# Aimpoint is slow - FACT



## Robobum (Jun 1, 2014)

Played 36 holes on Friday with a guy who used this caper. Without doubt it most definitely is slower.

I also asked him to explain it - he got the chart out!!!! You have got be be kidding me! Looked like log tables, but more complicated.


----------



## Joff (Jun 1, 2014)

I don't like popcorn... But I feel like I need some.


----------



## John_R7 (Jun 1, 2014)

How did he putt out of curiosity?


----------



## CMAC (Jun 1, 2014)

I havent played with someone who uses it, however I would say the only *fact* is the guy you played with was slow


----------



## User20205 (Jun 1, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I havent played with someone who uses it, however I would say the only *fact* is the guy you played with was slow
		
Click to expand...

thats x2 that use it and  are slow? how many do you need for it to be a fact ?

cos I'm sure I can find some more


----------



## Robobum (Jun 1, 2014)

John_R7 said:



			How did he putt out of curiosity?
		
Click to expand...

Not good at all. Probably the green/ sun/ moon/ UKIP/ aim/ stroke to blame


----------



## Robobum (Jun 1, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I havent played with someone who uses it, however I would say the only *fact* is the guy you played with was slow
		
Click to expand...

Hi Dean - great scores mate.

I presume you are Dean seeing as you feel qualified to comment on the 3ball I played in. Why have you changed your tune from when we discussed it down 15 on Friday?


----------



## chrisd (Jun 1, 2014)

I just saw Adam Scott use it for the first time and it seemed to slow things, but, he did make the putt which would have saved time !


----------



## User20205 (Jun 1, 2014)

chrisd said:



			I just saw Adam Scott use it for the first time and it seemed to slow things, but, he did make the putt which would have saved time !
		
Click to expand...

if he makes a putt he's using it, if he missed he's not   tis what I heard on here, must be true


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 1, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I havent played with someone who uses it, however I would say the only *fact* is the guy you played with was slow
		
Click to expand...

I have been out with a few who use it. some slow, but were always slow. Others no/little slower than normal/previous - and the fact they sink more putts means they are quicker than would have been.

The guys that use it a lot take very little time to check/look up and can simply hit the putt. I can imagine that it takes a while to get accustomed to and am sure it will not suit some - who may struggle and be slow with it before realising it/they aren't suited.

But to claim 'fact' from 1 (or 2) example(s) is invalid imo.


----------



## Robobum (Jun 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I have been out with a few who use it. some slow, but were always slow. Others no/little slower than normal/previous - and the fact they sink more putts means they are quicker than would have been.

The guys that use it a lot take very little time to check/look up and can simply hit the putt. I can imagine that it takes a while to get accustomed to and am sure it will not suit some - who may struggle and be slow with it before realising it/they aren't suited.

But to claim 'fact' from 1 (or 2) example(s) is invalid imo.
		
Click to expand...


Thanks for that Walter Mitty


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 1, 2014)

Said it before and stand by it, I've used Aimpoint on every forum meet for the last two years and NO-ONE has complained about my pace of play AND I use the chart. Givent he jip I've had on here about other stuff I can't believe anyone would be too scared to mention it!! :ears: :rofl:I would say the guy is just slow. I can do my read in 10-15 seconds these days.


----------



## User20205 (Jun 1, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Said it before and stand by it, I've used Aimpoint on every forum meet for the last two years and NO-ONE has complained about my pace of play AND I use the chart. Givent he jip I've had on here about other stuff I can't believe anyone would be too scared to mention it!! :ears: :rofl:I would say the guy is just slow. I can do my read in 10-15 seconds these days.
		
Click to expand...



I'm not sure how to break this to you homie, maybe you should sit down ........................you're no 2 :thup:


----------



## Robobum (Jun 1, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Said it before and stand by it, I've used Aimpoint on every forum meet for the last two years and NO-ONE has complained about my pace of play AND I use the chart. Givent he jip I've had on here about other stuff I can't believe anyone would be too scared to mention it!! :ears: :rofl:I would say the guy is just slow. I can do my read in 10-15 seconds these days.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting that slow play crops up a lot due to marking cards on the green - is that any slower than reading a chart? Even using crayons (not progressed to pencil yet) I can write2 numbers pretty quickly


----------



## richart (Jun 1, 2014)

Dennis Pugh has just said on the TV that Adam Scott is much slower using it. He also had little idea what it was about, but said he would know more by Thursday. I thought he had something to do with it but I may be wrong.:confused


----------



## AmandaJR (Jun 1, 2014)

richart said:



			Dennis Pugh has just said on the TV that Adam Scott is much slower using it. He also had little idea what it was about, but said he would know more by Thursday. I thought he had something to do with it but I may be wrong.:confused
		
Click to expand...

Isn't he involved with the new golf thinking/stop slow play "thing"??


----------



## richart (Jun 1, 2014)

AmandaJR said:



			Isn't he involved with the new golf thinking/stop slow play "thing"??
		
Click to expand...

 You may be right Amanda. I know he has been mentioned recently, but my memory is


----------



## pbrown7582 (Jun 1, 2014)

Robobum said:



			Played 36 holes on Friday with a guy who used this caper. Without doubt it most definitely is slower.

I also asked him to explain it - he got the chart out!!!! You have got be be kidding me! Looked like log tables, but more complicated.
		
Click to expand...


I can confirm it was slow on Friday


----------



## guest100718 (Jun 1, 2014)

Aimpoint is slow.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 1, 2014)

guest100718 said:



			Aimpoint is slow.
		
Click to expand...

Poppycock :blah:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			thats x2 that use it and  are slow? how many do you need for it to be a fact ?

cos I'm sure I can find some more
		
Click to expand...


The PGA Pros have complained about a Pro is very slow - they also have said he uses aimpoint and point to that as a reason


----------



## CMAC (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



*thats x2* that use it and  are slow? *how many do you need for it to be a fact ?*

cos I'm sure I can find some more
		
Click to expand...

dont think you understand the concept of a fact


just for the avoidance of doubt, I think aimpoint is a bunch of tosh but so is stating incorrect facts


----------



## CMAC (Jun 1, 2014)

Robobum said:



			Hi Dean - great scores mate.

I presume you are Dean seeing as you feel qualified to comment on the 3ball I played in. Why have you changed your tune from when we discussed it down 15 on Friday?
		
Click to expand...

starting a bit early tonight:smirk:


----------



## User20205 (Jun 1, 2014)

CMAC said:



			dont think you understand the concept of a fact


just for the avoidance of doubt, I think aimpoint is a bunch of tosh but so is stating incorrect facts

Click to expand...

No darth, I fully understand the concept of fact, it was a question, if one doesn't prove it, two likewise, what sample size would you need? Or as in this case is anecdotal evidence enough?


----------



## G_Mulligan (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			No darth, I fully understand the concept of fact, it was a question, if one doesn't prove it, two likewise, what sample size would you need? Or as in this case is anecdotal evidence enough?
		
Click to expand...

sample sizes vary greatly depending on what you are testing but for something like this I would suggest at least 30; 10 experienced in using aim point, 10 using 'normal' green reading methods, and a control group of 10 that just line up and go. The bigger the sample the more confident you can be in the validity of the results.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 1, 2014)

Robobum said:



			Thanks for that Walter Mitty
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 1, 2014)

Robobum said:



			Thanks for that Walter Mitty
		
Click to expand...

You're the one that doesn't seem to be able to distinguish fact and fantasy!


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			No darth, I fully understand the concept of fact, it was a question, if one doesn't prove it, two likewise, *what sample size would you need?* Or as in this case is anecdotal evidence enough?
		
Click to expand...

An infinite amount!  If an infinite number of golfers used Aimpoint on an infinite number of greens then one of them would win the masters.


----------



## stevek1969 (Jun 1, 2014)

I've never read so much much cack ,Aimpoint,charts, pfft get a grip. Putting look at the how the hole is cut then a putt to that side, simple.

Some people just make the game ben harder than it is.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			No darth, I fully understand the concept of fact, it was a question, if one doesn't prove it, two likewise, what sample size would you need? *Or as in this case is anecdotal evidence enough*?
		
Click to expand...

seems to be for you


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			No darth, I fully understand the concept of fact, it was a question, if one doesn't prove it, two likewise, what sample size would you need? Or as in this case is anecdotal evidence enough?
		
Click to expand...

Without rigorous proof, a single discrepancy provides enough to disprove - or at least bring into question - the assertion! Whereas, without rigorous proof, larger samples only increase the level of confidence - they never 'prove' the assertion!

That's (one of the reasons) why the introduction of new drugs is such a long-winded process!


----------



## srixon 1 (Jun 1, 2014)

Aimpoint, never heard of it. If somebody can post up a decent link I will have a look.


----------



## DAVEYBOY (Jun 1, 2014)

I've heard of it but I have no idea what it is and I don't need anymore confusion in this already extremely technical game


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 1, 2014)

DAVEYBOY said:



			I've heard of it but I have no idea what it is and I don't need anymore confusion in this already extremely technical game 

Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing wrong with that approach either!

Learning and applying it seems pretty much analogous to taking a swing change directly to the course!


----------



## User20205 (Jun 1, 2014)

CMAC said:



			seems to be for you
		
Click to expand...




Foxholer said:



			Without rigorous proof, a single discrepancy provides enough to disprove - or at least bring into question - the assertion! Whereas, without rigorous proof, larger samples only increase the level of confidence - they never 'prove' the assertion!

That's (one of the reasons) why the introduction of new drugs is such a long-winded process!
		
Click to expand...

So if my group is 1, Darren's also 1. The overall number of golfers in our study is 2, both of which are painfully slow.
That makes our study 100% accurate, therefore the statement is true, aimpoint is slow. You can't argue with the percentages. :ears:

I'll let Ethan decide if my little study was statistically relevant


----------



## Robobum (Jun 1, 2014)

The guy did not pull the chart out too often, especially after he missed a couple by a mile, so I am assuming he was using the 'Express' version!!??

But, and if this isn't how it should be done I am very happy to stand corrected, a putt of (say) 20' would mean walking down the line of the putt and standind there feeling the slope. Dependant on length? it would either be 1/2 way or 1/3 and 2/3. Then, return behind the ball and use the thumb & finger(s) pointing at the hole to get the Aimpoint. 

This guy then lined the mark on his ball towards this line (I know that isn't part of it) and then went onto practice stroke and then putt.

Whichever way you dress it up, that takes time.

Now, there are 2 scenarios I can see where that doesn't impact....

1. You hit it closest, so are last to putt and can go thru that rigmarole whilst others putt

2. You get to the green first so can do the Aimpoint whilst others mark and clean balls and grab the flag etc.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 1, 2014)

Load of old Bullocks.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 1, 2014)

stevek1969 said:



			I've never read so much much cack ,Aimpoint,charts, pfft get a grip. Putting look at the how the hole is cut then a putt to that side, simple.

Some people just make the game ben harder than it is.
		
Click to expand...

Possibly the most sensible comment yet on this subject  :thup:


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			So if my group is 1, Darren's also 1. The overall number of golfers in our study is 2, both of which are painfully slow.
That makes our study 100% accurate, therefore the statement is true, aimpoint is slow. You can't argue with the percentages. :ears:

I'll let Ethan decide if my little study was statistically relevant 

Click to expand...

Try applying the same 'logic' to Cricket. First over and first 2 balls are dots. I know Cricket can be a little dull at times, but do those 'facts' mean that at the end of the day, the score is still going to be 0 for 0? A slightly daft analogy (the events, not the analogy) but it pretty clearly demonstrates the sort of flawed 'conclusions' that small samples can throw up.

I par-ed the first 3 holes yesterday. Should I have stopped there and put the card in for level par? Bubba birdied the first 2 today. Why didn't he just sign for a 56? 

And in the 'tests', was the time for the guys pre-Aimpoint measured and compared? Or was it simply *assumed* that the additional time that the guys too was ALL down to Aimpoint.

You can surely see how from that pair of tests, the no valid conclusions could really be made. That doesn't alter the facts that they used Aimpoint and that they were slow, so it would be possible for the observers to say that 'Every Aimpoint practitioner I have seen has been slow'.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Try applying the same 'logic' to Cricket. First over and first 2 balls are dots. I know Cricket can be a little dull at times, but do those 'facts' mean that at the end of the day, the score is still going to be 0 for 0? A slightly daft analogy (the events, not the analogy) but it pretty clearly demonstrates the sort of flawed 'conclusions' that small samples can throw up.

I par-ed the first 3 holes yesterday. Should I have stopped there and put the card in for level par? Bubba birdied the first 2 today. Why didn't he just sign for a 56? 

And in the 'test'
		
Click to expand...

god Foxholer your so far out there that I need to hit 20 drives to catch up with you in the intelligence department and never get there, but I think I know what you mean. I'll just stick to the Vulcan 'V' sign to get my green reads and possibly turn it round for the detractors and flick it at them........... 

Is that an infraction?


----------



## richart (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			So if my group is 1, Darren's also 1. The overall number of golfers in our study is 2, both of which are painfully slow.
That makes our study 100% accurate, therefore the statement is true, aimpoint is slow. You can't argue with the percentages. :ears:

I'll let Ethan decide if my little study was statistically relevant 

Click to expand...

 It has all to do with your sample size.


----------



## User20205 (Jun 1, 2014)

richart said:



			It has all to do with your sample size.

Click to expand...


I agree, I have enough evidence with which to draw my conclusion
I this case my study group is 1 and the conclusions are overwhelming


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 1, 2014)

therod said:



			I agree, I have enough evidence with which to draw my conclusion
I this case my study group is 1 and the conclusions are overwhelming 

Click to expand...

:rofl: :rofl: :thup:

The Flat Earth Society could have a candidate for President!


----------



## chrisd (Jun 2, 2014)

richart said:



			It has all to do with your sample size.

Click to expand...

Size isn't everything, as they say!


----------



## Swinger (Jun 2, 2014)

Aimpoint killed my pet hamster and slashed my tyres.


----------



## pokerjoke (Jun 2, 2014)

Did I see Adam Scott last night standing with one foot either side of the hole.
He was about 2ft away.
Was he trying to see if there was any difference in the level of his feet,thus
trying to tell if there was a break on his putt?


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 2, 2014)

pokerjoke said:



			Did I see Adam Scott last night standing with one foot either side of the hole.
He was about 2ft away.
Was he trying to see if there was any difference in the level of his feet,thus
trying to tell if there was a break on his putt?
		
Click to expand...

Yes he was. They were talking about it last week. I don't claim to understand it though.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

pokerjoke said:



			Did I see Adam Scott last night standing with one foot either side of the hole.
He was about 2ft away.
Was he trying to see if there was any difference in the level of his feet,thus
trying to tell if there was a break on his putt?
		
Click to expand...

Yes he was - he was also sticking his fingers up on another putt


----------



## pokerjoke (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yes he was - he was also sticking his fingers up on another putt
		
Click to expand...

When I saw him do it I did think it was a good idea.
However the putt was about 15ft I think and he missed it to the left.
Overall his putting was very good.


----------



## Wedgey (Jun 2, 2014)

Whatever happened to 'just get the ball in the hole'!!!


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 2, 2014)

Wedgey said:



			Whatever happened to 'just get the ball in the hole'!!!
		
Click to expand...

That's only any good if you can already putt. If you can't, you need aimpoint and a long putter


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

Out of curiosity, is Adam Scott sponsored to use Aimpoint? 
Does anyone know? 
Can it be proven either way? 
Does it work? 
Where is the statistical evidence? 
Are aimpointers guilty of indirectly funding elite golfers? 
Who knows? 

For all the answers, and more, tune in to the next riveting episode of..........'Aimpoint'!










Y'all never know, he may actually be on the payroll.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Out of curiosity, is Adam Scott sponsored to use Aimpoint? 
Does anyone know? 
Can it be proven either way? 
Does it work? 
Where is the statistical evidence? 
Are aimpointers guilty of indirectly funding elite golfers? 
Who knows? 

For all the answers, and more, tune in to the next riveting episode of..........'Aimpoint'!
		
Click to expand...

Reads like a story of 2 sisters - and a butler named Benson! Wonderful series!


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

Wedgey said:



			Whatever happened to 'just get the ball in the hole'!!!
		
Click to expand...

How do you go about getting the ball in the hole?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

3565 said:



			How do you go about getting the ball in the hole?
		
Click to expand...

Hit the ball with a club - simples


----------



## Wedgey (Jun 2, 2014)

3565 said:



			How do you go about getting the ball in the hole?
		
Click to expand...

Hit it!!


----------



## AmandaJR (Jun 2, 2014)

I briefly saw Scott standing astride his line and gauging the slope with his feet. It was about 4' and he missed. Commentators said "he can't believe that didn't move as he felt he hit a good putt". Nothing is foolproof but have to say that kind of put me off the theory!


