dedalus101

Dude you really should care because it would make you look a little less like a self important jerk. despite your assurance the "science" is not conclusive. Here's hoping it gets there.

RandallT this thread started long before the proposed changes to the rules and the central point was not "hit it hard and hit the flagstick" but according to iacas "leaving the flagstick in is always beneficial... unless the flagstick is leaning towards you." That issue I am not at all convinced of, avoiding having to watch golfers smashing putts into flagstick is another issue altogether.

Iacas your argument is evolving...now it involves an entirely new putting style which is bang it had and hit the stick. I actually would agree that if you are going to hit it that hard you 'd be better off with the flagstick in, but that raises yet another issue apparently not yet scientifically resolved by your studies and that is what if you happen to be one of the vast majority of golfers who occasionally (or perhaps more than occasionally) push or pull putts. In that case the entire new "style" would almost certainly leave you far worse off. Just a note on your posting style as opposed to your putting style. It would be much more convincing if you tried to sound a little more "scientific" as in "From my study and experiments the evidence shows....." Sounds much more believable than "Its Physics...I'm right." In fact the more someone insists they are right and everyone else is wrong the less credibility you have. I am more than willing to be convinced by facts so lets hope you can nudge the USGA and the R&A into doing some comprehensive studies because I personally would hate to see putting become a "smash the flagstick operation."

sigh....a brief word a bout "science." All science is just theory until proven to the satisfaction of the great majority of scientist involved in the issues at hand. Iacas is a true believer because the definition of true believer fits him to a tee: true believer. noun. One who is deeply, sometimes fanatically devoted to a cause, organization, or person: “a band of true believers bonded together against all those who did not agree with them” (Theodore Draper). I mean come on he even has a website to argue with the USGA and R&A claiming that he is right and they are what? Dumb? Stupid? Uninformed? And yes posting a video of some guy slamming putts into a hole with a flagstick is not science, its a nice video but hey you could just as easily have posted a video of someone slamming putts into a nice welcoming hole without a flagstick, aka not science. Iacas claims to have done studies to prove his theory but also frankly it is not good science to trust statement of those who are (pardon the expression) true believers. And for the sake of those who missed the earlier point David Pelz is one hell of a putter and his study, good as it was, was not a study of "does the flagstick help or hurt in all cases" it was a study of "does the flagstick help when you don't have decent distance control." I say this because one third of the putts in his study were hit hard enough to go three feet past the hole (Pelz himself claims the best distance to aim for is 18" past the whole), one third were hit hard enough to go six feet past the hole and one third hard enough to go 9 feet past the hole. So scientifically speaking that study seems to conclude that there is a marginal benefit to leaving the flagstick in if you suffer from poor to terrible distance control. Perhaps, if iacas is sufficiently annoying to the USGA and the R&A who are now proposing to eliminate the two stroke penalty and just leave the flagstick in for those who want it, they will actually get down to business and do a real study that includes many more variables and then perhaps we will learn something definite but until then it is just irritating to hear someone say "I'm right and you, the USGA, the R&A, a goodly gaggle of pro golfers and frankly anyone who agrees with you....are wrong".

Alflighter, wish I could have warned you....iacas is a true believer that flagsticks always help. Ask him why most pros take it out he will tell you they aren't that smart, ask him why the USGA and the R&A think the flagstick makes no difference in scoring and they will send you to a website opposing the new rule ...which I suspect iacas might even be involved with again claiming that the flagstick will make it much easier to sink putts. Bottom line do what your experience tells you to do. It will be interesting if the new proposed rule is enacted to see what people's experience will be. I personally have bounced off flagsticks much more often than getting a "save" from a flagstick ...but that is just my experience.

Iacas is going to a lot of trouble to convince everyone to always keep the flagstick in. I can appreciate his commitment and his opinion and but beg to differ in one small regard and that is when a good putter who is not going to blast the ball three feet or more past the hole has a makeable putt from off the green. Yes, conceivably I might have a hand spasm and hit the putt too hard but for many golfers it is not all that difficult to cozy the ball up with a couple feet. In those situations the flagstick is both unnecessary and potentially (yes rarely but we have all seen it happen) an obstacle. And yes i know Pro Golfers can be really dumb but you sure see a lot of them pulling the flagstick when they are lining up makeable putts from off the green so lets try not to be too overly insistent in my way or the highway.

