Improving putting

[SocketRocket]

Improve the things that aren't working. If you can't work out how to improve it then get some help.

 

[Backache]

Putting today, oh dear! Conditions were easy so despite poor ball striking I had 38 points in the Stableford. But the putting was dreadful highlight of which was a three putt from inside 1 foot.

 

[KenL]

Putting today, oh dear! Conditions were easy so despite poor ball striking I had 38 points in the Stableford. But the putting was dreadful highlight of which was a three putt from inside 1 foot.

This doesn't add up. You hit the ball badly, putt poorly yet you still score 38 points. For me to score that I have to be at the top of my game.

 

[HeftyHacker]

This doesn't add up. You hit the ball badly, putt poorly yet you still score 38 points. For me to score that I have to be at the top of my game.

Could be shortened winter course still or off mats which can give better results for bad ball striking? Softer greens makes holding them easier?

A bad round at my place atm is me shooting handicap. Its playing about 400 yards shorter with soft greens so is much easier.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Greens are still a mess. Indoor putting with the gates working well so the stroke feels good but the greens are still so bumpy following hollow coring its academic as the ball bounces everywhere

 

[Backache]

This doesn't add up. You hit the ball badly, putt poorly yet you still score 38 points. For me to score that I have to be at the top of my game.

Doesn't seem right I agree, I think there were a couple of things one is that I think I should probably be a couple of strokes lower in handicap, I got bumped up on introduction of WHS. But the main thing was that my poor ball striking was largely in the form of topping it, which because of the dry conditions was not punished, on the contrary I was getting to greens that I didn't deserve it to.

 

[Backsticks]

So, ignoring the bluster and the usual nonsense about things not being helpful unless they help everyone...

We have agreed that standing behind the ball and pointing the line in the direction you wish to aim it at is beneficial. (That aim point could be the hole itself, the line of the break, or a mark on the ground a few inches in front of the ball. You know, exactly like you do when you stand above the ball and aim your putter!)

Do you believe that our perspective of angles changes depending on our position and that the best perspective from which to judge an aim point is directly behind it? (I'll give you a clue to this answer: there is a reason why precision sports - archery, shooting, darts, snooker etc. all have the player looking directly down the line of sight!)

Edit: Let's remember by the way, that this discussion was about me saying that one of the benefits of a line is to aid those people with a visual bias who struggle to see the correct aim from above the ball. To which you replied that this is nonsense. So don't waste time talking about persimmon drivers, just answer the questions and let's see if you are correct in saying that using a line is just nonsense that makes no more difference than using blue coloured tees.

My point is the lines on the ball are useless if you cannot align it with sufficient accuracy to your chosen target. If you could, and the line were long enough, then I would think lines would benefit putting. But being limited to a line that is 1.68" at BEST long, you cannot align it precisely in the first place. So making it possibly more misleading than helpful. The problem is that the line you can make, is limited to the diameter of the ball, and so too short to be of use. We just dont have it in our fingers and eyesight to place a 2mm wide line to a precision of 0.02mm.

But it is probably worth distinguishing the physics from the mental elements. Geometrically, lines are useless to aim a golf ball at a target. But for those who dont know that, I would certainly accept that the illusion that they might help can bring a positive mental aspect, giving a certainty on the line (even if it is wrong), a sense of confidence and focus, which is important in putting, and a routine.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I had a putting lesson. We worked a bit on my grip, a bit on green reading, a bit on alignment and a lot on pace.

Having done more reading on putting, I’m convinced pace is the most important factor.

Look at professional putting stats and realign your expectations. Realistically holing anything from 10ft plus involves as much luck as it does skill so don’t worry about it.

I’ve now started to concentrate on holing out from 8ft, then pace to make sure I don’t 3 putt from 20ft and 40ft. I measure out these distances every time I practice. I don’t try an hole anything over 10ft on the course, I simply try to get my pace right to give it the best chance possible.

All this has been done over winter on less than ideal greens and my putting has improved. So hopefully that carries on into the season.

