Are Golfers Better on Faster or Slower Greens?

[billchao]

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

Interesting, when you put it into this perspective. Two to four feet out of 8 to 12 feet doesn't sound like a lot at all?

I wonder why it feels like so much more?

It kind of is when you're trying to hit a 4.25" hole, isn't it?

Say you have a 10' putt and you hit it with exactly 10' weight, on a slow green you'd end up 2' short and on a fast green, 2' long, neither of those are desirable results (though the argument could be made that the putt had a chance of being holed on the fast green). The longer the putt, the greater the difference before you adjust.

36 minutes ago, lastings said:

and a putt that is hit a bit too far is punished more on a faster green.

And a putt that's hit a bit too short is punished more on a slower green.

10 minutes ago, BaconNEggs said:

I tend to over read break and under putt distance on slow greens. My stroke tends to be less smooth as well, which leads to poor contact and bad starting lines.

Same here. Faster greens don't expose the flaws in my stroke as much because I can make shorter strokes. Yea my distance control can be an issue, but I'm naive enough to think I don't have problems with distance control on slower greens.

[Lihu]

20 minutes ago, billchao said:

It kind of is when you're trying to hit a 4.25" hole, isn't it?

Probably.

 

20 minutes ago, billchao said:

Same here. Faster greens don't expose the flaws in my stroke as much because I can make shorter strokes.

In general smaller actions are easier to control, so it's not necessarily that they are "exposed" but maybe just not present?

[JonMA1]

The times I've played on fast greens I didn't think it was very difficult to adjust. My home course probably has a bit more speed than the average course I play, but at the same time, they are probably flatter than average.

On the flip side, I've played greens (early in the season) that were ridiculously slow.  Trying to guess the necessary speed was just impossible for me. I hated it.

Hopefully not too far off-topic, but while really fast greens don't seem more difficult for putting, I do have trouble getting the ball close on chips and pitches.

[Fourputt]

51 minutes ago, Lihu said:

 

In general smaller actions are easier to control, so it's not necessarily that they are "exposed" but maybe just not present?

Unless those small actions on fast greens bring the yips into play.  I've gone through a couple of bouts with them as I aged, and found ways that work for me to help counter them.  Those fear factor yips on fast greens can play a big part in causing some pretty comical putts.  I have been known to leave a 20 foot putt 10 feet short, then knock the next putt 10 feet past the hole.  That's a extreme example, but I've never experienced that sort of yippy behavior on slow greens. 

I've also gone through a period lasting 2 or 3 rounds where I was yipping on 3-4 foot putts, and it was solely the speed of the greens that was causing it.  2 days after that tournament I played on the slow greens here at home with no issues at all.  I know that deceleration was causing the problem, but I couldn't seem to figure out how to fix it, even struggling on the practice green between rounds.  Ultimately I did pretty much cure them, but it's still always in the back of my mind when I go to Denver for a tournament.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Fourputt

[GolfLug]

Fast greens are more fun, usually roll truer and sooner or later you can adjust as long as they stimp a Max of 11 or so. On the same token I guess slower greens can be easier to score on as long as they are not the kind that have not been mowed in few days.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, lastings said:

Aggressive would not be the right word.  mishit or misjudged would be better.  

You can mis-hit or mis-judge a putt on a slow green, too. And just as the one you mis-hit or mis-judge a little long goes past the hole, the one you mis-hit or mis-judge a bit short goes much shorter on a slower green.

And vice versa, too: the one you mis-judge or mis-hit a bit short gets a lot closer to the hole on a faster green than it does on a slower green… and vice versa for the ones hit past the hole, too. They all cancel each other out.

3 hours ago, lastings said:

10 handicaps are simply worse putters than PGA players, and a putt that is hit a bit too far is punished more on a faster green.

Not much worse.

And again… a putt that is hit a bit too soft is rewarded more than it would be on a slower green.

3 hours ago, lastings said:

But, I do think faster greens expand that separation value. even if it's only by a little. 

Based on all I know, I think they slightly narrow the separation value.

53 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

Unless those small actions on fast greens bring the yips into play.

People can yip on slow greens too. Let's not take ONE experience and blow it out of proportion.

53 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

I've also gone through a period lasting 2 or 3 rounds where I was yipping on 3-4 foot putts, and it was solely the speed of the greens that was causing it.  2 days after that tournament I played on the slow greens here at home with no issues at all.

Uh, so you yipped on a tournament that was probably not at your home course, but in your mind it was "solely the speed of the greens" causing it? It wasn't that it was a) a tournament, and b) not your home course?

53 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

I know that deceleration was causing the problem

Oy.

Most yippers accelerate.

Meanwhile, the best putters in the world tend to decelerate into the ball when putting.

[No Mulligans]

This is all a hypothesis:

Let's assume for illustration purposes that my putting tempo is pefectly constant and distance is controlled by the length of the swing of the putt. 

For a 9 foot putt on a 9 stimp I take my putter back 12 inches.  On a flat putt if I take my putter back 2 inches too far I'll be let's say 2 feet past the hole.

