skip nav

Forums

Putting Tip: Distance Control

Sat, Sep 28 2019 1:08 PM by RogueMedic007. 1,143 replies.
  • NALO1210 Germany
    186 Posts
    Sat, Mar 31 2018 11:20 AM

    OK i test my own calculation and i found a Mistake

    pls ad at the Greenspeed 7,4(slow) and 7,9(standart) not 2 on top make 3 its more secure.

    Although all come on but often a bit short... not 2ft longer

    all the other calculations work fine

    i make a short video to show.

    after the upload u will find it on my wall.

    HF

    cheers

    Petra

     

  • Dubfore Ireland
    4,184 Posts
    Tue, Apr 3 2018 1:54 AM

    Petra,

     

    Add these speeds to your list:  

    Speed

           8.7  x  .89

          9.4   x  .84

        11.4   x  .69

        12.5   x  .65

  • 11BC2 United States
    555 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 4:01 AM

    I use a version of FMags formula (I add more than +1 because I putt more aggressively):  9= 1.1, 10= 1.2,  11= 1.3,  12= 1.45, 13= 1.6, 14= 1.7, 15= 1.8  +/- elevation +1.  

    Fmag Quote:  "And you MUST always add the +1 to any elevation reading because WGT measures every putt down from the centre of the ball to the green surface.  Without this +1 you will have to make adjustments between long and short putts and all your green speed factors would generally be too slow." 

    Quote cont'd:  "Also -10% of distance for extreme uphillers, and +1ft for every 20ft of putt into a 30 mph wind and -1ft for every 30ft of putt down a 30mph wind"

    Quote cont'd:  "The distance is also not the straight line distance to the hole, but the distance the ball would have to travel to get there (so it's greater if the putt is bendy).  A rough rule of thumb is to add on half the elevation change you get when you move the marker from the hole to an aim point the same distance away as the hole.  Eg, a bendy putt,  you move the marker 2 yards to the side of the hole and the elevation changes from +2 to +5, so you are adding an extra +1.5 to the distance of your calculation."

    I also add +15-20% for severe downhillers when using this formula.  In addition I round up any putt to the next numeral, i.e, if the put is over 10F I round up to 11F.  Likewise, if the putt is at exactly 10F or even slightly under, say, 9.8, I'll round up to 10.5F. When I don't do this I come up short, even after adding the +1 in the 1st explanation.

  • 11BC2 United States
    555 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 7:30 AM

    NALO1210:
    OK i test my own calculation and i found a Mistake
    First off, this technique obviously works for you considering your putting stats have you birding 78.09% of the time which is quite the achievement (highest I've seen).  In contrast, mine is only at 76.87% of the time  Having said that I do find some of your numbers a bit curious.  In your video your 38ft, down 7 putt goes storming by 6.5ft!

    I had that putt looking like 38.5ft divided by 1.45 (26.55), subtracted by 7 (19.55), +1= 20.55, divided by 50= 41% Power (you hit yours for 45%).

  • Yiannis1970 Greece
    1,565 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 8:16 AM

    11BC2:

    NALO1210:
    OK i test my own calculation and i found a Mistake
    First off, this technique obviously works for you considering your putting stats have you birding 78.09% of the time which is quite the achievement (highest I've seen).  In contrast, mine is only at 76.87% of the time  Having said that I do find some of your numbers a bit curious.  In your video your 38ft, down 7 putt goes storming by 6.5ft!

     

    Can i ask, where do you get these numbers?

     

  • 11BC2 United States
    555 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 9:55 AM

    Yiannis1970:
    Can i ask, where do get these numbers?
    Okay, I see why we're asking ;).  Your numbers are higher than Nalo.  In case you really don't know how we get these numbers, it's by adding up all %'s of 0-5, 5-10, 10-25, 25-50, and 50+.  Yours is 78.26 which is quite remarkable. 

