Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'putting'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Welcome
    • Welcome, Everyone
    • The TST Blog
  • The Clubhouse
    • Golf Talk
    • Tour Talk
    • Member Outings & Meetups
    • Golf Courses and Architecture
    • Destinations and Travel
    • Rules of Golf
  • The Practice Range
    • Instruction and Playing Tips
    • Member Swings
    • Swing Thoughts
    • Reading Room
    • Fitness and Exercise
  • The Pro Shop
    • Clubs, Grips, Shafts, Fitting
    • Balls, Carts/Bags, Apparel, Gear, Etc.
    • Member Reviews
    • Marketplace
  • The 19th Hole
    • Disc Golf, Foot Golf, Etc.
    • Sports
    • Geek Zone
    • The Grill Room
    • Announcements & Tech Support
  • Michigan Golf's Golf Course Reviews
  • Michigan Golf's Topics
  • Apple Fans's Discussions
  • Wisconsin Golf's Discussions
  • Upstate New York's Topics
  • Central Florida Golfers's Discussions
  • General Architecture Fans's Discussions
  • Oklahoma Golfers's Discussions
  • Ohio Golf's General Discussion
  • SoCal Golf's Discussions
  • Missouri Golf's Discussions
  • Missouri Golf's TopicsThe eNewsletter of the Metropolitan Amateur Golf Association
  • Mid-Atlantic Golf's Discussions
  • European Union Golf's Discussions
  • European Union Golf's Europe golf Courses
  • Mevo Owners's Discussions
  • MA Golf's Courses
  • MA Golf's General Western/Central MA Golf Discussion
  • Golf Collectibles's What do you collect?
  • Minnesota Golf's What are your home courses?
  • Minnesota Golf's WITB?
  • Minnesota Golf's Thoughts on AM Tours in Minnesota
  • Dallas–Fort Worth's Golf Courses
  • Dallas–Fort Worth's Topics

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Product Groups

  • TST Supporter Options
  • TST Sponsor Options

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Handicap Index

Found 55 results

  1. I spent the better part of two days conducting this test last summer. I tested a few situations: In chart form: And for those who like the visuals… I used a PerfectPutter and positioned it far enough away that the ball wasn't bouncing at all but close enough that the ball wouldn't deviate too far from the intended line.1 I used Snell MTB Black balls. The flagsticks were standard Par-Aide fiberglass flagsticks. It wasn't windy, but there was often a little breeze.2 I tested on the flattest section of the greens I could find. The actual holes were as level as could be. Rolling the ball from close distance minimizes this anyway. I rolled balls from all around the hole so as not to overly damage one portion of the hole. Also, little "tracks" can form even after a few putts, so I wanted to balance that out as much as possible. The flagsticks were relatively centered in the hole, with only a little "wiggle room." I did not measure how far away the balls that didn't go in ended up; I considered it pretty obvious that a ball that hits the flagstick is going to finish closer to the hole than one that doesn't. This was clearly the case. I alternated five ball rolls with the flagstick in, five without. Then five without, and back to five with it in again. On putts where results seemed highly variable, I rolled more putts - up to 100. On putts that were a given (like 3' by speed at the center of the hole), I rolled fewer putts; as few as 10. I conducted the test on different holes and from different angles. I simply moved on when I felt I'd rolled enough balls at the holes that I could start to see a change to the lips, like some of the balls were "denting" or "rounding" the lips a little. I used holes where the lips appeared to be somewhat uniform (though obviously the specific soil density can vary around even a uniform looking hole). Stimp speeds were 9.75 to 9.9 feet. Distances off-center were done with a centered laser calibrated to aim straight (angular error in the laser was oriented upward) with a ruler across the hole, confirming both the proper hole dimensions and the distance off-center. I tried to roll balls from the same spot(s) on the PerfectPutter, but obviously there was some little error there - a few millimeters. I never rolled more than five balls at a time - and no balls ever hit a ball or balls in the hole and bounced out because of that. If balls did pile up on one side or in the front or back of the hole, I'd remove them. This rarely happened, though, as the holes are deep enough and only four balls would be in the hole when the fifth ball was rolled anyway. I'll add more information if I remember anything relevant. 1 Even with the PerfectPutter, you often can't make more than half of the 20-25 foot putts you roll across a real green. Just the tiniest deviation, hitting a bump slightly differently, can magnify over the duration of the putt and miss high or low even though you're trying to release the ball from the same exact spot on the PP. 2 One of the putts that almost surely would have gone in (as 98 others did) I felt was knocked away by the wind moving the flagstick at just the right time. Conclusions Leaving the flagstick in helps quite a bit, particularly on shots that are at the edges of capture speed/effective hole size. For example, at 4' by speed and 3/4" off-center, that's just beyond the capture size (only 8/100 went in) without the flagstick, but the flagstick took enough speed off that a 44/100 putts dropped with the flagstick in. At 3' by speed, the capture width of the hole is about 0.8 to 0.85" wide: wide enough for all of the 3/4" putts to go in, but few of the 1" putts. With the flagstick in, the 3/4" putts still went in, but the 1" putts that just nicked the flagstick scrubbed enough speed from the ball that a few more (14/50) putts went in. The largest percentage gain was the 6' speed at 1/2" off-center. At this distance from the center, only one putt went in (I would swear that I rolled it like all the others, but sometimes a putt that would have popped up and out hit some part of the hole just right and popped up and fell in), but since the contact with the flagstick (look at the image above) was still pretty flush, a lot of speed was taken from the ball and 45/100 fell. This is still fewer than half, but because the 1/100 is so low, the percentage is the largest. Similar inferences can likely be made on the 5' by putts - at 1/2" it's awfully close to the edge of the capture width of the hole, and at 3/4" is pretty much beyond it (again, though, a pesky 1/100 putts went in). These low make percentages without the flagstick make it possible for the delta between the flagstick in vs. out to be in the upper 30s to lower 40s.
  2. I like this game. Essentially: You start with six balls. You start from three feet. You putt from three feet until you make a putt. If you make the putt, you take that ball and all remaining balls back three feet. If you miss, that ball or "life" is lost. Your "score" is the farthest distance at which you make a putt. So for example: Make from 3'. Six balls remain. Make from 6'. Six balls remain. Miss, miss, make from 9'. Four balls remain. Two lives lost. Miss, make from 12'. Three balls remain, one life lost. Miss, miss, miss from 15'. Your score is 12'.
