Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Golf Discuss the game of golf

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-20-2013, 11:43 PM   #101
cwicemvp12
Sergei Bobrovsky!
 
cwicemvp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Delaware
Posts: 22,471
Re: It's not a math discussion CW

By popular demand, the thread has been reopened. I'll be happy to respond to ship and other's concerns, but I'm heading out right now.

In the meantime, no more personal attacks. It's a shame the thread got on such a derail on the premise of golfing skill being absolute knowledge. I was legitimately interested in the results, and Brocktoon convinced me that the thread deserved to come back, and back it is. Please keep the discussion civil.
cwicemvp12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2013, 11:56 PM   #102
KenoVictoryLap
veteran
 
KenoVictoryLap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Planning a trip
Posts: 3,303
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

It seems to me that the straight line camp values different ranges of speed for the range of available lines and the breaking putt folks put a premium on having a wider range of lines even if those different lines all have a narrower range of speeds.
KenoVictoryLap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 12:07 AM   #103
MikkeD
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Ty mods!

I'll just quote my post from the other thread as I should probably post it as it was - plz ignore the obvous parts that have now been resolved.



'You must be kidding mods - I was getting ready to try this challenge and bring back some stats for a very good putting bogey golfer. To be fair I got down to 10 once, but I am one of the best putters at my club even though I now play off 18.

I was about to make a post along the lines of - wtf do elite golfers think that they are the best putters also? The best putter in the world might not be able to break 100 to save his life!

I've never been much better than a low teen golfer with my long game but I have won plenty of stuff because I can putt well. I've won many comps. with mid 20s or less putts playing to 7-12 over par on the day.'
MikkeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 12:14 AM   #104
MikkeD
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenoVictoryLap View Post
It seems to me that the straight line camp values different ranges of speed for the range of available lines and the breaking putt folks put a premium on having a wider range of lines even if those different lines all have a narrower range of speeds.
For what it is worth, I hate it if I can't see a break. If I have a 6-10 ft straightish putt I often call out something like - 'Right edge firm'. Gives me more confidence.

Last edited by MikkeD; 12-21-2013 at 12:32 AM.
MikkeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 12:30 AM   #105
MikkeD
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Another thought - and I don't think this has been brought up yet in this thread.

There are a number of higher handicap players who putt from way off the green because they know that they will usually get down in 3 at worst.

I am kinda one of them, but I only do it if the way into the green is pretty slick when I am more than a few feet away from the it.

And I only do it if I think I can get down in 2 shots more times than I would with my 9- or 7-iron chip and putt.

This is also why some high handicap players may surprise you at how good they are from 100 feet away with the old flat stick.

At the club I play at we call putting from a good distance away from the green as Brindling, in respect to one of our players (Mr. Brindle) who has shown he can do that for years. Ironically he is pretty crap from 5 -2 feet. Sorry Den!

Last edited by MikkeD; 12-21-2013 at 12:37 AM. Reason: But he makes a load of twos from anywhere you can think of!
MikkeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 01:13 AM   #106
Brocktoon
Unreada Bill
 
Brocktoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,535
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

ship,

I read your post again with a much clearer head and I probably overreacted. It was your wording when you wrote the following:
Quote:
refer to the last quote here from Brockton where he acknowledges I am correct that breaking putt is in fact easier to make than a straight putt.
That I interpreted to mean that you were applying what I was saying about a very specific individual example of a putt to all putts and the overall debate of straight vs. breaking which I emphatically stated I wanted nothing to do with and never took a side on. It looks like you left out a word before "breaking" and I 100% read it "A" as opposed to "THIS", which changes a lot in this case.

If you would have instead said the following:
Quote:
refer to the last quote here from Brockton where he acknowledges that one specific example of a breaking putt that I described earlier is in fact easier to make than a straight putt.
I would not have reacted the way I did.

