Player Login
Log in with:
OR
skip nav

Forums

Putting Math (not for the faint of heart)

Wed, Aug 27 2014 2:47 AM (74 replies)
  • KenZarley
    12 Posts
    Thu, Jul 17 2014 9:06 AM
    This is just ONE person's take on a subject that seems to have sparked a firestorm of philosophies, and given some an opportunity to flame others.  I look at this game as a puzzle.  This is what works for ME. If you want to try it out go for it.  If you want to see how the method works for TSG11, or TSG12, or even CSG13 just juggle the numbers a little bit.  Have fun everybody!  And you are not gonna hurt my feelings if you don't like it. My own putting has improved immensely since using this method. 
    Contempt before investigation is the sign of a closed mind.  
    Have you ever thought that there should be a mathematical relationship between hitting a putt and how far it should roll?  Well, There is, even in WGT.  In college I majored in experimental physics, so I just applied the process to the putting in the game. Hit a putt, watch it roll.  For any given slope of terrain defined as rise over run how far a put rolls should depend on the slope of the green.  Not accounting for second order variables (small effects), I collected data (thousands of putts) of the ratio of hit to roll and then hit:roll for both uphill and down hill putts.  Turns out when You graph the data you end up with a linear relationship. Ratio of Hit:roll vs. slope of green.  And if you remember 8th grade algebra [ y = mx + b],  where y = ratio of Hit:roll and m is a constant, x = variable (slope up or down) and b = is a constant when there is no component dependent upon the variable ( where the line crosses the axis where x=0, that is to say a flat putt ). Then to get how far to hit a putt (as if it were a flat putt), simply multiply the ratio of hit:roll for any given slope by the distance to the hole.
    1st a couple definitions.  When I say at the end, hit the putt 10 feet it means (10 / 15 ) or 67% of the 15 foot meter.  So the result is a distance to hit the putt.   

    On down hill putts - hit the exact distance of the result.  

    On uphill putts add a foot to your computation. (You really don't want to leave an up hill putt short). 

    parameters:  

    E = elevation change (+) for uphill (-) for downhill in INCHES

    D = Actual Distance to hole in FEET.

    THE UPHILL PUTT= {[(+ E ) /(12* D )]  * M(CSG, or TSG, or VFG) + B(CSG, or TSG, or VFG) } x D + 1.0 Ft 

    THE DOWNHILL PUTT = {[(- E )/ (12* D )] * M(CSG, or TSG, or VFG) + B(CSG, or TSG, or VFG) } x D 

    Take the result(s) divide by the appropriate meter ( for my Odyssey putter meters are 15,30, 60 ,100, 150) and voila you have how hard to hit it.

    I have plugged there formulas into an excel spreadsheet that I have open while I play - one page for Championship Speed Greens, another for Tournament Speed greens, and another for Very Fast Greens. All that I type in is the Distance to pin and the elevation change.

    I can complete the calculations in about 3 seconds. It takes another 20+ seconds to read the break.  If you have a putt with TWO components - one uphill, then one down hill, calculate the components separately then add them together. 

    For Very Fast Greens M = 9.3966  and  B = 0.845

    For an uphill putt:

    HIT = Dist. to Pin in feet *(9.3966 * (elevation change in inches/Distance to pin in feet *12) + 0.845) + 1.0 Ft.

    For a down hill putt: 

    HIT = Dist. to Pin in feet *(9.3966 * (-1*elevation change in inches/Distance to pin in feet *12) + 0.845)

    let me know how it works out - practice at Beth Page Black as the greens are very flat.

    If you want to learn the M,s and the B's for Tournament, and Championship greens,  challenge me to a stroke play game and you can see for yourself.  

    KenZarley

  • courteneyfish
    15,796 Posts
    Thu, Jul 17 2014 12:22 PM
    No maths or calculators for me. What fun would there be in using those?
  • kirky67
    109 Posts
    Thu, Jul 17 2014 12:33 PM

    hmmm ile save my sleeve of balls and just rely on touch and feel and 2 b honest ure scores don't justify what ure saying unless you havre trouble with ure irons in which case for a sleeve of balls I can help you with that

  • fatdan
    3,378 Posts
    Thu, Jul 17 2014 12:48 PM

    Could've saved time by searching for the dozens of threads on the forum about the math=power ...

    a simple distance +/- elevation + 2ft x .65/.7/.75/.8 depending on the green speed works perfectly every time...after a while you just know, no need for the math.

     

    No sleeve necessary for me, someone else figured it out, use it free....

  • DaddysKat
    3,554 Posts
    Thu, Jul 17 2014 12:49 PM

    Great work Ken!  The calculation looks identical to the one I use with my calculators for putting.

