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
  • SoCal Golf's Discussions
  • Upstate New York's Topics
  • Apple Fans's Discussions
  • General Architecture Fans's Discussions
  • Oklahoma Golfers's Discussions
  • Ohio Golf's General Discussion
  • Michigan Golf's Topics
  • Central Florida Golfers's Discussions
  • Missouri Golf's Discussions

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.

Marker Groups

  • Members

Found 47 results

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. Seeing slopes correctly on the green

    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.
  4. Close to giving up the game!

    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
  5. I have been working on putting lately, primarily bead and speed (I will work on read in the future, when I am able to take an AimPoint class). At least I think I have been. I've been doing drills, but maybe I'm more finding out what I do wrong than fixing them. It's now getting more than the baseline 15% of my practice time (GG tells me I'm losing more strokes there, by quite a margin, compared to other parts of my game), but I want to make sure that time is well spent and leads to improvement. I worry that I may be getting into the "just hitting balls at the range" equivalent for putting. My problem is, when I'm doing drills and learning that I am not hitting my goals (not getting the ball across the ruler for that drill, taking many iterations to do a 4' 8' 12' drill, etc), how do I figure out what, if anything to change? I also worry that when doing a clock drill, if I miss from the same position on a few iterations, my next attempt from there might be a false read by what happened, not because I read it wrong, but because I kept pushing from there and thus aim left to make it. I'm fine with the idea of compensating for a miss during a round, but I don't want to do that when I'm practicing. I know that putting particulars vary wildly; should this be a case of "go back to the Utley putting book and review each chapter in order," or is there something else I can do to help on this? Timeline wise, my club championship is in a little over a month. I'm not in cramming mode at the moment, and I would like to be a better putter by then, but my overall goal is long-term improvement not peaking for this particular event.
  6. I've struggled with putting for years. I've tried different putters, different grips, different techniques, all for naught. See my other post about "Anyone else have this much trouble putting?" This past week, I saw this video: I practiced this in my garage a couple of days, just working on getting a good roll and getting my eyes in a position where everything looked lined up, then I played yesterday and BAM! I had one of the best putting days I've ever had. I have no relation to this person or company, I just stumbled upon this video and hopefully it'll help other people. I made two birdies and a couple of par savers from 10-20' and had three 40'+ that either lipped out or stopped literally a ball's width from the hole! Even my friends were commenting on how well I was rolling it. I have no idea how I'll putt next time, but until then I'm just going to enjoy the memory!
  7. I'm sure it's not just me. Just got back from our yearly golf pilgrimage in Arizona (which was incredible) and I'm the worst putter in the group, even worse than guys who are 5-8 shots worse than me hcp wise. One round I lost track of how many 3-putts after six times. I'm about 50% from 3-5 ft. Longer putts I'd save time and strokes by just taking 2 putts and staying in the cart. I have a hard time getting putts to start on line which makes it hard to make short ones. The putter tends to go all over the place on my backswing. Some things I've tried: Different types of putters (face vs. toe balanced). Left hand low (which is how I putt now). Claw grip. Putting mirror and rail. Putter wheel. Eyes closed (some success, but nothing long term). This at least helps me not watch the putter or look up too soon. I had pros look at my stroke on SAM a while back. My stroke is better one handed (either hand) than with both hands. Stroke tends to be fairly straight back, then follow through long and too far left. Everyone says putt with their shoulders, but what's the best move to start the putter back? Pull with your right shoulder blade? Push down with left shoulder? Thanks for the comments.
  8. 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).
  9. 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.
  10. Hello - Can anyone take a look at the placement of this putting tape on my putter? 1) Is the tape too low on the face of my putter? 2) If not, am I hitting the ball too high on the face of the putter? above the 'perfect' spot on the tape 3) how can i fix where I hit the ball if I am hitting it "too high" on the face? Thanks!
  11. What's the deal with grain?

