[Glenn Spencer]

David - you and me both, brother.  Now think of it placing the pins in the most awful possible places....

Of course it's silly, but this is the extreme which shows how things would be equalized.  ALL putters would just keep on missing and missing and missing....

TH

Have you seen the greens at The Masters on TV? How about Oakmont or Shinnecock, under US Open conditions? Sure, the pros 3 putted a few times, but generally not.

What really differentiates good putters from bad putters is lag putting, not holing 30 footers.

The guys on TV are playing well though. TV can be very misleading when it comes to ability. Not too many people are kicking it around when they are playing well. My experience? Good putters are the ones that make the ones inside 10 feet. Lagging is not really part of the equation, although, Tiger has been the best lag-putter in the game since he was 15, so maybe there is something to it, because he certainly is the best from inside 10 feet and I don't care if there are any stats to the contrary on him.

[JESII]

...my comments came from Larry Nelson when we were collaborating on our first design (Brookstone in Atlanta) He felt contoured greens took away the advantage of his competitors who were better putters, but less accurate in iron play.  In essence, the comparison was between similarly skilled players (ie tour level) with some being better putters and others scoring through accuracy (ie leaving shorter putts).  

Those sentences then have nothing to do with our conversation because according to this quote, Nelson is talking about some player making a score by putting prowess and some do so through ball striking prowess. In no way is Nelson weighing in on a differential between himself and the better putter starting at the same point.
 


I agree contoured greens (or any other difficulty factor) affect a handicap player 4 times as much as the Tour pro.

If that isn't exactly what I have been saying all along than I don't know what is. I think highly contoured greens affect mediocre putters much more in a scoring sense than they do Tour caliber putters.

[Jeff_Brauer]

If we confine the discussion to tour pros, shot link data might help, with average distance from flag, and other stats to add to the 1.767 putts per green average.  It it correct that the best players that week in putting are the ones we see on TV, and is skews our judgment of how good everyone is playing.

If stats were broken down even further, I think Tiger (and Jack, and top players before him) are better clutch putters than the others.  I don't know if shot link breaks down putts by round position (i.e. last four holes) or by up one, down one, tied, kind of like game winning and game tying goals in hockey.  

I think you would see the best players have higher clutch putt records even if their putting averages were similar.  I wonder if Tiger putts as well when he is doomed to a 20th place finish as he does when in contention.  Somehow, I doubt it, bringing his average back to the field.  But his make rate probably goes way up in the clutch, while most golfers careers get derailed by failing in the clutch when it matters most.

However, to get it back on topic, its really multi faceted.  Overall, I think the contoured greens would narrow the field, perhaps not identifying the best player that week.

Would Tiger rather have a contoured green or a flat green on the late holes of a tourney where he had to make the putt to take/keep the lead, assuming his nearest competitor was in his group and had a similar putt?  

Would it depend on whether the competitor was a poor clutch putter (say Phil) or a good one (like Furyk)?

My guess is that if he was head to head with a poorer putter, he would prefer a flatter putt.  With a great putter, maybe more contour, assuming he could handle it better?

[Tom Huckaby]

Sully:

Re the first part, OK.

Re the second, sure Jeff might agree with you on the degree of negative effect on the am v. the tour pro.  I just still don't think he would agree with your overall conclusions on the issue as a whole... and of course you know I don't.

See here's the thing:  even if I accept that contour effects the am 3-4 times as much as the pro, I stick with my conclusions.  Nothing changes.  Jeff does too... he says it's because the ams eventually get given putts, I say it's because the ams even with this lack of skill eventually do get close enough to make it.  Nothing has changed.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Jeff - that's all interesting re Tour Pros... but just like so much else regarding golf courses, why should they really matter?  I believe it's going to play out as you say.... I just don't care all that much.  Those guys continue to be a tiny, minuscule minority of all golfers.

Far more interesting to me is how it plays out for two average joes, one a 5 handicap, one a 15.  

Assuming the 5 is a better putter (fair assumption), I continue to very firmly believe his advantage is negated on contoured greens.

All other readers please also keep in mind there are a HELL of a lot more golfers in the 5-15 range then there are scratches and tour pros and 36 handicap hacks.  Methinks we've waisted a lot of time trying to each prove our point based on how it works out on the extremes... Isn't it far more worthwhile to assess how it works out for the vast majority of golfers?

Sully - cogitate on this for awhile.  I put a lot of stock in your take here... and George's, and AGC's, hell in all of you who think I'm insane.  

For the 5 v. 15 I mention, man it seems very very simple logic that the 5 loses his advantage.  But if you disagree, I shall promise to listen.

 

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

If we confine the discussion to tour pros, shot link data might help, with average distance from flag, and other stats to add to the 1.767 putts per green average.  It it correct that the best players that week in putting are the ones we see on TV, and is skews our judgment of how good everyone is playing.

If stats were broken down even further, I think Tiger (and Jack, and top players before him) are better clutch putters than the others.  I don't know if shot link breaks down putts by round position (i.e. last four holes) or by up one, down one, tied, kind of like game winning and game tying goals in hockey.  

