Putting - DO NOT Accelerate Through the Ball

[Golfingdad]

I think that the best part in this kind of putting is that you can measure how long backswing you need to make to clear certain flat distances.

For example if I make a 10 cm backswing and "let it go" the ball will travel about 1m on a flat surface.

This way I can get few repeatable distances and estimating putts on an actual green becomes a bit easier

Agree.  I've noticed this as well.  If you have a smooth pendulum stroke, rather than a "hitting" stroke, then you're going to start to notice a correlation between swing length and putt distance.  I learned something similar in my Aimpoint class.

You can (and must) decipher the stimp of the green, and once you've done that for your home course, and you practice enough 15 footers on those same greens, you have a baseline for what it takes to hit a putt 15'.

Then you go to a new course and figure the stimp, and now it's much quicker and easier to know how hard to swing for all different types of putts.

It's basically a way to "manufacture" feel.  And an added bonus is that its really easy.

[natureboy]

Thanks for the clarification.

The 3 foot backswing - 10 foot putt drill sounds a little bit like the 'long lazy' flop shot pitch out of rough. Is it a similar feel or different?

[iacas]

The 3 foot backswing - 10 foot putt drill sounds a little bit like the 'long lazy' flop shot pitch out of rough. Is it a similar feel or different?

It might be similar, but I'm hesitant to talk about someone's "feels" as they vary from person to person. I've simply found it's an effective way to get people to "contribute less" to the downswing.

Lots of other threads here @natureboy with some great information. Check 'em out.

[trickyputt]

I have this putter training toy that looks like a yardstick. It has black and white increments marked behind and in front of the ball. It is hard if not impossible for me to see how far back I take the putter without moving my head, even though the stick is marked from that express purpose.

[inthehole]

I have noticed alot of pro's do this - the whole stopping the club head shortly after contact without much of a follow through.   Seems they must be decelerating to stop the club so soon after impact.     I tried it & it feels so incredibly different.      I think this will require some serious practice over the winter - not comfortable enough to try it on the course ... but with my putting, I should - don't have much to lose !

[Golfingdad]

I have noticed alot of pro's do this - the whole stopping the club head shortly after contact without much of a follow through.   Seems they must be decelerating to stop the club so soon after impact.     I tried it & it feels so incredibly different.      I think this will require some serious practice over the winter - not comfortable enough to try it on the course ... but with my putting, I should - don't have much to lose !

I'm not sure who you're referring to - maybe Sneeeedeker?? - but what you describe doesn't sound like a good idea to me at all.  There shouldn't really be any ACTIVE deceleration.  That's asking for just as much trouble as active acceleration because if you time it wrong, there goes all of your speed control.

What you should be striving for is basically a pendulum stroke with roughly equal distance backswing and throughswing.  Do that, and have your ball position directly at the center (or bottom) of that swing, or, like me, slightly forward of that, and then you'll acheive your (very) slight decel passively.

[jgreen85]

congrats on the plug on golf channel! maybe Tiger will look you up after all!

[mvmac]

There shouldn't really be any ACTIVE deceleration.

What you should be striving for is basically a pendulum stroke with roughly equal distance backswing and throughswing.  Do that, and have your ball position directly at the center (or bottom) of that swing, or, like me, slightly forward of that, and then you'll acheive your (very) slight decel passively.

Well said

[natureboy]

An anecdote in support of the original post is that Bobby Locke - known for his great putting - said that too many players did not take the putter back far enough to create sufficient "potential energy"...and he had a very short follow-through.

[natureboy]

Just watched Jack putting. Looks like he's accelerating.

Tiger Woods. Looks like he's accelerating.

Dave Stockton. Looks like he's accelerating.

These may be illusions and if real numbers could be taken it may show something different, but it looks like they are all slightly accelerating just before impact.

I agree it appears like Nicklaus is accelerating (longer through stroke than backstroke). Tiger looks very pendulum like to me. Stockton seems to have a shorter (or at least equal) through stroke to backstroke.

