Master's bans green- reading books

[David Ober]

Is this new? How is the rule written?

I dont think it is new.  I think the Masters has never allowed the books.


Could be wrong but I am assuming there might not even be a rule.  Augusta just needs to prevent commercial companies from mapping the green slopes with a laser.

It's funny, because the "green book" that they reference in the article is no such thing. It's a very general yardage book with yardages from different points and some info on elevation change, etc. Very, very general info on green slope -- which should be perfectly fine, IMHO.

[William_G]

The folks at Augusta can do whatever they would like, it is an Invitational.


I hope that this leads to banning the books all together on the pro tour.

Whybwould the Tour do that when instead, they could work with their gaming partner to set odds of making every putt on the telecast, and then sell the books to gamblers trying to arbitrage the odds?

that is funny! sadly

[Daryl David]

In 97 Fuzzy was 14 years younger than Jeffrey Toobin is today.

Nominated for post of the year.

[David_Elvins]

Why would the Tour do that when instead, they could work with their gaming partner to set odds of making every putt on the telecast, and then sell the books to gamblers trying to arbitrage the odds?

Not sure it is conclusive, but there have been studies that concluded that the probability of making a putt on the PGA Tour is unrelated to slope, and correlates only with distance of putt. 


One can only assume that this is evidence that fast flatter greens and flattish pin position used on much of the pga tour neuter strategy. 

[Pat Burke]

Pretty sure Augusta National
Simply only allows “their” yardage book maker access.  He does not gather the data as the tour books Makers do, so no greens books are available


Don’t thinks it’s a “rule” just control of access


I could be wrong fwiw. But it’s what I understand

[Craig Sweet]

No books...no range finders...no yardage on sprinkler heads...Golfer should have to rely on their eyes and brains.

[JohnVDB]

Pretty sure Augusta National
Simply only allows “their” yardage book maker access.  He does not gather the data as the tour books Makers do, so no greens books are available


Don’t thinks it’s a “rule” just control of access


I could be wrong fwiw. But it’s what I understand

That is correct Pat.  No need to ban what you’ve never allowed to be made. 

[Buck Wolter]

Pretty sure Augusta National
Simply only allows “their” yardage book maker access.  He does not gather the data as the tour books Makers do, so no greens books are available


Don’t thinks it’s a “rule” just control of access


I could be wrong fwiw. But it’s what I understand

That is correct Pat.  No need to ban what you’ve never allowed to be made.

I have to believe Augusta has the data on the greens down to the mm -- if someone had that could they use it? I assumed this was some sort of local rule.

[David Ober]

Pretty sure Augusta National
Simply only allows “their” yardage book maker access.  He does not gather the data as the tour books Makers do, so no greens books are available


Don’t thinks it’s a “rule” just control of access


I could be wrong fwiw. But it’s what I understand

That is correct Pat.  No need to ban what you’ve never allowed to be made.

I have to believe Augusta has the data on the greens down to the mm -- if someone had that could they use it? I assumed this was some sort of local rule.

No, you can't, legally. The ruling bodies put limits on the amount of detail that can be contained in a green map booklet -- both on the size of the page and the amount of detail contained.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Can someone tell me just how accurately - other than confirming general slope direction - they can read putts using these books?  I have bought several, more to check how my plans were actually built (or altered over time) and even looked at them before putts.


How can a book translate into green speed, degree of stroke aggressiveness, etc.?


Thanks in advance.

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

It seems if you can read a topo map and combine that with a fair bit of practice to match what you see on the map to how the putt reacts, they could be quite useful.

https://golf.com/instruction/greenreading-books-pictures-golf-logix-puttline/

[Pat Burke]

Can someone tell me just how accurately - other than confirming general slope direction - they can read putts using these books?  I have bought several, more to check how my plans were actually built (or altered over time) and even looked at them before putts.


How can a book translate into green speed, degree of stroke aggressiveness, etc.?


Thanks in advance.

Jeff,
My experience is a bit limited but I have a decent knowledge on the books used on tour the vast majority use


IF. You can place yourself (Ball location)  accurately on the green charts
1) they really can be an amazing aid.
2) they are (to me) even more valuable on subtle breaks.  So often, you have a pretty straight putt from what a makeable distance is and this can really help you know any tendency for the break


3) in a lot of ways, for me at least, the very good greens books used in a tour event are also an enormous mental thing if you know how to locate yourself
The hole locations are incredibly accurate, so knowing the angles and how to position your ball location will give you (IMO) a very good idea


Some of the lesser greens books are giving good general info, but it’s not as precise as what they get at a tour event (besides the masters)

[Paul Jones]

No books...no range finders...no yardage on sprinkler heads...Golfer should have to rely on their eyes and brains.

