Do the newer generation putters really improve your putting?

[Jmk202]

I don't believe there are any putting performance statistics for amateur play. For pro Tour golf there are statistics for every type of shot, including the trendy "strokes gained" numbers.
Due to technology greens are maintained significantly better than they were 30 years ago, and smoother-faster greens absolutely allow amateurs as well as Tour pros a better opportunity to make putts. Within the amateur game I notice fewer "hot putting rounds" by players than I did 30 years ago. Once Cameron started selling heavy (for the time) 330 gram putter heads I noticed a decline in amateur putting that has continued as head weights went from 330 to 340 to 350 etc... Specifically, the "hot putting rounds I used to on occasion see from players using 310 gram head weight Ping's and Bulleye's and 8802's are more rare than before.
For PGA Tour play I think putting performance is about the same as it's always been, which is to say players do make putts (or they would lose their Tour card).
But considering how much greens maintenance has improved I do wonder if Tour putting performance might significantly improve if some players started swinging the old 310 gram Ping's, Bullseye's, and 8802 putters

I mean with millions of dollars on the line each week if the only 310g putters would give better results don't you think more Tour Players would be gaming them? I'm sure those guys/gals have the time and interest to actually figure out what will save them strokes.

 

[Jmk202]

Sure I do. "Anecdotal experience" is available to everyone who plays golf, either monitoring their own game or observing playing partners games.Why not use it ?

That's fair and relevant, but need to be careful to qualify when anecdotal experience is being utilized rather than statistical evidence since it could very easily be skewed. In today's world way too often anecdotal stories get passed off as fact, and we are all poorer for it.

 

[Rock N TN]

That's fair and relevant, but need to be careful to qualify when anecdotal experience is being utilized rather than statistical evidence since it could very easily be skewed. In today's world way too often anecdotal stories get passed off as fact, and we are all poorer for it.

And statistical data is manipulated to fit the narrative.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DG_1234]

That's fair and relevant, but need to be careful to qualify when anecdotal experience is being utilized rather than statistical evidence since it could very easily be skewed. In today's world way too often anecdotal stories get passed off as fact, and we are all poorer for it.

I am just a consumer with opinions based on my observations and experiences. But (on this subject of putter weight), I consider mine to be just as relevant and helpful as when a putter company employee promotes whatever he/she is selling.
My perspective is based on my play and observing others play golf, without bias or motivation to sell a product.
The putter company employee's goal is to sell more putters, and to do so he/she may proclaim "heavier putters are better for fast greens" or "mallet putters are more forgiving than blade style putters". Personally I don't believe the computer modeling work that putter companies do to create new designs is especially relevant or applicable to on course player performance, so to me the putter company claims are usually anecdotal rather than "fact".
Nevertheless, putter company employees have big microphone and big marketing budgets, and the companies tend to copy each others concepts, so the result is that the current putter industry offerings are mostly all heavy head, large diameter grip putter models.

 

[CBaker]

I am just a consumer with opinions based on my observations and experiences. But (on this subject of putter weight), I consider mine to be just as relevant and helpful as when a putter company employee promotes whatever he/she is selling.
My perspective is based on my play and observing others play golf, without bias or motivation to sell a product.
The putter company employee's goal is to sell more putters, and to do so he/she may proclaim "heavier putters are better for fast greens" or "mallet putters are more forgiving than blade style putters". Personally I don't believe the computer modeling work that putter companies do to create new designs is especially relevant or applicable to on course player performance, so to me the putter company claims are usually anecdotal rather than "fact".
Nevertheless, putter company employees have big microphone and big marketing budgets, and the companies tend to copy each others concepts, so the result is that the current putter industry offerings are mostly all heavy head, large diameter grip putter models.

Except you do have bias (which is fine). How you don’t see that I am not sure. You personally prefer a lighter head weight so you think everyone should, and anytime you see anything that might support that (seeing playing partners struggle) you bank that away as proof to your stance. Then you come up with this idea that people are struggling because they aren’t using lighter heads, and you have all of this selective memory to go on, and then discuss it as fact.

if history has shown anything, it’s that someones anecdotal evidence is almost always wrong. Just ask a group of people what just happened in a situation and you’ll get a ton of different responses. We all see what we want to see, whether you think you do or not is up to you.

 

[Chef23]

I’m not big on moi and forgiveness in a putter. I use the whole face from sweet spot to toe depending on situation, such as slope or green speed. I prefer having a given stroke length for a certain length putt and adjust the contact point over adjusting stroke for one contact point.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't use different parts of the putterface. I have used the toe on occasion but prefer to focus on the sweet spot.