I think given the nature of gravity any 'dropping' of the putter on the ball will result in an accelerating putter from the top of the backstroke down to the bottom of the arc. Perhaps as said in other posts they are decelerating and our eyes are unable to see that smaller change (relative to the change from backswing to downswing). The arms may just appear to carry through without actual acceleration as Iacas says he can do on the SAM lab.

Was Nicklaus known for being a good day-in day-out putter or primarily as a 'big moment' putter (I'd still take that).

Is the natural deceleration of gravity on the putter as it rises from the bottom of the arc what we should be using to passively decelerate the putter / allow it to decelerate rather than actively slow it? If so, does this affect how we should position the ball on downhill or uphill putts to ensure it is forward of the bottom of the arc relative to the force of gravity?

[smaug81243]

Quote:

Agree.  I've noticed this as well.  If you have a smooth pendulum stroke, rather than a "hitting" stroke, then you're going to start to notice a correlation between swing length and putt distance.

I really like this method but recently switched to a new home course that has really slow greens. The pendulum stroke works well for short-medium length putts but any long lag putts are impossible for me to handle without using an incredibly fast tempo. I'm still figuring out how to combat this and am temporarily trying a bit more of a hitting stroke for long lag putts.

[Lihu]

I'm starting to do more of this, and have lengthened my swing for lag putts.

My putting is now consistently around 32 to 34 from over 36.

Amazed that this simple thing worked.

I'll probably work more on it once my long game is at an acceptable level.

[Crazycanuck44]

Self proclaimed horrible putter will give this a go for sure. It can't hurt. :-D

[iacas]

The arms may just appear to carry through without actual acceleration as Iacas says he can do on the SAM lab.

Not just "says" he can do… look at the graph.

Is the natural deceleration of gravity on the putter as it rises from the bottom of the arc what we should be using to passively decelerate the putter / allow it to decelerate rather than actively slow it?

I would imagine that most players actively slow it. If we relied ONLY on gravity to hit the ball, the backswings would have to be REALLY long. So there's some "active contribution to gravity" on most player's downstroke, and likely some "active contribution to gravity" (to decelerate) on the follow-through.

But, what players feel will be very different. So this question doesn't really have an answer.

If so, does this affect how we should position the ball on downhill or uphill putts to ensure it is forward of the bottom of the arc relative to the force of gravity?

That's easy: do not change your ball position on uphill or downhill putts. It's not worth worrying about. Even severely tilted greens are 2-3° or so… and there's no guarantee the player is tilting with the ground and not just remaining "flat" already by bending one knee a teeny bit more or something.

Too tiny a difference to worry about ball position. If you want to, go ahead and adjust your ball position by a dimple. :)

[mvmac]

Amazed that this simple thing worked.

Simple is good

[Golfingdad]

Amazed that this simple thing worked.

You, of all people, should NOT be amazed that this works because it's science based!

Well again they are, but many won't feel like they are. The point is to have a curve that maximizes your margin of error:

That's the same graph, re-done to show the "timing" required to be within the same "one block" speed. "One block" might represent 1 MPH, or maybe a ball with +/- 3 feet of distance control.

If this thread has any "detractors" it's because they either haven't seen this graph, or they don't understand it.  And option B should be off the table for anybody older than about 12.

@Lihu , the only thing that we should be amazed by is the fact that it took this long for somebody to explain this simple concept to us.

[trickyputt]

He plays the cut or the draw with putter. Who would have drawn the similiarity to the Driver and other clubs without that graph?

[Lihu]

Simple is good :-)

You would think the same can be said for the full swing too. It's amazing how "simple" can be so hard to learn. :-) [quote name="Golfingdad" url="/t/74295/putting-do-not-accelerate-through-the-ball/234#post_1054556"]You, of all people, should NOT be amazed that this works because it's science based! :-P . . . , the only thing that we should be amazed by is the fact that it took this long for somebody to explain this simple concept to us. [/quote] I must have started golf at a good time. I'm certainly glad I didn't spend 30 years putting the old way. ;-)