Ah I was wondering when the infamous Pelz study would show up. This is the "scientific" study those who insist leaving the flagstick in refer to. As for what the study proves i totally agree with them but as with all scientific studies the devil is in the detail and in this study one third of the putts were rolled so they would go three feet past the hole, one third so they would go six feet past the whole and one third so they would go nine feet past the hole. In other words if, either because you have very poor speed control or because it is a very long or steep down hill putt, there is a good chance of overhitting the putt by six or nine feet then by all mean leave the flagstick in and pray you hit it. That is what this scientific study proves and nothing else. My question is what about the makeable putts from just off the green? It doesn't help to conflate the two questions and I suspect most people would agree to the results of the Pelz study for those long or treacherous putts that risk being badly over struck. However, that does not mean the same is true for a nice fairly level ten footer, In that situation I can see no advantage to the flagstick at all.

Patience Golfing Dad, it will arrive soon I am pretty sure ....

Phil, I posted the question because I am curious about what others do. It is true I believe from my own experience that I have a better chance of sinking makeable putts from off the green without the flagstick but I respect other people's opinions what I don't respect is those who insist they are right and anyone who disagrees is simply wrong. So it is refreshing to see the spread of answers as well as the caveats.

I posted a question asking the rationale for a two stroke penalty for hitting the flagstick while putting from the green. I came to realize that the rationale was to prevent golfers from using the flagstick in long range or steep downhill situations from acting as a backstop thus avoiding a three putt. What got sticky was the question of putting or chipping from just off the green where your intent is to sink the putt not just to try to stop it close to the hole. My experience and that of most of the good golfers I have played with is your odds go up if you remove the flagstick. However, some people on the previous post insisted without any real evidence that I was wrong. So just for kicks and giggles I'd love to do a poll to hear what most people on this site do in that situation. To make it specific lets say the ball is resting not more than three feet off the green is relatively level and without a severe break and the distance to the hole is under 15 feet. In other words a putt you can have some confidence you could make.

So what you are saying is that the penalty for hitting the flagstick while putting from the green is aimed at the golfers who essentially have very poor speed control. This makes very little sense to me. Those golfers are their own penalty and you really don't need to penalize them much less by two strokes. I truly believe this is a rule that may once, back in the day when greens had the consistency of today's fringe, might have mnade some sense but today is just an anachronism and a weird one at that.

I appreciate the feedback but the Pelze study is seriously flawed. Anyone who putts at a speed that goes six feet past the hole much less nine feet is not a good putter. and I hate to be contrary but I have many many years of experience and have done a number of admittedly not scientific experiments and it is very clear to me that anyone with decent speed control; is much better off without a flagstick and I have never seen any evidence to the contrary.

ok sorry but that was not a response that was just an insistence that a flagstick makes it more likely that a putt will fall. That is not evidence and is contrary than my long experience. If you believe it show me some evidence because I cannot find it.

We are still not getting to the rationale. True a Putt three feet past is decent (not good ) speed control but Pelze's study was equally six feet past and 9 feet past and the point is I have never seen any other evidence that flagstick is an advantage to a good putter. My index is built almost entirely on my short game since I am not a big hitter and my 60 years of experience is that the flagstick is an advantage soley when you are chipping from relatively far off the green and sharply downhill, otherwise the odds you hit the stick and bounce off in some random direction is much higher than the odds of hitting the stick square and having it drop into the hole. And yes I do understand the flagstick can be as wide as the course wants it to be but a three inch flagstick is even more or an obstacle. Please someone show me some evidence for the penalty not just opinion.

Sorry that does not explain the rule. The only evidence I have ever seen for being "statistically" more likely to make a putt by hitting a flagstick was a Pelze study that was frankly very poorly designed since it used putts that would have gone 3 feet past, 6 feet past and 9 feet past the hole. Of course a backstop like a flagstick would help if you are banging putts that hard but for anyone who actually has speed control the flagstick is an obstacle not an aide and I have never seen any evidence to the contrary thus why the penalty?