So, at this point when I first read it I'm actually pretty pissed, then I read this after you said some things which again I felt were more about the general straight v break argument rather than the very specific individual example I was talking about:
Quote:
As noted above, please see Brockton’s post below acknowledging this all is correct. He is to be commended for getting through the haze of logic and seeing the light.
This sent me straight over the edge since I felt that not only were you deliberately misrepresenting what I said, but you were even throwing in a sarcastic little jab about me seeing the light when we both knew you were claiming I had taken a side on the overall general debate when I had actually taken pains to avoid coming down on either side of it.

I took great umbrage with this and immediately started typing out a reply, I probably should have waited a little bit until I was less rustled, as people like to say now.

So, I'm willing to accept that it was bad communication. Although I do think you could have been much clearer in your wording, particularly the first part I quoted which actually looks like a typo as I'm reading it again, but is clearly omitting some very important words.

Last edited by Brocktoon; 12-21-2013 at 01:41 AM.
Brocktoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 01:28 AM   #107
Brocktoon
Unreada Bill
 
Brocktoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,535
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Less straight vs. breaking, more people actually trying and or discussing the prop proposed in the OP!

FWIW the weather is supposed to be decent where I live tomorrow and I will try to find a putting green if it is above 50. If that happens I'll film it and post here.

As for my pedigree, I'm about a 4-5 handicap and putting is the worst part of my game IMO. I avg 32.25 putts/round, and that's with hitting a lot of fringes and being a decent chipper/pitcher.
Brocktoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 01:28 AM   #108
durango155
Pooh-Bah
 
durango155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,326
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

when is someone going to lay some cash down and do this? i offered and there's a guy here in Arizona that wants to do it except he will only give me 50 tries lol
durango155 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 01:35 AM   #109
Brocktoon
Unreada Bill
 
Brocktoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,535
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Quote:
Originally Posted by durango155 View Post
when is someone going to lay some cash down and do this? i offered and there's a guy here in Arizona that wants to do it except he will only give me 50 tries lol
At this point I actually think most people realize that if you own a putter and can button your pants before leaving the house you're +EV here.
Brocktoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 01:41 AM   #110
tzwien
Pooh-Bah
 
tzwien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,267
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

I'd try it if it wasn't below zero with ****ing snow everywhere.
tzwien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 01:44 AM   #111
ntnBO
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,484
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brocktoon View Post
At this point I actually think most people realize that if you own a putter and can button your pants before leaving the house you're +EV here.
I merely assumed if you own a putter and can button your pants it's pretty easy to be a scratch golfer. So that would make your hypothesis accurate.

BO
ntnBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 02:03 AM   #112
Brocktoon
Unreada Bill
 
Brocktoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,535
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Oh BO, you lovable curmudgeon, you.
Brocktoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 03:46 AM   #113
cwicemvp12
Sergei Bobrovsky!
 
cwicemvp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Delaware
Posts: 22,471
Re: It's not a math discussion CW

Quote:
Originally Posted by ship---this View Post
CW, in all honesty, can you show me where MATH disproves my assertion?
See:

Quote:
Originally Posted by NxtWrldChamp View Post
And this is why I stopped posting. I can't explain it any better than all my posts. You simply don't seem to under the relationship between speed and line.

If you get more lines, your speed requirements on each line on average is reduced.

Think of it this way, a straight putt may have 5 simple lines with each line averaging 6 speeds they can go in on. So in a very simplified example you have 30 combos of speed and line that will find the bottom of the hole.

A breaking putt may open your world to 5 more lines for a total of 10, but instead of each line averaging 6 speeds that will go in the speed and line have to match more perfectly. Now there are on average 3 speeds for each of the 10 lines. Again you have a total of 30 combos of putts that will fall.


You see how this relationship works? Line is the most important thing on relatively straight putts as your speed can vary more. Each line of a breaking putt requires a more exact matching of speed and line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by A-Rod's Cousin View Post
This. I was going to post something like this earlier but figured it would be futile, or it would open up a bunch of new tangent arguments that keep him from answering the question.

More line+speed combos doesn't mean anything, because hitting one of the right combos is lower probability, so it's a wash. He doesn't seem to grasp that "more lines" is resolved in the physics world by "more fickle speed for each line".

