Advertisement
Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Joe Mama

Putting One-Handed

30 posts in this topic

One-Handed Putting I'm a right-handed player who putts with my left hand. I tried a hundred different putting styles, but this one works better for me than any of them. Without my right hand on the club I'm able to stand taller, which affords a better view of the intended line. I also don't have to worry about twitches, staggers, jitters and jerks ("yips") of the right hand taking my club face off-line. I use a John Riley Tri-Liner: The ball is just to the left of my right foot, and the club face is just to the right; my right foot is pulled way back. The COMPLETELY relaxed left arm hangs virtually STRAIGHT DOWN, with absolutely NO leftward, rightward, backward, or forward push or pull on the shaft, and zero torque (twisting action) employed to keep the face square. If these conditions are not met, then forget it. Move your head one way or the other, or shift your stance slightly, if necessary, until the club in your completely relaxed hand and arm hangs straight down, achieving this without the use of any force except the supporting upward pull by your left hand, and the competing downward pull of gravity. The thumb must be on top of the shaft, else if the thumb is a little on the right side there might be a tendency to push the shaft on the way down. That must not happen: the motion down should be purely pendulum-like in nature. Naturally, the center line of the Tri-Liner points at the center of the ball, and the face is square to the intended line; the club is about 1/8 of an inch off the green. Take the club back however far is necessary in order to achieve the desired distance. The arm and shaft remain on the same line going back, and there is no breaking of the wrists. Now, here is the BEST part: don't worry if during the takeaway the face angle changes; your backswing won't be perfect; let the face angle change if it wants to; do NOT attempt to fix the angle going back, or coming down. On the way down, let gravity alone pull the club down to impact. If your arm happened to twist a little going back, it will automatically twist back into proper alignment in time for impact. Keep your arm and wrist TOTALLY relaxed, and trust that the club face will return to its exact position at setup. Do NOT attempt to manipulate the club's face angle on the way down. If your arm and wrists are totally relaxed on the backswing and downswing just as they were at setup, the face almost magically finds its way back to a perfectly square position at impact. If your face was square at setup with relaxed arm and wrist, is is guaranteed to return to the same place. Do NOT pull the club down to impact; if you leave that job up to gravity, you won't be disappointed. The motion down should be pendulum motion only. Just let it all happen. The key is trusting that gravity alone will get the job done, and trusting that it is not necessary to worry about minor club face angle changes during the backswing. If you make any effort at all to adjust the face angle, you will fail to return square to the ball. Likewise, if you attempt to intervene in the natural gravitational course of events on the way down, your club face will fail to return square to the ball. If the face was square at setup and the club was hanging vertically, freely, at the end of totally relaxed arm and hand, it will return to square through gravity alone, as long as you do not manipulate the face angle on the way back, or the way down. You will be AMAZED at how well this works. Some PGA pros have done well putting with one hand; Mike Hulbert is one example, but he was a right-hand player putting with his right hand. I am a right handed player putting with my left hand.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Looking at your posts, you need to change your handle to Mr. Unconventional ... definitely an outlier.

0

Share this post


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

I putt basically one-handed, also, except it's with my right hand. I wrap my left hand over my right hand, but it's basically for show (only one finger touches,the grip). It's so I can do this, which apparently I do pretty well: [CONTENTEMBED=/t/74295/putting-do-not-accelerate-through-the-ball layout=block][/CONTENTEMBED]
0

Share this post


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

+1 on the don't accelerate through the ball thread!

I use both hands with a stroke that mimics a pendulum, it's not actually a pure pendulum (a true pendulum would be powered by gravity and centrifugal force alone) because I sometimes need to hit putts 20-30 feet and that would require one helluva backswing if it was truly a pure pendulum.

Question for the OP - how do you make long, uphill putts on slow greens?

0

Share this post


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

This putting method sounds better than the other thread on your golf swing. But the bottom line is, if it works, flaunt it. Long putts do sound like they could be problematical.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Long putts do sound like they could be problematical.

The one arm putt works well for distances less than about 20 feet. It is, indeed, very problematical for very long uphill putts, or long putts on very slow greens, because of the extra-long backswing that is required, so I don't use this method in those situations. For very long putts I use a modified version of Snedeker's putt--what I call the "Snedeker Snap," a two-handed, almost all-wrists swing; no arms or shoulders. I hinge the wrists back as far as they will bend, then rapidly unhinge them, pulling with my left wrist, pushing with my right wrist, all the while the watch on my left wrist remains in place from start to finish. Distance is determined by the speed at which the wrists are snapped toward the target.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one arm putt works well for distances less than about 20 feet.

It is, indeed, very problematical for very long uphill putts, or long putts on very slow greens, because of the extra-long backswing that is required, so I don't use this method in those situations.

