- Jan 8, 2009
- 8,204
- 6,042
- Country
-
Australia
How do you Stack Up?
From THE LOST ART OF PUTTING by Gary Nicol & Karl Morris
From THE LOST ART OF PUTTING by Gary Nicol & Karl Morris

Welcome To ShotTalk.com!
We are one of the oldest and largest Golf forums on the internet with golfers from around the world sharing tips, photos and planning golf outings.
Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon!
Actually probably pretty close. My problem is I tend to leave putts short and as we know 100% of putts that don’t get to the hole don’t go in.
Well, using the above chart, pros are going to miss more than they make outside 7 feet. If you are outside 7 feet, you are probably better off coming up short inside two feet than going too far. The Pelz theory was to have the ball stop 17 inches beyond the hole, problem is that if your distance control is off your odds of staying within a high perctage makable second putt go down fairly rapidly if you go a few feet long. I prefer to use the Harvey Penick method of dieing the ball at the hole. A putt going beyond the hole has a narrower window of dropping in the hole than a putt that dies at the hole. Also, if your distance control is off by 2 feet either long or short, your still in the 99% window of making the return putt. Now, if your in a match play situation, things change if missing the comebacker is irrelevant, but in stroke play you are probably better off having the ball die at the hole.Actually probably pretty close. My problem is I tend to leave putts short and as we know 100% of putts that don’t get to the hole don’t go in.
I'd agree on the amateur level but I'd rather miss a foot long than a foot short. A foot long I give myself at least a chance of making it. Short putts never go in.Well, using the above chart, pros are going to miss more than they make outside 7 feet. If you are outside 7 feet, you are probably better off coming up short inside two feet than going too far. The Pelz theory was to have the ball stop 17 inches beyond the hole, problem is that if your distance control is off your odds of staying within a high perctage makable second putt go down fairly rapidly if you go a few feet long. I prefer to use the Harvey Penick method of dieing the ball at the hole. A putt going beyond the hole has a narrower window of dropping in the hole than a putt that dies at the hole. Also, if your distance control is off by 2 feet either long or short, your still in the 99% window of making the return putt. Now, if your in a match play situation, things change if missing the comebacker is irrelevant, but in stroke play you are probably better off having the ball die at the hole.
At the amateur level, I am guessing that those percentages drop off at an alarming rate the further you get from the hole.
If your good enough to always judge your distance within a foot, I would agree. I am not good enough to always leave my putts within a 1 foot ring around the hole. Within a 10 foot radius, I could probably have a high percentage of leaving it within a 1 foot ring. As the distance increases, the percentage would drop off substantially.I'd agree on the amateur level but I'd rather miss a foot long than a foot short. A foot long I give myself at least a chance of making it. Short putts never go in.
If your good enough to always judge your distance within a foot, I would agree. I am not good enough to always leave my putts within a 1 foot ring around the hole. Within a 10 foot radius, I could probably have a high percentage of leaving it within a 1 foot ring. As the distance increases, the percentage would drop off substantially.
The gifs you post are dangerous enough.If I could putt I'd be dangerous.
When I was watching coverage today the commentators were discussing Stenson’s slide and how it corresponded with his poorer putting stats. It always does.