To Die or Ram short putts?

Redzah · 23-09-2014 03:35PM

GreeBo wrote: »

How can it be on line irrespective of pace?
We are not talking about straight 2 foot putts here, its its straight there is no line to worry about.

I never said we were talking about a straight putt greebo. In fact if you reread my previous example it was for a right edge 2 ft putt where I explained that it would take somebody with a sufficiently poor feel for the greens to miss a putt of this length based on pace (as opposed to line).

In my opinion there is a desirable pace to hit the ball into the hole, one that doesn't just drop in on its last roll and one that doesn't smack the back of the cup. This becomes even more relevant for an average amateur golfer due to the following;

1. They cannot consistently stroke the ball on line like the pros do to adopt an aggressive approach.

2. The quality of the cups on the courses played vary with many cups not taking an agressively struck put and resulting in a lip out even though the ball might hit it quite centrally.

3. The statistics would most likely suggest that even if a pro misses an agressively stuck putt from this distance that he would get the majority of the ones back, the percentages for amateurs regarding this would most likely suggest a different scenario.

I suppose what I'm saying to the OP is you can be positive without being foolish, there is absolutely no reason why you should bring a 3 putt from 2ft into the equation.

Practice as opposed to adopting a particular method is the answer

BigChap1759 · 23-09-2014 03:36PM

Redzah wrote: »

I never said we were talking about a straight putt greebo. In fact if you reread my previous example it was for a right edge 2 ft putt where I explained that it would take somebody with a sufficiently poor feel for the greens to miss a putt of this length based on pace (as opposed to line).

But you were effectively saying just hit them straight??

GreeBo · 23-09-2014 03:36PM

Redzah wrote: »

I never said we were talking about a straight putt greebo. In fact if you reread my previous example it was for a right edge 2 ft putt where I explained that it would take somebody with a sufficiently poor feel for the greens to miss a putt of this length based on pace (as opposed to line).

Its right edge only at a certain speed, you seem to be ignoring that.
For example if Im going to hit it with 5feet pace then it wont go in at right edge, would need to be middle or right half.

On a putt with break you cant have line without pace, its meaningless.

Redzah · 23-09-2014 03:50PM

BigChap1759 wrote: »

But you were effectively saying just hit them straight??

No, I did not effectively say that at all, if you point out where I could try clarify for you

Redzah · 23-09-2014 03:54PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Its right edge only at a certain speed, you seem to be ignoring that.
For example if Im going to hit it with 5feet pace then it wont go in at right edge, would need to be middle or right half.

On a putt with break you cant have line without pace, its meaningless.

I've made my case above for why an amateur golfer should never hit a putt from 2 feet at 5 foot pace. Go out and watch any senior cup, championship or other high level matches and you will see very little of this. it is mindless behaviour derived from watching too much pro golf and thinking that's the way to do it.

GreeBo · 23-09-2014 05:00PM

Redzah wrote: »

I've made my case above for why an amateur golfer should never hit a putt from 2 feet at 5 foot pace. Go out and watch any senior cup, championship or other high level matches and you will see very little of this. it is mindless behaviour derived from watching too much pro golf and thinking that's the way to do it.

Why do the pro's do it then?

Redzah · 23-09-2014 05:06PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Why do the pro's do it then?

1. Because they have a high level of reliability regarding their stroke.

2. Because they know that the cups are cut in a consistent fashion to comply with tour regulations to have assurances of what pace the ball should fall at.

3. They have a high percentage of making the one back in the event that they miss, a much higher percentage than an amateur golfer.

Neither of the 3 above can be guaranteed at amateur level on a regular basis.

Finally, an agressive approach is not taken by all pro golfers.

GreeBo · 23-09-2014 05:10PM

Redzah wrote: »

1. Because they have a high level of reliability regarding their stroke.

2. Because they know that the cups are cut in a consistent fashion to comply with tour regulations to have assurances of what pace the ball should fall at.

Neither of the 2 above can be guaranteed at amateur level on a regular basis.

Finally, an agressive approach is not taken by all pro golfers

1) Exactly how much stroke is involved in a 2 foot putt?
2) The faster the ball is moving the less likely it is to be impacted by imperfections on the green, much more likely in the amateur game.

