Tweet
It freaking kills me playing TGC tournament and putting for birdie and end up quadruple bogeying holes. I know I'm not the best putter in the world, but it just seems like putting is all over the board. Knocking short puts off the green, or long puts going nowhere.... I almost threw my putter into the screen during my last round I was so pissed. It would actually make me feel better knowing that I just suck and that it isn't the Skytak.
-
-
..........Last edited by BadEddieKit; 03-20-2017, 05:46 PM. -
So how would we go about voting on this or deciding what a reasonable HA dispersion would/should be for ST users? We have a 6 degree max dispersion as of today in regards to TGC. I think most can agree that is too much. Would 4 degrees be more reasonable? 2 degrees? Zero? Really don't like zero. My vote would be 2 degrees. To be clear a 2 degree dispersion would be (1,0,-1).Comment
-
User set option.. Does it have to be rounded to the nearest whole number? Or could it be to the nearest .5? I think for the time being, the setting needs to be defaulted to where its at now for tourney play, until us users can way in on what makes the most sense Yes it will benefit those who putt poorly. But nothing worse than striking that pure putt for a 10' birdie and it misses right! -
Posted response below to have the ability to add my graphic.
-
-
I vote for 2 degree total. Zero would give an advantage so that's not good.Comment
-
I think rather than talking in degrees, it is more useful to consider the maximum amount a putt could be offline in terms of putt length. A hole is 4.25" diameter, so 2.125" offline and perfect speed would be the cutoff for making a putt.
With 1 degree left/1 degree right (2 degrees total):
6 feet - 1.26" offline
8 feet - 1.68" offline
10 feet - 2.09" offline
12 feet - 2.51" offline
15 feet - 2.93" offline
With 2 degree left/2 degree right (4 degrees total):
6 feet - 2.51" offline
8 feet - 3.35" offline
10 feet - 4.19" offline
12 feet - 5.03" offline
15 feet - 5.86" offline
With 3 degree left/3 degree right (6 degrees total):
6 feet - 3.77" offline
8 feet - 5.02" offline
10 feet - 6.28" offline
12 feet - 7.54" offline
15 feet - 8.79" offline
To be fair, I don't have a skytrak, but if you do 2 degrees total and have a straight putt, you will always hit the hole on anything under 10 feet. That seems a little too easy to me. PGA pros make 65% of 6 foot putts and 38% of 10 foot putts. At the same time, if I hit it straight and got a misread by 2+ degrees, you won't touch the hole on any putt outside of 6 feet.
I'm a little surprised nobody has made a table like the above for 3 degrees offline vs distance. Then, if you had a 12 foot straight putt, look at the table, see that you need to aim 7.5" left in the game and hit your putt way right so it reads 3 degrees right for a net straight putt.Comment
-
Also, you'd have to consider every putt under 10 foot would have no break which is very rare. I don't disagree with the cheapness of it though. That's why I say there is no great fix for this. -
I think Skytrak must do a somewhat decent job at reading putts based on GarySatterwhite's data (I just picked yours because you seem to be a good sim player and are commenting). I downloaded your shot data from the tour website and sorted by putts.
-3 degrees: 26 putts
-2 degrees: 14 putts
-1 degree: 15 putts
0 degrees: 269 putts
+1 degree: 42 putts
+2 degrees: 29 putts
+3 degrees: 33 putts
So 76% of your putts are +/- 1 degree of going straight. -
Yes andy that is correct, but I have to fidget with it every time I set it up. My room is not dedicated so I move my Skytrak every day. So, before I play a tourney round, I'll warm up on a TGC range to make sure my ST alignment is to my liking. Then I'll chip over to a green, HUGE pain in the ass. Hit putts and try to find something to aim at for that day.
For instance, my second tourney round this past week I did the above and was zero HA on many putts in a row. I putted fantastic in that round. Came back yesterday, repeat the above, and during my practice putting couldn't hit a zero HA putt from 10 feet. Therefore, going into my round I had a lot of doubt about the shorter putts.
Interesting from the data you pulled, I miss more left than I do right. Lol!
-
-
My guess would be that unless the putting correction was turned OFF, you're not going to get anything other than a rounded off whole number. They check the data and adjust accordingly. Anything outside of 3 is set at 3.
It appears that on page 1 Protee has suggested that JNPG and it's tour may very well have ST users set at zero HA no matter what. I haven't confirmed this yet, but it sure sounds that way. I took me a couple of reads, but that is my understanding as of right now.
