Good Putting Aids!

[Damon Lucas]

Thanks Jim!

Jim,

That's a fabulous and informative post and one I was looking for to clarify your position on plane and sweetspot.

Brian, I hear what you're saying. I have grilled Geoff on every point of conjecture that I have had with him on every thing to do with putting. And he has answered every question, and then some. Sometimes I am a little assertive with my questions. Part of the reason this site is so successful is because of a free exchange of different opinions(which occasionally get out of hand...by various parties).I hope that Jim makes it to the Manziposium as I'm sure we'd get on great.

Remember that Geoff is not approaching putting with any pre conceived ideas stemming from TGM. So his ideas about 'putting on plane' are not as set in stone as some. This is where I'm coming from when I ask the questions about plane. He believes that the stroke is dominated(through impact) by the shoulders moving on a more vertical plane. He has written hundreds of posts describing in great detail his thoughts and backing his arguments up with plenty of information on biomechanics, physiology, and neuroscience. So this is where I'm coming from. I have been teaching for several years, but there is a gulf of difference between guys like Brian and Geoff, and me, and as hard as both those guys work, well ... that's a lot of work, study, and testing for me.

With respect to Pelz, Geoff has distanced himself from Pelz's theories as much as from Utley's. Geoff will back up every word that comes out of his mouth, and like Brian, will be the first to admit to it if he errs, which fortunately doesn't happen too often.

As far as sweetspot goes, I would agree with what you say Jim. I can't think of any reason to putt out of the heel or toe.

Damon

 

[jeffy]

Stan Utley's "The Learning Curve"

I like Stan Utley's dvd and the associated training aid, "The Learning Curve". The "Learning Curve" is nothing more than a plane board and putting arc in one device. It also has some good alignment grapics. The Utley dvd is excellent, but his approach takes a lot of practice to master: like Hardy's one-plane swing, it goes against the grain of a lot of the conventional instruction we've all been exposed to, so there is both "unlearning" and "learning" involved. Utley is a great guy, knows how to putt and needs the money, so buy it!

 

[mrodock]

Jim,

That's a fabulous and informative post and one I was looking for to clarify your position on plane and sweetspot.

Brian, I hear what you're saying. I have grilled Geoff on every point of conjecture that I have had with him on every thing to do with putting. And he has answered every question, and then some. Sometimes I am a little assertive with my questions. Part of the reason this site is so successful is because of a free exchange of different opinions(which occasionally get out of hand...by various parties).I hope that Jim makes it to the Manziposium as I'm sure we'd get on great.

Remember that Geoff is not approaching putting with any pre conceived ideas stemming from TGM. So his ideas about 'putting on plane' are not as set in stone as some. This is where I'm coming from when I ask the questions about plane. He believes that the stroke is dominated(through impact) by the shoulders moving on a more vertical plane. He has written hundreds of posts describing in great detail his thoughts and backing his arguments up with plenty of information on biomechanics, physiology, and neuroscience. So this is where I'm coming from. I have been teaching for several years, but there is a gulf of difference between guys like Brian and Geoff, and me, and as hard as both those guys work, well ... that's a lot of work, study, and testing for me.

With respect to Pelz, Geoff has distanced himself from Pelz's theories as much as from Utley's. Geoff will back up every word that comes out of his mouth, and like Brian, will be the first to admit to it if he errs, which fortunately doesn't happen too often.

As far as sweetspot goes, I would agree with what you say Jim. I can't think of any reason to putt out of the heel or toe.

Damon

homersson,

Wow man, why ask me on my ideas on eyes in relation to the ball? I had no idea you had this kind of expertise in putting!

 

[Damon Lucas]

Questions

Matt,

The reason I ask questions is because I believe people learn more efficiently when THEY answer the questions, including me and my questions.

I asked about the eyes because it is a VERY common (mis)perception that the eyes over the ball is sufficient.

Scotty Cameron believes that the eyes should be one inch inside.

What is the standard? Why?

How DO the eyes really work?

I just did a fitting with David Edel. It was extremely comprehensive. He has a view based on thousands and thousands of tests and fittings that the shape of the putter, the loft, the lie, the length, the hosel, the lines all affect the ability to aim to some extent.