  3. A little help? I have heard a statistic over the years but never found a source: 85% of all missed putts are short. When I look at PGA stats, I see they track the number of putts, but not whether they were short (or broke below the hole) or long past the hole. Is anyone familiar with a study that has been done on this? Thanks
  4. Here are three graphs of putting strokes. The s axis is "speed" and the "t" axis is time. We'll take a look at each of these in a moment, but consider first how putting can behave like a pendulum. In virtually all good putting strokes, the ball is hit with a slight positive angle of attack (AoA) - about 2-3° or so. This positive AoA helps minimize backspin, produce no spin, or even to produce a tiny bit of forward spin if the dynamic loft is 1-2°. But the point is: the ball is struck while the putter head is ascending, or after low point . If you were to swing a pendulum back and through, maximum speed would be where? At the bottom. At low point. At every point after that, the speed would be lower. Even one tenth of one degree after low point, the pendulum is slowing down (negative acceleration, or deceleration). The best putters almost all tend to have a decelerating putter head at or even slightly before impact. Their putting stroke resembles a pendulum, reaching maximum speed at or slightly before impact. Consider also the length of a pendulum's swing. A theoretical pendulum (no loss of energy to friction) swings as far past center in one direction as it does in the other direction. Whether you measure it in degrees or a linear measurement, the pendulum swings 22.7° left and 22.7° right, or 13.1 inches left and 13.1 inches right. The best putters almost all tend to have similar length backswings and through-swings in their putting strokes. Their putting strokes continue to resemble a pendulum in this sense. Now let's take a look at each of these putting strokes. Here's a putting stroke typical of a golfer who has a terrible time controlling their distances. This golfer may have a great sense of touch from 5-10 feet, maybe even out to 15', but when you ask them to hit a 30' putt, you start to see issues. They'll hit one 27', the next 34', the one after that 25', and then maybe 33'. These golfers often make a backswing that's - let's just say - eight inches for a six-foot putt, nine inches for a 12-foot putt, and ten inches for a 30-foot putt. They're almost the same length. Then they have to accelerate their putters various amounts to reach various speeds at impact to send the ball various distances. If you wanted to make a pendulum swing faster at the bottom of the arc, given the same pendulum length and weight (we aren't changing putters or our setup appreciably), how would you accomplish this? Why… you'd simply pull the pendulum back farther before letting it go. So look at the speed and time plot of the poor putter above. I've marked the instantaneous speed at two points: just prior to impact and just after impact. Note that impact - even on a putting stroke - severely slows the putter head down. I've exaggerated it quite a bit in these graphs, but that's something I can do given that I haven't added any scale to these charts. :D It simply makes things clearer to see and thus easier to grasp. At any rate, note that the direction of each of the arrows - both the dashed (pre-impact) and dotted (post-impact) lines is pointing upwards. This means the putter head has positive acceleration. It's speeding up. Note the pronounced "hump" after impact. Though the ball slows the putter head down temporarily, it's still speeding up, so you see a second peak speed after impact. This golfer is roughly 99% likely to have poor distance control. Let's look at the good and great putting dynamics (and by good I mean pretty darn good, because as you'll note the differences between these two are subtle): Note how in Good the putting stroke reaches maximum speed at the ball. The proof of this is that the acceleration is neither positive nor negative - the arrow is pointing horizontally, indicating that the speed is neither going up nor down. Constant speed is no acceleration (positive or negative). Notice that this condition continues immediately after impact, and the putter head continues to slow down thereafter. In the Great image, the putter head is actually slowing down slightly at impact (the arrow points downward). Then you see the BIG deceleration caused by the putter impacting the ball, and then the deceleration continues from there. Contrast those with what we often see from the golfers with the absolute worst distance control: This golfer actually manages to reach peak/maximum speed after the ball has left the putter . Note that his acceleration curve going into impact actually steepens - he is accelerating more at impact than at any other point in the downstroke. Then he accelerates MORE until he rapidly decelerates, well after impact, to bring the putter to a halt. This is more common than you might think. Golfers have been told for decades to "accelerate through the ball" and to "putt authoritatively" and so on. This advice ranks near the top of my list for counter-productive, harmful advice. By and large, the poorest putters accelerate far too much for far too long (including up to and after impact), while the best putters have roughly matching backstrokes and through-strokes that deliver the putter head to the ball while it is either not accelerating at all or is negatively accelerating (i.e. decelerating, or slowing down). If you feel you may be "accelerating" your putter into impact, put three coins on the ground, equally spaced from each other, in a line. Put the ball near the middle one, and practice making backstrokes that go to one and finish at the other. Try to feel that you're not adding anything to the downstroke or follow-through: you're not accelerating the putter much (just let gravity do it - in reality your muscles will contribute, but it's uncommon to feel much muscle contribution) and you're not forcing yourself to "brake" the putter too much at the end, either. Just make a natural, smooth stroke that matches - coin to coin. To change how far you hit the ball, move the coins farther apart or closer together, keeping the distances the same. If you still struggle with this, swing to the second or third longest coin, but still try to hit the ball a short distance and finish at the first or second coin on the follow-through. It's that simple. P.S. Note that I've made no attempt to show the scale of t and s. Specifically, I've fudged things a bit by implying that the the t is the same for all of these strokes, and that impact occurs at the same moment. This is very unlikely to be true: if you make a short backstroke and accelerate all the way up to and even after impact, you're likely to have a shorter (time) downswing and to reach impact sooner. They line up because I wanted to keep things simple, and because timing isn't really the topic here. P.P.S. A really old example of a SAM PuttLab read-out can be seen here . P.P.P.S. (2014-08-13) A great series of pictures and a simple explanation of the "why" is found in post #179:
  5. Distance control is an "athletic" thing for most golfers. Unless you're Bryson DeChambeau, who knows that a 12" backstroke makes the ball go 15.739 feet (or whatever), players tend to putt best when they tap into their athleticism. That's why studies will point out how golfers putting from 25+ feet with their eyes looking at the hole often have better distance control (even though they slightly mishit some putts) than golfers looking down at the ball. Combine both: do what Tiger Woods learned to do from his dad. When taking his last look at the hole, he'd take a mental "snapshot" - a picture - of the hole, the green between him and the hole, his putt. Then, when he looks down at the ball, he sees the ball but he also sees the "photo" and then, per his dad's instructions, he "putts into the picture." I do this, and almost always have, even though when I started playing golf it didn't have a "title."