Craig,


I use to fill the same way and then played golf with a friend who struggled with depth perception (medical issue) and couldn't tell if it was 100 or 250 yards.  I think we should have at least yardage on sprinkler heads and/or 100/150/200 yard markers.

[Paul Jones]

Here is the official information from USGA/R&A - https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rule-4-interpretations.html


Putting Green Maps:
The player is allowed to use a putting green map or other putting green information, except that:
- Any image of a putting green must be limited to a scale of 3/8 inch to 5 yards (1:480) or smaller (the “scale limit”);
- Any book or other paper containing a map or image of a putting green must not be larger than 4 ¼ inches x 7 inches (the “size limit”), although a “hole location sheet” that displays 9 or more holes on a single sheet of paper may be larger, provided that any image of a single putting green meets the scale limit;
- No magnification of putting green information is allowed other than a player’s normal wearing of prescription glasses or lenses;
- Hand drawn or written information about a putting green is only allowed if contained in a book or paper meeting the size limit and written by the player and/or his or her caddie.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kalen,


I can do both of those things.  I did use other brands at my Sand Creek Station and Prairie Dunes recently.  I didn't feel confident in much more than general break.  Strakaline (which the USGA recommended to SCS for the Mid Am there 4 years ago) and apparently ProGreen Books, go to 0.1' contours, whereas others (GolfLogix and Green Slopes) use 0.25' contours. Just by the looks of it, the two 0.1' books look more accurate to use.  The GolfLogix seems decently accurate, while to my eye, Greenslopes looks a bit cartoony, which reduces my confidence in them.  I like GolfLogix and the Green Books, because they also give contours outside the green surface, which are always interesting to me.


BTW, having purchased some of these for Raynor courses, Ross, etc., I am not convinced there is any magic formula for greens contouring that they knew!  Different discussion, I know.


Pat,


Thanks for the input.  My first thought was that it helps on major breaks that might be disguised in direction or severity by surrounding topo or features.  I guess if you really knew your ball and cup location, I could see it being helpful.  Will try again next time I'm playing a surveyed course.


The other interesting thing to me is that for the books I have bought, none of the courses, other than Sand Creek Station, even knew those companies had surveyed their courses.  It left me wondering if they simply buy a tee time, and have one guy send up a quick drone to get the contours as they play?

[John Crowley]

Thank God. It was only a matter of time before these books popped up in our weekend games.

It’s happening.
Last weekend in a club “Ryder type” competition our opponent(s) used a green map book from some internet source. On his HOME course!
He is a relatively new member, BUT STILL!

[Pat Burke]

Pretty sure Augusta National
Simply only allows “their” yardage book maker access.  He does not gather the data as the tour books Makers do, so no greens books are available


Don’t thinks it’s a “rule” just control of access


I could be wrong fwiw. But it’s what I understand

That is correct Pat.  No need to ban what you’ve never allowed to be made.

I have to believe Augusta has the data on the greens down to the mm -- if someone had that could they use it? I assumed this was some sort of local rule.

Would be shocked if ANGC did
NOT have data available But don’t make it available for greens books

[JohnVDB]

Augusta clearly has all the measurements as they use hey to reconstruct the greens when they do work on them such as installing sub-air systems.  They don’t give that information to anyone and it is probably in the same bank vault as the Coca Cola recipe.


There have been claims that it would be possible to map greens using aerial surveys, but I don’t know if anyone had tried it there.


As Paul said, the rule for green-reading materials limit the detail.  One of the issues with materials is that of player created notes.  At courses like Augusta where players have logged there on notes for years, it was felt that limiting them would not be appropriate as that was their own effort and skill.  The rules do limit them such hat you can’t make photo-copies and trade them with others or sell them without them then becoming the equivalent of a printed book.

[Kalen Braley]

JVDB,

Interesting last post, especially the last bit about sharing or selling.  I'm curious is there any oversight from a rules perspective for things like that?  Do rules officials ever inspect or ask to see player notes?  Or is it just based on the honor system?

Thanks!