Geoff thinks that the use of gaze,and head position accounts for the issues.
Who to believe??

I'm obviously inclined to trust Geoff, but I am not going to discount for one second everything David said. I am going to test myself...at length. Then I will work with my students. I will listen to debate on this site, and others... And hopefully I will have some answers that will help as many people putt better than what they do.

And so it goes...

 

[mrodock]

Matt,

The reason I ask questions is because I believe people learn more efficiently when THEY answer the questions, including me and my questions.

I asked about the eyes because it is a VERY common (mis)perception that the eyes over the ball is sufficient.

Scotty Cameron believes that the eyes should be one inch inside.

What is the standard? Why?

How DO the eyes really work?

I just did a fitting with David Edel. It was extremely comprehensive. He has a view based on thousands and thousands of tests and fittings that the shape of the putter, the loft, the lie, the length, the hosel, the lines all affect the ability to aim to some extent.

Geoff thinks that the use of gaze,and head position accounts for the issues.
Who to believe??

I'm obviously inclined to trust Geoff, but I am not going to discount for one second everything David said. I am going to test myself...at length. Then I will work with my students. I will listen to debate on this site, and others... And hopefully I will have some answers that will help as many people putt better than what they do.

And so it goes...

cool man, very cool!

 

[mb6606]

The putting stroke is a short version of the basic motion.
Use the RFT. Use a hinge action. Hit or swing.
Training aids: use a flashlight and a dowel.

Proper speed is more valuable than stroke or alignment.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

Jim,

That's a fabulous and informative post and one I was looking for to clarify your position on plane and sweetspot.

Brian, I hear what you're saying. I have grilled Geoff on every point of conjecture that I have had with him on every thing to do with putting. And he has answered every question, and then some. Sometimes I am a little assertive with my questions. Part of the reason this site is so successful is because of a free exchange of different opinions(which occasionally get out of hand...by various parties).I hope that Jim makes it to the Manziposium as I'm sure we'd get on great.

Remember that Geoff is not approaching putting with any pre conceived ideas stemming from TGM. So his ideas about 'putting on plane' are not as set in stone as some. This is where I'm coming from when I ask the questions about plane. He believes that the stroke is dominated(through impact) by the shoulders moving on a more vertical plane. He has written hundreds of posts describing in great detail his thoughts and backing his arguments up with plenty of information on biomechanics, physiology, and neuroscience. So this is where I'm coming from. I have been teaching for several years, but there is a gulf of difference between guys like Brian and Geoff, and me, and as hard as both those guys work, well ... that's a lot of work, study, and testing for me.

With respect to Pelz, Geoff has distanced himself from Pelz's theories as much as from Utley's. Geoff will back up every word that comes out of his mouth, and like Brian, will be the first to admit to it if he errs, which fortunately doesn't happen too often.

As far as sweetspot goes, I would agree with what you say Jim. I can't think of any reason to putt out of the heel or toe.

Damon

I have a friend near me that has a putter "launch monitor" if you will. I plan to try and 'borrow' the monitor over the next year to conduct testing. I'm hoping to make some kind of aparatus to statiscially back up my claims on "deviation" from your starting line depending on your plane and sweet spot contact.

I also plan to do the same with actual golfers. Not sure how much dough i have to put into the research at first. I might just start making them and if all goes well and i want to expand the product i will invest heavy in the statisical analysis.

I am a financial analysis by profession so i know how to gather and analyze data.

 

[Damon Lucas]

And roll too!

When you do these tests, do some testing on 'roll'. No one has ever tested whether roll, or skid, or a combination has any effect on makes, at least independantly.

Unfortunately we live in a world more full of marketing than substance.

 

[davidmac00]

putting aids

homersson is right,

you cant ask enough questions and geoff is THE man with the answers when it comes to putting.ive met up with geoff a few times and the guy just loves his subject.

eye line and straight gaze are so important to putting,but just the tip of the ice berg.as for teaching aids,do people learn motors skills better when using them???or is it better to have an understanding of what creates the correct movement then learn the feeling for said movement before letting the ball get in the way???

david