Redzah · 23-09-2014 05:24PM

GreeBo wrote: »

1) Exactly how much stroke is involved in a 2 foot putt?
2) The faster the ball is moving the less likely it is to be impacted by imperfections on the green, much more likely in the amateur game.

1. Enough of a stroke for a pro or very good amateur to have a consistently higher chance and higher statistics of holing these putts than a high handicapper.

2. Agree with this to a point but not a strong enough reason to whack these at the hole as it is more than negated by; a. Ability of the amateur to consistently hit the ball on the correct line at this pace, margin for error is smaller using this approach b. The fact that the hole has been made relatively smaller using an aggressive approach c. The inconsistency of the cups on the greens at an amateur level.

I suppose another way of looking at this would be the pros approach to the game as a whole, even the most conservative pro is extremely aggressive when compared to an amateur, the difference is that there aggressive game is derived from statistics and a high level of consistency that it pays off to be aggressive. Most amateurs cannot reach this level of consistency so it would not be worthwhile adopting this overly aggressive approach

GreeBo · 23-09-2014 05:30PM

Redzah wrote: »

1. Enough of a stroke for a pro or very good amateur to have a consistently higher chance and higher statistics of holing these putts than a high handicapper.

2. Agree with this to a point but not a strong enough reason to whack these at the hole as it is more than negated by; a. Ability of the amateur to consistently hit the ball on the correct line at this pace, margin for error is smaller using this approach b. The fact that the hole has been made relatively smaller using an aggressive approach c. The inconsistency of the cups on the greens at an amateur level.

If you hit it off line then its offline, irrespective of what speed you hit it at, no?
The hole is somewhat larger at lower speeds but I think the poorer surfaces and lack of skill at reading break, coupled with crowned holes means pouring it in on a bending putt will lead to more misses.

Redzah wrote: »

I suppose another way of looking at this would be the pros approach to the game as a whole, even the most conservative pro is extremely aggressive when compared to an amateur, the difference is that there aggressive game is derived from statistics and a high level of consistency that it pays off to be aggressive. Most amateurs cannot reach this level of consistency so it would not be worthwhile adopting this overly aggressive approach

Of the entire game I think 2 foot putts are exactly where we should copy and try to emulate the best in the world. Making a stroke to hit the ball 2 feet along the ground has to be the easiest part of the game and requires the least amount of skill, someone who has never touched a club before in the lives can probably hole a 2 foot putt.

If you could win 10k by holing 5/5 2 foot breaking putts and there was no downside to missing then I think everyone would be hitting them firmly and not dying them in. Dying them in brings in matters outside of your control (surface, crowning) and also your ability to judge the pace and break of the putt.

Redzah · 23-09-2014 06:14PM

GreeBo wrote: »

If you hit it off line then its offline, irrespective of what speed you hit it at, no?
The hole is somewhat larger at lower speeds but I think the poorer surfaces and lack of skill at reading break, coupled with crowned holes means pouring it in on a bending putt will lead to more misses.

Of the entire game I think 2 foot putts are exactly where we should copy and try to emulate the best in the world. Making a stroke to hit the ball 2 feet along the ground has to be the easiest part of the game and requires the least amount of skill, someone who has never touched a club before in the lives can probably hole a 2 foot putt.

If you could win 10k by holing 5/5 2 foot breaking putts and there was no downside to missing then I think everyone would be hitting them firmly and not dying them in. Dying them in brings in matters outside of your control (surface, crowning) and also your ability to judge the pace and break of the putt.

The margin for error on hitting these in aggressively is much smaller so if it's hit off line then it's off line as you say. However, for a 2 ft putt that is hit at a pace that the ball pours into the hole without hitting the back of the cup I.e. A more normal speed then a putt that is hit slightly offline should still drop from a 2 ft distance.

In relation to your 10k competition, I would just roll them in as I do on the golf course and I would agree with you aggressively putting yours in and I would agree with an individual who normally dies their putts in adopting this approach. The last thing anybody would want to do would be to adopt an approach that they are not used to with 10k at stake.

To Die or Ram short putts?

Comments