Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Interesting putting practice aid?


Note: This thread is 6234 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

Posted
Not sure if this was the right place to post this, but does anyone know what the device shown here is called:

http://www2008.clevelandgolf.fr/inde...tid=2274708001

I know that looks like a bogus link, but it links to a video of Kent Jones (PGA Tour) practicing with a putting aid. It involves a small platform, a couple of small metal spheres.... see for yourself.

Doesn't seem all that impressive, since Kent makes it look pretty easy (of course). But I was at the Wachovia in 2007 and saw Vijay using this same device. Vijay played pretty well that week, but I watched him hit over 20 putts using this device, and he booted nearly all of them!!

Anyway... thought somebody would know, or one of you mini-tour guys would have seen it.
Currently in the bag:
SQ Sumo 9.5* - Aldila ProtoPype 70-X
Burner TP 14.5* - Aldila NV 75 S
Idea Pro Gold 18* - Ozik Altus Xcon Hybrid - 90 S
675B blades, 3-PW, S300, Lamkin Tour Black Cord 588 SW, 53*, S300 588 LW, 58*, wedge flex Studio Design 2.5 Tour iX ball2007 Nature Valley Amateur Regional...

Posted
I saw a buddy of mine Sam using one once. I think its too technical personally. I prescribe to Bob Rotella's theory that making putts is more about believing a putt will go than the actual stroke that gets it there. When I play and practice I think nothing of the stroke itself, just where I want to hit it.

Callaway RazrFit Extreme 9.5 w/Project X 6.5
Callaway XHot Pro 15* 3Wood w/Project X 6.5
Callaway XTour 18* 2h w/S300
Callaway XHot Pro 4/5 irons w/S300
Callaway XForged III 5-PW irons w/S300
Callaway Forged 52*/58* Wedges
Odyssey 7 Versa 90
Callaway Hex Black Tour


Posted
I saw a buddy of mine Sam using one once. I think its too technical personally. I prescribe to Bob Rotella's theory that making putts is more about believing a putt will go than the actual stroke that gets it there. When I play and practice I think nothing of the stroke itself, just where I want to hit it.

No offense, but spoken like a guy who probably has a mechanically-sound putting stroke.

Rotella's theory has merit. It is nearly impossible to hole putts if you believe that whatever you do, the putt will miss. But the converse definitely is not true. You're not going to magically start making putts simply just because you believe you will. At some level (different for every golfer) it is a matter of technique (physical and mental), and the application of that technique. At the moment, my technique is poor. I'm trying to improve that technique. Maybe some day I will arrive at where you are, where my technique is sound and consistent. Would be nice!
Currently in the bag:
SQ Sumo 9.5* - Aldila ProtoPype 70-X
Burner TP 14.5* - Aldila NV 75 S
Idea Pro Gold 18* - Ozik Altus Xcon Hybrid - 90 S
675B blades, 3-PW, S300, Lamkin Tour Black Cord 588 SW, 53*, S300 588 LW, 58*, wedge flex Studio Design 2.5 Tour iX ball2007 Nature Valley Amateur Regional...

Posted
Here it is at Pelzgolf.com

THANKS!!! Happy Holidays!

Currently in the bag:
SQ Sumo 9.5* - Aldila ProtoPype 70-X
Burner TP 14.5* - Aldila NV 75 S
Idea Pro Gold 18* - Ozik Altus Xcon Hybrid - 90 S
675B blades, 3-PW, S300, Lamkin Tour Black Cord 588 SW, 53*, S300 588 LW, 58*, wedge flex Studio Design 2.5 Tour iX ball2007 Nature Valley Amateur Regional...

Posted
No offense, but spoken like a guy who probably has a mechanically-sound putting stroke.

None taken. My stroke maybe be sound, but it is by no means consistent. I often see myself taking it back on a terrible line. But, I just stopped caring so much about that. Now I feel more comfortable over putts.

I did actually try this Putting Tutor aid when my buddy broke it out one day. It's just too little room for error if you put the balls on the most narrow setting. It made me more tense about taking a stroke, rather than relaxed and natural feeling. After trying this aid for myself I had no desire to buy one. However, I ended up having to buying a replacement copy of Putting Out of Your Mind for Shindig after I highlighted to death the book he lent me.

