Aimpoint

[chrisd]

He’s a question, one without prejudice, if the green books are to be banned, will aimpoint be??

Of course not, a greens book can be read by any idio.............. I see what you mean 😁

 

[pinberry]

He’s a question, one without prejudice, if the green books are to be banned, will aimpoint be??

How can you ban aimpoint? It would be like banning reading putts with your eyes...

 

[r0wly86]

Utter claptrap.

Aimpoint IS scientifically based, fundamentally it is really simple...

On a slope with a known gradient with a known coefficient of friction, gravity (which is a constantly acting force) will cause a ball to roll down a slope at a given pace.

This can be mathematically modelled. As can the effect of gravity on a ball rolling across a slope rather than up or down it.

Science and mathematics.... pure and simple.

While that is true, that's not what aimpoint does as far as I can understand.

The gradient isn't known, not quantifiably anyway, it's down to the individual qualitatively scoring the level of gradient on an arbitrary scale.

As everyone is different you may say a slope is 2 on your scale, while homer says it's a 3 on his scale.

What it will do is give you a routine and library of putts for you as an individual. Every time you use it your brain will store it and it's result, so if you do 15 putts as a 2 and miss everyone on the short side your brain will compensate and the next time you have the same slope you'll grade it as a 3.

Everyone will be slightly different

 

[shortgame]

Utter claptrap.

Aimpoint IS scientifically based, fundamentally it is really simple...

On a slope with a known gradient with a known coefficient of friction, gravity (which is a constantly acting force) will cause a ball to roll down a slope at a given pace.

This can be mathematically modelled. As can the effect of gravity on a ball rolling across a slope rather than up or down it.

Science and mathematics.... pure and simple.

... provided that:


a) the slope is consistent ° across the length of the putt and the midpoint (where you feel the slope) is also consistent.

b) the green speed is known - not every green will be the same speed and not necessarily the same speed as the practice green, none of which may actually be at the speed published (some clubs do like to exaggerate their stimp readings!)

c) you can accurately guage the difference in a 1°, 1.5°, 2° etc slopes!

Or am I wrong?

Oh and assuming you haven't got thin, or fat, or swollen etc fingers!

 

[cliveb]

Never used Aimpoint and only just looked up the method but

Please can you give us some links to where you've managed to lookup the method? I ask because I keep hearing about Aimpoint and am curious, but nowhere have I managed to find a basic explanation of the technique.

I'd like to at least see the fundamentals explained before committing to the expense of paying for a course.

 

[chrisd]

While that is true, that's not what aimpoint does as far as I can understand.

The gradient isn't known, not quantifiably anyway, it's down to the individual qualitatively scoring the level of gradient on an arbitrary scale.

As everyone is different you may say a slope is 2 on your scale, while homer says it's a 3 on his scale.

What it will do is give you a routine and library of putts for you as an individual. Every time you use it your brain will store it and it's result, so if you do 15 putts as a 2 and miss everyone on the short side your brain will compensate and the next time you have the same slope you'll grade it as a 3.

Everyone will be slightly different

But if Homer gives it a 2 and I give it a 3 it doesn't really matter if we make the putts, if we don't, then we can recalibrate our reading accordingly. Speed also has to be calibrated too. Surely this is no different to golfers who use other methods, judge the break with the intended pace.

The best part of Aimpoint as far as I'm concerned is that you judge the direction of the slope better and ive often misjudged the slope in the past. I know loads of guys who can read a break every time perfectly - personally Aimpoint has improved that for me .

 

[r0wly86]

Please can you give us some links to where you've managed to lookup the method? I ask because I keep hearing about Aimpoint and am curious, but nowhere have I managed to find a basic explanation of the technique.

I'd like to at least see the fundamentals explained before committing to the expense of paying for a course.

It was in a today's golfer post (sorry GM)

 

[chrisd]

Please can you give us some links to where you've managed to lookup the method? I ask because I keep hearing about Aimpoint and am curious, but nowhere have I managed to find a basic explanation of the technique.

I'd like to at least see the fundamentals explained before committing to the expense of paying for a course.

