USGA, R&A Limit Green Reading Materials

[iacas]

Maybe we're all overthinking it. Maybe it's as simple as "Players may not use anything that displays the directions or amounts of slope on a green." That would be a bit of a judgment call, but it seems fairly clear, and wouldn't forbid other historically acceptable yardage books or other pre-written materials. It would also allow golfers to write down yardages to carry a ridge or a tier, or to mark where there's a bowl or some other feature on the green.

[iacas]

http://golfweek.com/2018/03/21/green-reading-books-the-masters-makes-own-rules/

Quote

In discussing upcoming preparations for the Masters, both Rory McIlroy and Jordan Spieth noted that they won’t be able refer to the detailed readouts.

“Augusta doesn’t provide you with a green-contour book, like the other tournaments do,” McIlroy said. “So you’ve got to sort of figure it out yourself.”

and

Quote

As for the impact on their games, McIlroy said he actually stores green-reading books with his caddie to prevent overanalysis.

“When I carry it myself, I find I get into the habit of taking it out on every green and just looking at it needlessly,” McIlroy said.

Quote

Spieth said some of this best putting rounds have been without a green-reading book.

“You can overanalyze some of the information you’re given,” Spieth said. “But other than that, I’ve still used greens books and had them been important in wins, as well.”

 

From what I wrote earlier, which generated… nothing.

On 11/9/2017 at 11:41 AM, iacas said:

Maybe we're all overthinking it. Maybe it's as simple as "Players may not use anything that displays the directions or amounts of slope on a green." That would be a bit of a judgment call, but it seems fairly clear, and wouldn't forbid other historically acceptable yardage books or other pre-written materials. It would also allow golfers to write down yardages to carry a ridge or a tier, or to mark where there's a bowl or some other feature on the green.

That would eliminate players measuring and writing down their own numbers, which maybe the USGA/R&A don't want… but I see no other way. Either you ban all such numbers and arrows and contour maps (those elevation lines), or you don't. Because you can't differentiate between one that's printed by a machine and one that's hand-printed.

[NEhomer]

I'm thoroughly failing to understand how printed information of this type would influence one's perception of direction and force while standing over a putt.

[iacas]

11 minutes ago, NEhomer said:

I'm thoroughly failing to understand how printed information of this type would influence one's perception of direction and force while standing over a putt.

Really?

Of course it does. Not when standing over the putt, but in determining the line before you hit it, definitely.

[NEhomer]

38 minutes ago, iacas said:

Really?

Of course it does. Not when standing over the putt, but in determining the line before you hit it, definitely.

Well ok if you say so. 

I'm standing over a putt that breaks downhill. The cognition that the drop in elevation is  precisely 13.5 inches just doesn't seem to be useful or critical information. 

[saevel25]

3 minutes ago, NEhomer said:

I'm standing over a putt that breaks downhill.

It better break downhill

I laugh to myself when someone says, "That putt broke uphill!!!". No it didn't, the putt fooled your eyes.

4 minutes ago, NEhomer said:

The cognition that the drop in elevation is  precisely 13.5 inches just doesn't seem to be useful or critical information. 

What if the golfer sees what looks like a pretty subtle slope, yet their book says the slope is 4%. That is pretty steep. Conflicting information, especially one that goes against the golfers visual perception, will cause a golfer to think more and try to rationalize if the 4% is right or their eyes are right.

[iacas]

46 minutes ago, NEhomer said:

Well ok if you say so.

I'm standing over a putt that breaks downhill. The cognition that the drop in elevation is  precisely 13.5 inches just doesn't seem to be useful or critical information. 

Given a hole location, a ball location, and a known slope (say, a 2% slope from right to left and downhill at 45°), I can not only tell you exactly how much break to play but how hard to hit the putt.

The charts take some of the mystery, some of the instinct, some of the actual skill of green reading out of the players hands.

At least with, say, AimPoint Express, you've still gotta have a skill of feeling the slope with your feet, making little adjustments for the rest of the line, the uphill/downhill, etc. It's not just looking at a piece of paper, you have to rely on your body and your feel to create the read.

With a chart you can just crunch some numbers (or have your caddie do it). It's point-and-click.

[iacas]

https://golfweek.com/2018/07/19/usga-ra-have-agreed-to-severely-restrict-green-reading-books/

USGA, R&A have agreed to severely restrict green-reading books

CARNOUSTIE, Scotland — The U.S. Golf Association and R&A plan to severely restrict the information allowed in green-reading books.

Beginning Jan. 1, 2019, the move will effectively render the books impractical to players who have increasingly leaned on them for reading putts.

Three golf industry rules experts confirmed the plan to Golfweek. The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the move.

[saevel25]

I have no issue with this. Green reading should be a skill on actually reading a green, not how to interpret a graph/chart. 

[billchao]

So is this going to lead to more AimPoint on tour or more plumb bobbing? 

[onthehunt526]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

https://golfweek.com/2018/07/19/usga-ra-have-agreed-to-severely-restrict-green-reading-books/

USGA, R&A have agreed to severely restrict green-reading books

CARNOUSTIE, Scotland — The U.S. Golf Association and R&A plan to severely restrict the information allowed in green-reading books.

Beginning Jan. 1, 2019, the move will effectively render the books impractical to players who have increasingly leaned on them for reading putts.

Three golf industry rules experts confirmed the plan to Golfweek. The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the move.

It's not the arrows they're concerned with correct? Because pros have been dividing greens into quadrants and putting arrows on the green chart for years.

I think it's the numbers associated with the green reading books that the governing bodies are concerned with.

I agree green-reading is an essential skill to playing good golf. I believe it is an SV3 skill. We don't want to turn this into a game of who can interpret a topographical map the best. Make golfers actually do the work and read the greens.

I, however am okay with them having the arrows showing general direction of undulation just without the numbers of slope percentage.

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, onthehunt526 said:

It's not the arrows they're concerned with correct? Because pros have been dividing greens into quadrants and putting arrows on the green chart for years.

I think so.

[Vinsk]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

I think so.

I’m sorry I don’t know a lot about this topic but I’m wondering how long these detailed books have been used? I know golfers today are better today than the past ( no brainer there) but has the use of these books created much better putters? Is Snedeker or Kisner or even Faxon a much better putter than Crenshaw ever was? I don’t care for the pros pulling out these 2” thick books and taking 2 minutes to work a putt....read the damn putt and make your stroke. Am I wrong here?

[iacas]

@Vinsk, what's your question?

They've been around the past 3-5 years. The tech has been around for about 10, tops. They have lasers that can measure a green every cm to within 1mm, for rebuilding greens, etc. Those laser things can also be used to create super accurate maps like these.

[Vinsk]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

@Vinsk, what's your question?

They've been around the past 3-5 years. The tech has been around for about 10, tops. They have lasers that can measure a green every cm to within 1mm, for rebuilding greens, etc. Those laser things can also be used to create super accurate maps like these.

Yeah sorry. My question: I think there is too much dependence on these books. They call a compass illegal but these books with all that information are fine? Is this the general consensus on why they are being questioned to use?

[Golfingdad]

I wonder if this will apply to aimpoint charts?

I don’t mind it either way.  They’re just further defining what skills they feel should be important.

Heck, I know it sounds ridiculous but I wouldn’t even care if they banned yardage books and the like altogether.  Make the players go completely by feel. :)

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

I wonder if this will apply to aimpoint charts?

No.

[saevel25]

Are these charts provided to the golfer by an outside source (i.e not the golfer/caddie)?