GCQ - Essential Putting Analysis

[DirkDigglr]

I just unlocked the essential putting data last week with the sale they had. I am a viewed to be a good putter by my playing partners. I was shocked that GCQ says I have a neg AoA. to even get the GCQ to show a positive AoA I need to swing crazy up on the ball or place the ball 2+" in front of my lead foot! I have done tests with 2 poker chips stacked up and I only hit the top chip on my stroke which leads me to believe my AoA with putter is positive. yet the GCQ says its negative...not trying to be a persion who disagrees with computer things but I am questioning if the GCQ is working correctly. I also have a forward ball roll at impact which suggest a positive AOA. anyone else experienced the same thing??? I see others talking about negative AoA when they used the feature as well. any other experiences are welcomed as I feel like I am going crazy here trying to get the GCQ to show a positive AoA.

Update: I just used the GCQ with a stack of 3 dimes behind the ball and it still showed negative AoAs of 1-2 degrees and I didn’t hit any of the coins. Something seems off here.

[delaloi]

I have spent very little time with the GCQ putting analysis, not because I doubt the measures but because I haven't seen good ways to link the data to a good putting stroke and making more putts. I find a few simple tools (template, gate, video) to be far more instructive. I'd be interested to hear if others have ideas how to make the quad useful here.

[DirkDigglr]

Michael Breed did a good video on the GCQ and putting which you can find on YouTube. the key metrics IMO are face-target (path doesn't matter much) and ball roll at impact - you want forward roll vs back roll.

[Baller]

You'll drive yourself crazy trying to perfect every detail on putting analysis. Don't do it. Figure out what effects your putting consistency the most.

For me, path was the key, which led to grip, stance, tempo...so many things to get right before you even start to think about angle of attack. I think by the time you're ready to look at aoa, it won't be important anymore.

[delaloi]

I agree Baller. Also, I get a much more instructive picture of my overall path and stroke with a template and video than I can with the Quad, which only shows moment of impact.

If you don't even want to do that, just put a line on the ball and figure out how to roll it straight end over end. If you can do that, your putting stroke is pretty good (face and path need to be good), and if you are still not a good putter it's probably a matter of fixing your aim, speed control, or green reading -- none of which are things the Quad is particularly going to help you with.

Huge GCQ fan, but not for putting.

[DirkDigglr]

thanks for the comments. I agree in not letting GCQ numbers dictate unnecessary changes. I was mostly interested in the AoA issue as almost every putting guru says to avoid a negative AoA and I dont think I have a negative AoA yet the GCQ says I do. its just odd that i can hit the ball with three dimes behind it (ie upward AoA) and yet the GCQ says -2* AoA. just questioning if the machine needs calibration (i realize that its tolerance is likely +/- 1*). I just want to ensure this expensive piece of equipment is accurately measuring what it says it does. for now, i am ingoring AoA and just looking at path and face-target.

FYI: I logged 400 putts over the last few days and my stat average for this are: path -0.7* and face-target -0.3*. so based on the face-target stat, my stoke is working well (path could be improved but it doesnt matter nearly as much as face-target). My AoA is -2.2*

[delaloi]

I also wonder whether the path measurement is good enough here. The Quad measures what it sees very precisely, but can you really line the machine up to within tenths of a degree? In principle yes, but 0.1 degrees at 10 feet is 0.2 inches. Half a degree -- significant when you are measuring path here -- is 1 inch off line. Can you put down the stick that accurately?