Callaway RazrFit Extreme 9.5 w/Project X 6.5
Callaway XHot Pro 15* 3Wood w/Project X 6.5
Callaway XTour 18* 2h w/S300
Callaway XHot Pro 4/5 irons w/S300
Callaway XForged III 5-PW irons w/S300
Callaway Forged 52*/58* Wedges
Odyssey 7 Versa 90
Callaway Hex Black Tour


Posted
None taken. My stroke maybe be sound, but it is by no means consistent.

Hey Ben, I give credit where credit is due. Your index is nearly +2. That tells me that you're doing something right, most of the time.

Me... it was pretty obvious I was doing something wrong, nearly ALL the time.
It's just too little room for error if you put the balls on the most narrow setting.

I'll take your word for it. Watching Vijay on the practice green that day was PAINFUL. He'd hit a putt... and knock one of the marbles off. And again, and again, and again. His caddie had the job of replacing the golf ball and the little marble. Quite a sight.

For me, its a decelleration and a push. I get lined up, I visualize the ball going in, I relax, I make what feels like a good stroke..... and I miss a straight 4-footer by an inch or two, wide right. I realize now that I don't release the putter correctly, therefore the putt never starts on line. So I'm trying to fix the stroke, and having a little tool like this one the practice greens would allow me to see the direction the ball is starting. Drawing a line on the ball does the same thing, except I'd need to line up every single ball.... a bit tedious. I guess one could argue, "Well Dummy... why don't you just practice 4-footers?" Good point, except I'm not really concerned about the 4-footers right now. I'm trying to hone the stroke, and get it as clean as I can. The cup is wide and forgiving... I can choke in a 4-footer a bunch of different ways... decell+push, lips in on the right, or a hard pull that lips in on the left.... those might help my score, but they don't actually teach me anything. Neither one of those misses started on line, but they somehow went in. Basically teaches me nothing. I want to learn how to make a stroke that feels natural AND starts the ball at my target. Might take some time, and might require a training aid (or five, for my ugly stroke). ;) Thanks for the help. I appreciate someone taking an interest.
Currently in the bag:
SQ Sumo 9.5* - Aldila ProtoPype 70-X
Burner TP 14.5* - Aldila NV 75 S
Idea Pro Gold 18* - Ozik Altus Xcon Hybrid - 90 S
675B blades, 3-PW, S300, Lamkin Tour Black Cord 588 SW, 53*, S300 588 LW, 58*, wedge flex Studio Design 2.5 Tour iX ball2007 Nature Valley Amateur Regional...

Posted
No sweat. Thanks for taking my comments as constructive. I really recommend giving that Rotella book a read. It's not that long and did wonders for me...

Callaway RazrFit Extreme 9.5 w/Project X 6.5
Callaway XHot Pro 15* 3Wood w/Project X 6.5
Callaway XTour 18* 2h w/S300
Callaway XHot Pro 4/5 irons w/S300
Callaway XForged III 5-PW irons w/S300
Callaway Forged 52*/58* Wedges
Odyssey 7 Versa 90
Callaway Hex Black Tour


Posted
I found this interesting with regards to the 'mind v technique'.

In the middle ages most continental european armies used crossbows, but the British used archers - this is golf related slightly, so keep reading!


With crossbows you could look straight down the bolt and fire.

With a long bow, to get the power to pierce armour plate, you would need to pull the string back past your ear. Obviously by doing this you cannot look down the arrow to get a line of sight.

British archers used to spend a long time practising and learning to be able to visualise and feel an arrow to the target.

In the end the bow turned out to be the better weapon only because it was quicker to fire, both weapons were similar in accuracy.

This seems the same for putting. Some people are better just visualising and feeling, and others prefer the more technical based method of having a target and then mechanically hitting that target.

Personally I prefer the feel method, but it is better to find what works for you and stick with it, even if its different from what the guy next door is doing.

Note: This thread is 6234 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

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

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.