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Reads like a story of 2 sisters - and a butler named Benson! Wonderful series!
		
Click to expand...


I was trying for Batman (Adam West era).


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

Wedgey said:



			Hit it!!
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## drdel (Jun 2, 2014)

Hair's on fire; feet are in a bath of ice so, on average I'm fine - bit like my putting !!

A hole. a putter and a ball that's hard enough for me - you want me to aim and point as well; give over !


----------



## jimbob.someroo (Jun 2, 2014)

Not a huge fan of it after considering it for a bit last year. I've already got too much going on in me heed on the greens. New approach is just to whack it at the hole whilst humming a catchy tune. 

Seems to be working for Scotty though. Has gone from upwards of 150 to top 20 in either strokes saved / average putts according to summink they said on TV t'other night.


----------



## AmandaJR (Jun 2, 2014)

jimbob.someroo said:



			Not a huge fan of it after considering it for a bit last year. I've already got too much going on in me heed on the greens. New approach is just to whack it at the hole *whilst humming a catchy tune*. 

Seems to be working for Scotty though. Has gone from upwards of 150 to top 20 in either strokes saved / average putts according to summink they said on TV t'other night.
		
Click to expand...

Best putting day I ever had in a comp was when I had "Price Tag" going round and round in my head. It's not about the money, money...tried since to recreate that but it was a one off!


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 2, 2014)

AmandaJR said:



			I briefly saw Scott standing astride his line and gauging the slope with his feet. It was about 4' and he missed. Commentators said "he can't believe that didn't move as he felt he hit a good putt". Nothing is foolproof but have to say that kind of put me off the theory!
		
Click to expand...

Personally I don't see how standing with the ball between your legs tells you the slope on the path of the putt? 

Many many years ago, I read a thing that Faldo said about walking along next to the line of the putt and feeling the slope with your feet. It is something I do occasionally if I'm really not sure of the read. Aimpoint is nothing new it seems.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

So can this thread be used for negative remarks about Aimpoint ?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

Not overly convinced by the express read. In aimpoint terms I may be a luddite but I like the comfort blanket of the chart to tell me what my read is rather than just relying on the feeling in my feet and sticking an arm out.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So can this thread be used for negative remarks about Aimpoint ?
		
Click to expand...

Give me strength

only constructive comments (positive or negative) about the effect of aimpoint on pace of play on this thread please.

thank you


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Not overly convinced by the express read. In aimpoint terms I may be a luddite but I like the comfort blanket of the chart to tell me what my read is rather than just relying on the feeling in my feet and sticking an arm out.
		
Click to expand...

Homer trust me it's as accurate as the Chart.


----------



## User20205 (Jun 2, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Not overly convinced by the express read. In aimpoint terms I may be a luddite but I like the comfort blanket of the chart to tell me what my read is rather than just relying on the feeling in my feet and sticking an arm out.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe off topic, but with aimpoint, the linear method, and NGT, it's all a bit paint by numbers, isn't it?

If you got to 4 without all of the above, why do you need them now?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

3565 said:



			Homer trust me it's as accurate as the Chart.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure it is but as I say feel happier with the chart as verification.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

therod said:



			Maybe off topic, but with aimpoint, the linear method, and NGT, it's all a bit paint by numbers, isn't it?

If you got to 4 without all of the above, why do you need them now?
		
Click to expand...


Got to 4 ?

Thats good golf that - when was this ?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

therod said:



			Maybe off topic, but with aimpoint, the linear method, and NGT, it's all a bit paint by numbers, isn't it?

If you got to 4 without all of the above, why do you need them now?
		
Click to expand...

Linear method no more. Much more conventional now and reaping rewards. NGT - not been out of the buffer zone since. Aimpoint - averaging almost 30 putts per round and going down. That and I was at the club 24/7 every day and working and playing loads with daily access to a solid teaching pro. That and I was 16, no aching bones, no wife. Where did I go wrong


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Linear method no more. Much more conventional now and reaping rewards. NGT - not been out of the buffer zone since. Aimpoint - averaging almost 30 putts per round and going down. That and I was at the club 24/7 every day and working and playing loads with daily access to a solid teaching pro. That and I was 16, no aching bones, no wife. Where did I go wrong
		
Click to expand...

Did you stop playing for while ? 4 at the age of 16 is good golf


----------



## User20205 (Jun 2, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Linear method no more. Much more conventional now and reaping rewards. NGT - not been out of the buffer zone since. Aimpoint - averaging almost 30 putts per round and going down. That and I was at the club 24/7 every day and working and playing loads with daily access to a solid teaching pro. That and I was 16, no aching bones, no wife. Where did I go wrong
		
Click to expand...

You can't equate the love of a good woman to a handicap figure homer!!
Surely it's better to be chopping it around off 28 (with clean shoes) than playing off 4 and having to cook your own spag Bol!!


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Did you stop playing for while ? 4 at the age of 16 is good golf
		
Click to expand...

Wanted to do the pro course but parents couldn't afford it, club wouldn't sponsor me. Kept going until 18 then got a proper job, found beer, women and went back to football. Injuries, no practice and other things mean I have never got back to those halcyon days. Mind you I did bunk off my 5th form at school and was getting Â£40pw (cash in hand) and only popped back to do my exams. Still got English Language (grade A - taken at 14) advanced O levels in Business Studies and English Lit, O levels in Economics and History and a CSE grade 1 in Maths. Pretty good considering.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Wanted to do the pro course but parents couldn't afford it, club wouldn't sponsor me. Kept going until 18 then got a proper job, found beer, women and went back to football. Injuries, no practice and other things mean I have never got back to those halcyon days. Mind you I did bunk off my 5th form at school and was getting Â£40pw (cash in hand) and only popped back to do my exams. Still got English Language (grade A - taken at 14) advanced O levels in Business Studies and English Lit, O levels in Economics and History and a CSE grade 1 in Maths. Pretty good considering.
		
Click to expand...

Did you have the same stand up swing thingy back then ?


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Jun 2, 2014)

Guys , can we get back on track please
Nice to see a LP & Homer love in


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Did you have the same stand up swing thingy back then ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes. Been there from day 1 but as a youngster with the hand eye co-ordination and hitting balls and playing at least 18 every day I could compensate so much better.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Yes. Been there from day 1 but as a youngster with the hand eye co-ordination and hitting balls and playing at least 18 every day I could compensate so much better.
		
Click to expand...

No worries

Anyway - Aimpoint - sorry but think its madness for anyone to pay to be shown a method on how to read a green. 

Why not just allow people to download the methods and charts etc


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

jimbob.someroo said:



			Not a huge fan of it after considering it for a bit last year. I've already got too much going on in me heed on the greens. New approach is just to whack it at the hole whilst humming a catchy tune. 

Seems to be working for Scotty though. Has gone from upwards of 150 to top 20 in either strokes saved / average putts according to summink they said on TV t'other night.
		
Click to expand...

I respect your comment on it. And since using this method it's the first time Scott has broken into the top 100. 
Extract from PGATOUR.COM

.452 Strokes gained-putting for Adam Scott during the 2013-14 season, which ranks 18th on TOUR. â€¦ Scott gained .644 shots on the field in putting en route to winning the Crowne Plaza Invitational at Colonial, which ranked 26th among the field. A lot has been made about the anchored putting stroke, which will be banned in 2016. Scott has used the long putter since 2011 and itâ€™s clearly helped him. In 2009, he lost .888 shots to the field average on the greens (180th on TOUR). In 2010, he lost .746 shots (186th). But he lost just .172 shots (142nd) in 2011, .204 shots in 2012 (148th) and finished above the field average at .001 in 2013 (T102). This year has been even better through his first eight events of the season. Scott also ranks fourth on TOUR in putting from 15 to 25 feet, 12th in putting from 15 to 20 feet and eighth in putting from more than 25 feet.

The improvement has been a combination of all aspects of his game but the massive gain from 102 to 18th in putting, you have to ask why the sudden Improvement this year? Is it a coincidence that he's learnt and uses Aimpoint?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			No worries

Anyway - Aimpoint - sorry but think its madness for anyone to pay to be shown a method on how to read a green. 

Why not just allow people to download the methods and charts etc
		
Click to expand...

I kind of see your point but you get to go on a free refresher so the Â£90 cost is actually on Â£45 if you take up the offer. For several hours that's no more than seeing a teaching pro so the cost issue is a misnomer to a degree. Why do it? Good question but having hit putts for years and wondered why it has or hasn't taken the break I'd seen as often as I liked I wanted to see if it was just me. As the course was held at the same place I have lessons it was on the doorstep which was also a clincher (and I got a tiny discount).

It does come down to physics but I am still surprised when I do a read, look at the chart and see how much it suggest the ball will move. It isn't infallible and you have to have a decent stroke (something I am constantly working hard to get better at). For me, it gives me piece of mind about the read and so can focus on pace and let gravity do the work. With the confidence of the read I can put a solid stroke on the putt.


----------



## richart (Jun 2, 2014)

Do aimpointers still crouch down behind the ball to check the line, or is it just charts feet, etc ?

There is a skill in reading greens, and you can have the best stroke in the world, but will not hole much if you can't read them. Remember watching Ross Fisher in the Ryder Cup, and he was holing them from everywhere. It was his partner Harrington that was reading all the putts for him. Normally his putting for a Pro is poor.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			No worries

Anyway - Aimpoint - sorry but think its madness for anyone to pay to be shown a method on how to read a green. 

Why not just allow people to download the methods and charts etc
		
Click to expand...

we know what your thoughts are, but I don't respect your opinion on something you've not tried and validate your reasoning, just like your views on NGT. So why don't you leave the madness to those who do want it. Quote you, Simples.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

richart said:



			Do aimpointers still crouch down behind the ball to check the line, or is it just charts feet, etc ?

There is a skill in reading greens, and you can have the best stroke in the world, but will not hole much if you can't read them. Remember watching Ross Fisher in the Ryder Cup, and he was holing them from everywhere. It was his partner Harrington that was reading all the putts for him. Normally his putting for a Pro is poor.
		
Click to expand...

Good question. Personally I use my feet to work out the severity of the slope, look for the low side of the hole as I'm walking towards the green and then find my angle and read off from the chart. Don't really get anything extra from crouching behind the ball so don't worry. Pace of play and all that


----------



## Stuart_C (Jun 2, 2014)

3565 said:



			we know what your thoughts are, but I don't respect your opinion on something you've not tried and validate your reasoning, just like your views on NGT. So why don't you leave the madness to those who do want it. Quote you, Simples.
		
Click to expand...

Haha @LP!

I Played with Virtuocity last week and he explained Aimpoint to me and to a certain degree its a good method to use.

What i don't get is how the use of a chart can help you read greens.

Maybe if i seen it in action then my opinion maybe different but it seems like its a closed shop unless your prepared/can afford to pay Â£90 for the Aimpoint session etc.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 2, 2014)

Stuart_C said:



			Haha @LP!

I Played with Virtuocity last week and he explained Aimpoint to me and to a certain degree its a good method to use.

What i don't get is how the use of a chart can help you read greens.

Maybe if i seen it in action then my opinion maybe different but it seems like its a closed shop unless your prepared/can afford to pay Â£90 for the Aimpoint session etc.
		
Click to expand...

No closed shop from me. Happy to explain in although in the middle of a round with others coming up behind hardly the best place. If we meet up at a forum meet (H4H etc) more than happy to give a quick demonstration


----------



## richart (Jun 2, 2014)

How many Pro's use Aimpoint ? It has been around for 5 years, but I have only heard of Adam Scott and Stacey Lewis using it. 

It may well be a good way to read greens, but is it better than the conventional way, or just for those that can't read greens the old way. Golfers like Nicklaus, Watson, Miller, Crenshaw, Faxon, Woods, Stricker etc are fantastic putters that read greens and have never needed charts.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

richart said:



			Do aimpointers still crouch down behind the ball to check the line, or is it just charts feet, etc ?

There is a skill in reading greens, and you can have the best stroke in the world, but will not hole much if you can't read them. Remember watching Ross Fisher in the Ryder Cup, and he was holing them from everywhere. It was his partner Harrington that was reading all the putts for him. Normally his putting for a Pro is poor.
		
Click to expand...

you can be the best reader in the world, but not a good stroke and still not hole much. 

Once I get my read, Aimpoint, I use the line on the ball to my Aimpoint, stand back, settle then go.  I don't stare down the line at all now or visualising the ball rolling, all I'm concentrating on is smooth stroke and pace.  Not too dissimilar to how Scott is doing it.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

3565 said:



			we know what your thoughts are, but I don't respect your opinion on something you've not tried and validate your reasoning, just like your views on NGT. So why don't you leave the madness to those who do want it. Quote you, Simples.
		
Click to expand...

If you read the post my point was actually about having to pay for it 

And instead why not allow people to download the method so they can "try" without having to fork out money.

People will always give things a try - but paying for a method that might not work for them ?


----------



## Stuart_C (Jun 2, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			No closed shop from me. Happy to explain in although in the middle of a round with others coming up behind hardly the best place. If we meet up at a forum meet (H4H etc) more than happy to give a quick demonstration
		
Click to expand...

H i may take you up on that offer though you'll have to speak like Homer does!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

Stuart_C said:



			H i may take you up on that offer *though you'll have to speak like Homer does*!
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

Stuart_C said:



			Haha @LP!

I Played with Virtuocity last week and he explained Aimpoint to me and to a certain degree its a good method to use.

What i don't get is how the use of a chart can help you read greens.

Maybe if i seen it in action then my opinion maybe different but it seems like its a closed shop unless your prepared/can afford to pay Â£90 for the Aimpoint session etc.
		
Click to expand...

tbh you won't do the Chart read class unless you specifically ask for it, the Express Read is just as accurate as the chart plus you can use this method for putts 5ft and under. But the chart does work as I've done as well as Homer for the past 2yrs.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If you read the post my point was actually about having to pay for it 

And instead why not allow people to download the method so they can "try" without having to fork out money.

People will always give things a try - but paying for a method that might not work for them ?
		
Click to expand...

 You are intelligent I take it? If YOU design a concept that can make the game easier or fun to play, or an aid that will help many, are you telling me you are willing to make it readily available to the mass for FREE!!!! God help a company who makes you CEO and running their business........ You talk about Madness.  Think your the one with a screw loose IMO.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

3565 said:



 You are intelligent I take it? If YOU design a concept that can make the game easier or fun to play, or an aid that will help many, are you telling me you are willing to make it readily available to the mass for FREE!!!! God help a company who makes you CEO and running their business........ You talk about Madness.  Think your the one with a screw loose IMO.
		
Click to expand...

Yet there we see multiple pros on you tube videos giving multiple tips and ideas and swing changes etc etc for free and people just snap them up. Pros showing people how to get out of bunkers for free, pros showing people how to putt - for free , pros showing people how to encourage a draw - for free. All over the internet there are thousands upon thousands of methods for golf being given out for free.

This is a method which is not fully proven to work for everyone - yet they want payment to show people how to use their unproven method. 

Please do not start throwing insults at me - believe the mods asked for that to stop. if you dont like my posts then please ignore them.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

richart said:



			How many Pro's use Aimpoint ? It has been around for 5 years, but I have only heard of Adam Scott and Stacey Lewis using it. 

It may well be a good way to read greens, but is it better than the conventional way, or just for those that can't read greens the old way. Golfers like Nicklaus, Watson, Miller, Crenshaw, Faxon, Woods, Stricker etc are fantastic putters that read greens and have never needed charts.
		
Click to expand...

i will answer this by saying whilst feeling the slope with your feet has been around for a long time, the fact that the inventor has been able to put a numerical value of break with certain parameters on any green is a new concept. Whilst something new and a change from the traditional values of the game ie hickory, persimmon, metal woods, graphite, gps, rangefinders, Trackman, gc2, etc etc, is hard to accept, these new technologies have been accepted in the game. 

Yes you have the worlds no1s on men's and women's tours using Aimpoint, but Mahon, Gay, Aguilar, Rock, Fowler has been seen with the chart, Rose has expressed an interest in it, but Westwood,who won't hear anyone say anything bout his putting won't entertain it, and possibly others, Stacy Lewis won the other day with Kim 2nd, and Nordquist 3rd both also using the system. Just to name a few. 

But don't be thinking that the pros on tour don't use charts for green reading as they ALL do in some form or another may not be Aimpoint but they have one. Jack Nicklaus was the first to use Strokesaver on tour, you honestly believe he wouldn't have mapped the greens as well?


----------



## 3565 (Jun 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yet there we see multiple pros on you tube videos giving multiple tips and ideas and swing changes etc etc for free and people just snap them up. Pros showing people how to get out of bunkers for free, pros showing people how to putt - for free , pros showing people how to encourage a draw - for free. All over the internet there are thousands upon thousands of *methods for golf being given out for free.
*
This is a method which is not fully proven to work for everyone - yet they want payment to show people *how to use their unproven method. *

Please do not start throwing insults at me - believe the mods asked for that to stop.* if you dont like my posts then please ignore them.*

Click to expand...



