.

I have done this looking at the hole thing about 4 years ago. Results were mixed.

So this is not new for me but results today seemed different than before. Putted from 7, 12 and 30 feet.

Made way more putts from the 7 to 12 feet than I normally do. The 30 footers, 8 of 9 were hole high the other was 2 feet short.

My routine was:

• Look at the hole while make 2 practice strokes to get the feel.
• Look at the ball to get club face aligned.
• Look back at the hole and go.

Small sample size but I will continue to try it and report back.

[Ty_Webb]

I gave this a try towards the end of last season. I played a couple of tournaments doing it. The first one was two rounds. I did it for the shorter putts inside about 15', but outside that it felt like I was looking too far and twisting my neck too much for it to be comfortable. I putted great (gained 1.64 strokes against PGA tour average - one of my best putting rounds in living memory). The short putts where I look at the hole, the ball was looking like it should go in even if it didn't. I often hit putts where the ball looks like it's dying away from the hole and has no chance of going in. Doing the heads up thing I didn't really hit any putts like that. They didn't all go in obviously, but a good number did. 

Second round I did it on all my putts. This round wound up being a -1.51 strokes gained. My distance control was worse using it for the longer putts, but the shorter ones still had that same feeling of going towards the hole. I had a couple of three putts though. One was from 85 feet away and the other was a 45 footer that had 20 feet of break and was over a hump down to the hole and I didn't get the first one over the hump, so both were result of not great distance control. 

Then tried it again for my next and last tournament round of the year (and last round as it happens - bloody winter). I only lasted 7 holes this time. I bogeyed 1 through 5, parred 6 and three putted 7 from about 25 feet by blasting it 8 feet by. Heads up and I either need to spend a lot more time on the practice green with longer putts or I'm just not suited to it. On 8 I found myself with a 35 footer for a birdie and I decided to look at the ball again. My next putt was so short I couldn't even look at the hole and not the ball.

I think going forwards I'm going to continue looking at the hole from inside of around 12-15 feet or so and look at the ball from outside that. That just seems to be what works for me.

[WillieT]

Tried this today on the putting green after the round.  I was pleasantly surprised at how accurate I was with this.  Would look at the hole, let my body align itself, look down at the putter to get it aligned, then look at the hole and make the stroke.  Within 5 feet or so I could still see the putter in my peripheral vision.  Longer putts - getting to 20 - 30 feet of course I could not.  Overall distance and accuracy was much better as I consistently had the ball stopping with 18" of the hole, many of them less than 12" or less.   A great confidence builder, will be making "heads up" a part of my warm-up routine.  

What caused me to think about this today - one was the recent discussion about Jordan Spieth, second was the absolute abandon my now six year old grandson has.  He just walks up to the ball and makes the stroke and it looks like he is seeing the hole and not overly worried about anything else.  

[Chris Brooks]

15 hours ago, WillieT said:

What caused me to think about this today - one was the recent discussion about Jordan Spieth, second was the absolute abandon my now six year old grandson has.  He just walks up to the ball and makes the stroke and it looks like he is seeing the hole and not overly worried about anything else.  

Love the comment about your grandson! I suspect we could all do well be remembering to just play around and have fun while practicing.

I find myself keeping my head down on putts 6 feet and shorter, focusing on a dimple of the ball and seeing the ball vanish and seeing the “retinal afterimage” (a Fred Shoemaker thing I think). Everything else it has been heads up for me.

[ChetlovesMer]

25 minutes ago, Chris Brooks said:

Love the comment about your grandson! I suspect we could all do well be remembering to just play around and have fun while practicing.

I think far fewer people would have the yips if they could somehow keep this in mind. ... I know, easier said than done. 👍

I've experimented with "heads up" putting as well. I've also talked to lots of folks who either do it, or used to do it. I haven't done any real studies on it, but it seems like it has a honeymoon period. Many of the guys I've talked to said they did it for a while and it really "seemed" to help them. But after a while they fell out of love with it and returned to a more traditional method. I think I may know why. 

Here's my thought. 

1. A person struggles with putting.
2. A person decides to try heads up putting (or really any other change to their putting.) 
3. They feel they need to practice the new method.
4. They see results.
5. They declare the new method is "better" than the old method. 
6. They stop practicing it.
7. After a while their putting declines and they decide to make another change.
8. Return to step 2.

I think this might have some influence on people's results. The heads up putting, a new putting grip, or even a new putter tends to get more practice for a while. The user feels they are improving so they stick with the new thing, but they stop practicing. A while later, their putting declines again and they make another change. 