    Imo this helps put things in perspective, especially if we are used to solely looking at 1 putt %'s, which quite often, isn't the end to all ends in regards to overall skill.  It's not uncommon to see someone in the 50% range really harp on a player with 40% range (1 putt stats) when in reality the true difference looks something more like 9holes*.6% vs .66%, or roughly 5.4 birdies out of 9 holes vs 5.9 birdies out of 9 holes.  That's not much of a skill gap at all.

    As a side note, this is by far and away the most accurate and fair way to implement handicaps for CCs which have those type of tournaments.

  • Yiannis1970 Greece
    1,565 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 10:44 AM

    11BC2:

    Yiannis1970:
    Can i ask, where do get these numbers?
    Okay, I see why we're asking ;).  Your numbers are higher than Nalo.  In case you really don't know how we get these numbers, it's by adding up all %'s of 0-5, 5-10, 10-25, 25-50, and 50+.  Yours is 78.26 which is quite remarkable. 

    Imo this helps put things in perspective, especially if we are used to solely looking at 1 putt %'s, which quite often, isn't the end to all ends in regards to overall skill.  It's not uncommon to see someone in the 50% range really harp on a player with 40% range (1 putt stats) when in reality the true difference looks something more like 9holes*.6% vs .66%, or roughly 5.4 birdies out of 9 holes vs 5.9 birdies out of 9 holes.  That's not much of a skill gap at all.

    As a side note, this is by far and away the most accurate and fair way to implement handicaps for CCs which have those type of tournaments.

     

    Don't understand this elaborate method you use. There's an easier way...

    Total putts and then you find the percentages on everything. If you are following this way, you 'll see that these percentages do not exist. (a 60% is pretty high)

     

  • NALO1210 Germany
    186 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 10:58 AM

    11BC2:

    NALO1210:
    OK i test my own calculation and i found a Mistake
    First off, this technique obviously works for you considering your putting stats have you birding 78.09% of the time which is quite the achievement (highest I've seen).  In contrast, mine is only at 76.87% of the time  Having said that I do find some of your numbers a bit curious.  In your video your 38ft, down 7 putt goes storming by 6.5ft!

    I had that putt looking like 38.5ft divided by 1.45 (26.55), subtracted by 7 (19.55), +1= 20.55, divided by 50= 41% Power (you hit yours for 45%).

    first of all ur math is way to complicate 4 me :)

    my math is 38,5 - 7 = 31,5 x 0,62 =19,53 +2 = 21,53 this i do in Video

    but also i said that at a 12 or 13 green u can make only + 1 its also enought

    so id i make only +1 like u do its 20,53 so we get the same result :)

     

    i only want to make it easy for some players to have a math what they can use easy without doing 5 min math. 

    if i wrote this numbers in my sheet i use 4 putting i get a result of 19,3 or 38,7% with 50 scale.

    so i make some finetuning on diff lenght and uphill or downhill.

    but why explain this here because the question was only to have a simple math to calc diff greenspeeds.

    4 this it works great

    in the video i dont wanna prove puttingskill i only wanna prove that all this shots are never to short as some guys saying.

    thats all

    Petra

  • YankeeJim United States
    25,034 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 11:46 AM

    Yiannis1970:
    Total putts and then you find the percentages on everything. If you are following this way, you 'll see that these percentages do not exist. (a 60% is pretty high)

    As I understand it, those %s indicate how many putts you actually made that were in that range. They show the distribution of putts made, not total putts. It's a confusing stat.

  • 11BC2 United States
    555 Posts
    Wed, Apr 4 2018 12:00 PM

    Yiannis1970:
    Total putts and then you find the percentages on everything. If you are following this way, you 'll see that these percentages do not exist. (a 60% is pretty high)
    I have no idea what this means, sorry.  My method simply adds up all your %'s:  Here's two Andyson post  http://www.wgt.com/forums/t/79327.aspx  and   http://www.wgt.com/forums/t/139325.aspx?PageIndex=2 , and a nivlac post here http://www.wgt.com/forums/t/8769.aspx?pageindex=1 .  

     

RSS