Had Ship answered my direct question about the red marble in the box, he may have realized his error. But he didn't - because he doesn't respond to questions which incriminate his position.

In Box B, there are twice as many ways to choose the red marble, but there are also twice as many ways to choose the blue marble. It's a wash. But I bet he would swear that Box B is better because 2 marbles are better than 1.
I really think the above two posts illustrate the point perfectly, yet you still insist on writing essays avoiding the simple fact that speed and line are related if you want to make a breaking putt vs. a straight putt, especially one of this magnitude.

Regardless, what incensed me the most about this thread was that a) this huge derail having nothing to do with the original prop discussed in the OP took away from what I otherwise found to be interesting topic, and b) the usual suspects again decided to assert their knowledge of the matter based not on the offered empirical evidence, but their personal, biased beliefs developed over years of selective memory. Newsflash: your brain is going to remember the time when you hit the putt on an imperfect line and you luckily also hit the putt with the right speed, but when you miss it pays no mind and you treat it just like every other putt that goes begging. This is the way the brain works, it is the way biases are formed, and it leads to long discussions that tard up the forum when something otherwise interesting is going on.

With that being said, less talk about this straight v. breaking putt nonsense, and more about how those with years and years of golf experience beyond everyone's wildest dreams have failed miserably attempting to handicap the bet so far. As far as I can tell, there have been three reasonable attempts, and all three have succeeded. Being so thick that you think skill alone is going to carry you in a discussion is something I've tolerated a great deal in the past, and it detracts greatly from everyone's forum experience. It's gone on too long, and this thread hit the boiling point for me. Please don't take this the wrong way; threads like your Q-School attempts, US Open runs, and US Mid-Am experiences are invaluable pieces to the forum and speak to parts of the golfing world many of us can only dream about. You can speak to the pressure, thought processes, and everything else involved with playing in these events, but it does not give you full reign to enter a simple probability problem, sling poo everywhere, and derail the thread to the point of no return because your confirmation biases aren't correct.

What is more, I know this may be way beyond the minds of the plus handicaps in this thread, but here's a tip: step back, consider the evidence, and evaluate your position. Maybe, just maybe, your predispositions and beliefs are incorrect, and you can learn something about the game and improve yours along the way. In the end, you are the ones losing out because you aren't the ones progressive enough to update your thought process in a way that will be extremely beneficial. When it comes to hitting a high draw to the fifth green at Pinehurst, you are truly the experts. When it comes to handicapping a simple putting bet, you're like the guy who hits two in the woods and picks up before he ever reaches the green in disgust. Stop looking down your noses at other posters, and help make the forum a better place.
cwicemvp12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 04:40 AM   #114
ReidLockhart
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ReidLockhart's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: prolly ATF
Posts: 7,777
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Why is everyone ignoring the physics of breaking putts? There's a reason pros would rather have a breaking putt, whether they know it or not.

That quote from the putting guru...whatever. Ignore it. I think that's more about misreads and psychological certainty than the mechanics of making a straight putt vs making a breaking putt.


Okay, what is my thought process on this? When you hit a breaking putt, it gives you cushion on both speed and direction, even if ever so slightly. If you know one of the combinations of speed and direction that will produce a holed putt, when attempting to perform the stroke, misses of both speed and direction will sort of 'autocorrect'. Please hear me out:

Let's take a 15 foot putt that breaks left (but has no elevation change from starting location to the hole). Let's assume the player has a read and speed in mind and that this speed and direction match one of the combinations of "PHYSICS APPROVED" lines that make the putt.

Scenario 1: The player applies the intended speed but misses slightly to the right of his line. He has now hit a putt that will lose speed faster than had it started on his intended line. This is because it is going "more uphill" through the break resulting in more negative acceleration to the ball (it will lose speed faster). The resultant loss of speed actually increases the amount that the misguided putt breaks (more break than the intended "PHYSICS APPROVED" line and speed would have seen). This increases the margin of error for direction to the right.