Maybe they are not business savvy? don't think Mr Crossfields isn't making money out of what he does... And my question was directed to You not to the you tubers who hope to make money from it. Just seems you want it for nothing. 

Adam Scott, Stacey Lewis both Worlds No 1 right now, how much proof you want? Search on your PGATOUR.com you might find something that satisfies your freebie needs. 

And that right there is where we share the same thoughts.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

3565 said:



			[/B]

Maybe they are not business savvy? don't think Mr Crossfields isn't making money out of what he does... And my question was directed to You not to the you tubers who hope to make money from it. Just seems you want it for nothing. 

Adam Scott, Stacey Lewis both Worlds No 1 right now, how much proof you want? Search on your PGATOUR.com you might find something that satisfies your freebie needs. 

And that right there is where we share the same thoughts.
		
Click to expand...

But i have seen both Scott and Lewis miss putts ? Believe it happened the other night when Scott thought it would break one way and it didnt - poor misread or a failing of aimpoint ?

It appears that Scott plays his best when he is driving and using the irons well - putting the ball closer to the hole. 

Unless its just down to his putting ? Is that what you are suggesting ?

Sorry but yes to unproven because out of how many professional golfers ? You have a handful. 

There are prob lots of different ways to read greens - how many charge to show their methods - one i believe - aimpoint - why ? prob because they know that golfers will try anything to gain an edge and will look to milk those golfers for the money.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But i have seen both Scott and Lewis miss putts ? Believe it happened the other night when Scott thought it would break one way and it didnt - poor misread or a failing of aimpoint ?

It appears that Scott plays his best when he is driving and using the irons well - putting the ball closer to the hole. 

Unless its just down to his putting ? Is that what you are suggesting ?

Sorry but yes to unproven because out of how many professional golfers ? You have a handful. 

There are prob lots of different ways to read greens - how many charge to show their methods - one i believe - aimpoint - why ? prob because they know that golfers will try anything to gain an edge and will look to milk those golfers for the money.
		
Click to expand...

thats a a shocker they both missed putts...... Have you? Have I? Has everyone on here? Has Tiger? You know there are varying factors to consider in putting. It doesn't take much to miss one, why, and I only watched bits of the Memorial, Scott missed, ask him? I know Costis said he's confused and not sure bout this putt just off the green and he canned it, only just tho. As for his improvement I posted a quote on his putting stats over past 5 yrs and never in top 100 but is now 18th, coincidence or not? I've never said it's solely down to his putting it's thru his general play that he is giving himself more opportunities within the 20ft scoring zone. But he still got to read and make a decent stroke on it. But you can't say he's holing more lengthy putts. So amalgamate the 2 factors, you'll improve. Strange how the Caddy who spent yrs with supposedly best golfer on planet Woods, and read his putts, doesn't for his new employer! 

Yes you can get free tube vids on how to do this n that, but my pro is ex European tour winner and senior tour player, if I want to know how to play shots, I pay him. If I want a putting lesson I'll seek someone who deals with putting mechanics only, and as with reading greens. I wasn't that bad at reading but now I've got a better understanding on greens and have seen things I've never seen before. I proved it in an scratch match the other night my partner said it's right lip I said trust me it's 6" right, it was online broke to the cup and put it's brakes on 2" from centre cup. The lad was bemused with the read but he would of missed 2" on low side but low side never goes in. 

You and I will never see eye to eye that's a certainty, your philosophy on golf works for you and you alone, how bout you leave others to their own philosophy.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

3565 said:



			thats a a shocker they both missed putts...... Have you? Have I? Has everyone on here? Has Tiger? You know there are varying factors to consider in putting. It doesn't take much to miss one, why, and I only watched bits of the Memorial, Scott missed, ask him? I know Costis said he's confused and not sure bout this putt just off the green and he canned it, only just tho. As for his improvement I posted a quote on his putting stats over past 5 yrs and never in top 100 but is now 18th, coincidence or not? I've never said it's solely down to his putting it's thru his general play that he is giving himself more opportunities within the 20ft scoring zone. But he still got to read and make a decent stroke on it. But you can't say he's holing more lengthy putts. So amalgamate the 2 factors, you'll improve. Strange how the Caddy who spent yrs with supposedly best golfer on planet Woods, and read his putts, doesn't for his new employer! 

Yes you can get free tube vids on how to do this n that, but my pro is ex European tour winner and senior tour player, if I want to know how to play shots, I pay him. If I want a putting lesson I'll seek someone who deals with putting mechanics only,
		
Click to expand...

Again its not full proof is it - i understand it currently doesnt deal with double breaks ? and maybe in the future when there could be a majority doing it then possibly it might be worth looking at but as defensive as you are about it ( hence why these threads decsend into chaos ) its still a very much a minority of people using it - and that must be for a reason. 

I have no doubt that you only saw the putts Scott got - it appears you always seem to miss the ones he misses ( poor stroke off course ) 

i have spoken to pros about it and the general consensus is the same - waste of money and slows the game down, thats people making money from the game. 

Maybe if people where able to see the basics and try it before buying then possibly people might not be against it - but paying money to be shown a method of reading greens when pros have given methods for free in the past ( no thanks ) and even more so as someone has already pointed out - its more than likely a hash of previous methods used by people to gain money.

And just read your edit - yes i have a different thinking in golf - but i pretty sure im allowed to show an opinion of golf related things - i know its an opinion you dislike - well im sorry about that there is nothing i can do about that and im certainly not telling you what to do or not too do - but the issue i have is whenever aimpoint is mentioned and people show any sort of negative feeling towards it - you are immediately on them regardless of what it is they say - you appear unwilling to allow people to have a negative view towards aimpoint - sorry but people have the right to have that viewpoint.

*your philosophy on golf works for you and you alone, how bout you leave others to their own philosophy. *

Which philosophy is that ? having fun and not getting sucked in to spend money on stuff i believe is nonsense - think i might be right in saying im certainly not alone in that


----------



## bluewolf (Jun 3, 2014)

Whilst I have no interest in the argument, I should point out that one of Stacy's sponsors is Aimpoint.. Along with La Croix mineral water... It seems to me that using Stacy as an example might be a bit dangerous, considering she is obviously paid to promote Aimpoint.. Unless you think that La Croix mineral water is also the best.. Because, you know, Stacy drinks it...


----------



## 3565 (Jun 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Again its not full proof is it - i understand it currently doesnt deal with double breaks ? and maybe in the future when there could be a majority doing it then possibly it might be worth looking at but as defensive as you are about it ( hence why these threads decsend into chaos ) its still a very much a minority of people using it - and that must be for a reason. 

I have no doubt that you only saw the putts Scott got - it appears you always seem to miss the ones he misses ( poor stroke off course ) 

i have spoken to pros about it and the general consensus is the same - waste of money and slows the game down, thats people making money from the game. 

Maybe if people where able to see the basics and try it before buying then possibly people might not be against it - but paying money to be shown a method of reading greens when pros have given methods for free in the past ( no thanks ) and even more so as someone has already pointed out - its more than likely a hash of previous methods used by people to gain money.

And just read your edit - yes i have a different thinking in golf - but i pretty sure im allowed to show an opinion of golf related things - i know its an opinion you dislike - well im sorry about that there is nothing i can do about that and im certainly not telling you what to do or not too do - but the issue i have is whenever aimpoint is mentioned and people show any sort of negative feeling towards it - you are immediately on them regardless of what it is they say - you appear unwilling to allow people to have a negative view towards aimpoint - sorry but people have the right to have that viewpoint.

*your philosophy on golf works for you and you alone, how bout you leave others to their own philosophy. *

Which philosophy is that ? having fun and not getting sucked in to spend money on stuff i believe is nonsense - think i might be right in saying im certainly not alone in that
		
Click to expand...

1. It does deal with double breaks. So sorry to inform you, YOU are wrong. 

2. Defensive about Aimpoint I've not, I have tried on other Aimpoint threads to explain along with Homer and Virtuocity, and got an onslaught from the likes of you stating waste of time. Find a post where I've said you ALL must do Aimpoint.  There have been plenty of postings yesterday attacking Aimpoint and I've read them all and stayed out of it until post #40 I think, I asked a question earlier about how do you go about holing putts to another forumer and you just couldn't resist to be a smarta** as you knew what I meant. So I laughed at the forumer post and let it be, but You then stated YOUR OPINION about Anyway, Aimpoint is blah de blah blah, I voiced my opinion that we know your stance and I don't respect yours and leave us all to our madness, I don't think that comment was out of order, but your feathers must of got ruffled in your budgie cage at Woburn when Stuart C found it funny. I might be wrong. I've been posting to others, some have asked, to me anyway, genuine questions about it and I've responded, so I immediately go on the defensive, I think not otherwise I'd of posted to ALL those who slagged, ridiculed Aimpoint. And I think you also create the chaos within threads with your inability to accept other peoples views by imposing your opinions on them, or is it you want the upper hand all the time? Your not 5ft 1 by any chance? 

3. Your point about I just watch Scott making putts and blah blah......... Clutching straws. We all miss putts Aimpoint or not. But understand this Aimpoint does not swing the club........ Simples. 

4. I've already posted about feeling with feet isn't a new concept, I don't think I have said it is, apart from turning the feeling into a numerical value of break to aim at.

5. Philosophy, stance, view, agenda call it what you want, you play golf for the hobby it is, the fun, the banter and to run round in 2hrs 38min telling people off if they hold you up.  If that's the case then why can't you let people do what they want, you paid for an SLDR and bought into the TMBS philosophy, which works for you, but certainly did not work for me, but I've not pranced around on here like you, stating your A SUCKER for parting with your money and saw you coming! How can you believe it's nonsense when you know nothing about it, for proof, SEE point 1. 

I will change my statement, 

You and I will never see eye to eye, your belief in how the game should be played, works for you and you alone, others have their views in how it should be played for them. You need to respect that and I think it's best if we avoid each other as I have no interest in what you say anymore from now on. 



Note. Some of my comments above are based on being sarcastic. But no doubt this well be deleted before many have read it.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

3565 said:



			1. It does deal with double breaks. So sorry to inform you, YOU are wrong.
		
Click to expand...

I pretty sure the question has been asked by numerous people and the answer was that something is coming ? - Has that extra arrived to include the double breaks




			2. Defensive about Aimpoint I've not, I have tried on other Aimpoint threads to explain along with Homer and Virtuocity, and got an onslaught from the likes of you stating waste of time. 
		
Click to expand...

.  There have been plenty of postings yesterday attacking Aimpoint and I've read them all and stayed out of it until post #40 I think, I asked a question earlier about how do you go about holing putts to another forumer and you just couldn't resist to be a smarta** as you knew what I meant. So I laughed at the forumer post and let it be, but You then stated YOUR OPINION about Anyway, Aimpoint is blah de blah blah, I voiced my opinion that we know your stance and I don't respect yours and leave us all to our madness, I don't think that comment was out of order, but your feathers must of got ruffled in your budgie cage at Woburn when Stuart C found it funny. I might be wrong. I've been posting to others, some have asked, to me anyway, genuine questions about it and I've responded, so I immediately go on the defensive, I think not otherwise I'd of posted to ALL those who slagged, ridiculed Aimpoint. And I think you also create the chaos within threads with your inability to accept other peoples views by imposing your opinions on them, or is it you want the upper hand all the time? Your not 5ft 1 by any chance? 
[/QUOTE]

So when i was talking to Homer about it and gave my opinion about having to pay for it and it appears to slow play up - you didnt jump in at all in any defensive way about aimpoint ? I believe Homer actually said he could see my point about paying for it - you on the other hand posted about not respecting my opinion etc in post 82. No feathers have been ruffled here. Also nowhere have i stated that you have told people they all must do aimpoint ? - strange comment. Not sure what my size has to do with anything ?



			3. Your point about I just watch Scott making putts and blah blah......... Clutching straws. We all miss putts Aimpoint or not. But understand this Aimpoint does not swing the club........ Simples.
		
Click to expand...

So did you not start a thread about Scott putting well and bring in Aimpoint and then when it all went wrong it was nothing to do with aimpoint ? Must re read that thread again 




			4. I've already posted about feeling with feet isn't a new concept, I don't think I have said it is, apart from turning the feeling into a numerical value of break to aim at.
		
Click to expand...

So its not new but this one you need to pay for - where as Faldo gave is method away for free




			5. Philosophy, stance, view, agenda call it what you want, you play golf for the hobby it is, the fun, the banter and to run round in 2hrs 38min telling people off if they hold you up.  If that's the case then why can't you let people do what they want, you paid for an SLDR and bought into the TMBS philosophy, which works for you, but certainly did not work for me, but I've not pranced around on here like you, stating your A SUCKER for parting with your money and saw you coming! How can you believe it's nonsense when you know nothing about it, for proof, SEE point 1. 

I will change my statement,
		
Click to expand...

Do you mean the same TM Driver that i was able to "TRY FOR FREE TO SEE IF IT WORKS FOR ME" and then parted with money .

I play to the ettitqute of golf and at the pace golf should be played at.




			You and I will never see eye to eye, your belief in how the game should be played, works for you and you alone, others have their views in how it should be played for them. You need to respect that and I think it's best if we avoid each other as I have no interest in what you say anymore from now on.
		
Click to expand...

I believe i mentioned that i you didnt like my comments on aimpoint that you should ignore them - it appears you didnt want too



			Note. Some of my comments above are based on being sarcastic. But no doubt this well be deleted before many have read it.
		
Click to expand...

Im not sure which post i should reply too - this or the exact same one you sent me via PM. But will address the points you have made to me in a respectful way 

Have a nice day - just off for my two hour round to tell people off


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Jun 3, 2014)

Gents, we sometimes need to respect other peoples opinions even though they don't marry up with ours.

I don't use aimpoint, but others do and that needs to be respected and having aimpoint threads swamped by the anti brigade isn't helpful.

Thankyou


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 3, 2014)

richart said:



			Do aimpointers still crouch down behind the ball to check the line, or is it just charts feet, etc ?

There is a skill in reading greens, and you can have the best stroke in the world, but will not hole much if you can't read them. Remember watching Ross Fisher in the Ryder Cup, and he was holing them from everywhere. It was his partner Harrington that was reading all the putts for him. Normally his putting for a Pro is poor.
		
Click to expand...

Harrington uses aimpoint according to their website


----------



## User20205 (Jun 3, 2014)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Gents, we sometimes need to respect other peoples opinions even though they don't marry up with ours.

I don't use aimpoint, but others do and that needs to be respected and having aimpoint threads swamped by the anti brigade isn't helpful.

Thankyou
		
Click to expand...

According to the OP & your own logic, phil, this is an anti aimpoint thread that's been trolled by pro aim pointers 

 Don't see you removing the pro comments 

I do think some of the pros are very defensive, and in their defence they state that aimpoint pulls together previous, widely used green reading techniques. This makes it even more of a con. Rehash previously accepted techniques, pretend it's the new and charge Â£90 for it. Where do I sign up?

The comparison between other new golf technologies is a nonsense. They are widely used, aimpoint isn't.

It's all a bit stack and tilt to me, where did that go??


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Jun 3, 2014)

Just trying to make sure that all views have a fair chance to be aired 
Most of the negative stuff has been said before and is being repeated.

It's a shame that some threads get swamped by negative stuff and die early.
But take the point


----------



## User20205 (Jun 3, 2014)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Just trying to make sure that all views have a fair chance to be aired 
Most of the negative stuff has been said before and is being repeated.

It's a shame that some threads get swamped by negative stuff and die early.
But take the point
		
Click to expand...

I'm only messin' phil, keep vigilant :thup:

It is a shame that some threads degenerate, I think  a lot of it has to do with posting style.

 Some posters just wind others up, they could be posting any subject and the outcome would be the same.


----------



## AmandaJR (Jun 3, 2014)

A genuine question - low side or high side? I see reference to finding the low side of the hole...is it always best to err on the side of the high side...gravity and all that? I've always assumed as much and if I'm a bit out then being a bit out on the high side is preferable?


----------



## Spuddy (Jun 3, 2014)

AmandaJR said:



			A genuine question - low side or high side? I see reference to finding the low side of the hole...is it always best to err on the side of the high side...gravity and all that? I've always assumed as much and if I'm a bit out then being a bit out on the high side is preferable?
		
Click to expand...

I guess it depends whether or not you prefer an uphill or downhill for your next putt.....


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 3, 2014)

AmandaJR said:



			A genuine question - low side or high side? I see reference to finding the low side of the hole...is it always best to err on the side of the high side...gravity and all that? I've always assumed as much and if I'm a bit out then being a bit out on the high side is preferable?
		
Click to expand...