  6. Everyone has a different strategy and methods for all types of putts. I'm curious as to strategy on short, downhill breaking putts. Ben Crenshaw advised playing these type of putts, more off the toe, instead of the sweet spot. I have always used this method and it has worked pretty well. He said that a person tends to decelerate the club head on these types of putts and that he played the putt in this manner. Just wanted to see what everyone else thought about this subject.
  7. The chart, in larger form: I think two things: Though there's a definite trend, those are some pretty small numbers. What Dave said is important, I think: A 40+ year old on the PGA Tour has made his money, has a family, is content, etc. They're less motivated, they don't practice as often, and so on. P.S. I putt better now than ever.
  8. I prefer to see my players exhibit two pendulum-like things in their putting strokes: A backswing length and follow-through length that are about the same. A fairly standard rhythm or tempo, defined as either when you take the putter away to when you strike the ball, or the end points of your backswing and follow-through. Both of those traits are characteristics of a pendulum. The period is the same, and the swing lengths are the same (in a vacuum 😄). Find Your Tempo Everyone has a slightly different natural tempo. Some players prefer to have a slower putting stroke (think Ben Crenshaw), while others might putt with a faster tempo (like Brandt Snedeker). Most golfers will fall between about 66 and 80 BPM, but… Here's how to conduct this test to find your natural putting tempo. Download an app like this one for iOS: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/metronome-tempo-lite/id599833596?mt=8 and set it to 2/4 time if you can. Start with about 72 BPM. Take your putter and set up in your address position, and just start swinging your putter back and forth, trying to time either the bottom of the arc as it passes to the left and to the right, or the end points of your stroke (backswing and follow through). If the metronome feels like it's too slow, and you feel you naturally want to go faster, speed up the tempo. If the metronome feels too fast, slow it down. Verify this by altering the length of your stroke - try to find a tempo that feels good for short, medium, and long strokes (and thus short, medium, and long putts). Vote in the poll above and post a response in this topic with your tempo. @mvmac and I are curious to see what everyone's tempo is. Me? I'm typically a 78.
  9. I was tempted to post "I doubt it," but I have this blog to use, so I'll use it for a quick discussion of this. I've taught a few thousand people to putt. I've never seen someone with their finger down the shaft who I would consider a "good" putter. More often - far, far more often - those with their finger down the shaft have distance control issues. The pressure they apply with that finger leads to added loft and wrist flipping, while many good putting strokes have de-lofted putters (4° turned down to 1°) and lead wrists that are slightly more in flexion than they were at setup. I understand what people think they're feeling - the pressure of the shaft/grip being applied to that finger - but again I've got SAM data and visual data (recorded) that leads me to these types of statements. I'm not super picky about putting grips. I putt with a pretty standard/classic reverse double overlap. My daughter is a single overlap kinda gal. I've taught claw grippers, crosshanders, etc. I could put the finger down the shaft (at least for awhile), and remain a good putter… but part of the reason I might be a good putter is that I don't put the finger down the shaft, and I've learned to control the putter swing by having a better wrist action than the one that the finger down the shaft encourages. Again, I've never seen a good putter who can actually control distance well with the finger down the shaft. Take it for what it's worth. P.S. If you try to putt without the finger down the shaft for awhile, don't judge the results immediately. Give it some time. And read this: P.P.S. Just because I've never seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It only means I've never seen it…
  10. https://ixiasports.com/products/true-pendulum-motion I wanted to take a long overdue moment to talk a little bit about one of the better putting training aids on the market today. Putting is, as you know, one of the areas of the game that have the least effect on your score, and yet… is so, so, so frustrating to a lot of people. Though the average person loses fewer strokes to putting than they might think, those with a glaring weakness can really pile up the lost strokes, becoming increasingly frustrated with each and every one. Now, long-time forum members know that putting is three things: Read, Bead, and Speed. TPM won't be able to help you with the Read, but it can help you with the Bead and the Speed keys - starting putts on line and hitting them the correct distance. What is it? Essentially it's two extendable rods that attach to your putter mid-way down the shaft to help you create a more pendulum-like putting motion. The rods rest on top of your forearms and under your armpits. The attachment point to your putter is rubbery, so it's not "clamped" in, and the rods will give a little of course unless you really squeeze your armpits tightly, so there's still a little wiggle room for a little wrist action in the stroke, which is great. Each rod extends much like some ball retrievers you've seen - you twist the "outer" or "upper" rod one direction to loosen it, slide it to the desired length, and then tighten by twisting the other direction. The inner or lower rod is marked with numbers, so you can set the TPM to the same setting each time - kids will use the smaller numbers, while even someone who is over 6' tall can use the TPM comfortably. Cody, above, is about 5'8" and can generally use one of the middle length settings. You can see the effect it has on his putting stroke (particularly from face-on) below: Yes, he still adds a little "flourish" (out to the right) at the end of his putting stroke. It leads to some interesting looking traces in SAM PuttLab, but generally doesn't impact his putting, as it's well after the ball is gone. Here's James Sieckmann talking about the TPM: And 5SK guy Corey Lundberg: The TPM comes already assembled: The TPM is lightweight, but sturdy and strong with aluminum and rubber composition (and a little plastic). How do you use it? 1. Attach the TPM to your putter at about the mid-point of the shaft below the grip: 2. Spread the rods apart and extend them to the proper length for your setup style: 3. Grip your putter, resting the TPM against the top side of your forearms and beneath your arms: 4. Putt! That's all there is to it. As you can see, the TPM accommodates putting strokes of variety, too: regular, cross-handed, claw, pencil, and other styles. It may not work with every putting style (some more extreme arm-lock style strokes didn't work perfectly), but it worked for far more than it didn't work for. The TPM costs $89.99 and is available for order at https://ixiasports.com. It comes with my strong recommendation.