Just put Aimpoint into Utube

 

[Imurg]

The best part of Aimpoint as far as I'm concerned is that you judge the direction of the slope better and ive often misjudged the slope in the past. I know loads of guys who can read a break every time perfectly - personally Aimpoint has improved that for me .

This is the crux isn't it....
If it helps someone make putts then, as long as it's done in a timely manner, there's nothing wrong with it.
And, let's face it, there a many, many non-aimpoint users who have a "Golfing Experience" standing over a putt.
It's another method of reading a putt - works for some, doesn't for others.
Whatever your green reading method - just don't take too long over it
Simples!

 

[Khamelion]

Aimpoint is like a lot of things in golf : bunkum. But, and it is not a trivial but, that is not to say that there are not people who gain a benefit from it simply by believing they gain a benefit from it. Scientifically, aimpoint is nonsense, but given that most golfers are not really scientific, then they are not alone not going to realise that its nonsense, but their lack of ability really evaluate it also makes it possible for them to believe in the nonsense as it were.
So much of golf is in the mind, that a mental approach, a hook or trick or routine, than even if it contributes nothing of itself, blocks out other thoughts or distractions can be beneficial. Or by simply instilling confidence even if the foundation for the confidence has no real substance.
Its why these kind of fads come and go.

Come on then do tell why it is bunkum.

Yes very true, golfers as a rule will clutch at anything they think will make the game easier irrespective of whether or not it does.

Regarding reading greens, ever since I first picked up a club over 45 years ago I have stood over putts and been able to feel my balance tilting me backwards, forwards or to the side denoting uphill or downhill slopes. Nobody taught me, it has always just happened. Maybe I invented aimpoint without realising it? I have never taken the course, I have no intention of taking the course either because I feel no need to based on the above. If people want to part with hard earned cash to be told something that is obvious then that is up to them.

Maybe you missed the boat, you could've started Aimpoint.

He’s a question, one without prejudice, if the green books are to be banned, will aimpoint be??

Green books are being banned, note so sure about the Aimpoint books, but with Aimpoint Express there is no book, so if anything there may be a few more Pro's using Aimpoint. Well the Pros that may choose to use it, won't be being coached by Butch Harmon or his offspring.

 

[chrisd]

This is the crux isn't it....
If it helps someone make putts then, as long as it's done in a timely manner, there's nothing wrong with it.
And, let's face it, there a many, many non-aimpoint users who have a "Golfing Experience" standing over a putt.
It's another method of reading a putt - works for some, doesn't for others.
Whatever your green reading method - just don't take too long over it
Simples!

Stop being sensible Ian or that brother of yours will give you grief 😀

 

[r0wly86]

But if Homer gives it a 2 and I give it a 3 it doesn't really matter if we make the putts, if we don't, then we can recalibrate our reading accordingly. Speed also has to be calibrated too. Surely this is no different to golfers who use other methods, judge the break with the intended pace.

The best part of Aimpoint as far as I'm concerned is that you judge the direction of the slope better and ive often misjudged the slope in the past. I know loads of guys who can read a break every time perfectly - personally Aimpoint has improved that for me .

Yes that's what I'm saying.

It's not scientific, as in x+y=x

For both putts the slope and speed are consistent so a scientific approach would give you the same answer.

As I said if you use it then you will build up a personal databank which will serve you, which is great.

But that's not a scientific approach

 

[Imurg]

Stop being sensible Ian or that brother of yours will give you grief again😀

Fixed:rofl:

 

[Khamelion]

Some may call Aimpoint bunkum, a crutch, a placebo that helps. but there are an awful lot of golfers out there who use it, who rate it and who it has helped enormously.

While the haters just see someone straddling their ball and holding up a finger or four, there is a lot more to it than just what people see.

I wasn't a bad reader of greens and could make plenty of puts, but the ones that got me were the putts where the optical illusions, the ones where you eyes tell you it breaks left to right and you aim left expecting a swing right, but the ball breaks further left and away from the hole, Aimpoint elimates those misreads.

 

[chrisd]

Yes that's what I'm saying.