Scenario 2: The player hits the putt slightly harder than his intended speed. Relative to a putt with the intended speed, the ball will see a greater net loss of speed because the ball is travelling higher(farther?) into the break. The apex of the putt will be higher than the intended apex, which means the ball will undergo negative acceleration for a longer duration, resulting in a greater net loss of speed than the intended putt would have otherwise undergone. This loss of speed in the later portion of the putt will in some non-zero amount make the putt break more near the end. This putt increases the margin of error for having greater than intended speed. I'm not saying that this putt will be traveling slower than the intended putt when both balls reach the hole. I'm just saying that there is a built-in autocorrect for it. I will grant that this window for error sounds like it would pale in comparison to the margin of error for speed on a flat putt. This is not a central part of the point I'm trying to convey about breaking putts. I'm just being thorough and it's there.

Scenario 3 and 4: These are the opposites of 1 and 2 as far as speed and direction, and although my intuition thinks that these two scenarios provide a lesser increase of margin of error than 1 and 2, they still add more to the window.


After typing this all out and re-reading it a few times, I think my hypothesis is that the directional margin of error is greater for putts that break than for flat putts. Speed is obviously a thing that needs to be correct in either case, but the break itself will apply, in some non-zero amount, an 'autocorrection' to the misguided putt. I believe this is why most pros prefer a breaking putt.


CW, I'm truly sorry to keep this debate rolling, but I hope my efforts here aren't taken as a slight against your request to let this derail die off. I'm just trying to shed some light into a conversation that seems to have very little thought FROM BOTH SIDES of the argument. It seems as though everyone is locked into "at X speed, there is one true line" and that if you hit it offline, those putts that you remember making, well, you must have hit them harder than you wanted to... I'm saying that for each speed, there are several lines the ball can take that produce holed putts, which gives a much wider margin for error in direction than a purely flat putt.


NXT, I would like to see your thoughts and commentary on my ideas and feel free to shut them down and prove them wrong, but I really think you're not as absolutely right as you think you are. Your post about the combinations that CW just quoted above, I think it's backwards... I think that even on a longer putt, the error in distance control (even for a poor putter) is not going to be as wide as the directional error (with respect to how each variable factors into the success of a putt). So instead of thinking about the lines and their correct speeds, think about the speed of the putt and what lines are available to the chosen speed. I think that lends itself to a more realistic interpretation of the problem and the contents within this post can be applied appropriately.

Last edited by ReidLockhart; 12-21-2013 at 05:06 AM. Reason: pardon anything that sounded redundant. it's 4am and I added in a few things after the initial post (redundancy ftw!)
ReidLockhart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 04:53 AM   #115
Brocktoon
Unreada Bill
 
Brocktoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,535
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Post #116:
Quote:
Fwiw I'm not all that interested in the straight vs break debate, though I'm pretty sure it's about to completely take over the thread.
For posterity.
Brocktoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 05:00 AM   #116
ReidLockhart
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ReidLockhart's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: prolly ATF
Posts: 7,777
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brocktoon View Post
Post #116:


For posterity.
I know CW's post is supposed to be the end of that, but I really hope my post shuts it down for good...or maybe it can be it's own ****ty thread. This forum is slow enough that it wouldn't really clog it up much.

I would love to add some meaningful anecdotes or research to the actual thread topic, but LOLOHIO
ReidLockhart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 05:00 AM   #117
tzwien
Pooh-Bah
 
tzwien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,267
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

In Scenario 1, your increased margin of error when you push it right is washed out by your decreased margin of error when you pull it.

In 2, your increased margin of error when you blast it is washed out by your decreased margin when you don't strike it hard enough.


So basically it's the box of marbles question.
tzwien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 05:06 AM   #118
Brocktoon
Unreada Bill
 
Brocktoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,535
Reid,

Don't worry. My post was much more about tooting my own horn than anything else.
Brocktoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 05:10 AM   #119
ReidLockhart
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ReidLockhart's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: prolly ATF
Posts: 7,777
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzwien View Post
In Scenario 1, your increased margin of error when you push it right is washed out by your decreased margin of error when you pull it.

In 2, your increased margin of error when you blast it is washed out by your decreased margin when you don't strike it hard enough.