I think you would see the best players have higher clutch putt records even if their putting averages were similar.  I wonder if Tiger putts as well when he is doomed to a 20th place finish as he does when in contention.  Somehow, I doubt it, bringing his average back to the field.  But his make rate probably goes way up in the clutch, while most golfers careers get derailed by failing in the clutch when it matters most.

However, to get it back on topic, its really multi faceted.  Overall, I think the contoured greens would narrow the field, perhaps not identifying the best player that week.

Would Tiger rather have a contoured green or a flat green on the late holes of a tourney where he had to make the putt to take/keep the lead, assuming his nearest competitor was in his group and had a similar putt?  

Would it depend on whether the competitor was a poor clutch putter (say Phil) or a good one (like Furyk)?

My guess is that if he was head to head with a poorer putter, he would prefer a flatter putt.  With a great putter, maybe more contour, assuming he could handle it better?

Jeff,
If I'm not mistaken, Tiger leads the Tour in least distance from the pin with approach shots (or however that stat is phrased...) so he will tend to have a flatter putt than his rivals anyway!  Therefore, I would guess that he would LOVE courses with heavy contours (read ANGC, for instance) because he is not only the best iron player, but the best lag putter and best clutch putter as well.

So whom would the contoured greens favor more?  The best player in the world, or the rest of us?  Case closed for me, but it was 2 years ago!

[Tom Huckaby]

As the great Lee Corso would say, and Sully did say earlier...

Not so fast, my friend.
AGC, you yourself waivered mid-way through this thread, saw the light, and only now are returning to this strident position.  If the case is closed, well... that's a new development.

I'm always watching.....

 

In any case, since neither of us ever play Tiger, see my last post prior to this one.  Let's compare a 5 and a 15.  I will be interested in your thoughts on that.

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

As the great Lee Corso would say, and Sully did say earlier...

Not so fast, my friend.
AGC, you yourself waivered mid-way through this thread, saw the light, and only now are returning to this strident position.  If the case is closed, well... that's a new development.

I'm always watching.....

 

In any case, since neither of us ever play Tiger, see my last post prior to this one.  Let's compare a 5 and a 15.  I will be interested in your thoughts on that.

TH

Tom,
The 5 and 15 are just the same, in relative terms, to Tiger and his fellow competitors.

I don't remember wavering ever in all of this over the last two years, but then I'm older and forgetting gets easier and more likely every day, unfortunately.

I'll go back and see where I wavered later, but the statute of limitations on flip-flopping may be up by now anyway.

[Tom Huckaby]

AGC:

OK.  You did see the light at some point.  But what the heck, it matters not now.  

As for how this relates, well... you really think Tiger is 10 shots better than his fellow competitors per round?

Interesting, he must really be playing like crap in all these tourneys he wins by 2-3 strokes.  

I do think it's quite different.  But if you want to look at it the same in terms of putting skill, that's fine.  My take remains the same, as stated many times.  And I think it quite obviously plays out in this comparison.  On most of the first putts, Tiger/5 barely misses (even though he's closer, the contour makes it too tough even for him - as compared to flat putts anyway), lesser pro/15 misses by a little worse, each make the 2nd.   Lesser pro/15 doesn't three putt nearly as much as required to overcome this.  Tiger/5's advantage is negated, as compared to flat greens.

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

But Tom, they won't HAVE the same putt!  That's a key point, isn't it?  The 5-15 thing IS the same as Tiger and his F.C.'s in that the 5 will hit the proper part of the green and the 15 won't, just like Tiger hits it closer and takes some or all of the contour out.

Add to THAT advantage of easier putts to begin with the putting skill differential on the putts that remain, and the gap gets bigger on contoured greens.

Wow, I think I just blacked out from deja vu overdose!

Let's stop for the weekend.  I'll meet you back here in November of 2008, o.k.?

[Tom Huckaby]

AGC:

In general they may not have the same putt, but remember that contour also takes many better shots away from the hole, to places of common collection - common lows as I've called them.  So while I understand this, I don't think it outweighs all the other things negating his advantage.  He's still going to have harder putts than he would on flat greens, putts he will miss... and 2 continues to equal 2.

I'll still be here, trying to get you fellows to understand.  2008 it is.

 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Okay,

Now I am not so proud to have had any part in starting a 13 page thread!

Any chance we can admit that we don't, can't, and won't ever know how any green affects various golfers to end t his whole thing?

When you boil it all down, greens can only affect individual putts, not golfers in general.

[Tom Huckaby]

Okay,

Now I am not so proud to have had any part in starting a 13 page thread!

Any chance we can admit that we don't, can't, and won't ever know how any green affects various golfers to end t his whole thing?

When you boil it all down, greens can only affect individual putts, not golfers in general.

Jeff - I offered to do just that several pages ago - agree to disagree, as it were.  For my trouble I was called insane, my thoughts absurd, etc.  Some people just have no sense of accomodation.

In any case, of course how you boil it all down is true.  But if we leave all issues at that level of boiling down, what would we ever talk about?

 

[Doug Sobieski]

I agree contoured greens (or any other difficulty factor) affect a handicap player 4 times as much as the Tour pro.

