Aimpoint

[chrisd]

If it stands up as science, then it should stand up on that alone.
And the claimant should back that up.
The above suggestion is what raises the scepticism - the old snake oil salesman's patter :
- absolutely it cures baldness, bad breath, lumbago, the common cold, arthritis, and, will make you attractive to the opposite sex!
- Proof ?
- why just give me your £99 and you can try it for yourself and you will see (or feel through your feet) !

Just like how to play out of bunkers every time, how to add 50 yards to your driver, the merits of stack and tilt, the hinge and hold chipping method etc etc

But ive done the course and it was well worth the money

 

[Foxholer]

O

Thats a lot of 'ifs' though.

In this whole discussion, I dont think anyone is really yestioning a fully computerised physical/geometrical calculation of the good line from a fully slope mapped green.

Its in the through-the-feet, and fingers business that it starts to look ropey. Or at best, be open to question.

Some of the key points are however quite easily tested using scientific (in the real sense) methods.

The key ones for me being (leaving pace judgement and putting stroke repeatability out of it for the sake of argument) :
- the need for a single slope value selection. Slope can vary according to where along the path of the putt it is measured. Sure, some will be very consistent. But are one, or even two or three measurements sufficient to be usefully accurate.
- can people judge, or be taught to judge, slope, using their feet, and is it any more accurate, or even as accurate, as by sight. Very easily checked beyond any doubt using blind tests and some statistics.
- is there any correlation between slope and finger thickness. This should be easily calculated at a desk by a mathematician skilled in geometry
- is a scale of 1-6 sufficient to provide accurate line resolution. Over some or all lengths. Again, some good geometry would clear up this point definitively one way or the other.

A failing in any of them of course, and aimpoint express fails.

Does anyone know of any reliable analyses of these ? (and please dont quote the irrelevant equations cited earlier in the thread).

Only the 1 'If' really!

And, given that you agree that the Math is correct, it's only the 'implementation' that you are querying.

Pace judgement and stroke repeatability are variables outside Aimpoint's 'control'. I believe Aimpoints calcs are based on a ball being struck hard enough to travel 6" past the hole. So while these are relevant to the likelihood of a putt dropping, they are irrelevant to whether Aimpoint is accurate or not!

To answer your relevant questions....

The key is to determine an 'average' slope. I think that was mentioned in the video, but was certainly been stated as important for the Chart version. And, after all, the effect of varying slopes has to be considered whichever method of reading a green is used, whether Aimpoint or 'traditional'!

I believe slope reading via the feet is, with experience, more accurate than visually. This is mainly because it ONLY uses a single variable (balance) over the line area to get a result. Reading by eye has to contend with several other 'variables' that can get in the way - including other slopes nearby, 'traps' off the green (nasty course architects!) that can confuse the eye and even the direction the grass is laying, even disregarding 'grain'.

The whole idea of Aimpoint courses is to actually train users in the method. If that, and their subsequent practice of it, is unsuccessful, then the (manual) concept fails. If it succeeds, then a bunch of golfers dis-satisfied with their performance with 'normal' green-reading will enjoy their golf more! Success or fail actually ends up dependent on the student/practitioner, not to the method!

Slope vs Finger thickness (and how far away the fingers are held) really becomes a case of 'experience'. Given that the result of the above 'confirmation of method' process above, it would be possible for a user to actually 'practice' converting reads obtained using the Chart method into the Express One. This would 'calibrate' the Finger width/Arm-Length variables. No need for any maths!

Likewise, there's no need for any maths wrt the 1-6 scales. I believe Aimpoint has something of a 'disclaimer' once the slope gets above a certain point.

I hope the above helps.

If it's not for you, I suggest you don't bother using it. But don't poo-poo it as simply (money making) 'waffle' for those, including some top Pros who wouldn't use it if it didn't 'perform'! It's not for me, but I know a couple of guys whose putting has been transformed by it! The major criticism of previous versions has been the time required to obtain a read. This has been eliminated by the Express version.