So basically it's the box of marbles question.
Ratio-wise, I will agree that the margins of error are greater on the higher sides., but I believe that the overall window of makeability is greater than that of a flat putt. I'll draw up something and post it when I'm done (might take a while, I'm awful with paint and I don't think I have any illustration programs on my computer at the moment.)
ReidLockhart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 06:29 AM   #120
lucky_scrote
adept
 
lucky_scrote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cheltenham, UK
Posts: 707
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Numbers aside I think people don't realise how difficult it is to make a 100ft putt. 100ft is a long way and I don't imagine I've holed many, if any 100ft putts in the 12 years I've been playing golf. I play golf to a decent level and have been single figures for 10 years.

It obviously gets a bit easier when you have multiple chances because you will keep getting a better feel for it, but drop a ball down and measure out 33 yards to the hole and it's a really long way! I think if the putt is dead straight on fast greens then I would bet against someone who is a bogey golfer, however, I'd take a single figure handicapper who is at a reasonable level in the short game department.
lucky_scrote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 11:05 AM   #121
farewellyeship
stranger
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 8
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Yes, I created a dummy account to respond to this immediately and then bid farewell for good to 2+2. I will be changing my password to a random 20 digit number and not writing it down so where others often say they are done, well, I am truly done. I have never been a person to say that purely due to my +7 handicap that I am somehow better than others. I have *almost* always been a person here to help others get better at the game. Sure there are a few people here who are simply too toxic to get out of their own way, but that is not the average of the population.

However, when a post such as CWís here tells me to stop being to thick headed and simply accept an INCORRECT equation as correct simply because it does work in a classroom that is where I simply donít care to help anymore.

Obviously I know that some will celebrate this and am not simply saying this in hope of people begging me to keep posting. It will not be possible with the change I will be making to my password assuming my one day ban endsÖI guess creating a dummy account might further that ban.

I do think that my past writings will help others get better at this great game. I also think that this post will hopefully inspire you guys to stop thinking that old people (lol Iím 40) are antiquated due to not growing up in the internet age. When you get a decade or two down the road I hope you remember this day and laugh at how smart you thought you were when you realize how truly clueless you are. Thatís not a knock on intelligence, you are all incredibly smart, itís more a statement that experience and seeing how a multitude of ideas and preconceptions play out of decades, not days, is vital to understanding life and growing as a person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwicemvp12 View Post
See:





I really think the above two posts illustrate the point perfectly, yet you still insist on writing essays avoiding the simple fact that speed and line are related if you want to make a breaking putt vs. a straight putt, especially one of this magnitude.

Regardless, what incensed me the most about this thread was that a) this huge derail having nothing to do with the original prop discussed in the OP took away from what I otherwise found to be interesting topic, and b) the usual suspects again decided to assert their knowledge of the matter based not on the offered empirical evidence, but their personal, biased beliefs developed over years of selective memory. Newsflash: your brain is going to remember the time when you hit the putt on an imperfect line and you luckily also hit the putt with the right speed, but when you miss it pays no mind and you treat it just like every other putt that goes begging. This is the way the brain works, it is the way biases are formed, and it leads to long discussions that tard up the forum when something otherwise interesting is going on.

With that being said, less talk about this straight v. breaking putt nonsense, and more about how those with years and years of golf experience beyond everyone's wildest dreams have failed miserably attempting to handicap the bet so far. As far as I can tell, there have been three reasonable attempts, and all three have succeeded. Being so thick that you think skill alone is going to carry you in a discussion is something I've tolerated a great deal in the past, and it detracts greatly from everyone's forum experience. It's gone on too long, and this thread hit the boiling point for me. Please don't take this the wrong way; threads like your Q-School attempts, US Open runs, and US Mid-Am experiences are invaluable pieces to the forum and speak to parts of the golfing world many of us can only dream about. You can speak to the pressure, thought processes, and everything else involved with playing in these events, but it does not give you full reign to enter a simple probability problem, sling poo everywhere, and derail the thread to the point of no return because your confirmation biases aren't correct.