    You'll find that WGT tends to play with the green speeds quite a bit, so you'll need a way to quickly change your variables in your spreadsheet.

    Don't let the naysayers discourage you ... you'll get lots of that here.  If you find it makes your game more enjoyable, just do it!  

    Oh ... since you're an experimental physics buff, avoid the magnus effect on ball flight with approach shots.  I don't think the programmers know much about physics here.  Think trigonometry when you try to determine ball flight and wind effects.

    Best of luck to you, from another Math nerd!

    Kat ♥ 

  • andyson
    6,415 Posts
    Thu, Jul 17 2014 1:54 PM

    I never got past the spaniel puppies to be honest!  Awwwwww....

    Here's one of ours

  • JFidanza
    1,674 Posts
    Thu, Jul 17 2014 3:16 PM

    DaddysKat:

    Oh ... since you're an experimental physics buff, avoid the magnus effect on ball flight with approach shots.  I don't think the programmers know much about physics here.  Think trigonometry when you try to determine ball flight and wind effects.

    Kat ♥ 

     

     

    This is a great question to have addressed by WGT or someone who knows for sure:

    [not a question about fade/drawing but the magnus effect]

    1) Is the basic idea of 'the magnus effect' (or as below suggests*) programmed into approach shots?

    2) Is the basic idea of 'the magnus effect' (or as below suggests*) programmed into drives?

    ----

    [JFidanza test with '5 'o clock to 11 o clock' tailwind 9-11 MPH]

    Preliminary test drives are suggesting that a full BS half 'slice' against a slight tailwind are going further by approx.10 yards than a half 'hook' along with a slight tailwind.

    (below says "slice shot will often have a higher trajectory"**  so is the ball being lifted and carried further in yardage because of this result?)

     

    *

    "A common cause of a sliced shot is the striking of the ball with an open clubface. In this case, the opening of the clubface also increases the effective loft of the club and thus increases the total spin of the ball. With all other factors held constant, a higher ball spin rate will in general produce a higher lift force and this is why a ** slice shot will often have a higher trajectory than a straight or hook shot."

     

    http://www.google.com/patents/US8550938

     

    sorry to digress, but yes I am using the simple calculations as Dan wrote, and it's easy to input into a cal next to the game window. Very enjoyable formula.

    fatdan:
     

    a simple distance +/- elevation + 2ft x .65/.7/.75/.8 depending on the green speed  

     

  • MukilteoMike1
    43 Posts
    Sun, Jul 20 2014 11:34 PM

    KenZarley:
    For a down hill putt: 

    HIT = Dist. to Pin in feet *(9.3966 * (-1*elevation change in inches/Distance to pin in feet *12) + 0.845)

    KenZarley

    First up, good work.  I think.  I assume you're on to something, but I can't make sense of it.  Your explanations, unfortunately, are similar to a lot of math instructors in that it includes a large amount of words that confuse matters instead of making things clear.

    Second, I'm fairly confident the calculations you published aren't accurate.   I don't doubt that you have it correctly in your own mind, but no matter how I manipulate your formula it doesn't come out to anything close to what it should be.  How about showing an example breaking down a calculation step by step?

    I'm interested because, despite what others say, the distance plus/minus inches in elevation equation simply isn't accurate enough on any putt with much elevation change.  I'm doing everything by feel (guess) right now.

  • fatdan
    3,378 Posts
    Mon, Jul 21 2014 1:01 AM

    MukilteoMike1:

    despite what others say, the distance plus/minus inches in elevation equation simply isn't accurate enough on any putt with much elevation change.  I'm doing everything by feel (guess) right now.

    try distance +/- elev + 2ft. / .7= I guarantee it is right on the money....add/subtract a little depending on how extreme the elev change is....based 20,000+ putts I've hit...

     

  • JFidanza
    1,674 Posts
    Mon, Jul 21 2014 1:42 AM

    fatdan:

    MukilteoMike1:

    despite what others say, the distance plus/minus inches in elevation equation simply isn't accurate enough on any putt with much elevation change.  I'm doing everything by feel (guess) right now.

    try distance +/- elev + 2ft. / .7= I guarantee it is right on the money....add/subtract a little depending on how extreme the elev change is....based 20,000+ putts I've hit...

     

    Dan, is that X .7 or as you have just wrote "/ .7" ?

    Because I've been using that one you posted a few days ago, I was using 'X .75-.8' for a very fast green and I really like that as a starting point. (If it's down like 15 inches, I shave a little off for inertia, or up etc. etc.)

     

RSS