Improving putting

[sweaty sock]

Whatever you say

I dont mean to cause offence, but your posts are misleading to anyone looking to quantify their putting and its improvement.

Understanding how to choose, record, analyse and apply the correct assumptions is key, and those examples in the post I quoted are clearly irrelevant.

 

[bobmac]

After over 50 years of playing golf, I don't need pictures and graphs and charts to tell me if I'm putting well or not.
And please note, I was only giving my opinion, I wasn't telling others what to do.
If some want to study the stats then fine, do it but just because others have a different approach to improving their game to you, doesn't make them wrong.
Live and let live

 

[phillarrow]

After over 50 years of playing golf, I don't need pictures and graphs and charts to tell me if I'm putting well or not.
And please note, I was only giving my opinion, I wasn't telling others what to do.
If some want to study the stats then fine, do it but just because others have a different approach to improving their game to you, doesn't make them wrong.
Live and let live

Most putting stats are worthless in my opinion.
The only thing that concerns me is.... did I start the ball on the line I chose with a decent pace.

They are VERY different posts!

So, to give context to why I asked why you think they are worthless (by the way, your answer was just plain odd?!):

1. I have always considered myself to be a poor putter, both in terms of distance control and on short putts.
2. I've spent my whole golfing life believing I am a poor putter and equally bad at both these aspects.
3. Since using Shot Scope, I have learnt that, compared with others of a similar handicap, I am actually better at long putting than my handicap...but truly and utterly god awful from less than 10 feet (which is why I've just started using a line but let's not go down that rabbit hole again!).
4. This has allowed me to realise that I'm actually not that bad at long putts but need to spend a lot more time focusing on short putts. (It turns out my expectations from long distance were too high, rather than my ability being too poor.)
5. Without this data, I would not have realised this and would have spent too much time focusing on something I am actually relatively good at, and, therefore, too little time focusing on a genuine and significant weakness.

Based on the above, how can these stats be worthless to me?

 

[bobmac]

Based on the above, how can these stats be worthless to me?

I didn't say they were

 

[phillarrow]

I didn't say they were

Okay Bob! You can just leave it to us to guess which stats you were actually referring to when you said "Most putting stats are worthless."

 

[RichA]

What happens if all the 6 footers are downhill left to right?
Or are across the grain, or very bumpy?
I'd rather have a 6 foot putt uphill than a 3 foot downhill slider.
But if I have a 6 foot uphill straight putt and I start it online and if it hits a bump and misses, should I be worried?
What happens if I miss 7 greens during a round and chip each one stone dead so 29 putts, does that me a good putter?

I agree with most of this. I think it very much depends where you play most of your golf. At my home course, hardly any of the greens have any plateaus - mostly they are like shallow upturned bowls lying at an angle. Putting is a nightmare. My best rounds have been achieved when I miss the green and manage to chip to leave myself a short uphill putt.
Green in regulation but above the hole is a recipe for a 3-putt every time.

I've got Arccos sensors and a Garmin watch, but stopped recording stats as they became meaningless.

 

[bobmac]

Okay Bob! You can just leave it to us to guess which stats you were actually referring to when you said "Most putting stats are worthless."

You missed out ''in my opinion''

There were 2 parts to that answer...
Most putting stats are worthless in my opinion.
The only thing that concerns me is.... did I start the ball on the line I chose with a decent pace.

Maybe I didn't make it clear enough... I was referring to me, my game and how I would rate my putting.
I also said do what you want and keep your stats, just don't tell me I'm wrong because I don't.

 

[phillarrow]

You missed out ''in my opinion''

There were 2 parts to that answer...
Most putting stats are worthless in my opinion.
The only thing that concerns me is.... did I start the ball on the line I chose with a decent pace.

Maybe I didn't make it clear enough... I was referring to me, my game and how I would rate my putting.
I also said do what you want and keep your stats, just don't tell me I'm wrong because I don't.

Nobody was telling you that what you were doing was wrong for you? However, the phrase "...in my opinion." is not the same as "...for me and my game." so yes, you didn't make it clear enough.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

What happens if all the 6 footers are downhill left to right?
Or are across the grain, or very bumpy?
I'd rather have a 6 foot putt uphill than a 3 foot downhill slider.
But if I have a 6 foot uphill straight putt and I start it online and if it hits a bump and misses, should I be worried?
What happens if I miss 7 greens during a round and chip each one stone dead so 29 putts, does that me a good putter?