For very long putts I use a modified version of Snedeker's putt--what I call the "Snedeker Snap," a two-handed, almost all-wrists swing; no arms or shoulders. I hinge the wrists back as far as they will bend, then rapidly unhinge them, pulling with my left wrist, pushing with my right wrist, all the while the watch on my left wrist remains in place from start to finish. Distance is determined by the speed at which the wrists are snapped toward the target.

With all due respect, that sounds like an awful way to putt. Distance control must be very difficult. Let me ask you this, on a 30' lag putt, how close to expect to be if it doesn't go in? How about a 60' lag?

I'm not against a little wrist action, I use it on longer putts, but it's an add-on to get a little more power without having to make a ridiculous back swing on longer, uphill putts. Using wrists only is, IMO, a recipe for terrible speed control.

0

Share this post


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

For very long putts I use a modified version of Snedeker's putt--what I call the "Snedeker Snap," a two-handed, almost all-wrists swing; no arms or shoulders. I hinge the wrists back as far as they will bend, then rapidly unhinge them, pulling with my left wrist, pushing with my right wrist, all the while the watch on my left wrist remains in place from start to finish. Distance is determined by the speed at which the wrists are snapped toward the target.

I'm watching Sneds putt on television ... that's not how he putts. He uses his shoulders and float-loads the putter on the thru-stroke.

But good luck.

0

Share this post


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

The one arm putt works well for distances less than about 20 feet. It is, indeed, very problematical for very long uphill putts, or long putts on very slow greens, because of the extra-long backswing that is required, so I don't use this method in those situations. For very long putts I use a modified version of Snedeker's putt--what I call the "Snedeker Snap," a two-handed, almost all-wrists swing; no arms or shoulders. I hinge the wrists back as far as they will bend, then rapidly unhinge them, pulling with my left wrist, pushing with my right wrist, all the while the watch on my left wrist remains in place from start to finish. Distance is determined by the speed at which the wrists are snapped toward the target.

I think putting is such a personalized action that depends on the persons ability to feel how far he can putt the ball on the correct line! I'm glad that you have found a way to play good golf while you're on the green! Keep us posted!

0

Share this post


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

Less than about 20 feet, I putt one-handed. Lags longer than about 59 feet I use my Snedeker Snap (with apilogies to him), between 20 and 50 feet I use an orhodox putting method. As for how close I expect my 60-foot Sneddy to go, the answer is, abou tsix feet, Distance control should be a problem, one would reasonably think, but the longer the lag, the smaller is the percentage error compared to traditional putts. In my first post I said I hinged my wrists as far as rhey would go. That's wrong; I hinge no more than about 20 degrees.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typos: 59 feet should be 60. Apilogies should be apologies. My iphone app didn't allow edits.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll say one thing, you certainly march to the beat of a different drummer when it comes to this game! ;-) [quote name="Mr. Desmond" url="/t/76599/putting-one-handed#post_1042015"]Looking at your posts, you need to change your handle to Mr. Unconventional ... definitely an outlier. [/quote] Yup. Ordinarily I'd say, "whatever works.....", but unfortunately none of this weird stuff seems to be working very well either.....
0

Share this post


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

The next time I break my right arm I'll give it a shot. In the meantime, since almost every putt that I miss is either bacause of a bad read or the wrong speed for the line, I'll stick with my fairly normal looking putting stroke.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a link to a website describing Snedeker's "pop" putt. [URL=http://www.golf.com/instruction/brandt-snedekers-putting-secrets-0]http://www.golf.com/instruction/brandt-snedekers-putting-secrets-0[/URL] He has a small arm swing, which don't have, but the main features of his swing are the the same as mine: little or no shoulder and arm movement; the swing is predominantly in the wrists. Energy is delivered to the ball over a very short period of time centered at the instant of impact, instead of being delivered over a "follow through" period as in the traditional putting stroke. As I indicated in a previous post, I use this putt only in those situations where a very long backswing would be needed in the traditional putt. I find that snapping the ball toward a cup sixty feet away more surely keeps the ball on line than does a putt with a long backswing and follow through, which gives more time and space for pushes and pulls to occur. The chance of a push or pull occurring with the snappy putt is much less than it is with the conventional putt. And, distance control, amazingly, is nowhere as difficult for me as you might expect. By varying the amount of wrist backswing, with practice one quickly gains a good feel for distance. As for my other "unconventional" putting style--putting one-handed, left handed, for distances less than 20 feet, I mentioned before that PGA pro Mike Hulbert putted one-handed. If it was good enough for him, couldn't it be good enough for some of those in this forum, too? If not, why not?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a link to a website describing Snedeker's "pop" putt.

http://www.golf.com/instruction/brandt-snedekers-putting-secrets-0

He has a small arm swing, which don't have, but the main features of his swing are the the same as mine: little or no shoulder and arm movement; the swing is predominantly in the wrists. Energy is delivered to the ball over a very short period of time centered at the instant of impact, instead of being delivered over a "follow through" period as in the traditional putting stroke.

