Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 3906 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

It is the most amazing system- you just have to TRUST it. I have taken the fundamentals and the advanced classes. The beauty of the classes is that you can sit in the fundamentals over and over again-observe is a better description. You have to practice, too. And it helps to be aimed where you think you are aimed! I have drunk the KoolAid and got an Edel putter and committed to AimPoint. I love it. Makes lags so much easier. I find that it is a faster way to read greens too. I need lots more work on the Advanced stuff. I am not fast enough to break down the putts and do the math. I say give it a try. You will love it.


Posted
Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Yeah, no idea.  Previous to Aimpoint, I did exactly what you described.  But here's the difference:  The old way would leave me unsure because it was always just a guess.  Lack of confidence is a killer in putting.  So, with Aimpoint, I can "know for sure" that it breaks a foot, because the system has confirmed my "guess," which makes it not a guess.  So even when I read the putt correctly in the past, the level of confidence wasn't as high as it is with Aimpoint.  That only leads to less made putts.  So worst case scenario (meaning you are already good at reading greens) Aimpoint boosts your confidence level by confirming your reads.

Except it's also very inconsistent.  He's all about alternative methods, and different swings, and there's lots of ways to skin a cat, right?  So, then, it would stand to reason that he should be intrigued by the idea of a different way of doing something like green reading.  But, obviously not.  So that really only steers me to the conclusion that he's being contrarion for kicks.

No don't get me wrong I'll (virtually) do anything to save a shot, Hell I went to side saddle putting because I thought it was a better system. And I've checked out everything that I can about Aimpoint , the vids, the tutorials, the charts etc. But.......Aimpoint is an educated guess, because the inputs are good guesses. I mean the stimp is 8,but is it on the green you're putting on? or is the slope 2 or 2.5 initially but then becomes a 1.  The grain is against me. Blah blah.

I use the green walking technique, but the rest is just good guessing......there's not much science to it really apart from a deduction based on a good guess.

And the stuff you see on telly with the ball following that line is awesone and spooky but its hardly the basis for aimpoint green reading. One's been mapped the green reading stuff hasn't.

Mind you It's very seductive, I mean the idea that you can use science to be a gun putter is very alluring. It fits very nicely with the mindset that alot of golfers have, ykow, the analytical folks.

Taking the above advice may lead to destruction of your golf game. Laughing at it may reduce stress.


Posted
Originally Posted by logman

No don't get me wrong I'll (virtually) do anything to save a shot, Hell I went to side saddle putting because I thought it was a better system. And I've checked out everything that I can about Aimpoint , the vids, the tutorials, the charts etc. But.......Aimpoint is an educated guess, because the inputs are good guesses. I mean the stimp is 8,but is it on the green you're putting on? or is the slope 2 or 2.5 initially but then becomes a 1.  The grain is against me. Blah blah.

I use the green walking technique, but the rest is just good guessing......there's not much science to it really apart from a deduction based on a good guess.

And the stuff you see on telly with the ball following that line is awesone and spooky but its hardly the basis for aimpoint green reading. One's been mapped the green reading stuff hasn't.

Mind you It's very seductive, I mean the idea that you can use science to be a gun putter is very alluring. It fits very nicely with the mindset that alot of golfers have, ykow, the analytical folks.

You are not far off here at all.  (Except there is nothing in the Aimpoint class - the beginner's one at least - where you have to worry about grain :))  But there is one key word you through in there that says everything about it.  " Educated " guess.  Without the word 'educated' then you're left with just a guess.  That is the difference.  The other big difference from the way most people read greens - and this is the hardest part that takes the most practice - is using your feet instead of your eyes.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

So that's why Sam Snead went barefoot on the practice days! Feel up the greens with his bare tootsies. I do wish he had won the US Open.


Posted

I have heard many great things about Aimpoint. Too bad I live in New Mexico which is an Aimpoint black hole. No instructors or clinics within 500 miles.

Danny    In my :ping: Hoofer Tour golf bag on my :clicgear: 8.0 Cart

Driver:   :pxg: 0311 Gen 5  X-Stiff.                        Irons:  :callaway: 4-PW APEX TCB Irons 
3 Wood: :callaway: Mavrik SZ Rogue X-Stiff                            Nippon Pro Modus 130 X-Stiff
3 Hybrid: :callaway: Mavrik Pro KBS Tour Proto X   Wedges: :vokey:  50°, 54°, 60° 
Putter: :odyssey:  2-Ball Ten Arm Lock        Ball: :titleist: ProV 1

 

 

 

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
If you have an Outback Steakhouse, chances are good Erik will fly out there. :)

  • Administrator
Posted
Originally Posted by logman

And the stuff you see on telly with the ball following that line is awesone and spooky but its hardly the basis for aimpoint green reading. One's been mapped the green reading stuff hasn't.