If that isn't exactly what I have been saying all along than I don't know what is. I think highly contoured greens affect mediocre putters much more in a scoring sense than they do Tour caliber putters.

Sully:

I agree, that is what I've been asserting all along as well. It seems that our corner is filling up with people in agreement  

Huck:

Coincidentally, I just spoke to a buddy of mine (PGA Professional, good player, former captain at Oklahoma State) and he played Pasatiempo yesterday for the first time. First thing I asked him was how difficult it was to putt those greens. He said they were probably rolling around 10, and he didn't find them overly difficult. Called them a good challenge for a public golf course. He said that if they were closer to 12, they would be quite difficult. So for your challenge of having less than 36 putts, does it require the greens and hole locations to be prepared in a less than typical fashion, bordering on unfair? If the conditions were such that you couldn't conduct a competition, it seems like you'd have to stretch to get to the result you are expecting.

Sobe

[Tom Huckaby]

Doug:

My challenge at Pasa was based on me setting the pins - so OF COURSE it was a stretch - that was the whole point!  But ask your friend what the putting challenge would be if the pins were set in the toughest possible place on every green, and they were running 11.  If he played yesterday, he sure as hell didn't see any of that.  His estimation of 10 is also likely rather high... hard to believe with the rain we've been having this week they were that fast.  

In any case, my challenge was not meant to do anything other than to try and get you to think about how awful contour COULD get.

As for the rest, I had posted some vitriole that I am now removing, and hopefully you never saw.  Jeff has asked for accomodation, which I remain happy to do.  

 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom,

Boil down, boil over.....its amazing how close those two things are, and yet how far!

Have a good weekend!

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,

Boil down, boil over.....its amazing how close those two things are, and yet how far!

Have a good weekend!

Roger that Jeff - as you see, my boil was momentary.  And same to you my friend.  The quality of my weekend will hinge on two things:

a) results of the glorious CV-Revolution U12Girls district cup soccer; and

b) USC v. Cal.

It's sick to let one's happiness ride on sporting events.  The first I can be excused for - it will determine my daughter's mood and near-future happiness.  The latter, well... I'm just sick.

 

[Doug Sobieski]

Huck:

We both know that it wouldn't be any fun here if everyone agreed. Please keep in mind that anything that ever comes out of my keyboard or mouth is ALWAYS dripping with sarcasm. Unfortunately, my 9 year old daughter has inherited my personality.

Regarding your last reply, here is how I interpreted it. I edited out the parts you wrote that aren't pertinent to the ongoing discussion  

Doug:

Hell I never disagreed about that anyway.  The main overall point, you get it.

on my side on the general point, sorry.

[Tom Huckaby]

Sobe - love it!  And understood re the sarcasm... from my side, I might boil at times but it's alway short-lived, and my smile rarely disappears.  Even with Mucci.

 

[Jeff_Brauer]

It's sick to let one's happiness ride on sporting events.  The first I can be excused for - it will determine my daughter's mood and near-future happiness.  The latter, well... I'm just sick.

 

With my Dallas Stars cooling off a little, I noticed I am in a funk lately, so I understand.  Good luck to your daughter though!

[Tom Huckaby]

Jeff - thankfully I have my beloved Sharks to brighten my mood.  But thanks!

 

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

I just spent two days watching a wide range of golfers (+3 to 18) play Seminole under F&F conditons.

The greens are contoured and pitched, and they were firm and fast.

I can state, without equivication, that poorer putters performed far worse than the better players on and around the greens.

I watched golfers degreen putts, on UPHILL putts.
I watched golfers degreen putts, on downhill putts.

I say three putts from 3 feet and four putts from 10 feet.

The poorer putter's inability to cope with firm, fast, contoured/sloped greens is exponential, not arithmatic.

[Doug Siebert]

Patrick,

Is it merely due to the contour or because the greens are also faster than what those players may be accustomed to?  There's a difference between a poor putter who just doesn't have much experience on greens like those and thus has no hope of handling them when presented the opportunity, and a poor putter who has had plenty of experience on such greens and has learned to deal with them using the golf equivalent of a prevent defense (prevent de-greening and three putts from 3 feet by putting scared)

[Tom Huckaby]

I just spent two days watching a wide range of golfers (+3 to 18) play Seminole under F&F conditons.

The greens are contoured and pitched, and they were firm and fast.

I can state, without equivication, that poorer putters performed far worse than the better players on and around the greens.

I watched golfers degreen putts, on UPHILL putts.
I watched golfers degreen putts, on downhill putts.

I say three putts from 3 feet and four putts from 10 feet.

The poorer putter's inability to cope with firm, fast, contoured/sloped greens is exponential, not arithmatic.

Patrick:

Interesting.  I have witnesse far different results, at greens that from what I can hear are at least as difficult, if not worse(Pasatiempo).

We shall have to plainly disagree on this.

I also never witnessed any of this at Sand Hills with you, and we did have a wide range of abilities there... and Sand Hills' greens are certainly neither flat nor easy....

TH

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Doug Siebert,

A poor putter is ..... a poor putter.

Tom Huckaby,

Other than the 2nd green at Sand Hills, none of those greens are highly contoured.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()