Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
billchao

Mark Broadie's Insights on Putting

Note: This thread is 1937 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!

15 posts / 1872 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Mark Broadie has studied the best putters in the world and shared some of his findings:

Quote:
The best putters have something in common: They're aggressive. They one-putt more often, they leave fewer putts short, and they leave slightly longer comebackers. "In my great putting rounds," Faxon said, "I noticed that when I missed, I always had to mark the ball, because it would go far enough past the hole that it wasn't a tap-in. I made most of those three-foot comebackers, but it always made for a little more angst than just tapping in."

Brad Faxon was the #1 putter on the PGA Tour from 1992-2002. He and Broadie are saying that golfers will gain more if they focus on making the first putt instead of worrying about three-putting.

Here is his summary:

Quote:

Takeaway 1: Get short putts to the hole. The better-putting 80-shooters leave 12 percent of their 10-footers short, compared with 17 percent for 90-shooters. [For pros, it's only 7 percent.]

Takeaway 2: Short putts [say, three to eight feet] matter most. Better short putting leads to more one-putts and fewer three-putts.

Takeaway 3: Distance control matters. As Pat Goss, Luke Donald's short-game coach, has said, "I don't think there's a more important skill in golf than controlling distance in putting."

Takeaway 4: Compare your putting with the benchmark: 80-shooters average about one three-putt per round, 90-shooters average about two, and 100-shooters about three. If you average more three-putts than your benchmark, consider a putting lesson.

http://www.golf.com/instruction/these-are-secrets-worlds-greatest-putters

Share this post


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

Thanks for posting.  I still fall a bit short more than long on my putts.  My putting objective this winter is to work a bit more on visualizing the putt's path going through and past the hole instead of just dying in.

Share this post


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

This pretty much goes along with what @david_wedzik and I have been saying:

From 15 feet and in , absolutely, get the ball to the hole. Amateurs leave a surprising number of shorter putts short of the hole. Those are the putts you actually have a decent chance of making, so get them there. Even bad speed should leave you a high, high-percentage putt (like 3 feet and in) if you miss.

From 25+ feet, we encourage everyone to hit the ball the exact distance of the hole. If you're trying for three feet past and you're off by three feet, you'll three-putt far too often. If you're shooting for the distance of the hole, and you're three feet past, you'll still make that putt a lot more often.

So yes, try to make the makeable putts, and do what you can to two-putt the three-puttable putts knowing that they'll occasionally go in anyway.

Edit: Just read the article. Pretty goofy that he based the ranking on putts per round. Brad Faxon never really hit a bunch of GIR. Yeah, he was a good putter and all, but still a goofy way to base the stats. But there was also no ShotLink, etc. back then, so… maybe the best he could do, and if the results match the "eye test," maybe they're "good enough."

Share this post


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

This pretty much goes along with what @david_wedzik and I have been saying:

From 15 feet and in, absolutely, get the ball to the hole. Amateurs leave a surprising number of shorter putts short of the hole. Those are the putts you actually have a decent chance of making, so get them there. Even bad speed should leave you a high, high-percentage putt (like 3 feet and in) if you miss.

From 25+ feet, we encourage everyone to hit the ball the exact distance of the hole. If you're trying for three feet past and you're off by three feet, you'll three-putt far too often. If you're shooting for the distance of the hole, and you're three feet past, you'll still make that putt a lot more often.

So yes, try to make the makeable putts, and do what you can to two-putt the three-puttable putts knowing that they'll occasionally go in anyway.

Edit: Just read the article. Pretty goofy that he based the ranking on putts per round. Brad Faxon never really hit a bunch of GIR. Yeah, he was a good putter and all, but still a goofy way to base the stats. But there was also no ShotLink, etc. back then, so… maybe the best he could do, and if the results match the "eye test," maybe they're "good enough."

One addition that needs to be reiterated for sure. From inside 15 ft-ish (maybe even 10-12 feet depending on player level) focus on trying to make them all as typical distance control will leave most players only 1-3 feet past the hole anyway and that is a very high percentage make zone. The reason I mentioned some players moving this "go for it" distance down to 10 feet is that they may not all have "typical" distance control :-).

I'll agree with Erik that the putts per round is a bad benchmark though I'm not even sure if these matching with an "eye test" carries any weight. I'd throw it out there that we have always seen this list of players with lower putts per round than most and then "look" at them as the best putters. Consider when you buy a new car and then notice everyone else who has one of those cars (never happens to me as I drive a Lotus...err... a SMART car with Golf Evolution wrap :-D). You hear all the time how great of a putter Faxon is because people have seen the stats and then you "notice" him making more puts than others.

