# Forums

Help › Forums

#### *Putting by the Numbers - UPDATE*

Mon, Feb 18 2019 2:32 PM (88 replies)
•  JCSneed 54 Posts Wed, May 13 2015 4:22 PM

•  11BC2 555 Posts Wed, May 13 2015 10:30 PM

@ JC

Thanks again for this technique man ;).  Not to toot my own chain, I'm tooting the JC Chain!!, but I used your technique in the current Masters Congressional and Marion tournament and so far am sitting in 1st place (both).   So imho there is some very serious merit in your technique.  Although, for double breaking or just strange putts Tekoma's Vertex putting hits the spot.

In regards to putting the aiming triangle on the right spot I'd suggest using JRuler, a visual, click and drag ruler with Pixels, Inches, Picas, and centimeters available.  I use the JRuler in Centimeters, 50 Pixels per inch and then zoom in 1 time in the reverse putt view.

I find that usually gets me between 9 1/2 - 11 1/2 centimeters on the ruler.  So you simply find out where the 10 foot mark is, divide the number by 10 and then use the ruler to move the necessary length.  I.e., 10 foot mark with JRuler ends up being 11 centimeters.  11 / 10 gives 1.1 centimeters.  Take your 8 foot break (adjusted for say 1/2 break) gives you a 4 foot aiming point.  4 X 1.1 = 4.4 centimeters aiming point.

•  JCSneed 54 Posts Thu, May 14 2015 1:21 PM

•  hpurey 11,491 Posts Fri, May 15 2015 11:58 AM

Nothing to add, just want to get this in "my discussions' for future reference.

•  IRISHPUNK 4,019 Posts Fri, May 15 2015 12:34 PM

11BC2:

@ JC

Thanks again for this technique man ;).  Not to toot my own chain, I'm tooting the JC Chain!!, but I used your technique in the current Masters Congressional and Marion tournament and so far am sitting in 1st place (both).   So imho there is some very serious merit in your technique.  Although, for double breaking or just strange putts Tekoma's Vertex putting hits the spot.

In regards to putting the aiming triangle on the right spot I'd suggest using JRuler, a visual, click and drag ruler with Pixels, Inches, Picas, and centimeters available.  I use the JRuler in Centimeters, 50 Pixels per inch and then zoom in 1 time in the reverse putt view.

I find that usually gets me between 9 1/2 - 11 1/2 centimeters on the ruler.  So you simply find out where the 10 foot mark is, divide the number by 10 and then use the ruler to move the necessary length.  I.e., 10 foot mark with JRuler ends up being 11 centimeters.  11 / 10 gives 1.1 centimeters.  Take your 8 foot break (adjusted for say 1/2 break) gives you a 4 foot aiming point.  4 X 1.1 = 4.4 centimeters aiming point.

•  SweetiePie 4,925 Posts Fri, May 15 2015 12:55 PM

I don't putt very well so I read all of these tips twice. The only thing I could think of, the only thing that came to mind was that bit in the movie "Tin Cup" when Renee Russo walks into Tin Cup's trailer-shack, and he is fully dressed in all of those slick, can't fail, guaranteed, game fixer gadgets and gizmos because he has the shanks (whoops, sorry) shanks...thank you no ;-}

•  11BC2 555 Posts Fri, May 15 2015 4:22 PM

lol at last 2 post ^^.

It's not as hard as it seems!   The hard part is figuring out the exact flow of the break.  Once you do this aiming becomes scary accurate (and putts fall quite often).

•  d3194 197 Posts Fri, May 15 2015 7:32 PM

Ok sorry but i'm missing something in the math part of putt length * math cann't get it.  can you break it down so a dumb azz like me can wrap my head around it   got the rest of your tips just fine but the math part Not So Much   I can't take 14 -0.2 +2 come out to 13.2

•  JCSneed 54 Posts Fri, May 15 2015 9:50 PM

•  oneeyedjohn 9,453 Posts Sat, May 16 2015 4:44 PM

Right, I am gonna go back to the first page and reread evrything there until it sinks in.

My methodology for putting is all about using the grid lines etc etc, and I want to see how it compares with ur method and whether both systems have a common ideology.

I too believe the maths, however we interpret it, is fundamental to working out the speed and line of any given putt.

I'll be back with my conclusions later.

OeJ