For a 12 foot putt on a 12 stimp I take my putter back about 12 inches.  On a flat putt if I take my putter back 2 inches too far I'll be more than 2 feet past the hole.  The faster green magnifies errors in distance control.

The same argument holds for errors in tempo with the swing length held constant.

I have two different putting carpets with different speeds, I'll try to test this hypothesis tomorrow.

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by No Mulligans

[Jack Watson]

For me quality of roll is number one or I guess smoothness.  For short putts which to me is the biggest part of putting I’d rather have a faster surface most times.

Distance control to me is all feel.  Don’t have a formula for it,  but faster greens are probably a bit tougher for me lag putting wise especially downhill...

Thats been my experience.

[406pat]

42 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

This is all a hypothesis:

Let's assume for illustration purposes that my putting tempo is pefectly constant and distance is controlled by the length of the swing of the putt. 

For a 9 foot putt on a 9 stimp I take my putter back 12 inches.  On a flat putt if I take my putter back 2 inches too far I'll be let's say 2 feet past the hole.

For a 12 foot putt on a 12 stimp I take my putter back about 12 inches.  On a flat putt if I take my putter back 2 inches too far I'll be more than 2 feet past the hole.  The faster green magnifies errors in distance control.

The same argument holds for errors in tempo with the swing length held constant.

I have two different putting carpets with different speeds, I'll try to test this hypothesis tomorrow.

 

No need to test. It can be proven with the equation V2^2=V1^2+2ad where V1 is initial velocity V2 is  final velocity, a is acceleration, and d is distance traveled. Lets say V1=10 ft/s and that is just enough to go 10 ft so V2=0. Solve for acceleration and you get -5 ft/s^2. Next assume a faster green with the same stroke and the putt goes 2' past. Change d to 12 feet and acceleration equals -4.167 ft/s^2. Finally assume a slower green same stroke and the putt stops 2' short. Change d to 8' and acceleration equals -6.25 ft/s^2. Looking at the differences between slow/control and fast/control the acceleration of the slow green is 25% different and the fast green is 16% different. So a green must be 25% slower to have the same impact on distance as a green only 16% faster.

Put another way, if the acceleration of the fast green was changed as much as the slow green, the value would be -3.7 ft/s^2 and the distance traveled would be 13.3 feet or 3.3 feet long. If acceleration is the only variable, distance becomes more sensitive to initial velocity as acceleration approaches zero. 

Edited February 8, 2018 by 406pat
clarification

[iacas]

32 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

Let's assume for illustration purposes that my putting tempo is pefectly constant and distance is controlled by the length of the swing of the putt. 

For a 9 foot putt on a 9 stimp I take my putter back 12 inches.  On a flat putt if I take my putter back 2 inches too far I'll be let's say 2 feet past the hole.

For a 12 foot putt on a 12 stimp I take my putter back about 12 inches.  On a flat putt if I take my putter back 2 inches too far I'll be more than 2 feet past the hole.  The faster green magnifies errors in distance control.

First of all, you'd take it back 9 inches to send the ball 12 feet on a 12 stimp if that's what sends the ball 9 feet on a 9 stimp green.

Second of all, it's not a linear deal, it's more than linear.

Third… we know this already. There are pros and cons. The studies I'd read suggest that the pros of fast greens ever so slightly more than make up for the cons. Nobody seems to be talking about any more than one of them at a time, favoring whichever side of the question they land upon.

32 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

I have two different putting carpets with different speeds, I'll try to test this hypothesis tomorrow.

No offense, but that's a horrible test and a waste of time, IMO.

[Piz]

8 feet uphill?  Fast is fine.  8 feet downhill?  The slower the better.  If the putt doesn't drop; I'd rather it still be in the same area code.

[No Mulligans]

9 hours ago, iacas said:

Third… we know this already. There are pros and cons. The studies I'd read suggest that the pros of fast greens ever so slightly more than make up for the cons. Nobody seems to be talking about any more than one of them at a time, favoring whichever side of the question they land upon.

No offense, but that's a horrible test and a waste of time, IMO.

Pros and cons... Speed, read, bead.  Break into individual components to have a better understanding.  I wasn't concluding faster greens were not easier, I was just pointing out one of the elements.

For me:

1) The faster the green the harder it is to get the speed right.  Proved by equation.

2) The faster the green the more break there will be for the same slope.  Proved by aimpoint.

3) The faster the green, in general the better the maintenance and therefore the truer the roll and the more likely the ball will go where you aim.

4)  How well you can control a longer stroke vs. a shorter stroke.  This may be the biggest element for me favoring faster greens.

Other...?

Edited February 8, 2018 by No Mulligans

[klineka]

13 hours ago, Fourputt said:

I've also gone through a period lasting 2 or 3 rounds where I was yipping on 3-4 foot putts, and it was solely the speed of the greens that was causing it.  2 days after that tournament I played on the slow greens here at home with no issues at all.  I know that deceleration was causing the problem, but I couldn't seem to figure out how to fix it

So it wasnt the speed of the green that was causing the yips, it was the deceleration because your physical skill of the putting stroke wasnt good/consistent enough to putt on a variety of different speed greens.