    So at the event at Kapalua, announcers pointed out what they called an effect of grain on a putt by Ryan Moore (gif below) where the trajectory of a left-to-right putt seems to change in a slight double-break. Objections were raised that studies of grain effects indicated they were minimal...up to 2 inches on a 20' putt. Not sure if that was for mostly level or appreciable slope. This jibes with what I recall about grain from one of the original empirical looks at grain in Vector Putting (since superseded / updated by AimPoint)...that it was relatively a small contribution vs. slope. From what I've come across, the least 'grainy' grass is supposed to be Poa Annua as it has the most vertical 'growth habit', while creeping bentgrass has more tendency to develop grain, and Bermuda even more (greens at Kapalua). The intuitive assumption might be that amount of deflection is spread out evenly along the whole length of the putt (like slope is - ball is always falling) so grain-induced deflection is like .008" per foot of putt length. I'm not convinced that's how it would work as it seems likely that grass grain (if present) would have more effect on a slower moving ball (end portion of longer putts or most of a short putt that is only intended to go a bit past the hole). So shorter putts might experience a greater percentage of deflection (but still under 2"). Most of the information says that grass grain tends to follow the slope (downhill) if it's present. So grain and slope would typically be aligned the same. On that basis it's implied that in the GIF above there was most likely a slope change that is reflected in the color change of the grass. The more closely mown the grass, the less the grain tends to be in play because the stems are cropped nearer the ground. But here's a video where grain has developed independent of slope sun or maintenance practices due to some particular quirks of the site, green location, or the plants. Grain changes 180 degrees where there is no appreciable change in slope. Based on the video above it seems possible that the color change apparent on the green in the Kapalua GIF isn't a change is slope, but only a 'random' variation in the grain as in the video above. In that case it seems like the 'jog left' the putt seems to take might be a case of the 'rising fastball' effect where the anticipation of the curve on the early phase of the putt as the ball is falling with gravity on a 'fast' portion of grain continues to fall, but does so more slowly on a 'slow' portion of grain (opposite the slope / falling ball) and tracks into the hole on a less curved than expected line for the average 'grain with the slope' green speed? So what's your experience? Do you find that grain primarily follows slope so that you can use visual 'grain' cues to help find slope inflections? And do you find patches of grain on some courses / holes that does not follow the downhill slope? If so, how frequently, and do you notice any common patterns or is it more random? If you notice grain effects, what type of grass is it usually? Do you find short putts have an equal amount of break as longer putts or do you find the effect of grain proportional to the length of the putt? Do you notice differing effects from grain if the average stimp is high or low? Here's some general info on grain and green agronomy (who knew there was a global turf network):
  12. Hi Guys, I'm fairly new to this website. I wanted to join to begin a forum on Indoor Putting Greens. I know most of us reside in the cold states where we can only sit and dream about golf. I grew tired of this routine of playing golf and finding my game by the time it was too late and the leaves began to fall and soon enough the snow-birds were snow-birding again.... lol. Anyways, I'm an avid golfer, a golf junkie, a golf pyscho, a serial golfer... whatever it is I'm just obsessed with the game. I love it, like all of us do on this site. I've got 3 kids, so this project was a MUST DO. I made a massive putting green in the basement after reading many reviews for the material Kevin Na and Ben Crane were touting about a couple years ago. I learnt many of the tour pros used this material so I HAD to get my hands on it. I thought it would've been pricey but it was super affordable. I spent about 2 weeks building and boy, was it worth it. The finished product was beyond my imagination - I've played many great golf courses and the green actually emulated the best. I even added slopes. And for the record, I'm basically here to spread the word that it is completely possible to have a massive(or small) putting green in your home without breaking the banks like these synthetic turf company's charge. The project literally cost me less than $400. The kids love it, they're down there and have practically forgotten about their Ipads and Ipods and video games(true story). But best of all, the WIFE APPROVES. Here are some pictures - If people are interested in how I constructed, please just feel free to comment. We do not need to be golf hibernators anymore! :)