What is more, I know this may be way beyond the minds of the plus handicaps in this thread, but here's a tip: step back, consider the evidence, and evaluate your position. Maybe, just maybe, your predispositions and beliefs are incorrect, and you can learn something about the game and improve yours along the way. In the end, you are the ones losing out because you aren't the ones progressive enough to update your thought process in a way that will be extremely beneficial. When it comes to hitting a high draw to the fifth green at Pinehurst, you are truly the experts. When it comes to handicapping a simple putting bet, you're like the guy who hits two in the woods and picks up before he ever reaches the green in disgust. Stop looking down your noses at other posters, and help make the forum a better place.
So to respond to this more directly, rather than simply telling others to step back and accept that they are wrong maybe you should consider that real golf is not played on a video game. There is not a formula that will dictate a ball must be hit X way to go in the hole and any other way will simply leave the putter hoping due to their existing bias that it will go in due to some late break they have seen before.

Reidís post below is incredibly timely for me. Clearly as I was reading your post I began fuming due to your calling me out and then not giving me the chance to respond due to being banned. The reason I was fuming is that your quoting NXTís formula as gospel is simply laughable. As Reid illustrates below, not only does that formula not work in a lab setting, it REALLY doesnít work in real life. I am not nearly as good with physics or writing as Reid clearly is so it actually hadnít occurred to me how important one little detail about my putt was. However, as I was reading NXTís formula this morning while ****ting I realized that the fact my putt actually was a tad uphill at the end as well as breaking right was incredibly important in creating its benefit. See thereís where being objective and considering the others views is so helpful, his all knowing formula is what made the last detail of what I intuitively knew to be correct come to light. I considered his point, thought it through, and it shined the path to the detail that I think will finally get your ****ers to get it.

I had it all planned out in my head to explain my MORTAL COMBAT DEATH MOVE was that as I was putting the putt that there were numerous speeds each putt missed left had to go in. There was not simply one speed for each line I as I previously thought all along in my life. A putt hit on the exact same line with perfect speed and a putt hit fractionally harder both could go in. The harder hit putt traveled slightly higher (apex, great word Reid, Iíll use it soon) and then broke harder at the end. This could result in 2 makes from the same line with different speed. So, not only does the breaking putt have the ability to go in on a perfect line/perfect speed, it can go in on a different line with completely different speeds. Again, the straight putt can go in with a wider range of speed on the PERFECT line, I understand and have never refuted that. But what you people seem to ignorant to accept is that NXTís formula is flawed. We are not putting on a plane of glass in a controlled setting. My assertion has never been that all breaking putts are easier than straight putts. I have always maintained that if you want to win this bet you would pick up equity by picking the correct breaking putt. So you can only imagine my joy when I read the next post from Reid explaining this perfectly, and intelligently.

That is a fact, if you canít grasp that between my comments and Reidís below then you simply arenít as smart as you think, nor is NXT, nor is A Rod. Not being smart is fine (kidding, I know you guys are smart, this is for effect) but being thick headed is simply unacceptable.

I will agree that I railed on A Rod simply for the sake of trolling and Iím not sorry for that. He seems to be bright, but he will not get anywhere if he doesnít get the chip off his shoulder. He seems to have many skills to offer but if nobody will take him serious due to his attitude he will get nowhere. As for NXT he is clearly bright and often personable, but rather than always thinking he is right he should try listening and considering other options. Sometimes in life you will be wrong and the best way to learn is to learn from others who have experience. Should you take all things as presented? Certainly not, but when you are wrong the best way to stop being wrong is to be open to the possibilities being presented. To show your age and post gifís and sweet internet sayings is simply pathetic. Is it cool in a different context or debate maybe I guess, but in an intelligent conversation it is out of place and awkward. To top it off the Ē Seriously Ship, flat out embarrassingĒ is the best. I hope at this point you can accept how incredibly stupid you look. I get your continuing to think youíre right, but I hope in hindsight when you realize you are wrong you feel as foolish as you look. Learn, grow, prosper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReidLockhart View Post
Why is everyone ignoring the physics of breaking putts? There's a reason pros would rather have a breaking putt, whether they know it or not.

That quote from the putting guru...whatever. Ignore it. I think that's more about misreads and psychological certainty than the mechanics of making a straight putt vs making a breaking putt.


Okay, what is my thought process on this? When you hit a breaking putt, it gives you cushion on both speed and direction, even if ever so slightly. If you know one of the combinations of speed and direction that will produce a holed putt, when attempting to perform the stroke, misses of both speed and direction will sort of 'autocorrect'. Please hear me out:

Let's take a 15 foot putt that breaks left (but has no elevation change from starting location to the hole). Let's assume the player has a read and speed in mind and that this speed and direction match one of the combinations of "PHYSICS APPROVED" lines that make the putt.

Scenario 1: The player applies the intended speed but misses slightly to the right of his line. He has now hit a putt that will lose speed faster than had it started on his intended line. This is because it is going "more uphill" through the break resulting in more negative acceleration to the ball (it will lose speed faster). The resultant loss of speed actually increases the amount that the misguided putt breaks (more break than the intended "PHYSICS APPROVED" line and speed would have seen). This increases the margin of error for direction to the right.

Scenario 2: The player hits the putt slightly harder than his intended speed. Relative to a putt with the intended speed, the ball will see a greater net loss of speed because the ball is travelling higher(farther?) into the break. The apex of the putt will be higher than the intended apex, which means the ball will undergo negative acceleration for a longer duration, resulting in a greater net loss of speed than the intended putt would have otherwise undergone. This loss of speed in the later portion of the putt will in some non-zero amount make the putt break more near the end. This putt increases the margin of error for having greater than intended speed. I'm not saying that this putt will be traveling slower than the intended putt when both balls reach the hole. I'm just saying that there is a built-in autocorrect for it. I will grant that this window for error sounds like it would pale in comparison to the margin of error for speed on a flat putt. This is not a central part of the point I'm trying to convey about breaking putts. I'm just being thorough and it's there.

Scenario 3 and 4: These are the opposites of 1 and 2 as far as speed and direction, and although my intuition thinks that these two scenarios provide a lesser increase of margin of error than 1 and 2, they still add more to the window.


After typing this all out and re-reading it a few times, I think my hypothesis is that the directional margin of error is greater for putts that break than for flat putts. Speed is obviously a thing that needs to be correct in either case, but the break itself will apply, in some non-zero amount, an 'autocorrection' to the misguided putt. I believe this is why most pros prefer a breaking putt.


CW, I'm truly sorry to keep this debate rolling, but I hope my efforts here aren't taken as a slight against your request to let this derail die off. I'm just trying to shed some light into a conversation that seems to have very little thought FROM BOTH SIDES of the argument. It seems as though everyone is locked into "at X speed, there is one true line" and that if you hit it offline, those putts that you remember making, well, you must have hit them harder than you wanted to... I'm saying that for each speed, there are several lines the ball can take that produce holed putts, which gives a much wider margin for error in direction than a purely flat putt.


NXT, I would like to see your thoughts and commentary on my ideas and feel free to shut them down and prove them wrong, but I really think you're not as absolutely right as you think you are. Your post about the combinations that CW just quoted above, I think it's backwards... I think that even on a longer putt, the error in distance control (even for a poor putter) is not going to be as wide as the directional error (with respect to how each variable factors into the success of a putt). So instead of thinking about the lines and their correct speeds, think about the speed of the putt and what lines are available to the chosen speed. I think that lends itself to a more realistic interpretation of the problem and the contents within this post can be applied appropriately.
This is very well written and completely accurate in the real world. I think my noting the gradual uphill nature of the end of my putt exemplifies this further for people to get it.