The high side is the pro side :thup:


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 3, 2014)

therod said:



			According to the OP & your own logic, phil, this is an anti aimpoint thread that's been trolled by pro aim pointers 

 Don't see you removing the pro comments 

I do think some of the pros are very defensive, and in their defence they state that aimpoint pulls together previous, widely used green reading techniques. This makes it even more of a con. Rehash previously accepted techniques, pretend it's the new and charge Â£90 for it. Where do I sign up?

The comparison between other new golf technologies is a nonsense. They are widely used, aimpoint isn't.

It's all a bit stack and tilt to me, where did that go??
		
Click to expand...

As I've said before, this Â£90 is a misnomer. You get the chance to go back ad do a refresher at any point free so if you took up the offer effectively you are doing two sessions at Â£45 per time for three hours. At Â£15 per hour that's a lot cheaper than a golf lesson. I am not defensive at all but I do get bored when people post crap on here who aren't prepared to accept that a) it might just work, b) have no intention of even trying it and c) its some kind of money fleecing operation.

Like anything in golf (Â£350 drivers and mega expensive Scotty Camerons!!) you have the choice. All I'll say is I'm more than happy to talk to anyone and show them the chart and how it works at a forum meet and refere them back to my stats which have gone from 34-35 putts per round to 30-31. Yes I'm chipping better but you still have to convert those 3-8 footers for up and downs and I'm making more in the 10-20 foot range too. Aimpoint will be seen more and more especially the express read Scott uses. 
I've said my piece on the way it works and the benefit I've seen but no-one wants to listen to anything positive when its easier to knock it.


----------



## Scrindle (Jun 3, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			At Â£15 per hour that's a lot cheaper than a golf lesson[...]my stats which have gone from 34-35 putts per round to 30-31. Yes I'm chipping better[...]
		
Click to expand...

I don't really understand what Aimpoint is, having never looked at it, so I'm not going to jump on the pro or con band wagon.

That said Aimpoint costs Â£90 and if I had spent Â£90 on putting lessons (Â£100 would get me 6 lessons with a 5 and 1 deal my pro is doing, so 3 hours with a pro pulling apart my technique and giving me tips) and only noticed a 10% difference (which is what your stats suggest), while also consciously knowing that my chipping had improved and was getting me closer to holes in the first place, I would be pretty annoyed at what I would consider to be a waste of money.

Granted you get free refreshers, though I imagine that to be a bit of a misnomer really since probably 90% of people don't bother going back (something I imagine the company banks on).

I don't think they're fleecing anyone - the purpose of a company is to make as much money through as little effort as possible, afterall, so fair play to them if people are buying their product since it makes them a success - and haven't tested the method so am not best placed to critique it, but from what you've described as your improvement (may I asked over what period?) I can't help but feel that I would be better off buying Â£90 worth of lessons.



HomerJSimpson said:



			I am not defensive at all
		
Click to expand...

This is a bit of a silly thing to say in my view.  Conversely, I don't really understand what people actually mean when they accuse people of being defensive.  Of course you're defensive.  You're using a system you believe in and someone is questioning its validity.  If you weren't defensive, I would be questioning your sincerity in relation to the product!


----------



## CMAC (Jun 3, 2014)

PhilTheFragger said:



*Gents, we sometimes need to respect other peoples opinions even though they don't marry up with ours.*

I don't use aimpoint, but others do and that needs to be respected and having aimpoint threads swamped by the anti brigade isn't helpful.

Thankyou
		
Click to expand...

wise words for the mods


----------



## Qwerty (Jun 3, 2014)

I can honestly say that I would never use Aimpoint even if it gave a huge advantage.

Reading greens is a skill Thats learned over years of playing the game and its a skill that it I take great pleasure from when I get it right.  Why would I want to lose that pleasure which is gained from a large part of the game.

Are your scores/handicap really that important that you feel the need to take away the pleasure gained from reading a putt correctly and then holing it?

I get my kicks from this game via the Skill & judgement Thats required. Take that away from me and the game starts to become dull.


----------



## tsped83 (Jun 3, 2014)

This whole debate has turned into a playground farce. It's quite sad and tedious to read the same things repeatedly. For me, Aimpoint, not interested, that said, if someone wants to use it and it's within the rules, good luck to them. The constant criticism, sneering and badgering for evidence and proof that it works is so unbearably boring! You don't like it? MOVE ON!


----------



## richart (Jun 3, 2014)

HawkeyeMS said:



			Harrington uses aimpoint according to their website
		
Click to expand...

 Don't think he did then.

Not sure he is a good example as his putting has not been so good recently. Probably more to his stroke than his reading of greens though.


----------



## garyinderry (Jun 3, 2014)

Qwerty said:



			I can honestly say that I would never use Aimpoint even if it gave a huge advantage.

Reading greens is a skill Thats learned over years of playing the game and its a skill that it I take great pleasure from when I get it right.  Why would I want to lose that pleasure which is gained from a large part of the game.

Are your scores/handicap really that important that you feel the need to take away the pleasure gained from reading a putt correctly and then holing it?

I get my kicks from this game via the Skill & judgement Thats required. Take that away from me and the game starts to become dull.
		
Click to expand...


I remember the first time I played tiger woods and my nephew pressed L1 or whatever it was to see the tiger line when putting. I thought it was cheating as it removed the skill.   pretty much the same here!


----------



## Birchy (Jun 3, 2014)

Can people not just learn how to read the greens? Or is that down to natural ability?


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 3, 2014)

Birchy said:



			Can people not just learn how to read the greens? Or is that down to natural ability? 

Click to expand...

That's what they are doing by using aimpoint. All it is is another method of reading greens, you either use it or you don't. If it was free, I doubt it would have as much opposition as it does.


----------



## Birchy (Jun 3, 2014)

HawkeyeMS said:



			That's what they are doing by using aimpoint. All it is is another method of reading greens, you either use it or you don't. If it was free, I doubt it would have as much opposition as it does.
		
Click to expand...

You don't need all these charts and stuff like that to read greens though? 

To be fair I have read a bit of the information and it is very in depth for such a simple task imo. I think they are making money out of overcomplicating something.

I can understand people doing it though if they are desperate to improve putting and have tried everything else.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 3, 2014)

One of the things that has been overlooked - again - is that these charts are universal and so really help when playing away courses. You may be able to read greens well, especially you own, but it you're being 100% honest, how many struggle on away greens. 

By being able to gauge the break based on the slope and angle and a quick look at the chart, at least I can stand there, and feel confident I know how much break to read. Again, how many are guilty of under/over reading putts at other courses. It worked a treat at KoK at Camberley, the Grove and at forum meets at West Hill etc. Didn't do any harm at St Pierre or FoA either. 

If you really feel confident you can read putts well then well done. I can't and this has helped me. Someone said my putting stats had only improved by 10% but it's only small margins like that which makes a difference between 0.1 back and buffer's and cuts so I'll take that kind of improvement


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 3, 2014)

Birchy said:



			You don't need all these charts and stuff like that to read greens though? 

To be fair I have read a bit of the information and it is very in depth for such a simple task imo. I think they are making money out of overcomplicating something.

I can understand people doing it though if they are desperate to improve putting and have tried everything else.
		
Click to expand...

I agree, I don't think you do, but then I am generally quite good at reading greens. If you aren't however, the charts may help. Each to their own and all that


----------



## pokerjoke (Jun 3, 2014)

Qwerty said:



			I can honestly say that I would never use Aimpoint even if it gave a huge advantage.

Reading greens is a skill Thats learned over years of playing the game and its a skill that it I take great pleasure from when I get it right.  Why would I want to lose that pleasure which is gained from a large part of the game.

Are your scores/handicap really that important that you feel the need to take away the pleasure gained from reading a putt correctly and then holing it?

I get my kicks from this game via the Skill & judgement Thats required. Take that away from me and the game starts to become dull.
		
Click to expand...

I would be interested if you use a DMD at all.?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 3, 2014)

Aimpoint wouldn't be much good for me since after about 9 hols my feet and legs start to ache and by the time I'm playing the last few holes I'm hobbling.

Besides - if you have to stand astride the line of putt what happens when you would stand on a PPs line.  You are scuppered.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 3, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Whilst I have no interest in the argument, I should point out that *one of Stacy's sponsors is Aimpoint*.. Along with La Croix mineral water... It seems to me that using Stacy as an example might be a bit dangerous, considering she is obviously paid to promote Aimpoint.. Unless you think that La Croix mineral water is also the best.. Because, you know, Stacy drinks it...

View attachment 10806

Click to expand...

Extremely good point. 

I asked the question if Adam Scott was sponsored by them, never realised that the Aimpointers poster girl was.


----------



## davidy233 (Jun 3, 2014)

I've not tried Aimpoint and have no interest in trying it - but to complain and troll threads about it primarily because they are charging for teaching it is nonsense - they put it together - it's a product and their source of income, good luck to them.


----------



## Qwerty (Jun 3, 2014)

pokerjoke said:



			I would be interested if you use a DMD at all.?
		
Click to expand...

I had a feeling I'd get asked this question    I was going to mention DMDs in the original post but thought I'd take a chance and leave it out. 

I do use one and wouldn't blame you if called me a hypocrite.  I do think its 2 different arguments though. Distance is an exact science, you've also always got 150 markers to read from and some courses have yardages in the sprinkler heads. Even when you have the yardage Theres still the skill involved in judging the wind and elevation changes, which there are a lot of at the courses i play, id imagine Ilfracombe is similar.
Saying all this though if it was up to me I would Ban DMDs.

It seems the aim of aimpoint is to make putting into an exact science and I just don't think its possible as There's  too many variables.
To bolster my reasoning though, in my opinion Theres far more skill involved and enjoyment derived in reading a break correctly and holing a putt than there is from judging a yardage.  Its a huge part of the game IMO and I honestly wouldn't want any help with it.


----------



## garyinderry (Jun 3, 2014)

do you have to factor in the howling wind when using aimpoint?


----------



## pokerjoke (Jun 3, 2014)

Qwerty said:



			I had a feeling I'd get asked this question    I was going to mention DMDs in the original post but thought I'd take a chance and leave it out. 

I do use one and wouldn't blame you if called me a hypocrite.  I do think its 2 different arguments though. Distance is an exact science, you've also always got 150 markers to read from and some courses have yardages in the sprinkler heads. Even when you have the yardage Theres still the skill involved in judging the wind and elevation changes, which there are a lot of at the courses i play, id imagine Ilfracombe is similar.
Saying all this though if it was up to me I would Ban DMDs.

It seems the aim of aimpoint is to make putting into an exact science and I just don't think its possible as There's  too many variables.
To bolster my reasoning though, in my opinion Theres far more skill involved and enjoyment derived in reading a break correctly and holing a putt than there is from judging a yardage.  Its a huge part of the game IMO and I honestly wouldn't want any help with it.
		
Click to expand...

Mate I do see what your trying to say,however there are many variables on a shot from 150 yards.
If there were no 150 markers or yardages on sprinklers.
A dmd gives the user a massive advantage to someone who is guessing yardages.
This is an art and dmds have taken that away.
However im certainly not saying get rid of anything that can help make this game easier.
I just think your argument is flawed.
The thing is with all these gadgets and accessories they don't hit the shot,so imo get all
the help you can.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 3, 2014)

garyinderry said:



			do you have to factor in the howling wind when using aimpoint?
		
Click to expand...

You certainly do on a links course!  No doubt there is a sub section on the chart to cover wind speed and direction


----------



## patricks148 (Jun 3, 2014)

Ive never heard of Aimpoint untill today! i just had a look at the links on the other tread and it all sounds a bit complicated. 

Will it make me a better putter?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

Homer - you have paid for the full course and are able to get a refresher ? Do you then get the express version free or get it in your refresher ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 3, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Extremely good point. 

I asked the question if Adam Scott was sponsored by them, never realised that the Aimpointers poster girl was.
		
Click to expand...

So maybe those pros that are using the method actually aren't - they know it's a load of tosh and are only pretending to use it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 3, 2014)

Qwerty said:



			I had a feeling I'd get asked this question    I was going to mention DMDs in the original post but thought I'd take a chance and leave it out. 

I do use one and wouldn't blame you if called me a hypocrite.  I do think its 2 different arguments though. Distance is an exact science, you've also always got 150 markers to read from and some courses have yardages in the sprinkler heads. Even when you have the yardage Theres still the skill involved in judging the wind and elevation changes, which there are a lot of at the courses i play, id imagine Ilfracombe is similar.
Saying all this though if it was up to me I would Ban DMDs.

It seems the aim of aimpoint is to make putting into an exact science and I just don't think its possible as There's  too many variables.
To bolster my reasoning though, in my opinion Theres far more skill involved and enjoyment derived in reading a break correctly and holing a putt than there is from judging a yardage.  Its a huge part of the game IMO and I honestly wouldn't want any help with it.
		
Click to expand...

:whoo::clap::thup:

Buit I say nothing...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 3, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			Will it make me a better putter?
		
Click to expand...

What's wrong with the one you have? (SILH is currently sitting in pedants corner)


----------



## c1973 (Jun 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So maybe those pros that are using the method actually aren't - they know it's a load of tosh and are only pretending to use it.
		
Click to expand...

I wouldn't know, but it would be bloody hilarious if they were pretending! I doubt they would 'pretend' though.

I am usually sceptical of someone advocating the use of anything if they are being paid by said product though. Does anyone know how many of the elite players do use Aimpoint?


----------



## Imurg (Jun 3, 2014)

The slope of the green is gauged by standing near the line and "feeling" the slope in your feet - is that right..?
:f so, what happens if you have such a gentle slope that you can't feel it but you can see it...?
Or the first part of the putt is flat but the slopes up and flattens again - all with a left to right then right to left...?
Is Aimpoint able to deal with these.?
I guess you would have to read it in small chunks and do a quick calculation.....?


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 3, 2014)

Scrindle said:



			That said Aimpoint costs Â£90 and if I had spent Â£90 on putting lessons (Â£100 would get me 6 lessons with a 5 and 1 deal my pro is doing, so 3 hours with a pro pulling apart my technique and giving me tips) and only noticed a 10% difference (which is what your stats suggest), while also consciously knowing that my chipping had improved and was getting me closer to holes in the first place, I would be pretty annoyed at what I would consider to be a waste of money.
		
Click to expand...

Er, umm....Have you considered applying that 'value for money justification' to normal lessons?  Or a new Driver?


----------



## 3565 (Jun 3, 2014)

tsped83 said:



			This whole debate has turned into a playground farce. It's quite sad and tedious to read the same things repeatedly. For me, Aimpoint, not interested, that said, if someone wants to use it and it's within the rules, good luck to them. The constant criticism, sneering and badgering for evidence and proof that it works is so unbearably boring! You don't like it? MOVE ON!
		
Click to expand...

As an Aimpoint user, I agree with you on this. I respect your view in not being interested in it, and I'm not here to convince you or any other either. I, as others, have tried to explain Aimpoint, and as we have done the course are in a better position to give a view point then those who haven't,  I'm open to new ideas and concepts in this game and won't discount it on others sceptisium, I do my research on product/item and if I think I need some answers, I will ask those who have tried and liked and those who tried and disliked rather then the ones who just give their unfounded opinions because they think there entitled to post them.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jun 3, 2014)

Qwerty said:



			I can honestly say that I would never use Aimpoint even if it gave a huge advantage.
		
Click to expand...

I really hope you don't use anything less than the bladiest, least forgiving clubs ever designed.

That follows your same logic. Hitting the perfect strike using those will be the best feeling ever, so why would you lose that pleasure by using easier clubs!


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 3, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			Will it make me a better putter?
		
Click to expand...

Might do; might not; might even be detrimental.

Not a lot of difference to the questions and possible answers when considering whether to have lessons/change swing markedly, something you've been through recently. 

It's roughly about the cost of a round on a 'posh' course (maybe different in your area) or a new wedge. Are they going to improve your game markedly? If Value for Money/Return on Investment was the sole measurement for golf purchases, several OEMs would be out of business pdq! And there would be only a few Pros who could survive!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 3, 2014)

3565 said:



			As an Aimpoint user, I agree with you on this. I respect your view in not being interested in it, and I'm not here to convince you or any other either. I, as others, have tried to explain Aimpoint, and as we have done the course are in a better position to give a view point then those who haven't,  I'm open to new ideas and concepts in this game and won't discount it on others sceptisium, I do my research on product/item and if I think I need some answers, I will ask those who have tried and liked and those who tried and disliked rather then the ones who just give their unfounded opinions because they think there entitled to post them.
		
Click to expand...

Question from a philistine (me): Do you always stick rigidly to what the technique tells you?  Even despite what your eyes might tell you differently?  I would really struggle with that and can certainly imagine it affecting my confidence and hence ability to make a good solid stroke. Yes sure - get a few right 'despite what your eyes tell you' and your confidence is bolstered.  But if you saw Bubba putting from edge of the 18th last round of the Memorial at the weekend - what would aimpoint have told you to do?