I get Bobs point I think). If you are missing a lot of shorter putts are you leaving the ball in bad positions or getting bad breaks. If you are leaving tricky putts the chances of missing increase. We have bumpy greens at the moment so everyone including our lowest handicap golfers are missing more than they would as it hits a bumps and deviates. The stats will tell you how many you are making/missing but they won't give you any context

 

[Jimaroid]

This comes up repeatedly and I feel like I'm the only person that ever says this but Shot Scope and similar putting stats are not as reliable as people think they are. Beware because you're not comparing yourself against a verifiable or fair set of data - GPS simply isn't precise or accurate enough in the small consumer devices that are in use, they can be wrong by many yards.

You can only trust the PGATour stats taken from ShotLink as they use a centimetre accurate RTK or Differential GPS base station as a reference point. It's a completely different level of technology, precision and accuracy.

 

[bobmac]

I'm out

 

[evemccc]

They are VERY different posts!

So, to give context to why I asked why you think they are worthless (by the way, your answer was just plain odd?!):

1. I have always considered myself to be a poor putter, both in terms of distance control and on short putts.
2. I've spent my whole golfing life believing I am a poor putter and equally bad at both these aspects.
3. Since using Shot Scope, I have learnt that, compared with others of a similar handicap, I am actually better at long putting than my handicap...but truly and utterly god awful from less than 10 feet (which is why I've just started using a line but let's not go down that rabbit hole again!).
4. This has allowed me to realise that I'm actually not that bad at long putts but need to spend a lot more time focusing on short putts. (It turns out my expectations from long distance were too high, rather than my ability being too poor.)
5. Without this data, I would not have realised this and would have spent too much time focusing on something I am actually relatively good at, and, therefore, too little time focusing on a genuine and significant weakness.

Based on the above, how can these stats be worthless to me?

(This is probably more of a theoretical / hypothetical point…but…)

Is it a ‘given’ that as golfers we should spend a decent chunk on our time and effort practicing our weak areas, as opposed to honing our ‘strong’ areas of our games?

A number of decent players (inc my club pro) don’t use fairway words or hybrids as they feel more comfortable with irons, and vice-versa. Some on here have argued about the sense of being decent with 1 wedge around the green, rather than having 3 or more wedges with different lofts/grinds

In life, specialists are usually rewarded > generalists, and to use the example of cricket, Alistair Cook reached the pinnacle of his game despite only really having two scoring shots! Find your strengths and perfect it!

In all seriousness with this thread, I can see why neglecting an essential part of putting (holing out) would not be sensible, but I equally can see this sense in focusing efforts (of a limited time we have for practicing) on a couple of specific areas of golf e.g. being great off the tee with the driver and around the greens with a SW

 

[HomerJSimpson]

(This is probably more of a theoretical / hypothetical point…but…)

Is it a ‘given’ that as golfers we should spend a decent chunk on our time and effort practicing our weak areas, as opposed to honing our ‘strong’ areas of our games?

A number of decent players (inc my club pro) don’t use fairway words or hybrids as they feel more comfortable with irons, and vice-versa. Some on here have argued about the sense of being decent with 1 wedge around the green, rather than having 3 or more wedges with different lofts/grinds

In life, specialists are usually rewarded > generalists, and to use the example of cricket, Alistair Cook reached the pinnacle of his game despite only really having two scoring shots! Find your strengths and perfect it!

In all seriousness with this thread, I can see why neglecting an essential part of putting (holing out) would not be sensible, but I equally can see this sense in focusing efforts (of a limited time we have for practicing) on a couple of specific areas of golf e.g. being great off the tee with the driver and around the greens with a SW

I do spend a significant amount of my practice in the summer working on my putting. I do a lot of work on distance control from around 20-30 feet. As our practice green is separated approximately half way with a slope this means I can work on uphill and downhill putts. I also have putting drills for holing out from close range and will use things like a chalk line to work on my stroke. If its a weakness then work on it. My short game is my worse area so that is where I devote most of my practice time

 

[Deleted member 29109]

This comes up repeatedly and I feel like I'm the only person that ever says this but Shot Scope and similar putting stats are not as reliable as people think they are. Beware because you're not comparing yourself against a verifiable or fair set of data - GPS simply isn't precise or accurate enough in the small consumer devices that are in use, they can be wrong by many yards.