  11. I know Putts/Round isn't a great stat, but how much better is Putts/GIR? On its own, it doesn't seem like it really amounts to much. If your first putt length tends to be higher, you're going to have a higher P/GIR than if it was shorter. You can't really tell by looking at it whether you need to work on your putting or you're just hitting the green too far away from the pin. I started thinking about this today and worked it out over my last 10 rounds, my P/GIR is 2.18 vs P/R of 1.92. I'm not sure that tells me much about anything. So what would be the point of tracking it, or what other states are needed to make it better? Do you need to average out your first putt lengths and factor that in? Then you're basically getting an average of X strokes taken from Y distance, which seems like if I'm going to do that, I might as well figure out the rest of my make % by distance data. Just trying to decide if any of this stuff is worth looking into, what do you guys think?
  12. I've been thinking lately about the short game and putting, specifically proximity to the hole from around the green. I don't actually know how close I should be getting to the hole at my skill level. Game Golf tells me I'm 97% < 5 yards within 25 yards (I wish they would break this down more), but let's say I average 12' from the hole. A PGA Tour pro makes ~30% of those putts. A Tour-level putter I most certainly am not; I might make < 10% of my 12' putts. I'm not scrambling at the rate I should be and I don't know if the problem is with my short game or my putting. If I don't hit it within 5-6', I don't have a realistic expectation of making the putt. I'd bet that means I'm 50% from about that distance. I know I have room for improvement in putting. My short game has gotten better to the point where I feel like I'm hitting the ball consistently well but I'm misjudging what it's going to do when it hits the green, so I feel like I could get it closer more often. So where's the point of diminishing returns? Do I spend more time on the short game and try to get the ball closer, or do I work on my putting and try to increase that make %? Is it even reasonable (for me) to expect to be within 12' from nGIR, or to make 25% of 12' putts? Given limited resources (time), what priority is going to affect scores the most?
  13. What are the general thoughts about Brooks Koepka's putting grip with the extended right pointer finger? After playing around with this over the past few days it is a change I'm actually really interested in making permanently. I often feel extreme disconnect between my hands and the club while putting and this is something that really unites the two for me.
  14. In all the years that I have played golf (i.e. mid 1980's), I have discovered that everyone is unique when it comes to putting. Everyone has their own special grip, their own special stance, their own special swing tempo, etc...etc... I have my prized, custom made, generic/component mallet putter, 35" long, and resembles an old Odyssey Rossie II mallet putter with the black polymer insert. Anyway, I use a slightly bizarre putting grip, slightly upright stance, and it just works for me. I'll try to describe it when you look at the photo below, that I just took in my living room, while practicing putting across the carpet. Anyone ever seen a putting grip like mine? Right hand: Right thumb centered on grip, covering up the "Crown" logo of Titleist/Scotty Cameron Baby T putter grip. Right fingers naturally curl around the grip. Left hand: Left thumb centered on grip and tightly nestled into fleshy part of right hand palm. Left index finger, as odd as it looks, the left index finger points down the shaft, resting on top of the right hand fingers. Left fingers (middle, ring, pinky) naturally curl around the grip.
  15. Just a simple video, putting on my living room carpet this morning, and wanted to try to make a "comparison" video with the camera right down behind the ball, showing my putting stroke...1) Cheap, used, Odyssey Dual Force blade putter from "Play It Again Sports" here in town.2) My prized, custom made, generic component, "Butch Ammon" mallet putter (it's a copy of the Odyssey Rossie II).What do you think of my standard, pendulum, straight out 'n back, type of putting stroke? Those two errant shots off to the right, were me acting foolish and rushing the shot. Normally, I can make those simple 6' putts on the carpet over and over and over and over, 18... 19... 20 times in a row.
  16. Hello everyone, I apologize if I'm posting in an inappropriate location as this is my first post, but I have a question regarding the Rules. I understand a person cannot place an object on the "line of the putt" at any point to help aid in a putt, but I was wondering if it's a rule violation to place a marker behind the hole while aligning the ball markings. It's easier to line the markings up with a smaller item sometimes than with the entire hole, and it would be placed directly behind the hole just while aligning the arrows on the ball. Rule 8-2b states one cannot place a mark on the "line of the putt," but "line of the putt" is defined as not extending past the hole, meaning that placing a mark behind the hole wouldn't violate this rule, as long as the mark was removed before the stroke was made. Thanks!
  17. I'm not sure I agree. It's differences in green speeds that affects people more. If your typical muni stimps 8.5, the golfer who is used to that will struggle when they play somewhere where the green stumps 11. But the reverse is true, as well. People used to 11-12 are going to struggle when they play an 8 green. Tour players complain when the greens are slow (sometimes we see this with American players at the British Open, for example). It's not just Tour players who play fast greens. Most of the private clubs I have played at have faster greens (though my munis are actually pretty good TBH) and the members of those clubs would be used to that speed. You don't just automatically become a better putter because the green is slower. You'll under-hit your speed and over-read breaks until you adjust. False
  18. Curious to hear why putts are missed in the 10 - 15 foot range.
  19. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/golfputt-ar/id1289750170?ls=1&mt=8 It's gonna be awhile before I'm on a putting green (maybe this afternoon), but the author wrote and the app can be used free. For $1.99 you can disable ads.