It's not scientific, as in x+y=x

For both putts the slope and speed are consistent so a scientific approach would give you the same answer.

As I said if you use it then you will build up a personal databank which will serve you, which is great.

But that's not a scientific approach

I'm not saying it's entirely scientific but, as has been said, its comes from the science that shows putt lines on tv

 

[Khamelion]

Yes that's what I'm saying.

It's not scientific, as in x+y=x

For both putts the slope and speed are consistent so a scientific approach would give you the same answer.

As I said if you use it then you will build up a personal databank which will serve you, which is great.

But that's not a scientific approach

Everyone would read a green differently as Chris wrote he may read a putt as a 2 Homer a 3, if both putts go in, then they will have had to hit their respective putts with different strength.

 

[shortgame]

Some may call Aimpoint bunkum, a crutch, a placebo that helps. but there are an awful lot of golfers out there who use it, who rate it and who it has helped enormously.

While the haters just see someone straddling their ball and holding up a finger or four, there is a lot more to it than just what people see.

I wasn't a bad reader of greens and could make plenty of puts, but the ones that got me were the putts where the optical illusions, the ones where you eyes tell you it breaks left to right and you aim left expecting a swing right, but the ball breaks further left and away from the hole, Aimpoint elimates those misreads.

I think it's fair to be skeptical without being a 'hater'. Personally I have for years read some putts through the feet when I'm in doubt - especially when the eyes can deceive (such as optical illusions caused by mounds, cambered fairways etc).

I get that it's fairly scientific but can't see it as an exact science due to the points already mentioned.

Interested to see how many hotshots come out of the US collegiate system using it or if it's just those who've tried and failed with eveything else.

As above though when all's said and done if it helps then great so long as it doesn't hold ul play.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

I wasn't a bad reader of greens and could make plenty of puts, but the ones that got me were the putts where the optical illusions, the ones where you eyes tell you it breaks left to right and you aim left expecting a swing right, but the ball breaks further left and away from the hole, Aimpoint elimates those misreads.

But how does it? Something somewhere in your brain has to give you the information to make the correct read when using aimpoint. That information is already in front of you with or without aimpoint. It is just another (expensive) method to process the information?

 

[HomerJSimpson]

But if Homer gives it a 2 and I give it a 3 it doesn't really matter if we make the putts, if we don't, then we can recalibrate our reading accordingly. Speed also has to be calibrated too. Surely this is no different to golfers who use other methods, judge the break with the intended pace.

The best part of Aimpoint as far as I'm concerned is that you judge the direction of the slope better and ive often misjudged the slope in the past. I know loads of guys who can read a break every time perfectly - personally Aimpoint has improved that for me .

Very good post. I tend to use the putting green as a starting point and build my reads on there based on the pace of that green. If they are then faster/slower which will only take a couple of holes to judge I'll recalibrate again. Of all the merits for me, it has reduced the number of putts I miss on the low side. Like a lot of club golfer I couldn't believe when I went on a course just how much I could under-read some breaks.

This may be the TG article referred to elsewhere

https://www.todaysgolfer.co.uk/news-and-events/general-news/2018/may/what-is-aim-point-putting/

https://www.todaysgolfer.co.uk/news...en-reading-work-or-is-it-a-load-of-nonsense-/

https://www.nationalclubgolfer.com/news/using-aimpoint-to-perfect-your-putting/

 

[Khamelion]

But how does it?

By the feel you get from you feet.

​

Something somewhere in your brain has to give you the information to make the correct read when using aimpoint.

Without wanting to be flippant it's the connection between you brain and feet and the knowledge through experience you have knowing that you are standing on a slope or gradient. Then knowing through Aimpoint and practice what that gradient equates to in terms of a percentage.

That information is already in front of you with or without aimpoint. It is just another (expensive) method to process the information?

The info is in front of you when you look for a read, but as I wrote, if what you are looking at tells your brain that the break is left to right and you play your put left expecting it to break right but instead it stays left or goes further left, Aimpoint through feeling the slope eliminates those optical illusion reads.