You can only trust the PGATour stats taken from ShotLink as they use a centimetre accurate RTK or Differential GPS base station as a reference point. It's a completely different level of technology, precision and accuracy.

It depends on how people measure and what they want out of the stats.

Personally, I’m tracking stats for on my game so I can see if there has been an improvement or not.
For putting specifically, I measure the distance of my putts so I know it’s accurate. I’ve seen an improvement in my putting since changing some things after a putting lesson. And that has come on crappy bumpy greens over the winter.

By tracking stats I’ve also learned that my putting is not the problem in my game I thought it was.

Also, if everyone is using the same GPS system. They will be out the same amount so comparisons are valid.

 

[SocketRocket]

That's quick tempo!!!!

Yes, I noticed my mistake and changed it ?

 

[phillarrow]

This comes up repeatedly and I feel like I'm the only person that ever says this but Shot Scope and similar putting stats are not as reliable as people think they are. Beware because you're not comparing yourself against a verifiable or fair set of data - GPS simply isn't precise or accurate enough in the small consumer devices that are in use, they can be wrong by many yards.

You can only trust the PGATour stats taken from ShotLink as they use a centimetre accurate RTK or Differential GPS base station as a reference point. It's a completely different level of technology, precision and accuracy.

Yeah that is a good point, and I've been surprised at how poor the accuracy is, but I always edit my round and my view is that the sheer quantity of data points that goes into the Strokes Gained aspect of things like Shot Scope will significantly iron out much of this inaccuracy.
On that point, it's simply a matter of opinion I guess.

However, the difference in strokes gained in my putting stats is so huge that almost no amount of inaccuracy would make them worthless.

If I can work out how, I'll take a screenshot and post it.

 

[phillarrow]

Here's my putting data from Shot Scope by distance.
I just don't/can't believe that this data isn't useful in making me realise that my middle and long distance putting is okay, it's just my expectations that were wrong... whereas my short putting sucks!

 

[Deleted member 23270]

I improved my putting today, I bought a new putter

 

[Jimaroid]

Also, if everyone is using the same GPS system. They will be out the same amount so comparisons are valid.

They’re not and it’s not a constant error so you can’t. The same device can(will) make different readings as they’re all subject to external variables.

I always edit my round and my view is that the sheer quantity of data points that goes into the Strokes Gained aspect of things like Shot Scope will significantly iron out much of this inaccuracy.
On that point, it's simply a matter of opinion I guess.

It’s not opinion, it’s basic science and engineering. The data can’t be trusted. You’ve even written another of the reasons why right there at the start of the quote.

The very best accuracy of consumer GPS units is about 3 feet in absolutely ideal conditions. So are you comparing 7 feet putts or 13 feet putts in that 10 ft stat? You don’t know because you can’t know, it’s a big difference in length of putt.

I’m not saying that these things don’t help and aren’t useful to some but they have flaws so beware how you interpret the information.

 

[phillarrow]

They’re not and it’s not a constant error so you can’t. The same device can(will) make different readings as they’re all subject to external variables.



It’s not opinion, it’s basic science and engineering. The data can’t be trusted. You’ve even written another of the reasons why right there at the start of the quote.

The very best accuracy of consumer GPS units is about 3 feet in absolutely ideal conditions. So are you comparing 7 feet putts or 13 feet putts in that 10 ft stat? You don’t know because you can’t know, it’s a big difference in length of putt.

I’m not saying that these things don’t help and aren’t useful to some but they have flaws so beware how you interpret the information.

Yeah I do get what you're saying, but in reality, the gaps in those putting distances are arbitrary anyway. So, whether in reality we are looking at 7 foot putts, 10 foot putts, 13 foot putts, or anything in between, the accuracy of them would only matter if someone was trying to compare specific differences between small distances.
What they do show, without any doubt, is a general pattern in putting ability. In my case, these stats do prove that my short distance putting is awful, whereas my medium to long distance isn't too bad.

I do agree that they need to come with a health warning, but I still believe they are very useful.