 

[Jmk202]

And statistical data is manipulated to fit the narrative.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It definitely could be, that's the beauty behind the scientific method and the importance of Peer reviews. If a party is manipulating data to fit their narrative a third party should be doing independent studies to their verify or disprove results. Groups like Golf Spy do a great job of this and are funded separately and should be unbiased. I always encourage people to have a healthy dose of skepticism if they are curious look into it themselves!

Were getting kinda far away from the OP, but I for one appreciate some of the innovative ideas behind some new putters (Not the truss putter). I Still game a pretty old putter but I'd be interesting in giving a new version a spin to see the difference for me.

 

[DG_1234]

Except you do have bias (which is fine). How you don’t see that I am not sure.

My perspective is based on my own trial and error as well as observing others play their rounds of golf. I do not have a bias one way or the other regarding putter head weight.
For example, I believe some players would putt their best with a relatively light 300 to 320 gram putter head weight, others would putt their best with a 320 to 340 gram head weight, some would putt their best with a 340 to 360 gram head weight etc....

 

[DataDude]

Sure I do. "Anecdotal experience" is available to everyone who plays golf, either monitoring their own game or observing playing partners games.Why not use it ?

As a statistician anecdotal non-recorded data is usually very inaccurate for a variety of reasons.

 

[Badger_Golfer]

I would say that it honestly depends. I do think that some of the newer mallet putters can be of help because of all the lines and aiming aids that they have. However, I dont think there is a huge difference in terms of how well you would putt with a new blade vs a Bullseye.
Ive got a Wilson Augusta that I put in the bag from time to time and I honestly dont putt any better with any of the high-end putters I own than I do with that thing and you could go out and buy a brand new Augusta on Amazon for like $30.

 

[DG_1234]

As a statistician anecdotal non-recorded data is usually very inaccurate for a variety of reasons.

That's fine, but for amateur golf it's players out there on the courses with no statistics recorded.
So, it seems to me the most sensible way to decide which clubs go in the bag is by monitoring our own games and that of our playing partners.

 

[baylrballa]

no.

 

[fairwaynut]

I prefer a face balanced blade putter. This gives me the best chance of success for making a putt. The problem is I still have to make the putt correctly.

 

[tahoebum]

My putting plateaued 30+ years ago way back in my early 20’s and nothing seems to improve it including long putter, belly putter, left hand low, claw, arm lock, etc.

A few months ago I had a lesson that changed my set up dramatically, mainly moving my eye line at address inside the heel of the putter from my old habit of having my eye line outside the toe of the putter. I’m now more upright and the ball is farther away from my toe line. Other more subtle changes were made as well but now magically I can hole putts with much greater frequency with all my putters whether a mallet, blade, or even my grandpa’s hickory shafted putter from 1928, lol.

 

[OGputtnfool]

Faster greens do not make putting easier.

I can agree with this, to an extent. I think there's likely a spot somewhere in the middle where putting is "easiest" and it's likely a different speed for everyone. I'm sure no one would say that putting is easier on ultra slow, shaggy greens or lightning fast Tour speed greens. I'd bet that many would say greens that measure a 5 on the stimp would be slow, maybe 9-10 would be comfortable, and 14 would be unputtable. Some people might shift that 1 or 2 numbers higher for the comfortable speed while others might shift is lower.

 

[Rock N TN]

I am just a consumer with opinions based on my observations and experiences. But (on this subject of putter weight), I consider mine to be just as relevant and helpful as when a putter company employee promotes whatever he/she is selling.
My perspective is based on my play and observing others play golf, without bias or motivation to sell a product.
The putter company employee's goal is to sell more putters, and to do so he/she may proclaim "heavier putters are better for fast greens" or "mallet putters are more forgiving than blade style putters". Personally I don't believe the computer modeling work that putter companies do to create new designs is especially relevant or applicable to on course player performance, so to me the putter company claims are usually anecdotal rather than "fact".
Nevertheless, putter company employees have big microphone and big marketing budgets, and the companies tend to copy each others concepts, so the result is that the current putter industry offerings are mostly all heavy head, large diameter grip putter models.

I really don’t pay much attention to the marketing hype the companies put out. Because that is just what it is, hype. Same with reviews. Every reviewer has their own preferences, quirks, needs and biases, just as I do.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Rock N TN]

I would say that it honestly depends. I do think that some of the newer mallet putters can be of help because of all the lines and aiming aids that they have. However, I dont think there is a huge difference in terms of how well you would putt with a new blade vs a Bullseye.