  13. Now that I've finished up a bunch of home DIY projects primarily in anticipation of our WHOLE family coming to our house for the Thanksgiving holiday, it is now 1. cold outside, it came quickly, 2. I don't have many projects left and I'd like to do a fun one. I have a 14 x 21 ft. office that is basically an office/man cave all-in-one. My wife and I have no kids yet but we may have one soon. This would be a good opportunity to create something in the house that I can relax and do while still watching the baby. I started my research and found some awesome custom indoor practice greens with fringe and everything... check the price tag and nearly fell out of my chair! $3,000-$6,000 for something like what I was thinking. I would say my budget is < $1,000. It would be built over the existing tight berber carpet. My main focuses are: 1. A quality, durable, even putting surface. My NC greens are bentgrass. They play slow (stimp 9 to 11 if I recall). If I can get something similar to this that would be excellent. I don't mind spending more for higher quality here. 2. I would like fringe around the majority of the perimeter because it should look a little nicer and it would be good practice putting from some fringe (which I often do). Our fringe is typically bermuda - so something like this would be great. I believe my initial design has some good space to include some larger sections of fringe. 3. I do not care about adding break components in this project. I'd rather focus my indoor practice on getting putts on line and some distance control with good, straight and flat feedback on my stroke. 4. I want it to have real holes. I'll also get short flag sticks. I've attached my rough draft I just whipped up of my initial design thoughts. It should be relatively to scale. Rough overall dimensions would be 7' x 17'. Right now I'm thinking I'll make the base out of 2x4, 3.5-in height + 1/2-in drywall is about ~4-inches tall plus putting/fringe surfaces. I'm worried though that because of the overall length of the green that it will flex under the padding of the carpet. Maybe not a big deal though? I might be overthinking that one. For the various more rounded edges I'll just do multiple cuts at varying degrees of edge cut to make a turn and then just cut a more rounded fringe? Or maybe find a more creative way? I think the areas I need the most help with are the surface materials, what type, where to get them, how to apply them best, and also some design components for good practice. Should I make a larger chunk of it fringe? Maybe the first 3-5 ft from the top area all fringe? Hole locations? Different fringe area cutouts? What would you do to maximize practice/drills (but without any break ) Here's some stuff online that I really liked: http://www.carolinacustomputtinggreens.com/indoor-putting-greens I would likely start this build in late February 2017. I want to make sure I have all my ducks in a row. TIA!
  14. This came up in a different thread so lets see if you do putt with a finger pointed down the shaft, if you did putt with a finger down the shaft or you use a different grip all together. If you select other, you can tell us your grip style.
  15. http://www.perfectstrokeputtingaid.com The PerfectStroke TPE putting training aid is a multifaceted putting training aid that reinforces a number of good things. It costs about $200 (some discounts are available) including shipping and comes with: A reflective base. Two posts to which you can attach… … one or two carbon fiber bars. … and one of two clear plastic strips with different alignment lines (single, double). The TPE can be used in a variety of combinations. You can attach or detach one or both carbon fiber rails and you can use use either (or neither) of the clear plastic alignment rails, which can also be oriented outward or inward if you're looking to encourage an exaggeration to change a stroke. The reflective base is great for seeing where your shoulders, your eyeliner, and things like that are at setup. The rails assist you in keeping the putter "on plane." If your putter stays on plane, it's tough to mis-hit the putt, and it's tougher (though not impossible of course) to over- or under-rotate the putter face. The alignment strips help you to line up square to the target line, with your feet, putter, etc. working back and through properly (ideally slightly inside the line on both sides, though how much it appears to do so will depend on where your eyes are aligned relative to the strip. Some Videos: This last video shows how easily the TPE can be set up: Over the next little bit, I'll be playing with and using the TPE 3.0 with students, with myself and my daughter, and checking out what else is possible (though the videos above really do show off the versatility!). Ultimately, I'll decide whether I'll recommend - or recommend against - the TPE 3.0 to golfers and instructors.
