Aimpoint

[Backsticks]

Yes, I do, because in the moment you are determining your line, you are not thinking about the what ifs, you're not worried about constants, gravitational pull, whether R over X squared equals roll over Y distance or whatever, you're just thinking about getting the line and pace right, so at the precise moment putter face hits the ball, you believe the line you have chosen is the correct one.

Well if that belief is a tenet of aimpoint, then we can conclude it to be unscientific, and well and truly debunked.

 

[Khamelion]

That belief is mine, you spin it any way you want, as I wrote in my other reply, if you want to know the science behind Aimpoint, ask the creators to explain.

 

[Hobbit]

Well if that belief is a tenet of aimpoint, then we can conclude it to be unscientific, and well and truly debunked.

I know its going around in circles but are you saying that a number of top professionals who use it are deluded? Do I believe you or them?

 

[Backsticks]

That belief is mine, you spin it any way you want, as I wrote in my other reply, if you want to know the science behind Aimpoint, ask the creators to explain.

There is no science needed to know that an incorrect doesnt become the correct one just because you choose to believe its the correct one. We are into the realm of magic crystals and tarot cards with that one.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

If something works for you, whatever it's called or whatever people think, then that is all that matters.

 

[6535]

Thanks for the effort, and I am not trying to be dismissive, but in short, it doesnt at all. I am puzzled that anyone could consider it did. Yes, its scientific style language, some equations, contstants. And me even be correct for what it is describing. But it no way justifies the fundamental premise of aimpoint as practised by golfers on the course (I dont speak of aimpoints computer driven equations calculating the lines for fully mapped greens on TV), which centres on their being only 6 possible lines for a putt breaking a given way, that one if them is (approximately) correct to hole a well paced putt, and that these lines correlate, even roughly, to a projection according to the thickness of ones fingers. I asked these questions earlier and they were dismissed as ramblings. And they may seem such to someone of no scientific or analytic thought. But to anyone of some scientific knowledge, they are fair questions - and I fully accept there may be good answer to them that do indeed justify aimpoint as a reliable and genuinely relevant, innovative, and useful aiming system. But I have yet to see it explained.

Mark Sweeney read your post as I was utterly, like I would imagine most on here, perplexed at what you were trying to say. The creator of Aimpoint said he’s confused the hell out of me.

It’s your opinion but you can’t say it isn’t scientific just cos no one has been able to understand your babble and give a response.

 

[chrisd]

I find it really amusing that there are any amount of Utubers, golf magazines and teaching pro's extolling the benefits of their techniques for driver, iron play, chipping and putting, hardly any of which barely raise a comment but do one on green reading and there's over 400 posts, most by people who've never done the course, criticising it 😐

 

[User 99]

I find it really amusing that there are any amount of Utubers, golf magazines and teaching pro's extolling the benefits of their techniques for driver, iron play, chipping and putting, hardly any of which barely raise a comment but do one on green reading and there's over 400 posts, most by people who've never done the course, criticising it 😐

I'd say because that's down to actually hitting the ball as opposed to holding your fingers in the air either at arms length or not, it does sound a bit ridiculous and open to ridicule.

 

[Slab]

I've done similar before but what the heck, this thread needs it...

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Hello, punter.
Punter: Who are you?
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: I am the Accredited Aimpoint Pro. I created Aimpoint. I've been waiting for you. You have many questions, and although the process has altered your consciousness, you remain irrevocably a golfer. Ergo, some of my answers you will understand, and some of them you will not. Concordantly, while your first question may be the most pertinent, you may or may not realize it is also irrelevant.
Punter: Is Aimpoint Scientific?

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Aimpoint is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the slope on the green. You are the eventuality of an anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. While it remains a burden assiduously avoided, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control. Which has led you, inexorably, here.
Punter: You haven't answered my question.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Quite right. Interesting. That was quicker than the others.

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Aimpoint is older than you know. I prefer counting from the emergence of one Aimpoint anomaly to the emergence of the next, in which case this is the sixth version.
Punter: There are only two possible explanations: either no one told me, or no one knows.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Precisely. As you are undoubtedly gathering, the anomaly's systemic, creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic forumer.
Punter: Choice. The problem is choice.

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: The first Aimpoint course I designed was quite naturally perfect, it was a work of art, flawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its monumental failure. The inevitability of its doom is as apparent to me now as a consequence of the imperfection inherent in every human being, thus I redesigned it based on your putting history to more accurately reflect the varying grotesqueries of your swing. However, I was again frustrated by failure. I have since come to understand that the answer eluded me because it required a lesser mind, or perhaps a mind less bound by the parameters of perfection. Thus, the answer was stumbled upon by another, an intuitive Pro, initially created to teach certain aspects of the chipping stroke. If I am the father of Aimpoint, she would undoubtedly be its mother.
Punter: The Short Game Pro?
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Please. As I was saying, she stumbled upon a solution whereby nearly 99% of all test subjects accepted Aimpoint, as long as they were given a choice, even if they were only aware of the choice at a near unconscious level. While this answer functioned, it was obviously fundamentally flawed, thus creating the otherwise contradictory systemic anomaly that if left unchecked might threaten Aimpoint itself. Ergo, those that refused the course findings, while a minority, if unchecked, would constitute an escalating probability of disaster.
Punter: This is about the Pace of Putt?

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: You are here because Slope is more important than Pace.
Punter: Bull!
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Denial is the most predictable of all golfers responses. But, rest assured, this will be the sixth time we have mapped this green, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: The function of the Punter is now to return to the green, allowing a temporary dissemination of the Scientific Aimpoint Course you carry, reinserting the green reading. After which you will be required to select from the Clubhouse 23 individuals, 16 female, 7 male, to watch you on the practice green. Failure to comply with this process will result in a cataclysmic crash killing everyone connected to Aimpoint, which coupled with the extermination of the practice green will ultimately result in the extinction of this topic.
Punter: You won't let it happen, you can't. You need slope to survive.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept. However, the relevant issue is whether or not you are ready to accept the responsibility for the pace of every putt you make.

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: It is interesting reading your reactions. The five previous versions of Aimpoint were by design based on a similar predication, a contingent affirmation that was meant to create a profound attachment to the Aimpoint Course, facilitating the function of the Punter. While the others experienced this in a very general way, your experience is far more specific. Vis-a-vis, Anchored Putting.
Punter: Adam Scott!
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Apropos, Adam took the Aimpoint course to save your credibility at the cost of his own.
Punter: No!

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the anomaly revealed as both beginning, and end. There are two greens. The green to your right leads to Aimpoint Express, and the salvation of you putts per round. The green to the left leads back to the course, and to the end of your Cat 2 status. As you adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you're going to do, don't we? Already I can see the chain reaction, the chemical precursors that signal the onset of emotion, designed specifically to overwhelm logic, and reason. An emotion that is already blinding you from the simple, and obvious truth: Aimpoint Express is here to stay and there is nothing that you can do to stop it.

-The Punter walks to the green on his left-

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Humph. Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness.
Punter: If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: We won't, I have your money for the Aimpoint Express course already…

 

[6535]

I've done similar before but what the heck, this thread needs it...

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Hello, punter.
Punter: Who are you?
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: I am the Accredited Aimpoint Pro. I created Aimpoint. I've been waiting for you. You have many questions, and although the process has altered your consciousness, you remain irrevocably a golfer. Ergo, some of my answers you will understand, and some of them you will not. Concordantly, while your first question may be the most pertinent, you may or may not realize it is also irrelevant.
Punter: Is Aimpoint Scientific?

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Aimpoint is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the slope on the green. You are the eventuality of an anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. While it remains a burden assiduously avoided, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control. Which has led you, inexorably, here.
Punter: You haven't answered my question.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Quite right. Interesting. That was quicker than the others.

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Aimpoint is older than you know. I prefer counting from the emergence of one Aimpoint anomaly to the emergence of the next, in which case this is the sixth version.
Punter: There are only two possible explanations: either no one told me, or no one knows.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Precisely. As you are undoubtedly gathering, the anomaly's systemic, creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic forumer.
Punter: Choice. The problem is choice.

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: The first Aimpoint course I designed was quite naturally perfect, it was a work of art, flawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its monumental failure. The inevitability of its doom is as apparent to me now as a consequence of the imperfection inherent in every human being, thus I redesigned it based on your putting history to more accurately reflect the varying grotesqueries of your swing. However, I was again frustrated by failure. I have since come to understand that the answer eluded me because it required a lesser mind, or perhaps a mind less bound by the parameters of perfection. Thus, the answer was stumbled upon by another, an intuitive Pro, initially created to teach certain aspects of the chipping stroke. If I am the father of Aimpoint, she would undoubtedly be its mother.
Punter: The Short Game Pro?
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Please. As I was saying, she stumbled upon a solution whereby nearly 99% of all test subjects accepted Aimpoint, as long as they were given a choice, even if they were only aware of the choice at a near unconscious level. While this answer functioned, it was obviously fundamentally flawed, thus creating the otherwise contradictory systemic anomaly that if left unchecked might threaten Aimpoint itself. Ergo, those that refused the course findings, while a minority, if unchecked, would constitute an escalating probability of disaster.
Punter: This is about the Pace of Putt?

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: You are here because Slope is more important than Pace.
Punter: Bull!
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Denial is the most predictable of all golfers responses. But, rest assured, this will be the sixth time we have mapped this green, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: The function of the Punter is now to return to the green, allowing a temporary dissemination of the Scientific Aimpoint Course you carry, reinserting the green reading. After which you will be required to select from the Clubhouse 23 individuals, 16 female, 7 male, to watch you on the practice green. Failure to comply with this process will result in a cataclysmic crash killing everyone connected to Aimpoint, which coupled with the extermination of the practice green will ultimately result in the extinction of this topic.
Punter: You won't let it happen, you can't. You need slope to survive.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept. However, the relevant issue is whether or not you are ready to accept the responsibility for the pace of every putt you make.

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: It is interesting reading your reactions. The five previous versions of Aimpoint were by design based on a similar predication, a contingent affirmation that was meant to create a profound attachment to the Aimpoint Course, facilitating the function of the Punter. While the others experienced this in a very general way, your experience is far more specific. Vis-a-vis, Anchored Putting.
Punter: Adam Scott!
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Apropos, Adam took the Aimpoint course to save your credibility at the cost of his own.
Punter: No!

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the anomaly revealed as both beginning, and end. There are two greens. The green to your right leads to Aimpoint Express, and the salvation of you putts per round. The green to the left leads back to the course, and to the end of your Cat 2 status. As you adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you're going to do, don't we? Already I can see the chain reaction, the chemical precursors that signal the onset of emotion, designed specifically to overwhelm logic, and reason. An emotion that is already blinding you from the simple, and obvious truth: Aimpoint Express is here to stay and there is nothing that you can do to stop it.

-The Punter walks to the green on his left-

The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: Humph. Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness.
Punter: If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again.
The Accredited Aimpoint Pro: We won't, I have your money for the Aimpoint Express course already…

Ha, I knew you were Backsticks. 😂

 

[6535]

I'd say because that's down to actually hitting the ball as opposed to holding your fingers in the air either at arms length or not, it does sound a bit ridiculous and open to ridicule.

Yeah, I’ve been ridiculed numerous times, even an Ex Man Utd and England player said what’s all that about? He soon shut up when I banged in a 25ft putt on a 2 finger read. So, is it open to ridicule? Only if your self conscious about it, but I’ve proved many a time
that it works, I would go to say using Aimpoint has enhanced my knowledge of green reading, more then I knew before AE.

 

[chrisd]

I'd say because that's down to actually hitting the ball as opposed to holding your fingers in the air either at arms length or not, it does sound a bit ridiculous and open to ridicule.

Hitting the ball - Aimpoint is about hitting the ball !

 

[User 99]

He soon shut up when I banged in a 25ft putt on a 2 finger read. .

I holed from further last night, from off the green with a no finger read, what does that mean then ?

 

[chrisd]

I holed from further last night, from off the green with a no finger read, what does that mean then ?

I rolled in about a 40 foot big swinging putt in a league match yesterday - we all have some luck some days!

 

[6535]

I holed from further last night, from off the green with a no finger read, what does that mean then ?

I was replying to your post on the subject of being ridiculed. But If you want to be pedantic and take it further then I holed out from the fairway on our 18th other week, what does that mean?

 

[6535]

I rolled in about a 40 foot big swinging putt in a league match yesterday - we all have some luck some days!

I got ridiculed 4yrs ago by my mate who saw I had a 40ft putt, and shouted it’s 2 fingers, I knew the break was 3, confirmed my read it was 3 and Dudley holed it. That putt won club champs for me.

We’ve all got stories where we’ve holed huge putts with or without fingers and toes.
It’s whatever works for you.

 

[User 99]

TBH, I'm more intrigued by how defensive you guys get more than the fact you use it, whatever works for you but getting so defensive is quite amusing.

 

[6535]

Call it what you want but it’s no more then the antagonistic remarks from yourself and others on here, who really not got a clue about it

 

[chrisd]

TBH, I'm more intrigued by how defensive you guys get more than the fact you use it, whatever works for you but getting so defensive is quite amusing.

As it happens I very rarely use it at my place as we have pretty small greens and I pretty much know the lay of the land I am not defensive, I really don't give a stuff who does, or doesn't use it, I don't care whether you make or miss every putt I absolutely don't care of your opinion, but, I don't like the small minded pettiness that is too often shown here to just try and ridicule others

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

There is no science needed to know that an incorrect doesnt become the correct one just because you choose to believe its the correct one. We are into the realm of magic crystals and tarot cards with that one.

Now that comment could be posted in another long-running and very contentious debate and could be absolutely spot on