As I indicated in a previous post, I use this putt only in those situations where a very long backswing would be needed in the traditional putt. I find that snapping the ball toward a cup sixty feet away more surely keeps the ball on line than does a putt with a long backswing and follow through, which gives more time and space for pushes and pulls to occur. The chance of a push or pull occurring with the snappy putt is much less than it is with the conventional putt. And, distance control, amazingly, is nowhere as difficult for me as you might expect. By varying the amount of wrist backswing, with practice one quickly gains a good feel for distance.

As for my other "unconventional" putting style--putting one-handed, left handed, for distances less than 20 feet, I mentioned before that PGA pro Mike Hulbert putted one-handed. If it was good enough for him, couldn't it be good enough for some of those in this forum, too? If not, why not?

Watch it on television and see if you agree. Of course, a putt, depending on its length, does not have a lot of shoulder movement. Typically, the shoulders move the arms, and the arms experience little/no independent movement. The float load is described on this site.

If you've got to putt like that to make the putt go where you aim, my thought was that putter does not fit you at all, and you are full of compensations.

Feel free to experiment and ignore what the unheralded like me advise ... but as a mid-capper, I prefer to set up in a more conventional manner when I don't know what I'm doing -- I set my body up square to the line, with my eyes over the ball or just inside (depends on your aim) with the putter set up square to the line and the ball in a place where the putter makes contact with just on the uptake of the stroke (at least I believe that I stated it correctly).

I don't need to be a pioneer when others have already made a path for me.

0

Share this post


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

I mentioned before that PGA pro Mike Hulbert putted one-handed. If it was good enough for him, couldn't it be good enough for some of those in this forum, too?

One, very pedestrian pro putted for awhile with one hand. EVERY other pro in the history of the game putts with both hands, and you really want to use that one mediocre outlier as your argument that others should putt one handed? :doh:

0

Share this post


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

Watch it on television and see if you agree. Of course, a putt, depending on its length, does not have a lot of shoulder movement. Typically, the shoulders move the arms, and the arms experience little/no independent movement. The float load is described on this site. If you've got to putt like that to make the putt go where you aim, my thought was that putter does not fit you at all, and you are full of compensations.

Then, you would say the same about Snedeker's pop putt? His putt is the same as mine, except he has little more arm movement.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then, you would say the same about Snedeker's pop putt? His putt is the same as mine, except he has little more arm movement.

I know what Sned's looks like and his setup ... I have no idea about what you think you do and what you do.

That's not a knock on you or anyone else -- too many times, I've heard what guys think they do and when they see what they do on video ... they can't believe what they see ... me included.