[JohnVDB]

JVDB,

Interesting last post, especially the last bit about sharing or selling.  I'm curious is there any oversight from a rules perspective for things like that?  Do rules officials ever inspect or ask to see player notes?  Or is it just based on the honor system?

Thanks!

Karen, it is an honor system unless someone notices someone using an old book that isn’t allowed.  Each week the tours will tell players what older books are not allowed.


There was one case of a player getting DQed last year for using an old book that didn’t conform. Unclear if he was aware of the fact that he wasn’t supposed to be using it or not. I believe it was a question by another player.

[Michael Dugger]

As long as you post your tournament scores and don't use the books when we play for money I could care less.

Couldn't, not could.  You couldn't care less. 


Mackenzie would have used proper grammar.  

[Tim_Cronin]

As long as you post your tournament scores and don't use the books when we play for money I could care less.

Couldn't, not could.  You couldn't care less. 


Mackenzie would have used proper grammar.

The language has evolved to accept either phrase, though I'm not a fan of either. (And it's MacKenzie.)


From Merriam-Webster.com:


Merriam-Webster treats the phrases [/size]couldn't care less[/color][/size] and [/color][/size]could care less[/color][/size] as synonymous, both meaning "not concerned or interested at all." "[/color][/size]Couldn't care less[/color][/size]" is the older and more obvious phrase grammatically, but it has been confused for so long that both are now defined.[/color]

[Michael Dugger]

As long as you post your tournament scores and don't use the books when we play for money I could care less.

Couldn't, not could.  You couldn't care less. 


Mackenzie would have used proper grammar.

The language has evolved to accept either phrase, though I'm not a fan of either. (And it's MacKenzie.)


From Merriam-Webster.com:


Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous, both meaning "not concerned or interested at all." "Couldn't care less" is the older and more obvious phrase grammatically, but it has been confused for so long that both are now defined.

LOL, thanks, Tim.  If I was politically inclined, I'd say something along the lines of "that rule change was made up by the same people who give participation trophys!"  (or is it trophies?) 

[Mark Kiely]

JVDB,

Interesting last post, especially the last bit about sharing or selling.  I'm curious is there any oversight from a rules perspective for things like that?  Do rules officials ever inspect or ask to see player notes?  Or is it just based on the honor system?

Thanks!

Karen, it is an honor system unless someone notices someone using an old book that isn’t allowed.  Each week the tours will tell players what older books are not allowed.


There was one case of a player getting DQed last year for using an old book that didn’t conform. Unclear if he was aware of the fact that he wasn’t supposed to be using it or not. I believe it was a question by another player.

Put your mask on and stop throwing things, Kalen!


#funwithtypos

[Jonathan Mallard]

Can someone tell me just how accurately - other than confirming general slope direction - they can read putts using these books?  I have bought several, more to check how my plans were actually built (or altered over time) and even looked at them before putts.


How can a book translate into green speed, degree of stroke aggressiveness, etc.?


Thanks in advance.

Jeff,
My experience is a bit limited but I have a decent knowledge on the books used on tour the vast majority use


IF. You can place yourself (Ball location)  accurately on the green charts
1) they really can be an amazing aid.
2) they are (to me) even more valuable on subtle breaks.  So often, you have a pretty straight putt from what a makeable distance is and this can really help you know any tendency for the break


3) in a lot of ways, for me at least, the very good greens books used in a tour event are also an enormous mental thing if you know how to locate yourself
The hole locations are incredibly accurate, so knowing the angles and how to position your ball location will give you (IMO) a very good idea


Some of the lesser greens books are giving good general info, but it’s not as precise as what they get at a tour event (besides the masters)

Pat,


You played on tour for a while. I'd like to pose a few questions and get your take on them. Hopefully some of our other professional players (paging Mike Clayton) will chime in also.


1.) The detail available in the green books, and hole guides would seem to make an approach to the game wherein the optimal score on any hole can be achieved by playing shots to very specific points on greens and fairways. Dave Pelz's work years ago showed that there is a very tight dispersion pattern for balls hit by players at that level. So, it seems there's some merit in the theory that better scores are attributable to players who optimize the strategy of how to play a hole given that we can reasonably hold execution ability constant. Is this line of thinking valid?


2.) Having this amount of detail available seems to me to advance another theory that the variance in scores is most attributable to the variance in environmental conditions that change during the round, and during the day. I'm talking about wind, humidity, barometric pressure, etc. Likewise, given that we can reasonably hold execution ability constant, is this a valid thought?