  20. Hi Guys I've been very close to giving up the game recently and just wanted to see if others have similar feelings post round. So passionate to play golf and improve and will always spend the time practicing to get better. Recently have been playing great golf only to be 3 putting from 15- 20 yards. whenever i'm playing well I can't hole 3 footers its insane!! I play off of 10 but I just can't putt when it means something. if i'm having a mediocre/bad round i'm ok with the putter but Havn't hit under my handicap in 20+ rounds and i'm actually creeping up when i'm playing/ striking the ball well enough to be lower. I'm at my wits end with it and just don't know where to go as it seems more of a mental problem that I just can't seem to overcome. Absolutely love the game of golf and spend every moment outside work thinking about golf if i'm not playing it. I know theres going to be cliché comments about not letting the last shot dictate your mood, I don't have a short fuse compared to some folk I see on the course but when its a constant problem, hole after hole after hitting in regulation i'm losing my head!!! Spend the weekend post round in a sometimes sombre mood and just thinking..... is this game worth playing if its constantly dictating my mood? Sorry to ramble on.... Cheers Guys
  21. Note: this fix worked for me in order to achive better aligment to the target, may not work for u but you can try it. I always wanted to align the ball line to my target on putts inside 15 feet like the pro and a lot scratch amateur i played with do. So i give it a lot of hours and every time the same happened, i aligned the ball to my target from behind the ball but when i take my stance over the ball the line aims to the rigth of the target, i putted along that line of the ball and i always missed rigth. A week ago on the putting green i decided to give it a go one more time, and the same as always. But this time i get a little creative and try out this fix. For a 4,5 feet (1 yard and a half) straigth putt i aimed to the left lip of the hole from behind the ball and when i take my stance the line aimed at the middle of the hole. Eureca I thought, but not. Do the same from 9 feet, from behind to the left lip but over the ball it was aimed at the rigth lip. As a man who love math i easy realiced that at 4,5 feet the difference between back from top view was half a hole and from 9 feet ( exactly 4,5 feet x 2 ) was a complete hole. It was easy to figure out that from 18 feet the difference will be 2 complete holes so from behind i have to aim 1 hole and a half from the left lip of the hole, i tryed and it worked!! over the ball the line was aiming at the center of the hole, and every well stroke putter rolls in that line to the middle of the hole. I still had one problem, what about 4 feet.. 8 feet, how much left i have to aim..? it´s hard to guess the exact place to aim, even more in tournament when you have to speed up. I figured out that if i extend the arm (like i do in long shots to aim) and aim 1 finger to the left of the target from behind the ball, when i´m over the ball the line is aiming at the hole. This weekend played and important tournament (posted it on the tournament thread), such were the good results on the practice green i decided to put this fix into play. It worked beautifully, every good stroked putter started in my intended line. As a good green reader i holed a lot of putts in 11-12 speedmeter perfect greens. This is my routine with this fix for a 6 footer half a hole break from rigth to left: While other players are playing i read my put (speed/line), when it´s my turn i place the ball and look for a spot a finger left of my target. My target it´s right lip of the hole, 1 finger left at that range it´s 0,66 of a hole, so the spot will be a bit left of the center of the hole. I align the ball line to that spot and take my stance, now over the ball i see the line aiming at the rigth lip and i can putt with confidence that i´m aiming ok. Need to work on the stroke but at least now i know that i´m aiming a lot better to my target more often with the bonus of the feedback of the line roling true to the hole or not when i hit it bad.
  22. I discovered something curious about my vision--when I stand naturally and look at a line that is perfectly horizontal, I see it as descending to the left around three degrees to the left. This means that if I look at a green that is perfectly flat and perfectly horizontal, I see a three degree slope to the left. For years, I couldn't understand why putts that looked straight in, broke to the right, and putts that looked like they would break to the left, went straight. When I got some advice to also look from behind the cup and saw the opposite break compared to looking from behind the ball, I attributed it to an optical illusion. Then one day, I discovered in my living room that horizontal lines such as the intersection between a wall and the ceiling and the top of a tv set looked like they were descending to the left. I used a carpenter's level to make sure that the lines were horizontal. I had my vision checked and was told that my dominant eye must have rotated in my eye socket and that it could be corrected by surgery on the muscles. I didn't want to do that, so using my engineering background, I came up with two methods of adjusting for this problem. The first is looking at the slope near the cup from behind the ball and behind the cup and estimating an average. For example, if the slopes are three degrees to the left from behind the ball and behind the cup, they cancel out, and the surface is horizontal. If the slopes point in the same direction from behind the ball and behind the cup, the "true" slope is the average of the two. There are other combinations. There is a problem that still remains--after estimating the actual slope, I have to putt an imaginary slope, or I have to develop a "cause and effect" relationship between the false slope and how the ball breaks for that false slope. I found a second correction last night that I will write about later.
  23. Here's a thread where we can all speculate and share data and thoughts and discuss "theories" and hypotheses… I've shared parts of this in other topics, but I hope to collect everything here, while simultaneously simplifying my position (maybe? hopefully?). I'd previously written a post about how you should almost always leave the flagstick in when you're given the opportunity to (without penalty). It, when you're off the green, tends to help you far more often than it hurts. The flagstick typically slows the ball down and lets it fall into the hole or at least stay closer than it otherwise would have. Then few weeks ago, the USGA and R&A published their proposed rules changes for 2019 (talk about those in the Rules of Golf forum), and one of them was to abolish the two-stroke penalty for striking the flagstick (in the hole) after a stroke from on the putting green. A Dave Pelz study from decades ago backs this up, as does basic physics (collisions lose energy). This, I immediately felt, had the potential to massively change the game of golf. My experience, the research I've read, and talks with others in the sciences and in golf have virtually convinced me of this. The USGA/R&A seem to be ignoring this, saying only "On balance it is expected that there should be no advantage in being able to putt with the unattended flagstick in the hole:". I think they're wrong. The rule is proposed among many to speed up play, and while I admire the USGA's/R&A's desire to speed up play, I'm not even sure it will do that - many have said it may slow play in most instances because where we currently take the flagstick out and put it back in once per hole on most holes, we may find situations where different players prefer the flag