This^^^

In the last 6months when faced with a longer putt or putt up a change in level, I tell myself to focus on weight. When I split my thinking between line and length too often line became dominant in my thinking, and I’d end up way out length wise, and often that introduces line issues. I have found with long putts i can get a good line on it quite easily, and so if I get my length right I’ll be there or thereabouts with a tap in or at worst 2-3ft wide. Focus my practice on holing the shorties I don’t have any issues and cut out the damnable 3 putts.

I don’t use any alignment marks on a ball as, again, I find that focussing on aligning these with my line or aim point just distracting. I have started trying to pick a point about 12-18” along my intended line that I want to hit over, but I’m not sure it‘ll work for me as my putting is very look and feel.

 

[phillarrow]

My point is the lines on the ball are useless if you cannot align it with sufficient accuracy to your chosen target. If you could, and the line were long enough, then I would think lines would benefit putting. But being limited to a line that is 1.68" at BEST long, you cannot align it precisely in the first place. So making it possibly more misleading than helpful. The problem is that the line you can make, is limited to the diameter of the ball, and so too short to be of use. We just dont have it in our fingers and eyesight to place a 2mm wide line to a precision of 0.02mm.

But it is probably worth distinguishing the physics from the mental elements. Geometrically, lines are useless to aim a golf ball at a target. But for those who dont know that, I would certainly accept that the illusion that they might help can bring a positive mental aspect, giving a certainty on the line (even if it is wrong), a sense of confidence and focus, which is important in putting, and a routine.

So, does your opinion extend to the belief that a golfer will find it easier to aim towards their chosen target better by standing above the ball and squaring the putter up perpendicular to that target? Are you saying that this will give a better chance of aiming correctly that standing behind the line of sight and using a line to aim to that target?

 

[chrisd]

I find the whole "putting thing" quite amusing . "Is Aimpoint any good, can you prove your handicap has come down", " there is/isn't any point in putting a line on the ball" etc etc etc

The fact is that we play (generally) on greens very much poorer than the top professionals do and, statistically, they make less than 50% of putts from 10 to 12 foot, we will obviously make far far less than that due to our greens being generally inferior and our level of ability much lower. So, if Aimpoint, lines on the ball, this or that method, type of putter etc etc are employed by the amateur golfer and they sink, or think they sink a putt because of whatever system they use then great , it's all been worth it. Yesterday on the World Matchplay the commentator said that more and more players were using Aimpoint, especially now that the green reading books were banned, would they use it if they knew it was rubbish?

When new golfers appear here for advice they are pretty well always told to go and get lessons but I've had, and seen, lessons that are absolutely never going to improve a that golfers ability, but hardly anyone tells posters that their swings or lessons are not any good, but, they'll put someone off who thinks they may use a line on the ball by saying it doesn't work. Even if these things are snake oil the effort to try them may be beneficial and from 12 foot most players will probably miss 75% of attempts, so if "snake oil" helps to only 2 putt from 12 foot then it's probably worth buying into it

 

[Billysboots]

This x1000

One of the biggest reasons I got a blade putter over a mallet putter (despite the mallet being marginally better for my stroke on the SAM lab) was because I was able to judge distance so much better with it.

I've accepted I'm unlikely to hole much from outside 8ft so ensuring it remains a 2 putt is critical, and that means the weight needs to be right.

Seems to be paying real dividends now the greens have been cut and rolled following winter.

I’m another firmly in this camp.

I hole my fair share from within 6’ so, for me, it’s all about making sure my first putt doesn’t finish outside that range. I have always been a fairly good judge of pace so, fortunately, don’t three stab too often.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I find the whole "putting thing" quite amusing . "Is Aimpoint any good, can you prove your handicap has come down", " there is/isn't any point in putting a line on the ball" etc etc etc

The fact is that we play (generally) on greens very much poorer than the top professionals do and, statistically, they make less than 50% of putts from 10 to 12 foot, we will obviously make far far less than that due to our greens being generally inferior and our level of ability much lower. So, if Aimpoint, lines on the ball, this or that method, type of putter etc etc are employed by the amateur golfer and they sink, or think they sink a putt because of whatever system they use then great , it's all been worth it. Yesterday on the World Matchplay the commentator said that more and more players were using Aimpoint, especially now that the green reading books were banned, would they use it if they knew it was rubbish?