Incorrect. Yes, AimPoint when it was on television (the line this year is NOT AimPoint, which is why it's wrong so often) had greens mapped to the millimeter, but you can easily map the greens of your own course. It IS the "basis" for AimPoint. You're wrong there.

Originally Posted by logman

Mind you It's very seductive, I mean the idea that you can use science to be a gun putter is very alluring. It fits very nicely with the mindset that alot of golfers have, ykow, the analytical folks.

More drivel. The people who like AimPoint the most are, in my experience, the people who are least analytical. It's very heavily based in "feel" as is all of golf instruction and all of golf, period. Everything's a feel - it just has to line up with reality to work.

Originally Posted by gwlee7

If you have an Outback Steakhouse, chances are good Erik will fly out there. :)

He's right... Danny - let's talk. I'll make it worth your while. I can come out for a few days, do a few clinics, and you and I can map out your course(s) as well. PM me or something.

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

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

But Erik, wasn't AimpointTV the start of the Aimpoint green reading phenomenon, and as I saw it Aimpoint green reading hitched a ride on the credibility of Aimpoint TV. Even though, as you said the greens used in Aimpoint TV were "mapped to the millimeter".....whereas the Aimpoint green reading system is just an estimation on all inputs of putting. AimpointTV seems to be scientific whereas Aimpoint green reading is less so.

Go to http://puttingzone.blogspot.com.au/2011/09/aimpoint-as-poor-science.html

You know what I mean there I think, but anyway

Taking the above advice may lead to destruction of your golf game. Laughing at it may reduce stress.


Posted
Originally Posted by logman

But Erik, wasn't AimpointTV the start of the Aimpoint green reading phenomenon, and as I saw it Aimpoint green reading hitched a ride on the credibility of Aimpoint TV.

They're one in the same, Logman.

Also, the fella you linked there is a tad biased against Aimpoint. ;)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Also, the fella you linked there is a tad biased against Aimpoint. ;)

But you could never say that Mr. Mangum doesn't know about putting. He has his opinions, as do the Aimpoint fans. It's up to every individual to decide which method(s) would be helpful in trying to sink putts.


Posted
Originally Posted by Golfingdad

They're one in the same, Logman.

Also, the fella you linked there is a tad biased against Aimpoint. ;)

I think thats my point, They're not one and the same. One of them was based on 3D digitally mapped  greens the other is based on the non scientific "educated" guesses of the operator of the putting stick. There two different things.

Also Mangum is a formidable critic. His expertise is well respected.......yeah?

Taking the above advice may lead to destruction of your golf game. Laughing at it may reduce stress.


  • Administrator
Posted
Originally Posted by logman

But Erik, wasn't AimpointTV the start of the Aimpoint green reading phenomenon

No. Green reading came first, and when Mark realized that the models worked as well as they did he simply found a way to "publish" the computerized data to TV. AimPoint has been green reading since before it was on TV.

Originally Posted by logman

Even though, as you said the greens used in Aimpoint TV were "mapped to the millimeter".....whereas the Aimpoint green reading system is just an estimation on all inputs of putting. AimpointTV seems to be scientific whereas Aimpoint green reading is less so.

Your point is what, exactly? It's already been addressed above: AimPoint is far more educated green reading than just saying "this here putt looks like it's gonna go that-a-way about this-a-much because of that little bump there, and those mountains that way, and the creek three holes away."

Originally Posted by Harmonious

But you could never say that Mr. Mangum doesn't know about putting. He has his opinions, as do the Aimpoint fans. It's up to every individual to decide which method(s) would be helpful in trying to sink putts.

His opinions so severely bias him, however, that it renders his opinions non-credible when it comes to AimPoint. I've talked with him about it many times - as has John Graham, Mark Sweeney, etc. Never mind that he has his own "green reading system" complete with this massive wheel you've gotta spin around to get your reads (to avoid the AimPoint patents) - hypocritical? Nahhhhhhhhhhh. :P

Originally Posted by logman

I think thats my point, They're not one and the same. One of them was based on 3D digitally mapped  greens the other is based on the non scientific "educated" guesses of the operator of the putting stick. There two different things.