A quick glance back at the statistics of Pavin, Frost, Crenshaw and Faxon show them as FAR BELOW average in the GIR category (Furyk had some very good years mixed in with not so great years early on). Many years during that stretch they had rankings b/w 100-180 in that category. So, the number of putts clearly shows them as relatively good putters (since there were also a number of other tour players in the same range in GIR ranks) but saying they are the best 5 is misleading at best IMO. I realize that nothing I bring up here is backed with 100% certainty but, at best, this is a surprising use of statistics from Broadie.

The important stuff in the article is clear. Go for it inside 10-15 feet (depending on skill level) and hit the ball the correct distance outside 25 feet. You shouldn't care if you make those... just NEVER three putt.

Share this post


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

This pretty much goes along with what @david_wedzik and I have been saying:

From 15 feet and in, absolutely, get the ball to the hole. Amateurs leave a surprising number of shorter putts short of the hole. Those are the putts you actually have a decent chance of making, so get them there. Even bad speed should leave you a high, high-percentage putt (like 3 feet and in) if you miss.

What do you think causes amateurs to leave shorter putts short of the hole?

Is that due to poor putter fitting, or is it just an adjustment that golfers don't make?

Share this post


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

What do you think causes amateurs to leave shorter putts short of the hole?

Is that due to poor putter fitting, or is it just an adjustment that golfers don't make?

Putter fitting is certainly a small factor here but it's much more the mindset. Understanding the stats can change that. I would also say that if you find yourself leaving a larger percentage than normal short from inside the 10-15 foot range it may be because you lack confidence in the 3 foot range for some reason. Another reason why spending practice time on the 3-8 foot range is beneficial.

Share this post


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

Who is not supposed to make the short putts?  The  general expectation is that short putts are 'easy peasy' and ought to get in.  That mental expectation brings tension to the mind, and the stroke. We all know that every putt is make-able, and every putt is miss-able.

I'll tell an incredible story, true too.  Played with a chap, i know him well, on golf day, no pressure,  stableford winner gets hat so rules are bendable.  His technique very poor, putting too. On short putts his tension so great, his belief that missing the 3 foot putt would bring him such loss of face that he would not permit his stroked ball to reach the cup.  He would putt and swiftly   reach out with his putter to guide the ball into the hole. Poor lad was so full of insecurities that i, and the others, had no business addressing that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is not supposed to make the short putts?  The  general expectation is that short putts are 'easy peasy' and ought to get in.  That mental expectation brings tension to the mind, and the stroke. We all know that every putt is make-able, and every putt is miss-able.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, or what question you're really asking.

I'll tell an incredible story, true too.  Played with a chap, i know him well, on golf day, no pressure,  stableford winner gets hat so rules are bendable.  His technique very poor, putting too. On short putts his tension so great, his belief that missing the 3 foot putt would bring him such loss of face that he would not permit his stroked ball to reach the cup.  He would putt and swiftly   reach out with his putter to guide the ball into the hole. Poor lad was so full of insecurities that i, and the others, had no business addressing that day.

So he had the yips or something. I'm still not sure what the point of this post has been.

Share this post


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

This pretty much goes along with what @david_wedzik and I have been saying:

From 15 feet and in, absolutely, get the ball to the hole. Amateurs leave a surprising number of shorter putts short of the hole. Those are the putts you actually have a decent chance of making, so get them there. Even bad speed should leave you a high, high-percentage putt (like 3 feet and in) if you miss.

From 25+ feet, we encourage everyone to hit the ball the exact distance of the hole. If you're trying for three feet past and you're off by three feet, you'll three-putt far too often. If you're shooting for the distance of the hole, and you're three feet past, you'll still make that putt a lot more often.

So yes, try to make the makeable putts, and do what you can to two-putt the three-puttable putts knowing that they'll occasionally go in anyway.

Edit: Just read the article. Pretty goofy that he based the ranking on putts per round. Brad Faxon never really hit a bunch of GIR. Yeah, he was a good putter and all, but still a goofy way to base the stats. But there was also no ShotLink, etc. back then, so… maybe the best he could do, and if the results match the "eye test," maybe they're "good enough."

Isn't relative pitching / chipping ability a major factor in lowering putts per round too?

Paul Runyan advocated a dual approach as well from about the same point where he said the 'never-up, never-in' principle gave way to the 'lag principle'.