It's not going to be perfect even at 1 degree max either direction. Take your ten footer for example. Perfectly flat put, and you hit it dead straight, most likely you're still going to get the 1 degree right miss. You're still going to miss that 10 footer most of the time. That ball will barely catch the hole and unless the speed is absolutely perfect it's most likely a lip out.
Comment
-
This is true. You would introduce the option to "run the bumper" and adjust your aim accordingly to get it to work in your favor though. As Andy above said, you aim 1 degree left of your intended line deliberately putt 2 degrees right and get a straight putt every time. It's more reasonable to do when dealing with 2 degrees vs 6. I wouldn't do that because by all rights it is cheating. So with a 10 footer, I'd still cursor aim just as I do today, aim a little left and hope like hell I can get a zero HA. And I believe the made putts from that distance would probably be very similar. -
I don't think it's cheating.. its the same as lining up a straight putt if the LM were to read it correctly, you still have to hit the putt straight. The problem is now, where the hell is straight? the 6 degree variance is way to large. I understand why it's been like that. At this point tho, I would be happy with 2 or 1.5 or 1, just anything better than where its at right now. 3 degrees is 6.375", so if you use that same logic and on that 15 footer and hit it 7.5" left, the putting correction setting is going to read that as a miss left, and hold you to that 3 degree barrier and still call it a miss left. Which is why you can't play the right bias consistently. so where do we aim? where is straight?Last edited by BadEddieKit; 03-20-2017, 08:28 PM. -
More than saying it's cheating, it would basically have the same effect as locking it in at zero. It feels like cheating to me because you are manipulating the output.
To be clear here, I would feel like I was cheating if I did this, not calling anyone a cheater.Last edited by DirtyGarry24; 03-20-2017, 08:38 PM.
-
-
You guys might want to look at the dispersion question a little differently. The Skytrak is essentially a random number generator for HLA with slow putts. So any amount other than 0 HLA dispersion will be adding arbitrary randomness to your putt. Do you really want the system adding randomness to your efforts?
Also I think the comments about 0 HLA being too easy or producing better than PGA averages misses the fact that speed is a big reason why PGA guys miss puts. So is reading the break. And then hitting the speed needed to take that break. Mishitting a putt offline is probably a small reason for PGA total misses.
Personally I think 0 HLA and putting for speed makes a lot of sense given the Skytrak's limitations with slow putt HLA and also it's alignment issues. These limitations have been well known from before time began on both the PG and TGC side. PG particularly has tried several ideas, I don't remember how they ended up but I think it is just putting for speed. That leaves it up to the skill of the user not randomness and is still challenging enough that few (none?) people complain about an uneven playing field.Comment
-
Ya the more i have been thinking about this today, i think you are right sir. If its anything but 0, its going to be random. I would rather have questionable putts fall than missing easy ones any day. I know this causes an issue for the tour, but for me, it would sure make the game more enjoyable on non tour play. Straight flat putts are a rarity, and reading greens and playing the right speed is really the challenge.. A good portion of my putts are on a decent line to start with. -
I agree with this as well. I just don't think it'll fly in the tournaments and honestly I really don't play much other than that. I'm either practicing the course for the tourney or playing it.
-
-
I've pulled and/or pushed plenty of putts in JNPG. There is no global 0 HA setting for skytrak putting imoComment
-
Ok great thinman, but what the hell does it mean? You're in the 86th percentile for putts of 10 feet? -
I agree, I have missed perfectly flat putts under 10 feet as well. Are they saying we should be hitting every flat putt we take under 10 feet? Because I certainly don't. -
Thinman Do you aim with the camera in JNPG? We can't overlook the break of the green. If you pick the right aim point, and use the right speed, it will go in. All that's eliminated is hitting it "straight". I would trust protee's take on this - he is sort of "in the know".
again, I'd like a manual entry for putting..take it over to my 15 foot putting mat and hit from the distance shown.
-
-
To further muddy the waters, I was thinking only about short putts. I understand that the Skytrak accuracy improves with ball speed (could be wrong on that though). If so then one could envision some kind of sliding scale based on ball speed/distance. Someone would have to do the raw data tests and collect the statistics for that though and then Protee would have to be willing to implement a more complicated algorithm.Comment
-
Interesting, just ran my numbers and they are listed below. About 80% are within -1 to +1. So how much of the 20% is the indian vs the arrow.