And again: educated approximations (very different than "guessing") with an accurate (physics, science) chart is going to improve someone's ability to read a green better than the old way of doing it. So no, they're not "two different things." They're exactly the same thing - one is simplified so that golfers can use it during play to improve their green reading.


Originally Posted by logman

Also Mangum is a formidable critic. His expertise is well respected.......yeah?

Not really. He lets his bias cloud his statements far too frequently. He's a hypocrite, and he teaches ONE model of putting. Furthermore, a guy I can beat putting left-handed with an old Callaway Tuttle putter in putting matches regularly beats Geoff Mangum - he's not even a good putter himself. Which doesn't mean that he's not a good instructor per se, but it's putting we're talking about - it's not like he's asked to hit a 2-iron off a hanging lie to an island green.

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

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by iacas

... an old Callaway Tuttle putter ...

Oh my god!!!  This is way off-topic but I had totally forgotten about that putter!  My friend had one of those and I always thought it was the most ridiculous thing ever!  I picture a board meeting where they were introducing the Big Bertha Driver, complete with a clay model, then somebody dropped it on the ground and it got stepped on, and that's where they got the idea for the Tuttle.  (Of course, its probably just because it looked different AND he was a horrible putter) :)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I did Aimpoint with with Erik and Dave and it was well worth it.

Spend the dough....

Deryck Griffith

Titleist 910 D3: 9.5deg GD Tour AD DI7x | Nike Dymo 3W: 15deg, UST S-flex | Mizuno MP CLK Hybrid: 20deg, Project X Tour Issue 6.5, HC1 Shaft | Mizuno MP-57 4-PW, DG X100 Shaft, 1deg upright | Cleveland CG15 Wedges: 52, 56, 60deg | Scotty Cameron California Del Mar | TaylorMade Penta, TP Black LDP, Nike 20XI-X


Posted
Originally Posted by Deryck Griffith

I did Aimpoint with with Erik and Dave and it was well worth it.

Spend the dough....

Deryck, I don't doubt your word, but can you quantify how it was worth it?  Did you see a reduction in strokes and was it easy to learn and use?  I am considering the 8 hour drive out to Erie at some point this year if I can come up with the money for the trip, this being one of the big reasons for it.

Nate

:tmade:(10.5) :pxg:(4W & 7W) MIURA(3-PW) :mizuno:(50/54/60) 

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Cipher,

I was there with Deryck and took the same clinic.  Yes, it is worth it and I was extremely skeptical.   I didn't buy totally in at first and had to come back home a play around with everything.  I was already "decent" at putting but I save a good 2 shots at least on mid range putts,  Every putt looks like it has a chance to go in.  It is all about speed now.

The basics are not that difficult.


Posted
Originally Posted by gwlee7

Cipher,

I was there with Deryck and took the same clinic.  Yes, it is worth it and I was extremely skeptical.   I didn't buy totally in at first and had to come back home a play around with everything.  I was already "decent" at putting but I save a good 2 shots at least on mid range putts,  Every putt looks like it has a chance to go in.  It is all about speed now.

The basics are not that difficult.

Thanks, I do believe what everyone is saying who has tried it.  I just like to hear that someone has calculated the actual results and not just is content with hey this is cool.  I think it would really help someone like me who misses a lot of putts that I should be making every now and then.

Nate

:tmade:(10.5) :pxg:(4W & 7W) MIURA(3-PW) :mizuno:(50/54/60) 

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3906 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