----------



## Qwerty (Jun 3, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I really hope you don't use anything less than the bladiest, least forgiving clubs ever designed.

That follows your same logic. Hitting the perfect strike using those will be the best feeling ever, so why would you lose that pleasure by using easier clubs!
		
Click to expand...

Not really a great analogy. Two totally different aspects of the game.

I don't think you understand though where I'm coming from though..
I don't care if Aimpoint makes the game easier. If people think it does and it works for them, great, crack on with it.

As I said earlier, I get a lot of enjoyment from reading a putt correctly then making the putt.  It's a large percentage of the game. Why would I want a chart or system taking away the pleasure I get from making that judgement.

My issue isn't about people wanting to make the game easier via aimpoint, its about aimpoint taking away the pleasure that I get from judging/reading a putt.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Question from a philistine (me): Do you always stick rigidly to what the technique tells you?  Even despite what your eyes might tell you differently?  I would really struggle with that and can certainly imagine it affecting my confidence and hence ability to make a good solid stroke. Yes sure - get a few right 'despite what your eyes tell you' and your confidence is bolstered.  But if you saw Bubba putting from edge of the 18th last round of the Memorial at the weekend - what would aimpoint have told you to do?
		
Click to expand...

I have best of both worlds if you like, old method and Aimpoint. Aimpoint has added to my game the knowledge they gained I have gained, no different to going to a Pro for swing changes, one is different to the other, as in green mapping and reading. I will ask a question to you, Have you had lessons from a pro? Likely answer is yes. Have You had a lesson on green reading from him? Likely hood is no and you like myself over years of playing picked it up thru playing and learning. 

Do I stick with the technique, yes, do I sometimes fall fowl of some subtleties, yes, I'm not going to say no for the sake of it, I'm just being honest with you. We all misread putts at times but the biggest thing that it helps on is getting the big breaks aiming right and it makes no odds if I stood on a green of 8 stimp or 12 stimp the system will tell me where to aim? Hypothetically and I stress hypothetically, If a system or device 'could' predict that from XXX yds out with a wind 25mph right to left you must aim X yds right of the target, would that be useful? The tradionalists would say that's not right, DMDs banned Aimpoint banned yet they have a bag of oversized game improving clubs etc. Aimpoint calculates the break you need to play, that's all, does it hole putts for you no, as your in control of aim, length of stroke and speed, just like being XXX yds from the green the DMDs can't hit the shot. 

As for Bubba, I can't comment on what Aimpoint would do as you need to be there to get your parameters and I wish I could play on greens that fast and break that amount like on 18, but reality of the average club in the UK don't, but I do play all over in scratch comps and like last week at Ganton, it helped, I holed a few and missed a few, I did 3 putt but that's my failing for not executing the putt properly. If I holed everything I putted, i would of been at the Memorial playing.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Question from a philistine (me): Do you always stick rigidly to what the technique tells you?  Even despite what your eyes might tell you differently?  I would really struggle with that and can certainly imagine it affecting my confidence and hence ability to make a good solid stroke. Yes sure - get a few right 'despite what your eyes tell you' and your confidence is bolstered.  But if you saw Bubba putting from edge of the 18th last round of the Memorial at the weekend - what would aimpoint have told you to do?
		
Click to expand...

Was reading some stuff from Stacey Lewis and she ignores the conventional things in regards where a green normally slopes towards - ie the water or away from a bunker etc and believe in gravity. She was talking about the 11th when every one knows the green slopes towards the pond but some of the slopes feel like they are sloping away from the pond - Augusta she says ( from something Harrington told her ) plays havoc with aimpoint in regards feel under your feet because of all the subtleties in their greens


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Was reading some stuff from Stacey Lewis and she ignores the conventional things in regards where a green normally slopes towards - ie the water or away from a bunker etc and believe in gravity. She was talking about the 11th when every one knows the green slopes towards the pond but some of the slopes feel like they are sloping away from the pond - *Augusta she says ( from something Harrington told her ) plays havoc with aimpoint in regards feel under your feet because of all the subtleties in their greens*

Click to expand...

I know a couple of other courses where that would be the case too. Grimms Dyke and Walton Heath both have greens that not only have slopes in them but also have areas that are best described as 'uneven' or 'puddles' - and it's quite deliberate, I've seen the feature being created in a replacement green at GD! I'm not sure A/p would be particularly helpful at either of those courses. Tom Watson even remarked on the feature in the Senior Open at WH a few years ago - from his memory of them in '81.


----------



## G1BB0 (Jun 3, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Load of old Bullocks.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 3, 2014)

G1BB0 said:








Click to expand...

Impressive!


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 3, 2014)

Qwerty said:



			Not really a great analogy. Two totally different aspects of the game.

I don't think you understand though where I'm coming from though..
I don't care if Aimpoint makes the game easier. If people think it does and it works for them, great, crack on with it.

As I said earlier, I get a lot of enjoyment from reading a putt correctly then making the putt.  It's a large percentage of the game. Why would I want a chart or system taking away the pleasure I get from making that judgement.

My issue isn't about people wanting to make the game easier via aimpoint, its about aimpoint taking away the pleasure that I get from judging/reading a putt.
		
Click to expand...

Would that be similar to GPS and Laser rangefinders!

I'll get me coat!


----------



## G1BB0 (Jun 3, 2014)

Aimpoint was designed by Mountain Man
[video=youtube;tGKvr9gobx0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGKvr9gobx0[/video]


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 3, 2014)

Get your unwanteds onto Ebay!

Gibbo's on the sauce again! :rofl:


----------



## G1BB0 (Jun 3, 2014)

actually I am not! New job = captain sensible


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 3, 2014)

G1BB0 said:








Click to expand...




G1BB0 said:



			Aimpoint was designed by Mountain Man
[video=youtube;tGKvr9gobx0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGKvr9gobx0[/video]
		
Click to expand...




G1BB0 said:



			actually I am not! New job = captain sensible
		
Click to expand...

Yeeeaaahh! Right! 

Off the sauce I can believe! :thup: Captain sensible? :rofl:


----------



## DAVEYBOY (Jun 3, 2014)

Can't I just strap this to my putter?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 3, 2014)

Funny your should say that. They do provide a spirit level which also measures the slope so students can check the mid point of the slope and their percentage slope estimation as it takes some getting use to http://woodyimports.com/collections/aimpoint-endorsed-training-aids/products/aimpoint-digital-level

I wouldn't dream of getting one myself as its about learning the technique, getting the right read and making the putts. However using it in the lessons is affirmation, especially on a refresher that you are doing it properly


----------



## 3565 (Jun 3, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Funny your should say that. They do provide a spirit level which also measures the slope so students can check the mid point of the slope and their percentage slope estimation as it takes some getting use to http://woodyimports.com/collections/aimpoint-endorsed-training-aids/products/aimpoint-digital-level

I wouldn't dream of getting one myself as its about learning the technique, getting the right read and making the putts. However using it in the lessons is affirmation, especially on a refresher that you are doing it properly
		
Click to expand...

youve be opened a can of worms now for the haters Homer....... :thup:


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 3, 2014)

3565 said:



			youve be opened a can of worms now for the haters Homer....... :thup:
		
Click to expand...

True, but let them be armed with the facts. As you know, it's not easy gauging the degree of slope of the mid point for a while after the lesson and it's a cracking tool to use with the tutor and other pupils


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Funny your should say that. They do provide a spirit level which also measures the slope so students can check the mid point of the slope and their percentage slope estimation as it takes some getting use to http://woodyimports.com/collections/aimpoint-endorsed-training-aids/products/aimpoint-digital-level

I wouldn't dream of getting one myself as its about learning the technique, getting the right read and making the putts. However using it in the lessons is affirmation, especially on a refresher that you are doing it properly
		
Click to expand...

When could they use the spirit level on the greens though ?


----------



## pendodave (Jun 3, 2014)

I quite like the look of this.


http://woodyimports.com/collections/aimpoint-endorsed-training-aids/products/aimpoint-faux-leather-aimchart-wallet

Doesn't Crossfield call it 'buttpoint'....


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			When could they use the spirit level on the greens though ?
		
Click to expand...

Its a training aid. Designed to get you learning the degree of slope and finding the midpoint crucial to get the right read. As I've said I wouldn't use one outside of the lesson but I can see its merits. I've seen people take them onto a course in the evening and use it.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

pendodave said:



			I quite like the look of this.


http://woodyimports.com/collections/aimpoint-endorsed-training-aids/products/aimpoint-faux-leather-aimchart-wallet

Doesn't Crossfield call it 'buttpoint'....
		
Click to expand...

This appears to be a compass ?

http://woodyimports.com/collections/aimpoint-endorsed-training-aids/products/aimpoint-bubble


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Its a training aid. Designed to get you learning the degree of slope and finding the midpoint crucial to get the right read. As I've said I wouldn't use one outside of the lesson but I can see its merits. I've seen people take them onto a course in the evening and use it.
		
Click to expand...

So normally used on the putting green ? 

Ok cheers


----------



## 3565 (Jun 3, 2014)

pendodave said:



			I quite like the look of this.


http://woodyimports.com/collections...roducts/aimpoint-faux-leather-aimchart-wallet

Doesn't Crossfield call it 'buttpoint'....
		
Click to expand...

think one of his side kicks use Aimpoint.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			This appears to be a compass ?

http://woodyimports.com/collections/aimpoint-endorsed-training-aids/products/aimpoint-bubble

Click to expand...

Now this I do have. Very easy to carry in a bag for a few holes in the evening and gives me affirmation from time to time that my reads are still good. The video (basic as it is) shows how it works


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Now this I do have. Very easy to carry in a bag for a few holes in the evening and gives me affirmation from time to time that my reads are still good. The video (basic as it is) shows how it works
		
Click to expand...

I wonder if being have been tempted to use it in comps ?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I wonder if being have been tempted to use it in comps ?
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. Purely a practice aid in same way as alignment sticks and I'd never dream of using it in anything other than a solo practice round. Anyone doing so would be duly penalised if I was playing with them

If I didn't know better I'd have thought that last comment was a fishing trip?:thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 3, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Absolutely not. Purely a practice aid in same way as alignment sticks and I'd never dream of using it in anything other than a solo practice round. Anyone doing so would be duly penalised if I was playing with them

If I didn't know better I'd have thought that last comment was a fishing trip?:thup:
		
Click to expand...


No not at all - my comment was supposed to read "wonder if anyone has been tempted"


----------



## DaveM (Jun 4, 2014)

I don't know anything about aimpoint. But to my mind if it works for you great. On a personal level I'm just not into charts for this charts for that. I tend to look at golf as more I art form and feel thing. But one of the beauties of this game, are the many ways to play it. So if charts are your thing so be it. As long as it is not to the detriment of the group behind.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 4, 2014)

DaveM said:



			I don't know anything about aimpoint. But to my mind if it works for you great. On a personal level I'm just not into charts for this charts for that. I tend to look at golf as more I art form and feel thing. But one of the beauties of this game, are the many ways to play it. So if charts are your thing so be it. As long as it is not to the detriment of the group behind.
		
Click to expand...

I respect your views and your quite right with them too. I hope others take note.


----------



## chrisd (Jun 4, 2014)

Surely enroling for Aimpoint is no different than taking any golf lessons.

 If you benefit by taking a structured set of instructions and then your putting improves the greater majority would surely feel its money well spent. Even if, and I don't know, that Aimpoint is just a coming together of old information it doesn't make it less relevent as there is very little ground breaking new coaching and, my favourite teaching Pro is a Hogan swing disciple and that's all there to be seen and read without me wasting my money on! The main reason then for lessons is this the can show me properly how to bring the swing in, properly co ordinate the various elements and check that it's working and, as a result, improving my game.

I do think that the constant anti Aimpoint sniping is unfair if you havnt tried it or you're in the camp who don't try things unless you're convinced, then it's pretty easy really - live and let live, everyone to their own, every mans meat ....... And all that!


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 4, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Surely enroling for Aimpoint is no different than taking any golf lessons.

 If you benefit by taking a structured set of instructions and then your putting improves the greater majority would surely feel its money well spent. Even if, and I don't know, that Aimpoint is just a coming together of old information it doesn't make it less relevent as there is very little ground breaking new coaching and, my favourite teaching Pro is a Hogan swing disciple and that's all there to be seen and read without me wasting my money on! The main reason then for lessons is this the can show me properly how to bring the swing in, properly co ordinate the various elements and check that it's working and, as a result, improving my game.

I do think that the constant anti Aimpoint sniping is unfair if you havnt tried it or you're in the camp who don't try things unless you're convinced, then it's pretty easy really - live and let live, everyone to their own, every mans meat ....... And all that!
		
Click to expand...

Far too much uncommon sense for this time of day Chris! The day can only get worse. I predict you won't be able to make a single decision without considering both sides, so no possibility of gaining any advantage over opposition/competitors! You may as well take the day off - and play Golf of course, where the same uncommon sense will prevent you from playing all those rash shots that cost you 5 shots a round but magically, and memorably, save you 1 every 5 rounds!


----------



## chrisd (Jun 4, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Far too much uncommon sense for this time of day Chris! The day can only get worse. I predict you won't be able to make a single decision without considering both sides, so no possibility of gaining any advantage over opposition/competitors! You may as well take the day off - and play Golf of course, where the same uncommon sense will prevent you from playing all those rash shots that cost you 5 shots a round but magically, and memorably, save you 1 every 5 rounds!
		
Click to expand...



...................... or maybe it won't!!


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 4, 2014)

chrisd said:



			...................... or maybe it won't!!
		
Click to expand...

Just proved the point! :rofl:

Have a nice day! :thup:


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 4, 2014)

More than happy to debate the merits (or not depending on your point of view) about Aimpoint or anything else. As long as you have a valid point and not just "it's a waste of time and money" then its good. I do think this will start to increase in popularity especially with Scott using it. Other pros will cotton on, and yes, putts will still be missed but once they see how much difference it makes to the amount of break compared to what they "see" it will gain momentum. Of course these guys are at the pinnacle of the game and so their green reading and technique are infinitely better than mine and most club players so any help I can get I'll take.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 4, 2014)

Quick question about Aimpoint......

If you have a breaking putt, does the chart allow for hitting the putt at different speeds  ie. some prefer to ram the ball in other prefer to die the ball into the hole.

How does the principle cope with this?


----------



## 3565 (Jun 4, 2014)

drive4show said:



			Quick question about Aimpoint......

If you have a breaking putt, does the chart allow for hitting the putt at different speeds  ie. some prefer to ram the ball in other prefer to die the ball into the hole.

How does the principle cope with this?
		
Click to expand...

The answer is No to the rammer and I will explain but first I will counter back with a question to you, 
what type of putter are you, Rammer, Die, or 6-12" past the hole?


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 4, 2014)

3565 said:



			The answer is No to the rammer and I will explain but first I will counter back with a question to you, 
what type of putter are you, Rammer, Die, or 6-12" past the hole?
		
Click to expand...

Erm.....one that leaves most putts short.  Guess that makes me a die'er


----------



## chrisd (Jun 4, 2014)

drive4show said:



			Erm.....one that leaves most putts REALLY short.  Guess that makes me a die'er  

Click to expand...

Isn't that more like it Gordon??    :clap:


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 4, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Isn't that more like it Gordon??    :clap:
		
Click to expand...


Harsh.....but fair Chris


----------



## Birchy (Jun 4, 2014)

Is there a recommended distance from the hole that aimpoint should be used from? Im thinking most good putters (pros) ram everything in from the 6 feet ish range. Would aimpoint recommend to play the break? Or would it only become effective from further away?

If aimpoint recommends to play the break on every putt then I cant see how it will be more effective than taking the break out for a 6 footer for example?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 4, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			More than happy to debate the merits (or not depending on your point of view) about Aimpoint or anything else. As long as you have a valid point and not just "it's a waste of time and money" then its good. I do think this will start to increase in popularity especially with Scott using it. Other pros will cotton on, and yes, putts will still be missed but once they see how much difference it makes to the amount of break compared to what they "see" it will gain momentum. Of course these guys are at the pinnacle of the game and so their green reading and technique are infinitely better than mine and most club players so any help I can get I'll take.
		
Click to expand...

How crucial is knowing the stimp reading of the greens ? Do you test it on the putting green ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 4, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			More than happy to debate the merits (or not depending on your point of view) about Aimpoint or anything else. As long as you have a valid point and not just "it's a waste of time and money" then its good. I do think this will start to increase in popularity especially with Scott using it. Other pros will cotton on, and yes, putts will still be missed but once they see how much difference it makes to the amount of break compared to what they "see" it will gain momentum. Of course these guys are at the pinnacle of the game and so their green reading and technique are infinitely better than mine and most club players so any help I can get I'll take.
		
Click to expand...

And as soon it becomes that commonly adopted by the pros the powers will decide that it is diminishing the value of an essential skill of the game - reading the green.  And they will ban it.  Bit like belly putting really.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 4, 2014)

drive4show said:



			Erm.....one that leaves most putts short.  Guess that makes me a die'er  

Click to expand...

Well the good news is being a Die'er you get to use the full width of the cup. If your a rammer you reduce the size of the hole considerably for every foot past you miss. Aimpoint advocate 6-12" past the hole is maximum.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And as soon it becomes that commonly adopted by the pros the powers will decide that it is diminishing the value of an essential skill of the game - reading the green.  And they will ban it.  Bit like belly putting really.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## 3565 (Jun 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And as soon it becomes that commonly adopted by the pros the powers will decide that it is diminishing the value of an essential skill of the game - reading the green.  And they will ban it.  Bit like belly putting really.
		
Click to expand...

I think you'll find the players on tour have greens mapped out showing slopes and how much it slopes by already, Aimpoint have taken it further so what ever speed of green you are on you will have the break value you need. Green reading is a skill but you can be the best reader in the world but YOU still have to swing the putter and hit the ball square to your target line, get the pace (no matter what method you use). So really I don't think it will be banned IMO.


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 4, 2014)

As a theory, Aimpoint is physically and mathematically as perfect as you can get. The problem is, it isn't possible for any person to compute the calculations required.

As far as I can tell, what Aimpoint does is give people an appreciation of how much a ball will move on any given slope. Most people will under-borrow and miss on the low side as they don't appreciate how much break to allow for. Once you allow for enough break to get the ball on the high side of the hole, there is more chance of it going in and therefore more putts will be made.

I would hazard a guess that after regular use, most Aimpointers would have learned subconsciously how much break to allow and could put just as well without using the Aimpoint system.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 4, 2014)

Birchy said:



			Is there a recommended distance from the hole that aimpoint should be used from? Im thinking most good putters (pros) ram everything in from the 6 feet ish range. Would aimpoint recommend to play the break? Or would it only become effective from further away?

If aimpoint recommends to play the break on every putt then I cant see how it will be more effective than taking the break out for a 6 footer for example?
		
Click to expand...

The charts etc are based on hitting at a speed that will send the ball 6-12" past the hole. So a 'rammer' putt is not an Aimpoint one. It's up to the player whether to use Aimpoint on such (or any) putts.


----------



## Simbo (Jun 4, 2014)

I need to read more into this aim point, don't why it's taking such a serious bashing TBH I can't see what's any different to trying/using this system as it is to taking lessons.  IMO all good putters will aim for 6-12" past the hole, all good putters will ram some and die others, depending on the scenario.

How does it deal with green speed?? A fast links green with exactly the same amount on slope/break on it to a slow heathland course will have a different breaking point. Surely if this aim point chart is a one size fits all type thing telling you that for X slope you need Y break then your going to miss one or the other of these putts all the time?.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 4, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			How crucial is knowing the stimp reading of the greens ? Do you test it on the putting green ?
		
Click to expand...




Simbo said:



			I need to read more into this aim point, don't why it's taking such a serious bashing TBH I can't see what's any different to trying/using this system as it is to taking lessons.  IMO all good putters will aim for 6-12" past the hole, all good putters will ram some and die others, depending on the scenario.

How does it deal with green speed?? A fast links green with exactly the same amount on slope/break on it to a slow heathland course will have a different breaking point. Surely if this aim point chart is a one size fits all type thing telling you that for X slope you need Y break then your going to miss one or the other of these putts all the time?.
		
Click to expand...

To answer both questions in one hit, the idea is you work out the stimp on the practice putting green before hand, usually from around 10 feet. There is a drill as part of the initial course which explains this but in essence, find a gentle slope (average 2) and work out the break from the chart. Decide which stimp chart the greens are (8-11) and make the putt. If it isn't accurate go to a slower/quicker chart as necessary and play for that amount of break. If you are out on the course and the practice green bears no semblance to the real ones it isn't too hard to make an adjustment to the next stimp chart.

A links and heathland course will be vastly different hence the differing speeds on offer. To be honest the fasted I've ever played was the Grove at 11. My own course is usually an 8 which is classed as medium. Camberley on the day we played was a 9. West Hill last year was the same and so I'd be surprised if many links got too far over 10. The point is there is a stimp speed for each scenario


----------



## gdunc79 (Jun 4, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			To answer both questions in one hit, the idea is you work out the stimp on the practice putting green before hand, usually from around 10 feet. There is a drill as part of the initial course which explains this but in essence, find a gentle slope (average 2) and work out the break from the chart. Decide which stimp chart the greens are (8-11) and make the putt. If it isn't accurate go to a slower/quicker chart as necessary and play for that amount of break. If you are out on the course and the practice green bears no semblance to the real ones it isn't too hard to make an adjustment to the next stimp chart.

A links and heathland course will be vastly different hence the differing speeds on offer. To be honest the fasted I've ever played was the Grove at 11. My own course is usually an 8 which is classed as medium. Camberley on the day we played was a 9. West Hill last year was the same and so I'd be surprised if many links got too far over 10. The point is there is a stimp speed for each scenario
		
Click to expand...

Mind boggling stuff all for a 10 foot putt!


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 4, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			How crucial is knowing the stimp reading of the greens ? Do you test it on the putting green ?
		
Click to expand...




Simbo said:



			I need to read more into this aim point, don't why it's taking such a serious bashing TBH I can't see what's any different to trying/using this system as it is to taking lessons.  IMO all good putters will aim for 6-12" past the hole, all good putters will ram some and die others, depending on the scenario.

How does it deal with green speed?? A fast links green with exactly the same amount on slope/break on it to a slow heathland course will have a different breaking point. Surely if this aim point chart is a one size fits all type thing telling you that for X slope you need Y break then your going to miss one or the other of these putts all the time?.
		
Click to expand...




gdunc79 said:



			Mind boggling stuff all for a 10 foot putt!
		
Click to expand...

Nope. A 10-15 second read, pick the target and hole it. The question was posed about speed. Process the same throughout


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 4, 2014)

How many courses do you know though that have the putting green the same speed as the course greens ? I haven't witnessed many


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 4, 2014)

Agreed but at least your initial read gives you a starting point for the first hole. If you make a decent putt (yes I know you still have to put a good strike on it) and it is over or under significantly you can adjust on hole two. Never have I gone past the third hole without making a decision on what speed chart I'll be using.


----------



## Imurg (Jun 4, 2014)

This does rely on greens being the same speed thoughout the course doesn't it....?
I'd wager that your average course doesn't have 2 consecutive greens running at the same speed..


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 4, 2014)

Possibly but the argument I'd put back is that applies to non Aimpoint putters too. How can you get to a new club for arguments sake and judge the greens if they are variable. All I would say is that at least the Aimpoint is giving you a starting point. Make your read, make your putt. If the green is variable then there isn't much you can do whatever way you read it


----------



## Imurg (Jun 4, 2014)

Good point.....


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 4, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Good point.....
		
Click to expand...

Law of averages. Had to get lucky eventually


----------



## DaveM (Jun 4, 2014)

Very interesting this thread. As I have said it's not for me. But I can see why people would use it, it seems to give Hommer confidence and that's all that matters at the end of the day
Really it's just another method for putting. Like any method it is only as good  As the person on the end of the putter. If you don't have the basics of the setup and a sound putting stroke. It will make no difference what method you use.
I would like to know more about it, (even though I have no interest in using it).just to understand where the users are coming from.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 4, 2014)

Imurg said:



			This does rely on greens being the same speed thoughout the course doesn't it....?
I'd wager that your average course doesn't have 2 consecutive greens running at the same speed..
		
Click to expand...

Homers point to you is spot on, I've learnt so much thru Aimpoint that you can, after using it over a period of time, pretty much know how fast the greens are by just hitting a general putt across the green without doing the speed putt drill using the chart. Someone said earlier that thru time and knowledge in doing Aimpoint, you can judge the break virtually straight away. But it's really helpful when you play greens that are so much quicker then your own course. 

As for  differing speeds on the course your playing, tbh, if they are vastly different then the club ought to sack the GK, if it's half a foot out either side from green to green, it's not going to make a great deal of difference.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 4, 2014)

DaveM said:



			Very interesting this thread. As I have said it's not for me. But I can see why people would use it, it seems to give Hommer confidence and that's all that matters at the end of the day
Really it's just another method for putting. *Like any method it is only as good  As the person on the end of the putter. If you don't have the basics of the setup and a sound putting stroke. It will make no difference what method you use.*
I would like to know more about it, (even though I have no interest in using it).just to understand where the users are coming from.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on. You can use surveyors lazers and lights and most sophisticated equipment, but it's YOU that swings the club.


----------



## chrisd (Jun 5, 2014)

3565 said:



			Absolutely spot on. You can use surveyors lazers and lights and most sophisticated equipment, but it's YOU that swings the club.
		
Click to expand...

Come on now 3565 you surely don't expect US to start taking the blame for poor shots - what a quaint idea!   :smirk:


----------



## Slab (Jun 5, 2014)

3565 said:



			Homers point to you is spot on, I've learnt so much thru Aimpoint that you can, after using it over a period of time, pretty much know how fast the greens are by just hitting a general putt across the green without doing the speed putt drill using the chart. Someone said earlier that thru time and knowledge in doing Aimpoint, you can judge the break virtually straight away. But it's really helpful when you play greens that are so much quicker then your own course. 

As for  differing speeds on the course your playing, tbh, if they are vastly different then the club ought to sack the GK, if it's half a foot out either side from green to green, it's not going to make a great deal of difference.
		
Click to expand...

I've stayed away from commenting on all the aimpoint threads because... well its obvious, but I have reviewed them so would like to ask a question as we're now talking about speed. 

Do the charts account for nap (grain/growth direction) on a green and the impact it has on the amount of break through the different speed required to achieve the same distance of putt on an identical gradient of slope?

Which kind of leads to another point really, what about putting at different times of the day and the impact of dew etc, are these within the scope of aimpoint?

Thanks


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 5, 2014)

Slab said:



			I've stayed away from commenting on all the aimpoint threads because... well its obvious, but I have reviewed them so would like to ask a question as we're now talking about speed. 

Do the charts account for nap (grain/growth direction) on a green and the impact it has on the amount of break through the different speed required to achieve the same distance of putt on an identical gradient of slope?

Which kind of leads to another point really, what about putting at different times of the day and the impact of dew etc, are these within the scope of aimpoint?

Thanks
		
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, and taking the cost of the course out of the equation, Aimpoint is only a green reading device. It will give you a break in inches based on where your ball lies in comparison to the contours of the green. Like anything, it won't take into account grain, moisture etc. Having taken a reading, and got a break from the chart, it is still up to the player to refine this to take into account the conditions. That's no different to what non-Aimpoint players do but the only difference I can see and which is the big plus for me is that Aimpointers have a specific starting point to begin with


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 5, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			At the end of the day, and taking the cost of the course out of the equation, Aimpoint is only a green reading device. It will give you a break in inches based on where your ball lies in comparison to the contours of the green. Like anything, it won't take into account grain, moisture etc. Having taken a reading, and got a break from the chart, it is still up to the player to refine this to take into account the conditions. That's no different to what non-Aimpoint players do but the only difference I can see and which is the big plus for me is that Aimpointers have a specific starting point to begin with
		
Click to expand...

Not wanting to be argumentative, but is the aimpoint starting point any more specific than any other method? I mean, there are a lot of variables and judgements to be taken into account before you get your aimpoint result, if you get those wrong, there is nothing specific about the result is there?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 5, 2014)

HawkeyeMS said:



			Not wanting to be argumentative, but is the aimpoint starting point any more specific than any other method? I mean, there are a lot of variables and judgements to be taken into account before you get your aimpoint result, if you get those wrong, there is nothing specific about the result is there?
		
Click to expand...

Therefore are you suggesting that 'the method' gives you a starting point to aim at then you change it in accordance to what your eyes and conditions tell you - and that could mean that your final 'aimpoint' is a good bit away from that which 'the method' told you.  Seems a little pointless in that case.  But hey.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 5, 2014)

Seems to me that there are a number of additional factors that could potentially reduce the value of Aimpoint.

However it's rare for any of those to be present on the greens I encounter - save the uneven/puddle style of green.


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Therefore are you suggesting that 'the method' gives you a starting point to aim at then you change it in accordance to what your eyes and conditions tell you - and that could mean that your final 'aimpoint' is a good bit away from that which 'the method' told you.  Seems a little pointless in that case.  But hey.
		
Click to expand...

I'm saying I don't think it is possible for a person to calculate the variables needed to give an exact aimpoint reading. I think you can get it within a few inches and I think, as I said earlier, that using it people will learn how much more a putt should break than they had originally thought which will enable them to hit more putts close to the hole and therefore have more go in - that's a good thing.

I dispute however that it is possible to get the line of every putt to the inch and that an Aimpoint read is any more specific than for example, my read.


----------



## Twire (Jun 5, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			At the end of the day, and taking the cost of the course out of the equation, Aimpoint is only a green reading device. It will give you a break in inches based on where your ball lies in comparison to the contours of the green. Like anything, it won't take into account grain, moisture etc. Having taken a reading, and got a break from the chart, it is still up to the player to refine this to take into account the conditions. That's no different to what non-Aimpoint players do but the only difference I can see and which is the big plus for me is that Aimpointers have a specific starting point to begin with
		
Click to expand...




HawkeyeMS said:



			Not wanting to be argumentative, but is the aimpoint starting point any more specific than any other method? I mean, there are a lot of variables and judgements to be taken into account before you get your aimpoint result, if you get those wrong, there is nothing specific about the result is there?
		
Click to expand...




SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Therefore are you suggesting that 'the method' gives you a starting point to aim at then you change it in accordance to what your eyes and conditions tell you - and that could mean that your final 'aimpoint' is a good bit away from that which 'the method' told you.  Seems a little pointless in that case.  But hey.
		
Click to expand...


This is very much like DMD's it give you a base line, somewhere to work from. You still need to take course conditions, weather etc into consideration, as with every other shot you play.

I know DMD's give me the confidence that I've made the right choice. If Aimpoint gives you that same confidence on the green then that's great.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 5, 2014)

And surely that is the crux. It gives me a definitve reading based on standard conditions. I don't play on greens with funky grass so grain is rarely an issue and once I've got a base speed from the practice ground I've an idea already of how conditions may or may not affect the reading. 

It's simply a reading albeit one based on scientific theory than just eyes and experience. How that information is then interpreted is not different to knowing it's 153 to the flag and deciding which club to use based on wind, firmness of greens.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 5, 2014)

Twire said:



			This is very much like DMD's it give you a base line, somewhere to work from. You still need to take course conditions, weather etc into consideration, as with every other shot you play.

I know DMD's give me the confidence that I've made the right choice. If Aimpoint gives you that same confidence on the green then that's great.
		
Click to expand...

I think the baseline DMDs provide - adjusted for the conditions - would give you a great deal more 'confidence' than the one Aimpoint would do - *when additional considerations exist*. That's because the idea of the shot int a green, say, is to get it close and a small error isn't all that important. With putting, the idea is to get it exact, so the additional considerations would make it virtually impossible to use Aimpoint for me - except as confirmation of the 'standard' break as one of the elements of the putt.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 5, 2014)

Putting my 'purist' (some might say 'Philistine', some might say 'snob') hat on - it seems to me that Aimpoint method is perhaps a good teaching/learning/practice aid - but should be left on the practice green.  

I have said similar for DMDs in the past but accept that there are many other sources of the factual information on distance that DMDs provide so have come to an acceptance.  But reading the line of a putt - even by the player or caddy with great knowledge of the course - comes down to skill and experience; simply due the infinite combinations of balls and pin positions.

Whether the Aimpoint Method helps a great deal or not is to me a moot point.  It gives factual information to players not available in any other form and not available to players who do not use it - and therefore will reduce uncertainty in the player's mind.  And as I do not feel that players should not feel it necessary to master the Aimpoint Method to be on a level playing field with those that have, I think it should be left on the practice green.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 5, 2014)

I have to be honest though, in the normal run of things, I can make the read based on the slope and stimp and make NO adjustments and be confident that 8/10 times it has an excellent chance of going in (subject to pace which is a variable in all putts irrespective of targetting) and the other 2/10 times would be close enough to make the one back a certainty if the read is a little out. That sort of accuracy at my level I can live with

The only time I make any real adjustment is if the greens are saturated. If not I'll usually go with what I have as my read and make no account for whatever grass makeup the greens are comprised of. On the courses I play I've found there has been little real difference in the makeup of away courses to my own in terms of the effect of nap or grain.

In plain terms, unless the greens are really wet I go with my read. It's getting the ball on the right line most of the time and those times it doesn't it is causing little cause for concern. The three putts I still have come purely from distance control especially on the long ones. No method other than improving my own technique will change that


----------



## garyinderry (Jun 5, 2014)

on a 30 foot putt, how can one be sure they are aimed 4inches outside the hole rather than 5inches.    you can try but being that precise is rather difficult imo. 


some find I difficult to aim square at a green from 150 yards !


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jun 5, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			To answer both questions in one hit, the idea is you work out the stimp on the practice putting green before hand, usually from around 10 feet. There is a drill as part of the initial course which explains this but in essence, find a gentle slope (average 2) and work out the break from the chart. Decide which stimp chart the greens are (8-11) and make the putt. If it isn't accurate go to a slower/quicker chart as necessary and play for that amount of break. If you are out on the course and the practice green bears no semblance to the real ones it isn't too hard to make an adjustment to the next stimp chart.

A links and heathland course will be vastly different hence the differing speeds on offer. To be honest the fasted I've ever played was the Grove at 11. My own course is usually an 8 which is classed as medium. Camberley on the day we played was a 9. West Hill last year was the same and so I'd be surprised if many links got too far over 10. The point is there is a stimp speed for each scenario
		
Click to expand...

just wondering Homer, how slow on the stimp does Aimpoint cover? I've definitely played some exceptionally slow greens in the last year!


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 5, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			just wondering Homer, how slow on the stimp does Aimpoint cover? I've definitely played some exceptionally slow greens in the last year!
		
Click to expand...

Charts start at 8 which is pretty average. For slower greens than that I'd simply add an inch to each reading


----------



## Qwerty (Jun 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Putting my 'purist' (some might say 'Philistine', some might say 'snob') hat on - it seems to me that Aimpoint method is perhaps a good teaching/learning/practice aid - but should be left on the practice green.  

I have said similar for DMDs in the past but accept that there are many other sources of the factual information on distance that DMDs provide so have come to an acceptance.  But reading the line of a putt - even by the player or caddy with great knowledge of the course - comes down to skill and experience; simply due the infinite combinations of balls and pin positions.

Whether the Aimpoint Method helps a great deal or not is to me a moot point.  It gives factual information to players not available in any other form and not available to players who do not use it - and therefore will reduce uncertainty in the player's mind.  And as I do not feel that players should not feel it necessary to master the Aimpoint Method to be on a level playing field with those that have, I think it should be left on the practice green.
		
Click to expand...


Id say purist.  Good post :thup:     

If low scores and low handicaps are that important to you and you think aimpoint works then crack on.
However, if your someone who wants to enjoy the challenges that golf brings...


----------



## CMAC (Jun 5, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Charts start at 8 which is pretty average. For slower greens than that I'd simply add an inch to each reading
		
Click to expand...

cause golfers are that accurate:mmm:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 5, 2014)

Qwerty said:



			Id say purist.  Good post :thup:     

If low scores and low handicaps are that important to you and you think aimpoint works then crack on.
However, if your someone who wants to enjoy the challenges that golf brings...
		
Click to expand...

Plus unlike the swing as a whole - surely of all club swings the easiest to make 'mechanical' and hence endlessly repeatable is that of the putter.  Where my putting goes wrong is when I am unsure - and it's usually uncertainty of line rather than length.  It's then that things like 'lifting my head' too quick - or snatching the putt - start to creep in.  Reduce or indeed remove uncertainly from the players mind around putting - give him the point to aim at and a mechanical swing.  Nah.  Just doesn't feel right to me.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 5, 2014)

CMAC said:



			cause golfers are that accurate:mmm:
		
Click to expand...

Already said that 8/10 times I start it on the right line in terms of giving it a very good chance to drop subject to pace. Mind you I am spending a lot of time on the putting green this season working on it so maybe I am just reaping what I'm sowing. Said what I think and how its benefitted me so please don't come on here suggesting an average golfer like me is incapable of accurately get a ball on line from relatively short distances on a regular basis.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Plus unlike the swing as a whole - surely of all club swings the easiest to make 'mechanical' and hence endlessly repeatable is that of the putter.  Where my putting goes wrong is when I am unsure - and it's usually uncertainty of line rather than length.  It's then that things like 'lifting my head' too quick - or snatching the putt - start to creep in.  Reduce or indeed remove uncertainly from the players mind around putting - give him the point to aim at and a mechanical swing.  Nah.  Just doesn't feel right to me.
		
Click to expand...

I think you are overestimating how accurate the method is by quite some considerable way.

If Adam Scott who uses this method can still get the line wrong, and he has a caddy and the green maps available to pros on top of AimPoint, then I seriously doubt a club golfer spending a few hours on a course will suddenly have the line to every putt on earth unlocked and available to him.

As I understand it, it is simply a method of calculating a point of aim based on a number of factors that the golfer using it has to assess for himself and doesn't take into account some others so I don't think it goes any further than giving the average Jo a method by which to try and ascertain an aiming point.


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 5, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I think you are overestimating how accurate the method is by quite some considerable way.

If Adam Scott who uses this method can still get the line wrong, and he has a caddy and the green maps available to pros on top of AimPoint, then I seriously doubt a club golfer spending a few hours on a course will suddenly have the line to every putt on earth unlocked and available to him.

As I understand it, it is simply a method of calculating a point of aim based on a number of factors that the golfer using it has to assess for himself and doesn't take into account some others so I don't think it goes any further than giving the average Jo a method by which to try and ascertain an aiming point.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. Aimpoint is no more accurate when calculated by a person than any other method. The maths behind it can't be questioned, the inputs by the golfer can. Aimpoint results may be to the inch or even half inch but there has to be a margin of error.


----------



## Birchy (Jun 5, 2014)

HawkeyeMS said:



			Exactly my point. Aimpoint is no more accurate when calculated by a person than any other method. The maths behind it can't be questioned, the inputs by the golfer can. Aimpoint results may be to the inch or even half inch but there has to be a margin of error.
		
Click to expand...

Even then if you get the calculations bang on and have the correct aimpoint it can still miss


----------



## CMAC (Jun 5, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Already said that 8/10 times I start it on the right line in terms of giving it a very good chance to drop subject to pace. Mind you I am spending a lot of time on the putting green this season working on it so maybe I am just reaping what I'm sowing. Said what I think and how its benefitted me so please don't come on here suggesting an average golfer like me is incapable of accurately get a ball on line from relatively short distances on a regular basis.
		
Click to expand...

calm down dear, maybe re-read my very short and very impersonal statement about *all* golfers- 


these help


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 5, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I think you are overestimating how accurate the method is by quite some considerable way.

If Adam Scott who uses this method can still get the line wrong, and he has a caddy and the green maps available to pros on top of AimPoint, then I seriously doubt a club golfer spending a few hours on a course will suddenly have the line to every putt on earth unlocked and available to him.

As I understand it, it is simply a method of calculating a point of aim based on a number of factors that the golfer using it has to assess for himself and doesn't take into account some others so I don't think it goes any further than giving the average Jo a method by which to try and ascertain an aiming point.
		
Click to expand...

There is nothing inaccurate about the method - that's where the 'too fiddly/complicated' criticism can be relevant. But the actual execution of the putt, after working it out, is still manual and capable of being messed up - as are any of the factors involved.

The Aimpointers I've seen - apart from the 2 that gave up - certainly scare the hole almost every time and a couple of them - including a now +3 player - were quite poor putters before they used it!  

As for the 'challenge' of getting a read right, that still exists (determining the right slope for example), though the pleasure of the challenge is now more weighted towards getting the execution of the putt right imo!


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 5, 2014)

CMAC said:



			calm down dear, maybe re-read my very short and very impersonal statement about *all* golfers- 


these help 
	View attachment 10865





Click to expand...

In which case it was a shame you ommitted the word ALL


----------



## ger147 (Jun 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			There is nothing inaccurate about the method - that's where the 'too fiddly/complicated' criticism can be relevant. But the actual execution of the putt, after working it out, is still manual and capable of being messed up - as are any of the factors involved.

The Aimpointers I've seen - apart from the 2 that gave up - certainly scare the hole almost every time and a couple of them - including a now +3 player - were quite poor putters before they used it!  

As for the 'challenge' of getting a read right, that still exists (determining the right slope for example), though the pleasure of the challenge is now more weighted towards getting the execution of the putt right imo!
		
Click to expand...

I did not say the method was inaccurate, merely that it is not 100% accurate i.e. you do not automatically know the line of every putt if you employ the method, but you do have a method to try and work it out for yourself.


----------



## HawkeyeMS (Jun 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			There is nothing inaccurate about the method - that's where the 'too fiddly/complicated' criticism can be relevant. But the actual execution of the putt, after working it out, is still manual and capable of being messed up - as are any of the factors involved.

The Aimpointers I've seen - apart from the 2 that gave up - certainly scare the hole almost every time and a couple of them - including a now +3 player - were quite poor putters before they used it!  

As for the 'challenge' of getting a read right, that still exists (determining the right slope for example), though the pleasure of the challenge is now more weighted towards getting the execution of the putt right imo!
		
Click to expand...

There is nothing inaccurate about the theory, there has to be something inaccurate about the practice. 

It's like someone giving you a box,a tape measure and a calculator and asking you to work out the volume. Easy right?

Now take away the tape measure and the calculator and guess the length of each side and do the calculation in your head. Not quite so easy. You might get close but you won't get it right.

What Aimpoint does is give you the "getting close" bit, which, if you weren't very good at reading greens in the first place will improve your putting. But finding the right point of the slope, guessing the amount of slope, guessing the stimp rating and then actually aiming your ball exactly x number of inches outside the hole are all variables that make it impossible for a person to get exactly right.

Aimpoint gives you the tools to make a better guess, that is all.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 5, 2014)

HawkeyeMS said:



			There is nothing inaccurate about the theory, there has to be something inaccurate about the practice.
		
Click to expand...

We are saying the same thing! That's what my 'as are any of the factors involved' was about - badly phrased apparently.

There is, of course some 5.5 inches or more of tolerance (hole size plus 2 times just under half ball width) where it will drop in anyway.

As I posted, committed Aimpointers normally at least 'scare' the hole!   

Good analogy btw!


----------



## CMAC (Jun 5, 2014)

HomerJSimpson said:



			In which case it was a shame you ommitted the word ALL
		
Click to expand...

no need as anyone who understands English knows the 's' is plural:smirk:


----------



## Simbo (Jun 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			There is nothing inaccurate about the method - that's where the 'too fiddly/complicated' criticism can be relevant. But the actual execution of the putt, after working it out, is still manual and capable of being messed up - as are any of the factors involved.

The Aimpointers I've seen - apart from the 2 that gave up - certainly scare the hole almost every time and a couple of them - including a now +3 player - were quite poor putters before they used it!  

As for the 'challenge' of getting a read right, that still exists (determining the right slope for example), though the pleasure of the challenge is now more weighted towards getting the execution of the putt right imo!
		
Click to expand...

What did the +3 guy play off when he was a "poor" putter?? Is his +3 handicap being attributed to aimpoint??  
I find it hard to beleive he got anywhere near scratch being a "poor" putter.

Homer is making his point extremely well and in a good manner, although I'm sceptical about the aimpoint procedure I can now see the basis for it. Not really any different to using a laser!


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 5, 2014)

Simbo said:



			What did the +3 guy play off when he was a "poor" putter?? Is his +3 handicap being attributed to aimpoint??  
I find it hard to beleive he got anywhere near scratch being a "poor" putter.
		
Click to expand...

Think he was Scratch or a little lower. Pretty huge hitter and good into/around the greens, but was definitely shaky on them! Markedly more confident on them now.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			There is nothing inaccurate about the method - that's where the 'too fiddly/complicated' criticism can be relevant. But the actual execution of the putt, after working it out, is still manual and capable of being messed up - as are any of the factors involved.

*The Aimpointers I've seen - apart from the 2 that gave up - certainly scare the hole almost every time* and a couple of them - including a now +3 player - were quite poor putters before they used it!  

As for the 'challenge' of getting a read right, that still exists (determining the right slope for example), though the pleasure of the challenge is now more weighted towards getting the execution of the putt right imo!
		
Click to expand...

Of which the bit in bold suggests proof that it gives the player an advantage - using 'factual' information not otherwise available.

But I admit to not liking stuff that takes away from the key mind-over-matter aspects of the game.  So for me _assessing borrow_ is in the same category of key golfing skill as _assessing distance_.  My grudging  acceptance of DMDs is that the information that they provide can in the majority of circumstances be determined from other sources available to all.  I do not believe that to be the case for borrow.


----------



## 3565 (Jun 5, 2014)

I really can't see what the problem is with players using a system that helps with getting the breaks on the green. It's available to all, there is a fee to learn the system just like there's a fee to learn Harmons teachings, Foleys, Cowans, Leadbetters, your own local Pros method. There will always be sceptics to new methods who will put up barriers or obstacles in the way or try and discredit it in some form or another. We as in those who have done Aimpoint, are not the experts in this, there has been a lot of research by the founder of Aimpoint that they could answer your questions, we are simply explaining the outline of Aimpoint in what it does, to give you a number of the amount of break to play from a measured distance on a measured slope, no different then your 150yd marker post, or 153 to the pin techno stuff. You still have to play the shot. At the end of the day it's there to help ALL who choose to do so, just like NGT recently, we all play the game for differing reasons we all use different clubs, and have our purist way of thinking or our tech way of thinking. Neither is right or wrong, it's down to each individual to make their own mind up what's best for them. 

If you don't think it's right or money for old rope, like someone posted here earlier, Move on, leave it be and let those who use/do or say get on with it. Is that too much to ask?


----------



## c1973 (Jun 5, 2014)

3565 said:



			I really can't see what the problem is with players using a system that helps with getting the breaks on the green. It's available to all, there is a fee to learn the system just like there's a fee to learn Harmons teachings, Foleys, Cowans, Leadbetters, your own local Pros method. There will always be sceptics to new methods who will put up barriers or obstacles in the way or try and discredit it in some form or another. We as in those who have done Aimpoint, are not the experts in this, there has been a lot of research by the founder of Aimpoint that they could answer your questions, we are simply explaining the outline of Aimpoint in what it does, to give you a number of the amount of break to play from a measured distance on a measured slope, no different then your 150yd marker post, or 153 to the pin techno stuff. You still have to play the shot. At the end of the day it's there to help ALL who choose to do so, just like NGT recently, we all play the game for differing reasons we all use different clubs, and have our purist way of thinking or our tech way of thinking. Neither is right or wrong, it's down to each individual to make their own mind up what's best for them. 

If you don't think it's right or money for old rope, like someone posted here earlier, *Move on, leave it be and let those who use/do or say get on with it. Is that too much to ask?*

Click to expand...

Yet this is a thread about it being slow, should those who disagree with that view not 'move on,leave it be.....'? Just a thought. 

Not everyone thinks that taking a punt on it is worthwhile, some believe it negatively affects pace of play also, even after reading the explanations of it on here, witnessing golfers using it, talking to Pros and reading about it online. Why can't people accept that these views are as valid on an online forum as others? 

I may well be wrong (and apologies if I am) but you appear (to me) to be ultra defensive of Aimpoint to the point of being obsessive.

Edit: spelling.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 5, 2014)

3565 said:



			I really can't see what the problem is with players using a system that helps with getting the breaks on the green. It's available to all, there is a fee to learn the system just like there's a fee to learn Harmons teachings, Foleys, Cowans, Leadbetters, your own local Pros method. There will always be sceptics to new methods who will put up barriers or obstacles in the way or try and discredit it in some form or another. We as in those who have done Aimpoint, are not the experts in this, there has been a lot of research by the founder of Aimpoint that they could answer your questions, we are simply explaining the outline of Aimpoint in what it does, to give you a number of the amount of break to play from a measured distance on a measured slope, no different then your 150yd marker post, or 153 to the pin techno stuff. You still have to play the shot. At the end of the day it's there to help ALL who choose to do so, just like NGT recently, we all play the game for differing reasons we all use different clubs, and have our purist way of thinking or our tech way of thinking. Neither is right or wrong, it's down to each individual to make their own mind up what's best for them. 

If you don't think it's right or money for old rope, like someone posted here earlier, Move on, leave it be and let those who use/do or say get on with it. Is that too much to ask?
		
Click to expand...

I hear what you say but I see a very big difference between something that gives you a pretty good idea of the break on a green and something that gives you a distance from your ball to the green.  I can pace out the distance to the green if I must - but I have absolutely no way of getting a fairly accurate measure of the break on a putt.

My wonder is why many are so determined to find ways of deskilling golf - and for me assessing the break on a putt is deskilling golf.  I may be in minority on this as I am on DMDs.  But hey!


----------



## chrisd (Jun 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			My wonder is why many are so determined to find ways of deskilling golf - and for me assessing the break on a putt is deskilling !
		
Click to expand...