I don't have any data on this, but is it possible its the practicing of the change and not the change itself that causes the improvement? 

It seems like very few folks really practice their putting UNLESS they are working on some kind of change. i.e. new putting style, new grip, new putter...

I'm no Alfred Einstein, so I'll just ask the question. Do you think heads up putting makes you better, or do you think the fact that you actually practice putting makes you better? I don't think I've ever seen any studies done on long-term results of changing styles. Plenty of studies on short term results. 

[WillieT]

4 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

I think far fewer people would have the yips if they could somehow keep this in mind. ... I know, easier said than done. 👍

I've experimented with "heads up" putting as well. I've also talked to lots of folks who either do it, or used to do it. I haven't done any real studies on it, but it seems like it has a honeymoon period. Many of the guys I've talked to said they did it for a while and it really "seemed" to help them. But after a while they fell out of love with it and returned to a more traditional method. I think I may know why. 

Here's my thought. 

1. A person struggles with putting.
2. A person decides to try heads up putting (or really any other change to their putting.) 
3. They feel they need to practice the new method.
4. They see results.
5. They declare the new method is "better" than the old method. 
6. They stop practicing it.
7. After a while their putting declines and they decide to make another change.
8. Return to step 2.

I think this might have some influence on people's results. The heads up putting, a new putting grip, or even a new putter tends to get more practice for a while. The user feels they are improving so they stick with the new thing, but they stop practicing. A while later, their putting declines again and they make another change. 

I don't have any data on this, but is it possible its the practicing of the change and not the change itself that causes the improvement? 

It seems like very few folks really practice their putting UNLESS they are working on some kind of change. i.e. new putting style, new grip, new putter...

I'm no Alfred Einstein, so I'll just ask the question. Do you think heads up putting makes you better, or do you think the fact that you actually practice putting makes you better? I don't think I've ever seen any studies done on long-term results of changing styles. Plenty of studies on short term results. 

Good points about “change” and the novelty of such.  I have found myself jumping on the “gotta do this from now on train” in just about anything I was striving to learn/improve on.  Only real change occurred and occurs when I consistently practice it. The key points back to what Erik wrote about in LSW and the five “S’s”. Heads up putting or any other change has to be grooved and groomed to fit you, to where it becomes second nature, I.e. part is what you “naturally” do.  There are no instant fixes despite the tens of thousands of YouTube videos out there.  

[iacas]

I re-watched the video today. I bumped on a part I hadn't bumped on before, but I'll get to that. The over-riding important thing is still about the importance of speed control.

I'll write more below, but I think that if you care about putting (and you should), you should watch this video and take notes. Wear a cap, too, because your mind might be blown a few times re: what matters and what doesn't in making putts.

I've always felt that speed control is super important, and it's a huge part of what makes me a good putter. @DeadMan can attest to the fact that on the first hole at Sand Valley I hit my birdie putt about 5' past the hole (and tapped in) and immediately said "hey, just a heads up, these greens are about a foot or so faster than the Sandbox." They were, and my distance control and touch/feel let me know that. A 25' putt that should have rolled about 2' by rolled 5' by.

Now, I'm not going to switch to heads up putting — I feel I effectively do that by "putting to the picture" — but you might want to.

Anyway, my notes as I watch through it (again) with timestamps:

• 16:00 - Four factors that influence initial ball speed: impact spot, clubhead speed, clubhead design, golf ball design.
• 18:00 - Lots of factors affect clubhead speed, including intent. Can you execute that speed once?
• 19:00 - Speed intention vs. ability - assume solid strikes (no hit, face, path issues). Is it golfer's green reading (bad intended speed) or inability to generate the right speed?
• 20:00 - On missed putts, when do you know you didn't execute the right speed? Immediately?
• 26:45 - Initial Ball direction, Initial Ball spin, Initial Ball speed, green characteristics, the environment affect whether a ball goes in the hole or not.
• 27:30 - Clubhead path (AoA and L/R) at impact and clubface angle at impact (loft and L/R). Almost all these things affect ball speed, initial ball direction, spin…
• 31:30 - AoA, loft, spin - affect ball launch and spin, so we want to know how much it affects the consistency of the stopping distance.
• 32:30 - 0°, 5°, -5° with 0° loft, no effect on the major part of its path or whether it goes in the hole. 1968. More recent studies 2000: 0-6° loft, no change: 2014, four lofts including negative, 0° AoA, looked at the roll ratio. No clear pattern relating roll ratios to distance of the putt. (This changed the way I teach putting.)
• 37:30 - Golfer can try to control horizontal path, face angle, impact spot, and clubhead speed at impact.
• 38:30 - Relative importance of those four things:
  • 39:15 - Why 12'? 30% for Pros, 15% for Ams. This helps us narrow down what matters. What's the error in those four things and how does it affect the ability to make putts?
  • 40:30 - 0.6° offline will miss at optimal speed. ±0.7° = a miss, a lip-out. Stroke path error can be ±3.5° and still hole the putt. Impact spot can be 1cm off to affect 1% of putt line and 2% in distance. 1.7cm might be possible given a different putter design (higher MOI).
  • 44:30 - Face angle: Joe: ± 0.9°, Pro: ±0.5°. Joes miss 44%, Pros 8%.
  • 46:30 - Path: Joe ±1.35°, Pro ±0.80°. Joe misses: 1%, Pro < 1%.
  • 47:30 - Impact Spot: Joe ±0.43cm, Pro ±0.29cm. Joe misses: 1%, Pro < 1%.
  • 49:15 - Optimum putter head speed: Joe miss 5%, Pro 1% (goes up on breaking putts).
  • 50:00 - Takeaways: face angle king for amateur golfers, pros would still make 90% on a perfect green. So what about the rest of the misses? 20% would still miss on an excellent green from 12' with perfect launch conditions (Perfect Putter).
• 51:00 - Green reading and judging speed super important!
• 54:00 - Pelz says on a 12' putt green reading accounts for 50% of misses. While determining the starting line/target line is important, speed is ~4x as important. 80% of the misses were due to poor speed. Important to get it right on the first attempt.
• 56:15 - Once you hide something from view, you immediately start losing the feel for the intended speed/distance.
• 59:15 - Heads up putting stuff. Study results is around 1:01:00. No difference on face angle, path, or impact spot. Speed control had a reduction in variability of putting speed. Better speed control. Looking at the hole does not affect quality of impact. On a 12' putt.

So my takeaways are:

• Face control/face angle is very important, so find a stroke that reduces your face angle variability.
• Maintain that, but then focus only on speed/green reading.
• Consider heads up putting — or at least "putting to the picture" — to help with distance control.

P.S. On a recent golf trip I demonstrated the importance of marrying line and speed when in one round on some fairly crazy greens I made a pair of 12-footers that I read perfectly at a very specific speed and then holed them by hitting them at that very specific speed. One was "barely falls in" and the ball barely fell in, and the other was "try to die it at this spot and let the slope do the rest of the work" and then I did that too. Particularly on breaking putts, speed becomes VERY important and must match up with the line. The more they break, the more the speed matters.

[Ty_Webb]

Thanks for the breakdown Erik. One question if I may - I think I have watched the video, but it was some time ago and I'm not sure I have the time to watch it presently, so I'll ask. I see you talk a little about the impact of path on start direction and that all makes sense to me, but does Sasho go into any detail on the impact of path on consistency of speed? When I last went on a SAM, my consistency numbers were pretty good. I was steadily about 3-4* out to in with the face about 0.8* open. That resulted in a very consistent start line close to target. Where I think I have issues is with my speed control and I think that the combination of out to in with open face results in inconsistent speed. So I work on trying to straighten both things out, which has questionable effects on my start lines.

[iacas]

Not sure what you mean: if you're consistent with both, why would that negatively affect your speed? In other words, if your horizontal spin loft is always about 4-5°… (because the face is about 85% and the path is about 15%), then what's that matter?

[Ty_Webb]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Not sure what you mean: if you're consistent with both, why would that negatively affect your speed? In other words, if your horizontal spin loft is always about 4-5°… (because the face is about 85% and the path is about 15%), then what's that matter?

I guess what I mean is what difference would it be if it was 4* vs 5*? For a certain amount of force, how much would that impact speed? That and I find it harder to control speed and this is something to blame...

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

I guess what I mean is what difference would it be if it was 4* vs 5*? For a certain amount of force, how much would that impact speed? That and I find it harder to control speed and this is something to blame...

Basically not at all.

[Ty_Webb]

10 hours ago, iacas said:

Basically not at all.

So there is basically no benefit to being consistently 0* 0* vs being consistently -4* and +0.7*. If you're -4 and +0.7 then you'll have to hit it a bit harder, but that's it?

[iacas]

6 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

So there is basically no benefit to being consistently 0* 0* vs being consistently -4* and +0.7*. If you're -4 and +0.7 then you'll have to hit it a bit harder, but that's it?

Basically. You're going to have the tiniest bit of sidespin that I'd wonder about, but distance control… should be no effect there, really, if you do it consistently.