in or out and change its status when it is their turn to putt. This topic will not discuss pace of play - just the potential (or real) advantages to be gained. I think these potential advantages will affect two types of putts: Short-medium putts from 4-6', with lesser benefits out to about 10' or 12'. These are putts where players are somewhat or quite likely to hit the hole and, thus, the flagstick. Long putts from 25+ feet. Currently "tap-ins" are about 2' out, but if the first bullet point becomes an issue, and "tap-in" range extends to 4' or 5', the importance of getting your 30-footer to a foot or two diminishes greatly. In this topic, I'd like to explore the pros/cons, the physics, the data, the science, the mentality/psychology… and all of that stuff. I'd like to discuss the theory, the hypotheses, etc. behind this "advantage." This topic isn't about pace of play. It's not about whether we play golf into a "hole" and that this violates some sacred idea or something. It's just about the "advantage." First, some stipulations: There are few regulations on flagsticks. Circular in cross-section, not super dampening like foam or something, not strongly tapered… that's about it. I'm only suggesting a change from 12" past capture speed to about 3' to 4' past capture speed. Do not take me saying "bash it at the stick" or things like that as suggesting that I think players should hit a 5' putt with enough speed to go 10' past the hole. There's some grey area here because greens stimp at different speeds, uphill putts stop closer to the hole than downhill putts traveling the same speed at the hole, etc. Grey areas are unfortunately unavoidable. Players all have different psychologies. Some players will be struggle to do things other players can do more easily. Let's jump right in. Credible arguments for this proposed rule creating an advantage: The flagstick slows the ball by a greater factor than it decreases the time the ball spends suspended over the hole. Unless you have exceptional distance control, effective capture speed can remain about the same. Hitting the ball more firmly allows for a larger margin of error. It also reduces the tendency of a slow-moving putt to "wobble" or be moved off-line due to imperfections. Players, particularly poorer putters, leave a lot of putts from 6' to 15' short. This change would let them be more aggressive. The situations where the flagstick should be removed (it leans too much, it's moving around a lot in the wind) almost never occur. The flagstick offers an aid - it gives the player yet another point or two at which to aim. Credible arguments against there being any advantage: Three putts from short range may increase. Poor putters miss the hole from short range and will miss a lot of the come-backers. Hitting putts faster eliminates the putts that would fall at the outer "edges" of the hole with slower capture speed. These putts don't touch the flagstick, and lip out with faster speeds, but would fall in the "edge" or "side" with slower speeds. Let me take a look at the "pro" list above. 1. The flagstick slows the ball by a greater factor than it decreases the time the ball spends suspended over the hole. Simply put, the ball has to fall 0.84" or so to fall into the hole. Gravity is a constant, so this becomes a matter of time - time which the ball is unsupported and able to fall (another grey area: the ball can be "supported" partially along the "side" of the ball, slowing its descent). But back to the idea of time… Time for an object to fall 0.84 inches is about 0.066 seconds. So what can affect the time it takes? Two things: the speed the ball is traveling (faster = less time), and the route it takes over the hole (going straight across the middle of the hole provides the longest route and the most time to fall) - taking a cord along the edge provides a much shorter route. Many who think they should take the flagstick out when they are chipping from off the green say "the flagstick takes up room in the hole." It does, and so no ball can take a "long" route through the middle of the hole - it will be deflected. So, the question becomes this: how does the flagstick function to affect the time the ball spends unsupported over the hole? It's not as simple as subtracting the diameter of the flagstick from the 4.25", because the ball will contact the flagstick with its outer edge. If you imagine a ball that's hit directly at the flagstick, it will only spend about 2.1" unsupported by the ground - 1.035" from the time the center of the ball goes over the front lip until the front side of the ball hits the stick, and another 1.035" on its way back directly the way it came. The first 1" will be much shorter in time because the ball is moving much more quickly. 2.1" of travel does not afford the ball very much time to drop, and yet… we've all seen a ball rocketing at the flagstick, smack into it dead-center, and fall. In testing I've done, I've rolled balls with as much as 20' past capture speed on a flat portion of a green stimping at about 10 and had them repeatedly fall in to the hole. I shouldn't have to tell you… none of the balls rolled at the same speed went into the hole with the flagstick removed. Thus, the conclusion is simple: the flagstick dampens the speed of the ball by a significantly larger factor than it reduces the distance (and time) that the ball spends in free-fall. A few working physicists have supported this statement in my talks with them, though none have gone beyond preliminary calculations to quantify this, or to measure how advantage declines as you move away from direct hits, though one added that even a "half-ball hit" (he knew I played pool/billiards) should be pretty close to the same math - the ball traveling farther and thus having more time help to offset the less direct impact. Grey areas: 1. Flagsticks differ in their composition. I was using a pretty traditional flagstick, but some courses have wooden flagsticks, metal flagsticks, fiberglass, etc. 2. I'm unsure of how long this holds - It's obvious that a ball that overlaps the flagstick by 0.01" will act almost as if there was no flagstick in there, and regular capture speed rules will basically apply. 2. Unless you have exceptional distance control, effective capture speed can remain about the same. From this thread… … you'll see that a ball putted only 1' past the hole has only the center 2.6" of the hole. At 2' past, the capture width of the hole shrinks quickly to 1.9". Those look like this: Now, obviously that ball rolling 1' past isn't even close to hitting the flagstick, but it's still going to drop (in a pure physics standpoint). The ball hit 2' past is going to hit the flagstick if one was there, but even the edge of the ball isn't passing over the center of the hole (the ball is 1.68" in diameter). (These numbers are part physics, part experimental data, and come from Mark Sweeney.) A ball rolling 3.5' past the hole has an effective capture width of only about 1.2". That looks like this (the flagstick is pictured here simply for continuity): Losing 1.4" is significant (0.7" on both sides) to 0.8" (0.4" on each side) is fairly significant, and that's why, under the current rules, I've suggested people understand and read the capture speed topic, and to strive to deliver the ball with the speed that takes it only a foot or two past the hole. The question is now… what's an effective capture width with the flagstick in the hole and the ball rolling at about 3.5' past the hole? Obviously we need the ball to impact the flagstick enough to slow it down, so let's make an educated guess (based largely on the tests I did last fall, and yes, I know, you're going on a little faith here, but @david_wedzik and I will test thoroughly soon, hopefully this Friday). In my testing, and again I intend to document