Knowing what was realistically possible seemed to be important in managing his performance expectations so he wouldn't grind his confidence down with misdirected frustration.

With a go-for-it range out to 15' and a lag range starting at 25', how do you handle the in-between of 15'-25'? Would it depend on the amount of green pitch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Did you see Dave's post above?

I did, but must have missed something.

I read it as:

0-15' (or slightly less depending on skill) = don't leave any short

15' - 25' = ?

25+' = lag as close as possible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So… what are you asking? Did you read LSW?

I'm asking about that in-between distance, wondering if there is a third strategy beyond never-up and lagging.

I haven't bought or read the book (yet). I didn't see the title of the book in the thread so I commented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

So… what are you asking? Did you read LSW?

I'm asking about that in-between distance, wondering if there is a third strategy beyond never-up and lagging.

I haven't bought or read the book (yet). I didn't see the title of the book in the thread so I commented.

Christmas is coming.  Ask Santa for it!

Share this post


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

I'm asking about that in-between distance, wondering if there is a third strategy beyond never-up and lagging.

I haven't bought or read the book (yet). I didn't see the title of the book in the thread so I commented.

Paul Runyan suggests an approach where he adjust his distance 'target' such that he would expect ~ 80% of his putts to reach the cup without going past the hole far enough to make a 3-putt likely.

He doesn't say, but I expect this percentage would decrease and the 'allowable' distance past the hole would increase gradually until he was in his 'lagging' range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 1937 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!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Affiliates

    SuperSpeed
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • Heard quite a bit of talk about this on sports talk radio right after. You don't have to mic up everybody, but I'd sure pick a few folks to mic up. Especially Justin Thomas!  He was very funny.  AMEN!!!
    • I wonder if they have jellies on the ISS
    • 143 yard carry with a 7i? That’s pretty impressive Julia. The one thing I will say about blades, is front to back dispersion is smaller than with cavity backs. If you say hit a SGI 7-iron as Mark did. You could hit 100 shots, with reasonable strikes (not sculls and fats). And you’d have a bigger distance dispersion than you would with a blade on similar strikes. That’s why a lot of Lower handicappers these days have some sort of blended set of irons. Whether it’s blades from say 7-iron through pitching wedge, player‘s cavity 5 and 6 iron, utility or GI 4-iron and a hybrid or utility 3-iron. I don’t know if I could jump from say 5-iron to a “Rinky Dinks” though because the gapping May become an issue.    In my opinion, at least in the scoring clubs, (7 or 8-iron through PW) blades could be an option for probably almost any golfer with an 18 handicap or lower, no problem. If I’m say 152 yards out and I hit my 9-iron, I want that 9-iron to go 152 yards, not 130 sometimes and 170 others. Sometimes they go 149 others they go 156. I’m ok with that distance dispersion.
    • Day 157 - June 3, 2020 Work on the full swing downtown (right arm does nothing), then 18 holes at Little Mountain with @Divot Master, @NatalieB, and @billchao.
    • Don't tighter fairways and heavier rough affect every golfer on the course? Of course, some of that thinking has changed over the years. They'll give them medium rough and invite them to try an approach to the green rather than just gouge a wedge onto the fairway. Then, they'll shave all the rough around the green, allowing the ball to run forever if the green is missed.  And yes, the speed of the green is the same for everyone. You seem to assume that every golfer's putting skill is the same, or the skill at placing shots on the green that don't get above the hole. That also is inapt.   What tee is she playing? Admittedly, some courses don't really set things up fairly for women. My buddy got his Sis involved with golf a few years back. She is now a full fledged golf nut, and has made a couple of lady friends who are the same. On occasion, we guys will give them strokes and scramble against them. They have beaten us a time or two, but it's surprising how often the matches end up tied. That just means we got the bet right!  One issue we find, especially on older courses, is when the senior men's tees are crammed into the same box as the lady's tees! We are all seniors, and it is not fair! Which prompted one of our group to say, "OK, there are the senior men's tees and the lady's tees. Where are the senior lady's tees?!" I think that's a valid question. As far as some of those older courses go, I've talked to course managers about distancing the senior men's tees from the lady's. I've told them that they don't have to build us distinct tee boxes. Just give us a closely mown area on one side of the fairway or the other, and put the markers there. Give the ladies a 60-70 yard advantage, Or, give the senior ladies their own teeing ground. So far, nothing has changed. So, I guess my arguments are unpersuasive.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays


×
×
  • 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...