  16. http://www.wrightputtingdynamics.com or http://www.wrightputtingdynamics.com/the-putting-t-bar.html http://shop.wrightputtingdynamics.com/The-Putting-T-Bar-with-Balance-Rod-practice-aid-tbar.htm if you want to buy. The T-Bar is two things: A device that attaches beneath your putter grip which places a bar across your shoulders. A two-piece rod that has markings equally spaced apart from the middle so you can practice a matching back- and through-swing (among other things). A video, from two views: Years ago Rick was going to send me one of these and it was lost in the mail or never sent or something. I never got it. I wasn't too disappointed as I didn't think it would be a particularly useful training aid. I generally prefer a putting stroke with a bit more freedom of movement - a little bit in both the elbows and a bit more in the wrists. Good putters have soft wrists that can compensate at the last minute for a putting stroke that would otherwise be too strong or weak (distance control). But… a lot of that was based on what I understood that good putters do. For example, I didn't need this training aid because I was a good putter: I already used my shoulders, elbows, and wrists properly. This training aid "limited" me by removing the little bit of elbows and wrists from my stroke. It felt rigid, forced, and too structured for a free-flowing, artistic, "feely" putting stroke. Turns out, though… some people don't even use their shoulders properly. They're unable to rock their shoulders back and forth properly to provide the general path of the putter, to use the "big muscles" to provide the overall shape of their stroke and to use the wrists/elbows to provide a little of the more subtle motions important to touch. For these people (at least one or two of them are on my college golf team…), the T-Bar provides an immediate help. These golfers often have a stroke guided primarily by the wrists and/or elbows. They often take the putter too far outside on the backswing, or roll it well inside on a strong arc… their follow-throughs often result in poor contact with a variable face angle. For these golfers, the T-Bar is great at providing them the structure, and feel, of a good putting stroke. I like to use the T-Bar in two ways: As you see in the video of me up above: with the T-Bar square resting against the student's chest/collarbones. With the T-Bar an inch or so away from the student's collarbones. The former trains the general feeling, the second confirms that the student can "do it" without being forced to do it: if the T-Bar stays an inch or two away from the golfer's chest with the center in front of his sternum, he's done it properly. If the ends get closer to or farther from the golfer's chest, he's doing something wrong. In the video above I hit four putts from down the line. The first goes in from 16 feet. The second I didn't re-align and misses right. The third hits a ball in the cup and bounces over the hole. The fourth goes in as it was hit slower. You'll notice my shoulders working pretty well along their plane, and the putter working in an arc. Because I can't twist the putter open or closed, it stays square "to the path" the entire time. Which is why, if I line up the putts as I do the first, third, and fourth… they go in. The latter four videos are from face-on (actually a bit behind face-on, as my ball position is not that far forward). After the third putt I "goof around" to show you how you can do things incorrectly and what would happen to the T-Bar. Simply put, it moves relative to your chest. Now, you can still make bad strokes with the T-Bar. Toward the end of the goofing around portion, I turn my shoulders very horizontally. Similarly, you can still become a good putter while not using your shoulders as the T-Bar wants you to do, too (though I'd think the odds would go down quite a bit). I'm here to answer questions you might have and/or film anything else you might want to see. P.S. Given the shat is vertical at impact with a ball position normally a little forward of center, the impact and launch conditions will generally not be ideal: too much positive loft, not quite enough shaft lean, etc. This is one of the things the wrists can help you do to putt well (controlling delivered loft). So, while using the T-Bar, you'll hit putts with a bit too much loft and possibly a little backspin. Just wanted to add that bit…
  17. Mini Golf Putting