this fully very soon with Dave, 1.8" provided sufficient flagstick-ball contact to get putts to fall with the flagstick in the hole. "But we've lost 0.8"!", you'll say. And you're right. But remember, that's if you're able to deliver 1' past capture speed. Add just a little and hit your putt with 2' past capture speed and your 2.6" wide target drops down to 1.9" - basically the same width as the picture above. Also, that 0.8" you lost is not the same value. Huh? Consider that PGA Tour players make 77% of their five-foot putts. If we place a bell curve over the effective capture width of the hole, it would look something like this: PGA Tour pros hit the center of the hole more often than they hit the edges of the hole. They don't use whatever size capture width they are given evenly - that's why they make the majority of their putts from 5'. The outer edges - where we're relying on a slowly rolling ball to fall in - don't have the same value as the center of the hole. Bad putters make only about 50% of their putts from 5'. Their bell curve might look like this: Note: the center of the hole is still more important, but the edges are relatively more important. Bad putters hit the center of the hole less often and hit the edges or miss completely more often. If you're still awake at this point, you're correct that 2.6" is wider than 1.8". Even 1.9" is wider than 1.8". If you putt a ball with 3.5' past speed 1.1" off-center, it will miss the flagstick and be traveling too fast to go in. You're correct! But… here's the important thing… With the flagstick in, delivering the ball with 2' past speed within the 1.9" zone or 1' past speed within the 2.6" zone, and the ball will still fall. The flagstick is not hampering your ability to do this at all. There's no negative here - the only negative is if you choose to hit the ball with faster than 2' past capture speed… at which point the flagstick begins to help. At 3' past capture speed, without the flagstick the capture width of the hole shrinks to 1.4". Leaving the flagstick in gains 0.4". It’s insurance in case you hit the ball a little too firmly. If I had to boil down the “is it an advantage” thing to one thing, there it is. This is an important point, so I'm going to hammer it again. If you want to keep putting the way you’re putting now (without the flagstick), do it… but leave the flagstick in, because it will not hurt you if you have good distance control, and WILL help you if you don’t. There's literally no downside here (assuming one of those two conditions - flagstick leaning a LOT or high wind and a jostling flagstick - aren't met). Grey areas: 1. Ball speed vs. roll-out distance on different stimps is not linear - a ball rolling at a speed of x on a stimp 8 green and rolling out 2' past is not rolling 8x/12 if it rolls out 2' on a stimp 12 green. This is why a ball can roll out 3' but still fall in the sides of the hole at Augusta National: the ball is rolling slowly. 2. Players aren't robots. They won't control ball speed to 1' exactly. If they could, and people could read greens perfectly, and greens didn't have imperfections, I'd say take the flagstick out for these putts! 3. Hitting the ball more firmly allows for a larger margin of error. It also reduces the tendency of a slow-moving putt to "wobble" or be moved off-line due to imperfections. Let me address the second part first. In the last 6-12" of a putt, the ball has a tendency to wobble. It's moving more slowly, and minor imperfections can have a large effect on a ball. That's why, though the ideal capture speed is "dead weight" making the hole its full 4.25" wide, it's impractical because you'd leave too many putts short and the ball behaves unpredictably near the hole. Whether you call it the Dave Pelz "lumpy donut" or just the minor variations in the putting surface due to the fact that grass is not a perfectly flat, smooth surface (nor are golf balls, for that matter)… the ball can divert from its path quite a bit in the last foot of its travel. Hitting the ball more firmly makes the path more consistent and thus more predictable. Go ahead… roll a ball on a putting green and watch the last foot of its roll. It'll divert relatively easily, and more so on the slower, bumpier greens many average golfers play. Now, regarding the margin of error… time for more math. Gravity pulls a ball down the hill. If the hill had 0% slope (i.e. dead flat), it would not pull a ball at all. The acceleration due to gravity would be 0 distance/time^s. If the hill had infinite slope (i.e. was a vertical wall), acceleration would be x distance/time^2 (or 9.8m/s^2 if you want to use those units). Any slope between those two points: 0% and infinite %, will be between 0 and x. More slope = more acceleration downhill (i.e. more break). Hitting a ball more firmly means that a ball gets to the destination (the hole) in less time. This lower amount of time means that differences in gravity due to a slight mis-read or a slight error in your start line can be reduced. I'll use some generic units here for distance and time, "d" and "t" because the specific units aren't important. Let's imagine that for a 2% slope, a putt breaks 100d/t^2. A 1% slope will be about 50d/t^2, and a 3% slope about 150d/t^2. Let's imagine two kinds of putts. One takes 10t (time units) to get to the hole (the one we hit firmly), and the other takes 12t to get to the hole. This chart shows how far the ball will deviate due to acceleration (from physics, the ball will travel d = 1/2*a*t^2). I've left the units off just to make the numbers convenient to use, so we could be talking about micrometers per hour squared (though given the units I chose, mm/sec^2 might be relatively close units). Putt Time 1% (50) 2% (100) 3% (150) Delta 10t 2500d 5000d 7500d +/- 2500d 12t 3600d 7200d 10800d +/- 3600d Let's assume the pro reads a putt as 2%. If he plays it firmly, and he's off by 1%, his ball will deviate from the line he read by 2500 distance units (say, 2.5cm). If he's wrong by that same 1%, but hits the ball more softly, and it takes longer to get to the hole… he's going to be off by 3600 distance units (say 3.6cm). A 120% difference (1.2) in time becomes a 144% (1.44) gap in the line. The firmer putt gives our golfer here a larger margin for error in his read. In graphic form, putts would look something like this, where the middle line of each is the proper read (this isn't to scale or the top and bottom blue and red lines would actually be a bit farther apart): If our golfer chooses to hit the ball at 2' past speed (red) or 4' past speed (blue), and 2500d translates to 0.75 inches offline (a make, with the flagstick in, as it is within the 1.8" zone), then his error will send his slower putted ball (red) 1.08" (0.75 * 1.44) offline, which is not within the 1.9" width allowed for a make. He'll miss with the slower putt, and make (comfortably) with the blue putt. In other words, and simplified… when you putt a little bit firmer, a putt has less time to deviate from the line before it reaches the hole if you misread the putt slightly. The faster putt gives you more margin for error in misreading your putt. Good players have known this for a long time. That's why PGA Tour pros rap the ball in the back of the hole (even without the flagstick). That's why you hear "I'll just firm it in and take the break out of it." They're not hitting the ball with 6' past speed… they just hit it with 3' past speed or so, to increase the margin of error on their read. Yes, they're comfortable at hitting their lines to within a small percentage, but as we know already, PGA Tour players make 77% of their putts, and that includes all putts… whether they misread them, hit them too softly or too firmly, etc. So > 77% of the time, they are able to hit their line pretty darn well. Within about half a degree, that number is actually well into the 90% range. 