    • Day 1: 2025.12.26 Worked on LH position on grip, trying to keep fingers closer to perpendicular to the club. Feels awkward but change is meant to.
    • Please see this topic for updated information:
    • Please see this topic for updated information:
    • When you've been teaching golf as long as I have, you're going to find that you can teach some things better than you previously had, and you're probably going to find some things that you taught incorrectly. I don't see that as a bad thing — what would be worse is refusing to adapt and grow given new information. I've always said that my goal with my instruction isn't to be right, but it's to get things right. To that end, I'm about five years late in issuing a public proclamation on something… When I first got my GEARS system, I immediately looked at the golf swings of the dozens and dozens of Tour players for which I suddenly had full 3D data. I created a huge spreadsheet showing how their bodies moved, how the club moved, at various points in the swing. I mapped knee and elbow angles, hand speeds, shoulder turns and pelvis turns… etc. I re-considered what I thought I knew about the golf swing as performed by the best players. One of those things dated back to the earliest days: that you extend (I never taught "straighten" and would avoid using that word unless in the context of saying "don't fully straighten") the trail knee/leg in the backswing. I was mislead by 2D photos from less-than-ideal camera angles — the trail leg rotates a bit during the backswing, and so when observing trail knee flex should also use a camera that moves to stay perpendicular to the plane of the ankle/knee/hip joint. We have at least two topics here on this (here and here; both of which I'll be updating after publishing this) where @mvmac and I advise golfers to extend the trail knee. Learning that this was not right is one of the reasons I'm glad to have a 3D system, as most golfers generally preserve the trail knee flex throughout the backswing. Data Here's a video showing an iron and a driver of someone who has won the career slam: Here's what the graph of his right knee flex looks like. The solid lines I've positioned at the top of the backswing (GEARS aligns both swings at impact, the dashed line). Address is to the right, of course, and the graph shows knee flex from the two swings above. The data (17.56° and 23.20°) shows where this player is in both swings (orange being the yellow iron swing, pink the blue driver swing). You can see that this golfer extends his trail knee 2-3°… before bending it even more than that through the late backswing and early downswing. Months ago I created a quick Instagram video showing the trail knee flex in the backswing of several players (see the top for the larger number): Erik J. Barzeski (@iacas) • Instagram reel GEARS shares expert advice on golf swing technique, focusing on the critical backswing phase. Tour winners and major champions reveal the key to a precise and powerful swing, highlighting the importance of... Here are a few more graphs. Two LIV players and major champions: Two PGA Tour winners: Two women's #1 ranked players: Two more PGA Tour winners (one a major champ): Two former #1s, the left one being a woman, the right a man, with a driver: Two more PGA Tour players: You'll notice a trend: they almost all maintain roughly the same flex throughout their backswing and downswing. The Issues with Extending the Trail Knee You can play good golf extending (again, not "straightening") the trail knee. Some Tour players do. But, as with many things, if 95 out of 100 Tour players do it, you're most likely better off doing similarly to what they do. So, what are the issues with extending the trail knee in the backswing? To list a few: Pelvic Depth and Rotation Quality Suffers When the trail knee extends, the trail leg often acts like an axle on the backswing, with the pelvis rotating around the leg and the trail hip joint. This prevents the trail side from gaining depth, as is needed to keep the pelvis center from thrusting toward the ball. Most of the "early extension" (thrust) that I see occurs during the backswing. Encourages Early Extension (Thrust) Patterns When you've thrust and turned around the trail hip joint in the backswing, you often thrust a bit more in the downswing as the direction your pelvis is oriented is forward and "out" (to the right for a righty). Your trail leg can abduct to push you forward, but "forward" when your pelvis is turned like that is in the "thrust" direction. Additionally, the trail knee "breaking" again at the start of the downswing often jumps the trail hip out toward the ball a bit too much or too quickly. While the trail hip does move in that direction, if it's too fast or too much, it can prevent the lead side hip from getting "back" at the right rate, or at a rate commensurate with the trail hip to keep the pelvis center from thrusting. Disrupts the Pressure Shift/Transition When the trail leg extends too much, it often can't "push" forward normally. The forward push begins much earlier than forward motion begins — pushing forward begins as early as about P1.5 to P2 in the swings of most good golfers. It can push forward by abducting, again, but that's a weaker movement that shoves the pelvis forward (toward the target) and turns it more than it generally should (see the next point). Limits Internal Rotation of the Trail Hip Internal rotation of the trail hip is a sort of "limiter" on the backswing. I have seen many golfers on GEARS whose trail knee extends, whose pelvis shifts forward (toward the target), and who turn over 50°, 60°, and rarely but not never, over 70° in the backswing. If you turn 60° in the backswing, it's going to be almost impossible to get "open enough" in the downswing to arrive at a good impact position. Swaying/Lateral Motion Occasionally a golfer who extends the trail knee too much will shift back too far, but more often the issue is that the golfer will shift forward too early in the backswing (sometimes even immediately to begin the backswing), leaving them "stuck forward" to begin the downswing. They'll push forward, stop, and have to restart around P4, disrupting the smooth sequence often seen in the game's best players. Other Bits… Reduces ground reaction force potential, compromises spine inclination and posture, makes transition sequencing harder, increases stress on the trail knee and lower back… In short… It's not athletic. We don't do many athletic things with "straight" or very extended legs (unless it's the end of the action, like a jump or a big push off like a step in a running motion).
    • Day 135 12-25 Wide backswing to wide downswing drill. Recorder and used mirror. 
×
×
  • 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.