    I've always been frustrated by how badly I putt on these surfaces. I'm sure these guys who win these tournaments are good at what they do, but it sure seems to take a different set of skills than putting on a golf course. Off the top of my head, some of the differences that throw me off in mini-golf: uneven carpets, less uniform than golf greens (for example, mini-golfers wouldn't have a need for Aimpoint, is my guess!) the stupid little volcano effect that seems to be around many holes- throwing your ball off line if it is going too slow as it nears the hole the need to shorten your backswing when you're near a wall or obstacle I'm not sure what skills these guys have that make them good at dealing with these things. Is it just that they practice and are used to it all? Some of the folks in the video don't appear to have very good traditional putting form to my eye, but presumably they're pretty good to be competing in this tournament. Interesting video though. Not sure if this is related to the real Masters, but they have certainly "borrowed" a few things such as the "green jacket" and the logo. http://prominigolf.com/tournaments/masters/masters-schedule/ Anyway, I just stumbled onto that video above in one of my news feeds, and thought it was kinda fun.
  18. I created the table below based on how the PGA Tour calculates Strokes Gained putting, using my most recent round. For some reason, GameGolf is telling my my Strokes Gained (or lost) was -4.62 strokes for this round against a scratch golfer. Seems quite a bit off considering the actual calculation is -3.02 against the PGA Tour Average. That's over a 1.5 stroke difference. I don't know that I would take the time to do this for every round I play, but it seems that GG is quite a bit off when I spot checked a few more rounds.
  19. So I just played my round best yesterday and only lost 2 golf balls! Which is really good for me because the course I live on has so much water and narrow fairways. The first time I went I lost a 24 pack of laddies.... so this made me happy in the wallet to say the least haha. anyhow I'm not sure where I should spend more time practicing so I wrote down my score into 3 different sections shots to get to pitching or chipping distance. pitching and chipping. putts. my score was a 100 with a 45 on the front and a 55 on the back... (I smoked on the back and I blame the 10 extra strokes because of this.) shots to chipping and pitching: 18 F 22B pitching and chipping: 9F 8B putts: 18 F 22 B Penalties: 0F 2B so in my opinion I think my distance with my long game is there I just need to work on my accuracy to lower my chips and pitches. my pitching chipping and putting all go together because I've already used my GiR so my first chip or pitch is actually counting as my first putt (if I'm going for scratch golf. my putting is horrendous because of the amount of pitching and chipping I had there should be no reason for any 3 putts at all. The only time I should 3 putt is if I hit an iron to the green. tell me what u guys think
  20. So I notice the commentators all rave about Lyida Ko's putting. But looking through her stats, she hits a ton of greens - especially considering her driving distance. So in a sense, if she's that good with her approach shots, she's likely hitting more than her share close and having tighter average proximity for her first putts. So you'd expect her to have a low PPGIR. And she is number one in that stat, probably because she's a good ballstriker and putter. Who you wouldn't expect to have a really low PPGIR is Julie Yang. Now I don't know who she is, but for the past two years she has had the highest PPGiR when you take her GIR into account. In other words she has a really below average GIR, but a surprisingly above average PPGIR. So it seems like she might be the best pure putter in the LPGA. Now it's possible that in Lydia's case she is taking very little risk with her approach shots and hitting to a safe target in the middle of the green most of the time in which case the correlation between her GIR and proximity to the hole may not be as strong. Conversely, Amy Yang may be taking extremely aggressive lines to pins relying on her short game to bail her out so when she does hit the green she has a close first putt. I tend not to think this is the case for either of them, but what do you see watching on TV or what you know of these two players?