0

Share this post


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

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • Thanks for your questions Swede. Regarding data for irons, if I understand what you are asking, the driver data can't really be correlated. Each iron would have it's own ideal launch conditions (launch angle, spin rate, ball speed) which would be based off of the player's swing speed.  The ball is designed to perform differently with longer clubs than shorter clubs, but if you can get dialed in with your driver, you'll be pretty close with the rest of the set also. The driver/shaft combo certainly affects the trajectory as well, and sometimes guys are playing the wrong ball and the wrong driver.  But what I see more often is a player who goes through the fitting process when purchasing a driver and irons, then they play whatever ball happens to be on sale.  It would be like using a different driver every time they played!  When trying to optimize trajectory, the ball is a good place to start.  Why buy a new driver when moving to a different ball can make the difference?  Sometimes the ball will help some, but to get where a player needs to be a different shaft or driver might be needed also. A lot of guys will go through a ball fitting whenever they get a new driver, which is not a bad idea.  Usually, if your previous driver fit properly and the new one fits properly, the ball will work just fine.  I usually suggest going through a ball fitting at least every-other-season just to make sure.  Sometimes our swings evolve...maybe your swing has improved or swing speed has increased, or it could be the other way, but it's good to make sure your stuff is correct.
    • To be clear, I have never talked about "the Titleist fitting." I don't know what they do to fit players. I'm simply talking about their recommendation to start at the green and work backward, but ultimately to consider all the shots you play in a round of golf, not just ones with the driver. I'm not talking about "here's two balls, try them out." I'm talking about the idea of "here are 30 kinds of golf ball. I eliminated a few because they felt horrible off my putter. I eliminated a few more for poor performance around the green. I eliminated some more for poor spin or flight with my irons. Of the six that I had left, these two performed well with my driver, so one of them is a good fit. If they have a super official "ball fitting" process, I wasn't talking about that, nor was I talking about a "here is a Pro V1 and a Pro V1x… hit some shots and pick one." So… I wish you hadn't devoted that much attention to the "Titleist method" in your post when that's not at all what I was asking. My point was… I'm skeptical that the Bridgestone method (only hitting a few balls, not doing much to account for consistent tee heights, ball position, players getting "warmed up" during the process, etc., only using the driver and disregarding the rest of the shots) is a great method, either.
    • 1. Golf is elitist. So far from true but I still get way too many people who chuckle at my interest in golf- as if I should be embarrassed that I enjoy such a snobby pastime.  2. Just swing your swing- and stop obsessing about getting a "pretty" swing. Sorry, but that's not sound advice - when I get rid of the key elements that are holding me back, yes, sure- then I'll make the most of what I've got. I'll swing that swing. Until then, not a chance, now that I have learned about the fundamentals . There's work to be done to make my future golf far more enjoyable and competitive.   3. Lessons are expensive. Nope- look hard enough and you can find quality swing guidance at a reasonable price.  I agree with lotsa others above but these resonate for me at my level of play right and interactions with people now. 
    • Let me address the things you mentioned and clarify a little bit, because I think there is some misconceptions on some of the aspects. There is perception that the Titleist fitting covers everything and the Bridgestone only addresses the driver.  One of the biggest issues I have with the Titleist method is it's not a real golf ball fitting.  They give you a Pro V1 2-ball pack and a Pro V1x 2-ball pack and basically tell you to hit some shots and see which one you like best. So regardless of swing speed, handicap, launch numbers or anything else, they are saying you can pick this ball or that ball.  The other models in Titleist's line are not included and competitor models are not included.  I know for a fact that there are many players who don't fit into either of those models, but Titleist doesn't offer other options or comparisons.  They claim the Pro V1 and Pro V1x have the best distance, best short game spin, best flight characteristics, softest feel and great durability.  I hate to tell everyone, but there is no such thing as a perfect golf ball.  The laws of physics and aerodynamics apply to Titleist just like everyone else.  A ball that is designed for high spin will not be as long as a lower spinning model and will tend to curve more, and a ball designed for distance will not have the same type of performance on approach shots and around the green. Titleist also doesn't offer any data that shows how those models stack-up for players, or how they perform compared to their ideal numbers.  Sure, people love the spin that they get around the green, but do they need that much spin?  Is all that spin hurting them in other areas?  High spin actually gets a lot of players in trouble and costs them more strokes than it saves them.  Similar to the Titleist method that has players go through the process on their own, after a Bridgestone tech works with a player and their driver and shows them the data, a 2-ball pack is given to the player to continue their testing on the course with irons and short game.  As far as the number of shots on the launch monitor is concerned, you are correct...typically 3 or 4 shots with each ball is recorded.  It's not a lot, but it's 6-8 more shots over a launch monitor than a Titleist fitting. Obviously it would be great to do more, but a fitting could easily stretch to an hour per player, so a typical 4-5 hour event we could only help a handful of players.  A normal fitting takes about 15 min, so that is 16-20 players per event.  At that number, the cost of each fitting was right around $40/player.  If an hour was spent with each player, it would cost almost $200/player which isn't cost effective. On the launch angle issue, what I said was there are many things that can affect the launch, including the ball.  I didn't say 2* wasn't possible and I didn't say in the example I posted that only 1/2* could be attributed to the ball.  Honestly, I can't say how much of that 2* is related to moving to a different model...even if other variables like tee height, ball position were removed, the difference in loft will vary from player-to-player due to different swing speeds, swing paths, angle of attack etc which is unique to everyone.  Plus depending on what model is used first and which model is recommended could have a smaller or larger affect than other combinations.  You could probably make the same case for every category if you wanted though, right?  You could say how much of the difference in spin was caused by the ball change and how much was the result of some other variable?  Spin is more important than the launch angle, so even if the l.a. stayed the same, the drop in spin would have made a nice difference by itself.  But we know the player was launching the ball too low with too much spin, a lower spinning/higher launching ball was recommended and the results were a more efficient trajectory and an increase in performance. I believe the key is to be able to show a player in black and white what their launch conditions are with their current ball and how it compares to their ideal numbers.  If you can't show a player the areas that need improvement, then how can you confidently recommend the best ball for them?  The truth is, most people are playing the wrong ball, so it's not that hard to make an improvement, and honestly there are probably a handful of different makes/models that would be better.    
    • 1-5. Putting matters most. Uh huh. What are the chances I gain 2 strokes because I (or just about any golfer) 4 putted? It's happened. Rarely. What are the chances I (or just about any golfer) hit an errant tee shot and blow 2 strokes? 40% every tee shot for me. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Dragondrake
      Dragondrake
      (57 years old)
    2. Mistabigevil
      Mistabigevil
      (36 years old)
    3. Taylor56
      Taylor56
      (61 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon