We've launched the new forums! Read more here

is it really always "all that much better" to putt past the hole vs let it die in?

TheHeez said:
I think it's a flawed question. You can't say people that putt aggressively leave longer second shots and then ask what is better. My guess is that is a characterization created by the fact that that's not your miss. All miss distances being equal i.e. long vs short, which I think they are, you should generally miss long so you can see the break in which you will be making your next putt. That being said, if going long is going to leave a slick downhill putt, I'd consider trying to die it at the hole.
Click to expand...

I can see your point and my logic is certainly not perfect in any way. I only based it on the thought that (to me) it just "seems" those who putt more aggressive tend to pass the hole further when its missed than those who try to die it in. No facts on this but just enough rounds of observation through the years. In general Id have to agree when one is on target well enough then putting a bit past the hole should sink more than putting it to die in.
 
Wicked Cool Bearded Man said:
Yes but are they created equal hahaha I get what he's saying - Tap ins are way less stressful and much higher likelyhood of making. I guess it's a mindset


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No doubt brother. He plays that boring golf. I'm an adventurous type haha
 
T2GRN18 said:
No doubt brother. He plays that boring golf. I'm an adventurous type haha
Click to expand...

You and me my man. You and me both!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
TheHeez said:
I think it's a flawed question. You can't say people that putt aggressively leave longer second shots and then ask what is better. My guess is that is a characterization created by the fact that that's not your miss. All miss distances being equal i.e. long vs short, which I think they are, you should generally miss long so you can see the break in which you will be making your next putt. That being said, if going long is going to leave a slick downhill putt, I'd consider trying to die it at the hole.
Click to expand...

You definitely don't want a hard putt coming back. Being an uphill first putt in that scenario where you could be left with a slick downhiller, is a case where you can be a little bit aggressive since it's an uphill putt and you can try to take some of the break out. But yeah, you gotta be careful not to knock the crap out of it.
 
Canadan said:
I've always been a die it into the hole kind of putter... Every once in a while I get overzealous and smash them into the back door but for the most part, I enjoy the stress free experience of tap in pars.

Yeah, the break will come into play more, but I'm fine with it. I'd rather three pars than one par, one birdie, and one bogey.
Click to expand...

On the shorter putts with heavy break I always take the die it in method and play the break . That is certainly one scenario where I do believe I see longer misses after being aggressive. The term "putt through the break" on those shorter putts I think only works best when that break is minor. The miss via the die in method on a heavy breaking putt will (for me) usually be considerably closer vs if putting through the break. But some of this also depends whether or not the first putt is uphill, down, or from the side and what I anticipate the miss might do. It is very possible to sometimes have a harder second putt than the original one was. When I feel that's the case I usually try a careful die in.
 
Don't necessarily think 1 is better than the other. However I do think its important to let your putt have a chance to go in the hole on makeable putts. While it might be a bit of a generalization, I think the biggest difference in mindset is how comfortable you are with those 2-3 footers. If you don't have confidence in them, I think people tend to putt more conservatively fearing the potential 3 putt.
 
Lions81 said:
Don't necessarily think 1 is better than the other. However I do think its important to let your putt have a chance to go in the hole on makeable putts. While it might be a bit of a generalization, I think the biggest difference in mindset is how comfortable you are with those 2-3 footers. If you don't have confidence in them, I think people tend to putt more conservatively fearing the potential 3 putt.
Click to expand...

I think there is truth in what your saying and that also happens to me. To be honest I have more confidence from 10 feet than I do from 4 feet...lol. Or when the putt is for par and brdie vs bogey's. Of course its all a mental thing as I do tend to be over careful. its more a flaw of mine than an asset.
 
T2GRN18 said:
I used to be a die it in the hole guy. I noticed that I would have many curlers at the hole.

However since putting a new putter In the bag. The confidence has gone up and rarely will I leave it short. I'm not afraid of the 3' knee knockers coming back if I happen to power it by.
Click to expand...
And in one post, Kevin has completely changed my mindset. I've been a 'die it in the hole' guy since picking up the Cure CX2 at the THP event in May...and while my speed had been very good with it, I NEVER seem to make ANYTHING with it. And 99% of my misses are these little curlers at the hole. Looks like I'll be a 'run it by' guy in Vegas.
 
rollin said:
I think there is truth in what your saying and that also happens to me. To be honest I have more confidence from 10 feet than I do from 4 feet...lol. Or when the putt is for par and brdie vs bogey's. Of course its all a mental thing as I do tend to be over careful. its more a flaw of mine than an asset.
Click to expand...

Just think of those rounds where you have left like 3-4 putts a ball short in the middle of the hole. You likely arent going to miss 3 or 4 of them on the way back (at least I hope). So even if you miss one of them and 3-putt, you just made up 2 shots. That's just the way I think of it, and a lightbulb kind of went off for me early last year on it, and I really started focusing on giving makeable putts a chance to go in, and it has helped.
 
If you don't putt or chip past the hole, you leave strokes out there. Any professional will confirm this.
 
I like mine to die in. If I miss, I have nothing left but for sure in.
 
thewitt said:
If you don't putt or chip past the hole, you leave strokes out there. Any professional will confirm this.
Click to expand...

Not always, not all the time and depends how much past the hole one is talking about. That and some other scenarios like just what the putt at hand is faced with and is all sort of part of the topic. So generally speaking its probably correct to state that but just not always so correct all the time. Probably not close to all the time but perhaps a majority of it.
 
According to one book i read, only up to 20 foot and then you should try to die at the hole. Outside 20 you don't have enough precision to hit it 17" past the hole and if you figure a 10% accuracy on distance (pro level accuracy) at 20 feet that's 2 feet, if you aim 17" past the hole and are within your 10% window you could be 3 1/2 feet past on a good putt. Use 17" past only to around 6 foot and then taper it off to 2" past at 20 feet and past that die at the hole. According to Riddoch anyway. But i think the logic is sound, accounting for that 10% margin of error.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BluesManDan said:
According to one book i read, only up to 20 foot and then you should try to die at the hole. Outside 20 you don't have enough precision to hit it 17" past the hole and if you figure a 10% accuracy on distance (pro level accuracy) at 20 feet that's 2 feet, if you aim 17" past the hole and are within your 10% window you could be 3 1/2 feet past on a good putt. Use 17" past only to around 6 foot and then taper it off to 2" past at 20 feet and past that die at the hole. According to Riddoch anyway. But i think the logic is sound, accounting for that 10% margin of error.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's interesting and seems logical enough.
 
There are putts that should be died in, downhill for instance, or maybe a big drop beyond the hole.

But obviously you won't find too many that agree with die it in, so that speaks for itself, the verdict is in.

Along with the other reasons I think the speed is more accurate as well, slower speeds tend to dance around, a nice firm putt rolls on target.
 
I'll never make a putt that doesn't at least make it equal or pass the cup. So, unless you just can't miss it long because in doing so is really bad, then I'd rather get to or just a few foot past. Plus, like other have mentioned, it does allow you to see the break coming back, so that's also an advantage over leaving it short.
 
MrDC said:
But obviously you won't find too many that agree with die it in, so that speaks for itself, the verdict is in.

.
Click to expand...


I would argue "a" verdict is in. There are people out there for whom the 18" past results in higher average score per round. I average less than 2 putts/hole (a flawed statistic if ever there was one) and I am definitively a die it in. Earlier this year I bought into the put it past the hole thing as I am a firm believer guys like Pelz are much more knowledgeable about the game. I quickly raised my average putts nearly to 3/hole. Guaging speed past a visual target for whatever reason just doesn't work for my brain. When I try to put it to the back of the cup I tend to leave tap-ins. When I try to go 18" past I tend to leave 6' putts followed by 4' putts. I suddenly found myself 3 and 4 putting with regularity.

From a scientific standpoint you will never hear me argue that the AVERAGE golfer should not aim to putt 18" past the hole. The math is inarguable, that is the mathematically correct approach for the average golfer. But not for every golfer.

But there are exceptions for whom that simply does not work. I am sure we are rare but we are out here.
 
I don't want to leave more than a foot or two coming back if I'm putting uphil .
 
My goal when putting from inside 20 ft is to make it and my speed goal is to get it to stop a foot beyond the hole (max) if it doesn't go in on my putt outside of 20 ft i'm trying to get within 3ft of the hole.
 
Monty says a putt 2" short is really 2' short as the ball should go past the hole if not made
 
I'll reiterate what most have said, you gotta get up to get down...
 
I tend to leave a lot of putts short but I'd prefer to be about a foot beyond the hole if it doesn't go in. When I start thinking about not leaving a putt short is when I start blasting putts 4-5 feet past and taking 3 putts.
 
I went with a Odyssey Rossi putter about 20 years ago. It seemed I was always leaving my putts short.

The putts weren't always online, but twice during a round the ball would run straight at the cup, and stop a few inches short.

There have been times I would try to let it die, and about 2 inches from the hole, the ball would take a weird kick and miss it.

If the ball is going aggressive enough, it will take some of the last minute break/kick out of it.

I'm not a good putter at all, but I aim for 1 foot past the hole. Most of the time the ball is only 4-8" past the hole.(Shows my poor judge of distance)

I hate to leave one a few inches short, and hear someone say "Oh, a little bit harder would have went in".
 
These stats and averages can be quite bleak as the average joe will almost always race that one birdie putt by and in stable Ford with one shot left the mentality is don't leave it short amongst many golfer

Sent from my 5056X using Tapatalk
 
I agree with Penick's idea that a ball should sneak into the hole like a mouse. The hole is an inch wide to a putt that is on its way 3' past. It's only the full 4.25" to a ball that is just running out of gas at the hole. I'm not a great putter by any means, but my good putting days the putt just runs out of gas at the hole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top