 

[JohnnyDee]

I believe that Aimpoint will not teach anyone anything new without them already having a modicum of natural God given talent on how to putt accurately and consistently in some shape or form in the first place.

It may provide a level of comfort that will then allow golfers to believe in whatever inherent putt-reading ability they have when using it.

I would never take the course even it was being offered for free as having seen others I play with using it - before and after taking it - I can honestly say it hasn’t, in their cases, made the slightest bit of difference in overall levels of consistency or success.

For me it’s another myth being peddled in much the same way as the latest ‘TaylorPingWay’ driver will give you another 20 yards carry off the tee over your current one.

Simply put it is (IMO) just another example of selling us golfers snake oil.

Just watched Rose use it on the 18th green on a medium length putt swinging from left to right. I could even see the break on the TV screen for heaven’s sake without having to bestride the line.

In the end Rosey under-borrowed and missed it low. Go figure.

 

[Foxholer]

I believe that Aimpoint will not teach anyone anything new without them already having a modicum of natural God given talent on how to putt accurately and consistently in some shape or form in the first place.

It may provide a level of comfort that will then allow golfers to believe in whatever inherent putt-reading ability they have when using it.

I would never take the course even it was being offered for free as having seen others I play with using it - before and after taking the course - I can honestly say it hasn’t, in their cases, made the slightest bit of difference in overall levels of consistency or success.

For me it’s another myth being peddled in much the same way as the latest ‘TaylorPingWay’ driver will give you another 20 yards carry off the tee over your current one.

Simply put it is (IMO) just another example of selling us golfers snake oil.

Just watched Rose use it on the 18th green on a medium length putt swinging from left to right. I could even see the break on the TV screen for heaven’s sake without having to bestride the line.

In the end Rosey under-borrowed and missed it low. Go figure.

It's not a guarantee that every putt will drop! How many others did you see where he used it successfully?

Would you have been convinced if the putt had gone in? Somehow I doubt it!

Btw. Missing it low may simply means that the user got (or hit) the pace wrong - the read could well have been spot on!

 

[JohnnyDee]

It's not a guarantee that every putt will drop!

And there's the point I believe.

There is NO guarantee that any putt will drop using ANY method and if AP was a panacea then surely everyone on tour would be adopting it?

 

[Backsticks]

It's not a guarantee that every putt will drop!

And there's the point I believe.

Straw man argument really. No one is criticising it because it wont make you hole every putt. Its understood that one must have the putting stroke to despatch the ball on whatever line is chosen at the right pace.

But it does claim to be a useful line selection method. And on this point alone that it is still questionable.

 

[Foxholer]

And there's the point I believe.

There is NO guarantee that any putt will drop using ANY method and if AP was a panacea then surely everyone on tour would be adopting it?

There certainly seems to be a significant number that do!

http://greensidegolfacademy.com/tour-players.html

I think those that don't are 'content' with their existing method. After all, that's part of what the Caddy relationship is all about.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

There certainly seems to be a significant number that do!

http://greensidegolfacademy.com/tour-players.html

I think those that don't are 'content' with their existing method. After all, that's part of what the Caddy relationship is all about.

20 odd players on the list for the PGA tour, at least 2 of those are seniors (does Faldo even still play??) and out of the rest only a handful are 'decent'. There are 200 players in the PGA tour putting stats so 10% use it and only 1% of them are any good.

This leads me to one of the following conclusions:

1. Lots of players don't know about it (pretty unlikely)
2. 90% of the players on the PGA tour are already able to read greens
3. It is a load of nonsense

Make your own mind up.

 

[Beezerk]

From what I've read I'm still not convinced it will help with putts where the turn gradually increases or decreases, or moves one way then t'uther. Like I said before, it seems to be developed for putts on greens which are one dimensional or the slope stays constant the whole way.

 

[chrisd]

From what I've read I'm still not convinced it will help with putts where the turn gradually increases or decreases, or moves one way then t'uther. Like I said before, it seems to be developed for putts on greens which are one dimensional or the slope stays constant the whole way.

They don't say that when on the course. They do cover double breakers and longer putts using variations on the main theme

 

[Jamesbrown]

I could sit here and write crap about plumb bobbing but I’ve never tried it, or know how to use it.

 

[6535]

I could sit here and write crap about plumb bobbing but I’ve never tried it, or know how to use it.

I’d be interested to know in those who have on this thread, questioned Aimpoint and it’s merits if they use plumb bobbing and tell us what it actually does for them?

 

[Backsticks]

I’d be interested to know in those who have on this thread, questioned Aimpoint and it’s merits if they use plumb bobbing and tell us what it actually does for them?

I dont. Plumb bobbing has been around for decades, and the science truly has been done on that one, showing it to be of no practical use (although again the placebo, or just the discipline of procedure even if it contributes nothing of substance can have people resort to it and even convince themselves it is beneficial) whatsoever.

 

[6535]

I dont. Plumb bobbing has been around for decades, and the science truly has been done on that one, showing it to be of no practical use (although again the placebo, or just the discipline of procedure even if it contributes nothing of substance can have people resort to it and even convince themselves it is beneficial) whatsoever.

I’m curious in how you do things. As you are forth right with your views and seem to have an answer (even tho, when you start on a path you then deviate to give us a mass rambling of but if the earth and stars are lined up and the spinning of the world increases by 2.74% will increase the gravitational pull by 8.34% on a londitude of 12* will give a speed of 3.9mph) for everything.


The only other person that I knew who could do this was the great Billy Connelly and he was brilliant.

 

[Beezerk]

They don't say that when on the course. They do cover double breakers and longer putts using variations on the main theme

Fair enough mate, so a putts which break more as the slope is nearer the hole vs one where the slope is at the start of the putt but levels out, how do you know where to take the read? Both putts will have different amount of break even though the slope is the same (just in a different place).

 

[chrisd]

Fair enough mate, so a putts which break more as the slope is nearer the hole vs one where the slope is at the start of the putt but levels out, how do you know where to take the read? Both putts will have different amount of break even though the slope is the same (just in a different place).

The read method for all putts depends on several factors. How long is the putt, is it a double breaker, what's the speed of the green, is it up or down hill, how hard are you going to hit it. If your example it a 6 foot putt or a 26 footer then the method would vary. Out of interest, how would you read it?

 

[Beezerk]

The read method for all putts depends on several factors. How long is the putt, is it a double breaker, what's the speed of the green, is it up or down hill, how hard are you going to hit it. If your example it a 6 foot putt or a 26 footer then the method would vary. Out of interest, how would you read it?

I’d be imagining the ball rolling up to and into the hole, how would it get there. Not scientific at all and I don’t get it right every time but I accept I’m not a machine and I’ll make mistakes 😁

 

[Khamelion]

Not necessarily just for Aimpoint, but people can see a read in two different ways, no doubt someone in here will contradict me, anyway, two different ways, curved or linear. Some people like to imagine a straight line and say put to 6, 12 or 18 inches for arguments sake either side of the cup to read a break, they pick that point and imagine a line between that point and the ball and choose a point the ball will roll over.

Others see the line to the hole as a curve they can visualize in their mind the curve the ball will take and line their ball up accordingly.

Myself I can sometimes see the line I need to take, literally I can see the green line drawn onto the green, I know some will say that is daft, that I'm talking out my hat, but sometimes it does happen. Other times I like to choose a linear approach.

 

[User 99]

Been watching the BMW on PGA live as I don't have Sky and their featured holes and haven't seen a single player use aimpoint yet and I've been watching it for over two hours.

 

[Khamelion]

Been watching the BMW on PGA live as I don't have Sky and their featured holes and haven't seen a single player use aimpoint yet and I've been watching it for over two hours.

DJ's caddy was using it yesterday.