When new golfers appear here for advice they are pretty well always told to go and get lessons but I've had, and seen, lessons that are absolutely never going to improve a that golfers ability, but hardly anyone tells posters that their swings or lessons are not any good, but, they'll put someone off who thinks they may use a line on the ball by saying it doesn't work. Even if these things are snake oil the effort to try them may be beneficial and from 12 foot most players will probably miss 75% of attempts, so if "snake oil" helps to only 2 putt from 12 foot then it's probably worth buying into it

One of the things about Aimpoint is it gives you the confidence that you have a good read and so you feel more confident over the putt. If you can work on starting it on line and pace (you never get anything for nothing and have to put the work in) you have a good chance to make putts. The growth in the pro game shows there is merit in the system. If you can hole a couple of 10-15 foot putts, especially as a mid-handicapper then you are making gains against most of the field

 

[6535]

I’ve been using Aimpoint for the past 10yrs, from its early conception of the chart to express. But Aimpoint is more than just gauging slope with feet and sticking fingers in the air, I will never go back to reading greens the ‘normal’ way full time. it’s like most things, you either commit to it or don’t.
I’ve learnt a lot on putting by being a member of the Aimpoint community, that I really enjoy practising putting and work hard at it. It all depends how serious you are about the game to be fair. It’s not for everyone.

 

[chrisd]

One of the things about Aimpoint is it gives you the confidence that you have a good read and so you feel more confident over the putt. If you can work on starting it on line and pace (you never get anything for nothing and have to put the work in) you have a good chance to make putts. The growth in the pro game shows there is merit in the system. If you can hole a couple of 10-15 foot putts, especially as a mid-handicapper then you are making gains against most of the field

I did Aimpoint with Jamie Donaldson about 4 years ago .

 

[Foxholer]

Getting the pace right is key for me, at least on longer ones.
There are plenty of drills that help shorter length percentage.
And consistence, without stiffness, of swing helps too, especially keeping the wrists from being 'active'.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I did Aimpoint with Jamie Donaldson about 4 years ago .

I did it with him too. Great instructor.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I’m another firmly in this camp.

I hole my fair share from within 6’ so, for me, it’s all about making sure my first putt doesn’t finish outside that range. I have always been a fairly good judge of pace so, fortunately, don’t three stab too often.

100% this. Do best to eliminate 3 putts and all things being equal a few longer ones will drop.

Plus I am finding that as I improve my wedge accuracy then so my putting stats improve - especially the increased numbers of single putts and reduced numbers of three putts. Go figure. I think I’ll do more work on my approach shots than worry too much about holing long putts.

 

[SocketRocket]

Getting the pace right is key for me, at least on longer ones.
There are plenty of drills that help shorter length percentage.
And consistence, without stiffness, of swing helps too, especially keeping the wrists from being 'active'.

I agree. Pace is most important, it's better to be off line by a foot with the right place that past the hole by four feet and missing by an inch.

 

[Jimaroid]

I agree. Pace is most important, it's better to be off line by a foot with the right place that past the hole by four feet and missing by an inch.

Interesting thought but from what distance does this line start to matter more than pace? It has to at some point otherwise you'd always miss up to some distance from the hole?

 

[Orikoru]

Interesting thought but from what distance does this line start to matter more than pace? It has to at some point otherwise you'd always miss up to some distance from the hole?

Pace is always more important - but anything that's close enough that you consider it holeable, then you need pace and line to both be correct. This pace vs line debate is really just for three-putt avoidance in my opinion, so mostly for lag putts that you don't expect to hole.