  21. I thought I was doing pretty well putting (was averaging about 1.8 holes for a long stretch, a few months at least) but I knew in the back of my head that my putting stroke was primarily based on "feel." My "technique" was to "pop" the ball with an accelerating force to get it to cover a distance gap. So the amount of "pop" I gave it was largely (almost exclusively) based on feel. I would pull the club head back about the same length for any gap, but would give it a stronger pop for longer lags. I'm trying my darnedest to develop a true putting technique with the guidelines found in LSW. Making distance control with the same stroke every time and pulling the club head back farther and farther to cover longer and longer distances. Allowing gravity to accelerate the ball only, ball slightly forward in stance. I have been working on this stroke with my current cheap Yes! C-groove Natalie center mallet putter but it is causing me to absolutely hate this putter. I am SURE that the head is quite light. How much? I don't know. I spent about 1 hour in Dick's trying different styles of lower-end putters. Couldn't find anything worth a lick. I drove over to Golfsmith and spent probably and hour and a half on their practice green. I told myself I would never buy a Scotty Cameron putter, but my goodness if that putter didn't feel like sweet cream butter... The one I like the most was the Futura 7m. I also like the Odyssey sabertooth but at $220 it wasn't too much cheaper and the Scotty Cameron was at least marginally better feel. So I started getting one of those "you get what you pay for" moments... but I never thought that logic could hold up for a different chunk of metal smacking a ball forward at low speed. I'm sure there's a lot of people on here that would swear by their Scotty Camerons. I'm sure there are a lot of others that will say "just work on your technique because you're obviously a bad putter," and finally the group who thinks "you should get fitted." I wouldn't mind getting fitted, but what I'm worried about is having a different feel one day to the next. I have that with my current putter. Some days it feels okay off the face, some days it feels like garbage. That's because I'm not an expert putter. If I go with the Scotty Cameron, will that expertise gap be covered a little better? It sure felt like I could his-hit more on the face of the futura 7m than I could with my current. And if I went to a fitting session, I would worry that if I DIDNT get a SC and went with a higher end Odyssey or something, that it would be good that day and terrible feeling the next day. Then I would have just blown a bunch of money. I checked out Edel fitting and it's in the same price point so I was thinking "maybe," but they didn't have a similar type of putter than the ones I liked. Could really use some of y'alls opinions here. Thanks! Edit: I didn't mention exactly what the differences were between my current putter and the ones I was trying in the store. The best change I felt was how I was able to control pulling the club head back and to allow it to come down nice and evenly. My current putter I really struggle with this as I feel it twisting ever so slightly 75%+ of the time. I think this is driven by how light the putter is? The SC and the higher end Odyssey (both @ 350g+) were MUCH easier to control in this area; that I know for SURE (the one thing I know for sure about this whole thing). My putter is also a 34-inch. I was looking at mostly 34 and 35 inch in the stores. standard grip lengths. The odysseys had the 3.0 slim super strokes on them, the SCs had their stock grips which actually felt great... like really great.
  22. The courses I frequent the most often have really, REALLY slow greens. I believe the grass type on these greens are tifdwarf and I don't believe they're being mowed as frequently as they should be. The greens are fairly large on most holes. I frequently will have 60-80 ft putts. I've noticed I'm developing a really bad habit where I pull the club head back and then accelerate with a vengeance to "pop" the ball toward my target. Obviously, this level of acceleration makes distance control ridiculous. Yesterday on the practice green I started working on trying to break that habit, by bringing the club head back farther and allowing it to fall down naturally (gravity-acceleration only, not muscular). I couldn't get the ball to go 60 ft with a slight uphill. How the heck should I play these shots? I'm really starting to hate slow greens.
  23. I saw this grip and said: "this will completely solve my flipping problem!" thinking that a less severe arc along the edge of the grip (being fatter) would attribute to more palm action and less turning action. Personally (now), I feel like this could not be any more false. I hate this grip. It disgusts me. Ever since the club fitter handed it back to me and I walked up to the practice green I said to myself "oh crap..." Sure enough, I feel like I have zero control over my putts. My hands are so much MORE easier to turn and flip in the stroke than with the 3.0 grip. This grip may work for some, but don't be like me in assuming that you'll get a more flat palm action on the stroke from the width alone. I'm getting it redone tonight. I tried it for a week and hate it. $30 down the drain. FYI, FWIW before this grip change I was averaging ~1.8 putts/hole on large, slow greens in this area.
  24. From the album Statistics/GamePlanning/Other

    © 2014 Every Shot Counts

  25. Discuss "The Science of Golf Putting: A Complete Guide…" by Dias and Couceiro here.
×

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.