-3 55
-2 45
-1 53
0 524
1 27
2 26
3 17
Comment
-
At this point, I'm thinking the way to go would be to give everyone the option to use zero HA if they choose.
As faulty said, speed and read is most important. A guy like keither can actually work on his stroke with his system so he may want to leave it as is.Comment
-
If gc2 has a +/- 1 degree tolerance for azimuth and gc2 users get to set putting forgiveness to 2 degrees in gsx, and skytrak is +/- 2 degrees shouldn't there be a 4 degree forgiveness for skytrak users?Comment
-
FYI, Protee confirmed on page 1 that JNPG gives ST users a 0 HA on all putts. It's no wonder (anymore) why the putting is "better".Comment
-
If somebody could pull my putting tour data, you would see very few 0.0 Also very few 3.0..... if you see one I was probably too lazy to go to the keyboard. I wouldn't want my HA to change. If I am pushing it left.... I want to see that.Originally posted by GarySatterwhite View Post
This is a tough topic. For example if you rounded my data off to the nearest degree.... sometimes it would benefit me and sometimes not. That 0.6 putt might have gone in if it was left at 0.6. If you round it up to 1 degree.... I just lipped out. I find my system, that doesn't round off, to be very realistic.... My second round of the last event I missed 6 putts within 13 feet. That can happen IRL. I think that 2 of them had zero break.... I just missed.
One thing is that we don't want to make putting too easy.... for me, I don't think it is.
I have played an entire practice round with my hcam disabled to compare ball flight between the PX4 and PX5. Shot direction was calculated but putting was given 0.0 HA for every putt. I might have gained a stroke or two, but that's it.
Take a look at my video for PX5 putting on another post today. ST users turn putt correction off. Do a similar test and see what the results are. GC2 users should try it too. Somebody needs to have some data with putt correction off. ProTee could write the code so that every putt less than 1 degree is given a 0 and every putt over 1 degree is given a 1, but no more. Somebody could use my putting data if you wish..... I use the keyboard 95% of the time during tour rounds. Sometimes when I am mad, I might not even go get my putter let alone go to the keyboard.
After some testing.....if the majority feels that 0.0 makes their putting experience better without making it too easy, I would be fine with ST users or GC2 users having 0.0 . I would want my HA to stay the same. Having the grid makes it a little easier than RL.
3.0 must feel like a misread, I bet it is frustrating. Once there was a ball in my FOV that I didn't notice. I am lining up a 12 foot putt for eagle.... I take the shot and the ball goes flying into the trees at 70 mph. A WTF moment for sure.
@ Protee...... maybe do a beta test with about 12 users or so at 0.0. See what the consensus is. If a beta test is to be done, a mixture of high and low handicappers should be used.Comment
-
I've checked yours keither, you keep it around 1.5 max. Maybe an oddball 2. Much more realistic. -
I did the math on about 60 putts. 0.8 average. A few of those, I didn't move the cursor. I simply aimed a few inches left or right.... I had a couple of 3 degree putts in there which are for sure me not moving the cursor. It's actually a pretty good stat to look at. From now on, I will move the cursor and putt straight.
-
-
just tested, jnpg does not ha 0 putts.Comment
-
So, what does it do? What kind of HA's do you get over there? Just having a real hard time trying to figure out the difference.
The fact that TGC can be soooo good for so many for ball flight across many different systems but can't handle a simple slow moving putt is ridiculous.
So we have to blame something in order to get a resolution.
Sorry thinman, not trying to pick a fight, but we need more than "it doesn't" and I push and pull.
I realize protee isn't gonna necessarily flash the pom poms for the other software, so these details are very important.
-
-
To be clear here, nobody (certainly not me) is saying that anyone is doing anything that they aren't doing. I (we?) are needing more information. Always it seems on this forum we deal with vagaries, I have a low tolerance for that. I'm taking the info in and trying to make a conclusion based on the info. It's very difficult if we don't get everything. For instance, what does your shot data say on the other software? Well, I don't check it but it's better. That helps absolutely nobody. End the thread now and just keep wishing putts in the hole. Sorry, I can't operate in that way. I do this mostly for myself (not shy about that), but every week there is another user claiming that putting on ST inside TGC is garbage. I agree with that to an extent, but am interested in the why. I care not that another software handles it better. I want to know why. We've had exactly one source say why, (Protee). I agree they may be biased, but we need some hard evidence that they are wrong. Otherwise we're just pissing in the wind and frankly my britches are soaked through, what's the point of undoing the belt...Comment
Comment