 

5 hours ago, Piz said:

8 feet uphill?  Fast is fine.  8 feet downhill?  The slower the better.  If the putt doesn't drop; I'd rather it still be in the same area code.

You can leave that 8 foot putt uphill on fast greens short or long just like you can leave the 8 foot downhill on slow greens short or long.

Just because the putt is downhill on fast greens doesnt mean every single putt is automatically going to roll 6 feet past. 

Based on a lot of the responses in this thread it seems like a lot more people struggle with putting speed than I previously realized. I've never really had much of an issue with distance control and neither have my buddies who I play with regularly. If we go to a course that has significantly different green speeds than we are used to, it might take us a hole or 2 to get used to it, but more often than not for our long distance putts we typically get it within a 3 foot circle around the hole.

In looking back at my GameGolf rounds, I've 3 putted 5 times in my last 5 rounds, which have been on 5 different courses and 3 rounds being in South Carolina and 2 November rounds in Ohio which probably had slower greens than typical. 

[iacas]

2 hours ago, No Mulligans said:

Pros and cons... Speed, read, bead.

No, this list:

20 hours ago, iacas said:

Slow Greens…	Fast Greens…
… have less break	… have more break
… tend to be bumpier	… tend to be truer
… have a smaller disparity between uphill and downhill putts	… have a greater disparity between uphill and downhill putts
… require a larger stroke	… require a smaller stroke
… allow for the area immediately around the hole to be sloped 2-4%	… generally require that the area immediately around the hole be sloped at 1-2%

That's about all I can think of. Green = an advantage, however small.

Not listed: the confidence you get from either. Why? Because poor putters might be more confident on slow greens and good putters are almost always more confident on truer greens. I think the studies may hint at the idea that, given time to acclimate to the faster greens, even poorer (relatively) putters appreciate the trueness of the roll.

Those are the pros and cons, not "read, bead, and speed."

Slow greens are less speed sensitive and have less break. Fast greens are truer and require a smaller stroke.

2 hours ago, No Mulligans said:

1) The faster the green the harder it is to get the speed right.  Proved by equation.

I could use the same equations and arrive at the opposite conclusion, because you're completely ignoring stroke length, and the fact that pendulum acceleration isn't linear for the amplitude. It's exponential. Thus two inches used to go from a 14 to a 16" backstroke produces a smaller increase in impact velocity than two inches used to go from 20 to 22".

Basic acceleration stuff - there's a "squared" unit in there. You used it in determining the slow-down rate of the ball, but not the acceleration rate of the putter.

Your other reasons were in the chart I already provided.

1 hour ago, klineka said:

Just because the putt is downhill on fast greens doesnt mean every single putt is automatically going to roll 6 feet past.

Right. People have good touch. A lot of downhill putts are left just short… or just trickle in. Johnny Miller, if he has a putt he has to make or win, prefers downhill putts, because he at least knows the ball will get to the hole and all he has to do is manage the line, and  he gets to do that with a smaller stroke. Plus the downhill putts funnel to the hole while uphill putts hit off-line are pushed away from the hole.

1 hour ago, klineka said:

Based on a lot of the responses in this thread it seems like a lot more people struggle with putting speed than I previously realized.

Except they don't, not nearly as much as they're pretending here, because… they're not that much worse than PGA Tour players.

And, if they are bad at distance control, they should read the "DO NOT ACCELERATE" topic again…

People's own perceptions about their game are weird. I played with a guy who hit one wedge shot to tap-in range, and missed the green with his four others. At the end of the round he said "man my wedge was good today!"

[The Recreational Golfer]

I like faster greens because in my experience they are better cared for and thus roll truer.

[Mr. Desmond]

I am comfortable with faster greens, but since switching putters, my aim and reads are great, but distance control is inconsistent. Thinking about counterbalancing for a heavier all around club.

Need Aimpoint Express 2 and Speed Classes. Tough to find.

Edited February 11, 2018 by Mr. Desmond

[JonMA1]

On 2/8/2018 at 10:32 AM, iacas said:

People's own perceptions about their game are weird.

This is certainly true with me. I don't properly record putting through GameGolf so everything is memory or perception based and probably not very accurate.

On 2/8/2018 at 8:28 AM, klineka said:

Just because the putt is downhill on fast greens doesnt mean every single putt is automatically going to roll 6 feet past. 

Agreed. If anything, I may be more apt to leave a putt short on faster greens just from being overly cautious.

[iacas]

This guy is dumb.

At least I'm pretty sure it's not @Ty_Webb. 😄

Also, many average courses have steeper slopes (particularly where the hole is cut) than PGA Tour greens, where they rarely cut the hole on a spot that isn't 1 or maybe 2% slope.