I admit my bias for blade putters, and thorough dislike of mallet style. I also have no love for the heavy head, even the Cameron I had was only 310 grams. I think that goes along with my desire to “feel” the strike of the ball, and the more massive the head the less feel. Just my opinion and I’m sticking to it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Rock N TN]

That's fine, but for amateur golf it's players out there on the courses with no statistics recorded.
So, it seems to me the most sensible way to decide which clubs go in the bag is by monitoring our own games and that of our playing partners.

Roger that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Nikhil]

In my opinion, modern putters have improved putting dramatically.

Regardless of putter shape - the new multi material shafts are a massive improvement over steel shafts.
Counter balanced grips/shafts definitely help improve putting consistency especially on modern fast greens.
Grip shapes and (over)sizes are another area that provide huge amount of help in modern putters.

Not going to get into head shapes but face inserts are another area where modern putters are way ahead.
Face inserts definitely help roll the ball much more consistently for those who prefer a soft feel.
For those who prefer milled faces - modern milling patterns provide remarkable feel and control.

I still have my old putters from 10 - 15 years ago. I would get slaughtered if I dared to game them today.



.

 

[Badger_Golfer]

I admit my bias for blade putters, and thorough dislike of mallet style. I also have no love for the heavy head, even the Cameron I had was only 310 grams. I think that goes along with my desire to “feel” the strike of the ball, and the more massive the head the less feel. Just my opinion and I’m sticking to it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm with you on that. I want to love mallets but have never found one that I like the feel of.
I tend to be a blade guy and tend to prefer vintage. I still love the old Bullseyes, 8802s, Spalding Cash-In and anything with a thin topline and a heel shaft.
Probably the most modern I get is an Anser style and even those came out over 50 years ago.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[fuffle master]

I will jump on the side of modern putters have helped my game and putting numbers. I know I don’t hit the center on each putt, and my new seven has surely helped with the ball roll. Is this due to the face, MOI, stroke lab shaft, or divided weight. I would say all of the above. The newer technology is vastly superior in getting the ball rolling quicker, balance in the shaft, and off center hits.

I can see that in my data with programs like blast and Arccos. But most of all, I can see it in my putts per round when I use different putters.

 

[Acesteve]

The variety of new designs alone gives us the opportunity to find a putter that better fits the stroke. Take the arm bar putter a few people are using on tour which lets the left arm swing and right hand be passive. Not something that I was aware was possible 30 years ago.

That said about 3 to 4 years ago, I concluded myself and my entire Saturday morning 4some of almost 30 years sucked at putting. This in spite of some of us having newer putters. I've held you can't buy a swing for a long time and in putting you certainly can't buy one of those.

Most people don't care to want to put in the work to improve putting fundamentals and new technology won't help with that.

 

[Rock N TN]

Most people don't care to want to put in the work to improve putting fundamentals and new technology won't help with that.

That’s what I think Acesteve. A putter that “fits” your build and stroke will give the best chance of seeing improvement. But, if you don’t put the work in to consistently make the same stroke, no amount of technology will help.

Just my 2¢ worth.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Badger_Golfer]

I will jump on the side of modern putters have helped my game and putting numbers. I know I don’t hit the center on each putt, and my new seven has surely helped with the ball roll. Is this due to the face, MOI, stroke lab shaft, or divided weight. I would say all of the above. The newer technology is vastly superior in getting the ball rolling quicker, balance in the shaft, and off center hits.

I can see that in my data with programs like blast and Arccos. But most of all, I can see it in my putts per round when I use different putters.

I'l admit to being highly skeptical of the stroke lab shafts. Ive tried them and theyre nice putters but the shaft seemed like nothing special to me. To me, its just marketing fluff. I know people like them though and hey, if you like them, good on you (but I still think its all marketing )
I just dont see how you would swing a putter hard enough that shaft flex would make much difference.

 

[Badger_Golfer]

I was thinking about this topic when I was on the course today. If you really think about it, the last true innovation in putter design really was over 100 years ago when center shaft putters came out.
That was the start of MOI and designing a putter that resisted twisting on off-center hits. Everything after that has simply been a tweak or reinvention of that idea.
The Bullseye was designed when the R&A banned center-shaft putters and the Anser is pretty much a Bullseye that has more weighting to the head.
Mallet putters? Ive got an old persimmon mallet putter in my closet with a hickory shaft that is from the late 1800s.
Aiming lines? Again, those first came about on the persimmon mallets in the 1800s.
Now, Im not saying that we shouldnt ever buy new putters, I just question many of the, "innovations" that these companies like to boast nowdays.