4. Players, particularly poorer putters, leave a lot of putts from 6' to 15' short. This change would let them be more aggressive. Higher handicap golfers leave a lot of their putts short from 6-15'. Just look at this chart, which pretty much matches what @david_wedzik and I have charted: On that chart, you'll see that the 90s golfer leaves over 10% of their 8' putts short of the hole, and nearly 30% of their 15' putts have no chance of going in because they don't even reach the hole! In a chart (there's no real scale here, but you may pretend the vertical line is at 15' or so), these results may look like this, with green representing good golfers, and red representing bad golfers: If leaving the flagstick in and making the come-back putt easier increases the confidence of the two groups to where they can hit their putts with the pace to go just one foot further, we might see a chart that looked more like this: As you can see here, this means 10-20% of their putts that previously came up short will now reach the hole and have a chance to go in. Now, not all of that 20% will go in, but if even half did, it would be a HUGE bonus. Hell, if even a quarter of the 20% went in, bananas! Who wouldn't want to make 5% more putts from 15' (where the 90s shooter only makes 20% right now… despite leaving nearly 30% short of the hole). Ah, but what about an increase in three-putts? Even without the flagstick, 90s shooters three-putt from 12-15' less than 5% of the time. That number is not going to double by adding one foot of pace to the putts, and even if it did double, it would still only break even if just a quarter of those 20% of putts that now reach the hole fall in. Plus, the flagstick will make the come-back putts easier to make. This advice, btw, to make sure you get your 6-15' putts to the hole, applies whether the flagstick is in or out, under the proposed rules or the current rules. This is advice you should follow now, and advice which would only be more relevant and important should this proposed rule actually be put into place in 2019. 5. The situations where the flagstick should be removed (it leans too much, it's moving around a lot in the wind) almost never occur. I debated even leaving this one in here. The first four reasons are pretty strong, IMO. But it's here, and I'll try to be quick about it. The flagstick impedes a ball going in under two very rare circumstances: The flagstick leans toward you so much a ball will not fit between it and the hole. (If it leans toward or away from you a little, it's actually even more advantageous than if the flagstick is straight up and down. So we're only talking about a LOT of lean, and only toward you, in this case.) The flagstick is jostling around in the hole because of high winds or something so it could knock your ball away. (Even this one requires perfect "bad" timing - if the flagstick is jostling away from your ball at the time of impact, your chances of holing the putt are increased even more over a steady flagstick left in.) So, if one was forced to make up some advice about putting with the flagstick in, and they understood ALL of the above five points, they would still conclude that you should leave the flagstick in, even if the advice was not allowed to add the addendum "unless one of these two situations exists." These two situations almost never occur. The ball is almost always helped by the flagstick being in the hole. 6. The flagstick offers an aid - it gives the player yet another point or two at which to aim. I've seen advice on shorter putts about aiming at a small blade of grass at the back of the cup, or where you want the ball to enter the cup, or other sorts of things. Jordan Spieth, for a number of years (he may still do it, I don't know) used to look AT the hole when putting short-ish putts… So, and yes, this is a very small reason or "pro," but that's why it's #6 and only gets three paragraphs: a flagstick can offer another thing at which to aim. It provides visual certainty as to where the middle of the hole is, and players and caddies can say things like "right edge of the stick" or "half a ball outside the stick" or whatever. For straight-ish putts, the flagstick is in the middle of the hole, and obviously offers a nice aiming point. Never mind that the flagstick shadow can be quite helpful in aiming. There have been a number of times when teaching AimPoint classes or playing by myself that where the flagstick shadow was on the green, on the edge of the hole, etc. was helpful in offering an aim point for my putting. In summary… Here's the deal… With the flag out, at 1' past, the capture width of a hole is 2.6". At 2' past, it's 1.9". At 3', it's 1.4", and at 4' it's 0.9". With the flag in, at 1' past, the capture width of a hole is 2.6". At 2' past, it's 1.9". At 3', it's 1.85", and at 4' it's 1.8". At 5', it's 1.7". For good putters, who can reasonably control their start lines to +/- about 0.9" at the hole, adding a little pace to their short-ish putts can remove some wobble, provide more margin for error on their reads, and allow them to make more putts. The flagstick offers a significant advantage. For poor putters… even if you just keep putting the same way you are now (except please take our advice on not leaving so many makeable putts short - hit them just a little harder), leaving the flagstick in can not hurt you, and on the putts you "goose" a little, can only really help you. Maybe you're confident from 4' at hitting the flagstick, but not from 6'. Or from 3' but not even 5'. Either way, it can't hurt you, and can only help you… just not as much as it can help a good putter. The "cons" above assume everyone's going to be smacking the ball at the hole so it runs out several feet farther than it does now. The cons above can be completely eliminated if everyone just putts as they do now, and recognizes situations where hitting the ball a bit firmer and using the flagstick is advantageous. There's no downside here. Not if you're smart enough to take the flagstick out (or re-center it in the hole) when it's leaning 30° toward you… And that is why I'm opposed to this rule. It's only really an advantage. The USGA and R&A are wrong that it will offer no advantage, and in fact, I would imagine that it will offer the biggest advantage to the better players. Despite the fact that, say, they make 77% of their five-footers while the 90s golfer makes 50%, and thus have a smaller range to improve (23% versus 50%), I still imagine, if this rule passed and was instituted, that we might see that 77% go up by a larger percentage than we see the 50% increase. In truly closing, look, this post was composed over three days, and multiple hours, and many, many stops and starts. I retain the right to fix any errors, tweak my conclusion, and otherwise to edit. For anything that affects the actual points and isn't just grammatical or spelling in nature, I'll note it publicly in this topic discussion. I encourage everyone to read this over, and to consider what I've said, and to discuss. I think this is important, and I think the USGA/R&A are risking seriously altering the game if this proposed rule sticks. I'm fighting this fight because I care about golf, and I do not think that we should be playing into anything but a hole, ultimately, for the shots that are more likely to go in - putts from on the green. I'd support a rule that let you keep the flagstick in the hole for putts outside of a certain distance, like 20', because for those I could perhaps be swayed by pace of play arguments… but I don't think such a rule will exist because then we'd have to be able to measure 20' or 7 yards or some distance pretty accurately (and often quickly).
×
×
  • 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...