Surely every golfer on the planet is looking for a way to assess the break on a putt and everyone has their way of trying to do it - I don't see how learning how to do it constitutes deskilling the game, any more than a lesson on bunker play is deskilling


----------



## 3565 (Jun 5, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Yet this is a thread about it being slow, should those who disagree with that view not 'move on,leave it be.....'? Just a thought. 

Not everyone thinks that taking a punt on it is worthwhile, some believe it negatively affects pace of play also, even after reading the explanations of it on here, witnessing golfers using it, talking to Pros and reading about it online. Why can't people accept that these views are as valid on an online forum as others? 

I may well be wrong (and apologies if I am) but you appear (to me) to be ultra defensive of Aimpoint to the point of being obsessive.

Edit: spelling.
		
Click to expand...

Ive never come on here and stated guys you'd be a fool not to do Aimpoint as it's freaky how it reads the green for you and blah blah, I like Homer and Virtuocity, have TRIED to explain the system,if you want validation on results look no further then Scott who, and before you jump down my throat it's not cos of Aimpoint alone that's got him to break into the top 100 for the first time in putting stats in past 5yrs but his general play has improved, more fairways greens and holing more lengthier putts. 

As for pace of play it takes no longer then normal methods ie, if you look at the putt from both sides of the hole, but if your a player that crouches down quick 3 second look stand and hit it player then obviously any method i going to be slower then that, but I don't know how you go about with your putting routine so I'm not going to insult you. 

As for the obsessive defense of Aimpoint, I could say you and others are being obsessively attacking, but that's your view and it means nothing to me, I think Homer has put over good points and for every negative there's a positive, if you want to think negatively that's your choice. So good luck


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 5, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Surely every golfer on the planet is looking for a way to assess the break on a putt and everyone has their way of trying to do it - I don't see how learning how to do it constitutes deskilling the game, any more than a lesson on bunker play is deskilling
		
Click to expand...

Yes...learn to do it in practice and take that learning onto the course.  On your comparison with bunker play - difference obvious I'd have thought.  You learn and practice how to play out of a bunker off the course using whatever aids you wish to deploy - on the course you are on your own.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 5, 2014)

3565 said:



			Ive never come on here and stated guys you'd be a fool not to do Aimpoint as it's freaky how it reads the green for you and blah blah, I like Homer and Virtuocity, have TRIED to explain the system,if you want validation on results look no further then Scott who, and before you jump down my throat it's not cos of Aimpoint alone that's got him to break into the top 100 for the first time in putting stats in past 5yrs but his general play has improved, more fairways greens and holing more lengthier putts. 

As for pace of play it takes no longer then normal methods ie, if you look at the putt from both sides of the hole, but if your a player that crouches down quick 3 second look stand and hit it player then obviously any method i going to be slower then that, but I don't know how you go about with your putting routine *so I'm not going to insult you.* 

As for the obsessive defense of Aimpoint, I could say you and others are being obsessively attacking, but that's your view and it means nothing to me, I think Homer has put over good points and for every negative there's a positive,* if you want to think negatively that's your choice. So good luck*

Click to expand...

Well, thanks for not insulting me. I'm not a negative thinker though, generally I'm extremely positive but I can look at the negatives without it affecting my mind set. 

My point was, this was a 'negative' aimpoint thread and that 'positive' thinkers in regard to Aimpoint (like yourself) should consider, what was it you said others should do again?, ah yes, 'move on and let it be' whilst perusing this particular thread. 

Also, you are quite right, Homer has made some decent points.


----------



## chrisd (Jun 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes...learn to do it in practice and take that learning onto the course.  On your comparison with bunker play - difference obvious I'd have thought.  You learn and practice how to play out of a bunker off the course using whatever aids you wish to deploy - on the course you are on your own.
		
Click to expand...

Oh, I get it, taking a chart on the course! Outrageous, and of course, nothing like taking the old course planner with loads of extra notes on it like we did before Laser devices were ok'd


----------



## 3565 (Jun 5, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Well, thanks for not insulting me. I'm not a negative thinker though, generally I'm extremely positive but I can look at the negatives without it affecting my mind set. 

My point was, this was a 'negative' aimpoint thread and that 'positive' thinkers in regard to Aimpoint (like yourself) should consider, what was it you said others should do again?, ah yes, 'move on and let it be' whilst perusing this particular thread. 

Also, you are quite right, Homer has made some decent points.
		
Click to expand...

I apologise, yes your right, it is a negative thread from the outset and I have no right to interfere in it.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 5, 2014)

3565 said:



			I really can't see what the problem is with players using a system that helps with getting the breaks on the green. It's available to all, there is a fee to learn the system just like there's a fee to learn Harmons teachings, Foleys, Cowans, Leadbetters, your own local Pros method.
		
Click to expand...

By all means pay for a putting lesson to get the mechanics of the stroke right but c'mon, do you really need to pay for a lesson to see how a ball reacts to a slope?


----------



## chrisd (Jun 5, 2014)

drive4show said:



			By all means pay for a putting lesson to get the mechanics of the stroke right but c'mon, do you really need to pay for a lesson to see how a ball reacts to a slope?
		
Click to expand...

If the slope is uphill and you leave it short all the time it could be money well spent !!


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 5, 2014)

chrisd said:



			If the slope is uphill and you leave it short all the time it could be money well spent !!
		
Click to expand...

That was below the belt Chris.....you know I started it on the right line


----------



## richart (Jun 5, 2014)

drive4show said:



			That was below the belt Chris.....you know I started it on the right line  

Click to expand...

 Have you looked into Aimpoint for your chipping ? Most of them seem to hug the ground.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Of which the bit in bold suggests proof that it gives the player an advantage - using 'factual' information not otherwise available.
		
Click to expand...

None of it! I wasn't presenting it as 'proof'!

As for the de-skilling issue; that's tosh! About as logical/sensible as claiming creating a repetitive swing is de-skilling the game!


----------



## 3565 (Jun 6, 2014)

drive4show said:



			By all means pay for a putting lesson to get the mechanics of the stroke right but c'mon, do you really need to pay for a lesson to see how a ball reacts to a slope?
		
Click to expand...

I know how a ball reacts on a slope. But stop letting your :ears: out as you know the principles of Aimpoint which is to give you the tools/parameters/calculations/mathematics, how ever you want to put it, to calculate 'how much' break to play on a putt. That's what you learn.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 6, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			None of it! I wasn't presenting it as 'proof'!

As for the de-skilling issue; that's tosh! About as logical/sensible as claiming creating a repetitive swing is de-skilling the game!
		
Click to expand...

I don't agree - you are using an external aid to provide information that previously and for most comes about through experience and development of your green reading skill.


----------



## chrisd (Jun 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I don't agree - you are using an external aid to provide information that previously and for most comes about through experience and development of your green reading skill.
		
Click to expand...

So if you draw a chart of your greens with all the bumps and hollows, lines and slopes marked and then refer to it in future rounds doesn't that become an external aid?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 6, 2014)

chrisd said:



			So if you draw a chart of your greens with all the bumps and hollows, lines and slopes marked and then refer to it in future rounds doesn't that become an external aid?
		
Click to expand...

Good point. No different to glorifying the old fashioned yardage books we had to use before DMD's. If someone takes the time and effort to go and map each green on their own course then why wouldn't they use it. Of course, the advantage of the Aimpoint charts is they are universal and so can help much more on unfamiliar away courses


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I don't agree - you are using an external aid to provide information that previously and for most comes about through experience and development of your green reading skill.
		
Click to expand...

Assistance - Yes (why would you use it otherwise)

De-skilling - not on your nelly!

Ban Trolleys and Caddies to keep the physical element! 

Luddite!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 6, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Assistance - Yes (why would you use it otherwise)

De-skilling - not on your nelly!

Ban Trolleys and Caddies to keep the physical element! 

Luddite!
		
Click to expand...

Luddite - Indeed I am - but less so than I was.  But I DO see a difference between a DMD giving distance info and aimpoint giving you the borrow aimpoint for any putt.  How many times have you stood on a green on a course you haven't played before - faced with a massive borrow and wondered 'where the heck to I hit this?'  What you do is use your experience and judgement to work it out - that's what you do.  So if you don't see being GIVEN the aimpoint as deskilling and/or giving you an advantage then OK - we disagree.

And please let's not be realistically suggesting that we could all get out there and on every green roll balls from every spot on a green to every flag position and mark out aimpoints on our own chart.  Even if you could do it for your own place you couldn't in any practical way do it for any other course you play.

Will Aimpoint method be slow? - doubt that on average it makes the time we spend on the green any longer as some folk spend an eternity fiddling about marking balls, aligning their ball prior to putting etc etc.


----------



## chrisd (Jun 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And please let's not be realistically suggesting that we could all get out there and on every green roll balls from every spot on a green to every flag position and mark out aimpoints on our own chart.
		
Click to expand...


I could probably map my own clubs greens sitting at home, they are fairly small and only a few have much movement. If an enterprising person had mapped greens and produced  book like a yardage book for ever golf club would you have had them banned?  I think there is someone who does just that for the European Tour.


----------



## garyinderry (Jun 6, 2014)

as far as the challenge of golf goes-

two men meet at the top of a mountain. one trekked up taking days on end , the other flew up in a helicopter in minutes. do they both enjoy the same view?  


:mmm:


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 6, 2014)

3565 said:



			I know how a ball reacts on a slope. But stop letting your :ears: out as you know the principles of Aimpoint which is to give you the tools/parameters/calculations/mathematics, how ever you want to put it, to calculate 'how much' break to play on a putt. That's what you learn.
		
Click to expand...

I learned how to calculate the break by dropping half a dozen balls on the green and hitting putts in all different directions and with different breaks.

And the best thing is.......it's *FREE!*


----------



## tsped83 (Jun 6, 2014)

I am amazed that we are still debating this. Wow. At the end of the day, use it or not, but who actually cares??????

Ooh, a lorry has just gone past my office window, infinitely more exciting. And it's red! Amazing!


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 6, 2014)

Red lorry, yellow lorry.......try saying that when you come out the pub tonight


----------



## 3565 (Jun 6, 2014)

drive4show said:



			I learned how to calculate the break by dropping half a dozen balls on the green and hitting putts in all different directions and with different breaks.

And the best thing is.......it's *FREE!* 

Click to expand...

no good doing that if, by your own admittance, you leave them short all the time........ So Aimpoint no good for you as you do need the ball to have enough momentum to pass the hole, which obviously you not got, but a quick putting lesson with your pro maybe more beneficial to see if you can venture past the hole......... It's not as scary the one back as you might think. Try it sometime :thup:


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Luddite - Indeed I am - but less so than I was.  But I DO see a difference between a DMD giving distance info and aimpoint giving you the borrow aimpoint for any putt.  How many times have you stood on a green on a course you haven't played before - faced with a massive borrow and wondered 'where the heck to I hit this?'  What you do is use your experience and judgement to work it out - that's what you do.  So if you don't see being GIVEN the aimpoint as deskilling and/or giving you an advantage then OK - we disagree.
		
Click to expand...

As Aimpoint teaches you how to read the greens, I see it as an additional skill rather than de-skilling the task.

It's pretty much the same as going on an on-the-job training course. Is that de-skilling the job or increasing your skill-set?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 7, 2014)

tsped83 said:



			I am amazed that we are still debating this. Wow. At the end of the day, use it or not, but who actually cares??????

Ooh, a lorry has just gone past my office window, infinitely more exciting. And it's red! Amazing!
		
Click to expand...

It matters to me as I think it reduces the need to learn a key skill required for putting.  

Further  is probably only acceptable as few do it - and were all to do it then time we spent putting would be unacceptable.  Anything that is only acceptable when a few do it is not in my mind an acceptable part of the game,


----------



## User20205 (Jun 7, 2014)

It's official, aimpoint is dead !!! It's all about the rodpoint!!! All the pros are gonna sign up.:thup:

Matchplay, 17 putts, 8&7 victory:thup:

I'm available for lessons :rofl:


(I forgot the .....boom!!)


----------



## USER1999 (Jun 7, 2014)

therod said:



			It's official, aimpoint is dead !!! It's all about the rodpoint!!! All the pros are gonna sign up.:thup:

Matchplay, 17 putts, 8&7 victory:thup:

I'm available for lessons :rofl:


(I forgot the .....boom!!)
		
Click to expand...

I assume there were some givens in there, how do you know you read them right, if you didn't hole out? I think you need a chart,and a device like a sextant, which you could charge a fortune for. It could be a cross between a sextant, a theodolite, a range finder, and a microwave oven. While you read the putt, you can reheat a bacon butty, or do popcorn. Perfect.

As an aside, 17 putts for 11 holes is ok, but hardly stellar!


----------



## User20205 (Jun 7, 2014)

I like your thinking, a cross between a compass, a protractor and a metal detector:thup:

I'll tell you what Murph, you like a tinker. If you agree to be in the YouTube vids I'll chuck the first lesson in free.

FYI, 17 putts, enough to close it out 8&7, no gimmes. It would have been less but I got confused, read my Rodpoint (TM) chart upside down, and poked myself in the thumb with the compass.


Rodpoint (TM) has legs, homer has already blogged about it!!!


#boom #rodpoint buckets


----------



## USER1999 (Jun 7, 2014)

therod said:



			I like your thinking, a cross between a compass, a protractor and a metal detector:thup:

I'll tell you what Murph, you like a tinker. If you agree to be in the YouTube vids I'll chuck the first lesson in free.

FYI, 17 putts, enough to close it out 8&7, no gimmes. It would have been less but I got confused, read my Rodpoint (TM) chart upside down, and poked myself in the thumb with the compass.


Rodpoint (TM) has legs, homer has already blogged about it!!!


#boom #rodpoint buckets
		
Click to expand...

Well, you can't argue with that! 

I'm in, where do I give my account details?


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Jun 7, 2014)

Before I sign up for Rodpoint I have a few questions.......

Can I download the latest charts for free?

How many fingers do I need to stick up?

Does it take into account the strong winds that blow across Hayling?

If I adopt it, will Dorset's unbeaten record remain intact?

:thup:


----------



## 3565 (Jun 7, 2014)

drive4show said:



			Before I sign up for Rodpoint I have a few questions.......

Can I download the latest charts for free?

How many fingers do I need to stick up?

Does it take into account the strong winds that blow across Hayling?

If I adopt it, will Dorset's unbeaten record remain intact?

:thup:
		
Click to expand...

Even Rodpoint won't help, you can't get the ball to the hole can you!


----------



## User20205 (Jun 7, 2014)

drive4show said:



			Before I sign up for Rodpoint I have a few questions.......

Can I download the latest charts for free? *Absolutely competely FOC to you gordon, anyone else Rrp Â£99:thup:*

How many fingers do I need to stick up? *Can't help you there, sounds more of a personal issue*

Does it take into account the strong winds that blow across Hayling?* There is a supplementary chart, with wind sock to calculate wind speed. *

If I adopt it, will Dorset's unbeaten record remain intact?* Yep :thup: one from one, no one else wants a shot at the title *

:thup:
		
Click to expand...

:whoo:


----------



## Qwerty (Jun 8, 2014)

garyinderry said:



			as far as the challenge of golf goes-

two men meet at the top of a mountain. one trekked up taking days on end , the other flew up in a helicopter in minutes. do they both enjoy the same view?  


:mmm:
		
Click to expand...


I like it Gaz, I like it :thup: we think the same game.


----------



## chrisd (Jun 8, 2014)

therod said:



			It's official, aimpoint is dead !!! It's all about the rodpoint!!! All the pros are gonna sign up.:thup:

Matchplay, 17 putts, 8&7 victory:thup:

I'm available for lessons :rofl:


(I forgot the .....boom!!)
		
Click to expand...

Is there any place for using a green Sharpie in the Rodpoint system??


----------



## BTatHome (Jun 8, 2014)

Thread synopsis ...
1. Aim point is slow
2. No it's not
3. I'm not paying for it
4. You don't have to, it's a choice
5. Return to post 1


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 8, 2014)

therod said:



			I like your thinking, a cross between a compass, a protractor and a metal detector:thup:

I'll tell you what Murph, you like a tinker. If you agree to be in the YouTube vids I'll chuck the first lesson in free.

FYI, 17 putts, enough to close it out 8&7, no gimmes. It would have been less but I got confused, read my Rodpoint (TM) chart upside down, and poked myself in the thumb with the compass.


Rodpoint (TM) has legs, homer has already blogged about it!!!


#boom #rodpoint buckets
		
Click to expand...

Do you have an express Rodpoint ? and do i get a free refresher course within the Â£899 cost ?


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 8, 2014)

BTatHome said:



			Thread synopsis ...
1. Aim point is slow
2. No it's not
3. I'm not paying for it
4. You don't have to, it's a choice
5. Return to post 1
		
Click to expand...

250+ posts pretty much perfectly summed up! 

Though you missed the following:
4.4 It's expensive
4.7 Everything in Golf is


----------