Anyway, good luck all. I hope the best for each of you, including A Rod. No reason to go through life mad itís far too short and exciting.
farewellyeship is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 11:06 AM   #122
farewellyeship
stranger
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 8
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Quote:
Originally Posted by farewellyeship View Post
Yes, I created a dummy account to respond to this immediately and then bid farewell for good to 2+2. I will be changing my password to a random 20 digit number and not writing it down so where others often say they are done, well, I am truly done. I have never been a person to say that purely due to my +7 handicap that I am somehow better than others. I have *almost* always been a person here to help others get better at the game. Sure there are a few people here who are simply too toxic to get out of their own way, but that is not the average of the population.

However, when a post such as CWís here tells me to stop being to thick headed and simply accept an INCORRECT equation as correct simply because it does work in a classroom that is where I simply donít care to help anymore.

Obviously I know that some will celebrate this and am not simply saying this in hope of people begging me to keep posting. It will not be possible with the change I will be making to my password assuming my one day ban endsÖI guess creating a dummy account might further that ban.

I do think that my past writings will help others get better at this great game. I also think that this post will hopefully inspire you guys to stop thinking that old people (lol Iím 40) are antiquated due to not growing up in the internet age. When you get a decade or two down the road I hope you remember this day and laugh at how smart you thought you were when you realize how truly clueless you are. Thatís not a knock on intelligence, you are all incredibly smart, itís more a statement that experience and seeing how a multitude of ideas and preconceptions play out of decades, not days, is vital to understanding life and growing as a person.

So to respond to this more directly, rather than simply telling others to step back and accept that they are wrong maybe you should consider that real golf is not played on a video game. There is not a formula that will dictate a ball must be hit X way to go in the hole and any other way will simply leave the putter hoping due to their existing bias that it will go in due to some late break they have seen before.

Reidís post below is incredibly timely for me. Clearly as I was reading your post I began fuming due to your calling me out and then not giving me the chance to respond due to being banned. The reason I was fuming is that your quoting NXTís formula as gospel is simply laughable. As Reid illustrates below, not only does that formula not work in a lab setting, it REALLY doesnít work in real life. I am not nearly as good with physics or writing as Reid clearly is so it actually hadnít occurred to me how important one little detail about my putt was. However, as I was reading NXTís formula this morning while ****ting I realized that the fact my putt actually was a tad uphill at the end as well as breaking right was incredibly important in creating its benefit. See thereís where being objective and considering the others views is so helpful, his all knowing formula is what made the last detail of what I intuitively knew to be correct come to light. I considered his point, thought it through, and it shined the path to the detail that I think will finally get your ****ers to get it.

I had it all planned out in my head to explain my MORTAL COMBAT DEATH MOVE was that as I was putting the putt that there were numerous speeds each putt missed left had to go in. There was not simply one speed for each line I as I previously thought all along in my life. A putt hit on the exact same line with perfect speed and a putt hit fractionally harder both could go in. The harder hit putt traveled slightly higher (apex, great word Reid, Iíll use it soon) and then broke harder at the end. This could result in 2 makes from the same line with different speed. So, not only does the breaking putt have the ability to go in on a perfect line/perfect speed, it can go in on a different line with completely different speeds. Again, the straight putt can go in with a wider range of speed on the PERFECT line, I understand and have never refuted that. But what you people seem to ignorant to accept is that NXTís formula is flawed. We are not putting on a plane of glass in a controlled setting. My assertion has never been that all breaking putts are easier than straight putts. I have always maintained that if you want to win this bet you would pick up equity by picking the correct breaking putt. So you can only imagine my joy when I read the next post from Reid explaining this perfectly, and intelligently.

That is a fact, if you canít grasp that between my comments and Reidís below then you simply arenít as smart as you think, nor is NXT, nor is A Rod. Not being smart is fine (kidding, I know you guys are smart, this is for effect) but being thick headed is simply unacceptable.

I will agree that I railed on A Rod simply for the sake of trolling and Iím not sorry for that. He seems to be bright, but he will not get anywhere if he doesnít get the chip off his shoulder. He seems to have many skills to offer but if nobody will take him serious due to his attitude he will get nowhere. As for NXT he is clearly bright and often personable, but rather than always thinking he is right he should try listening and considering other options. Sometimes in life you will be wrong and the best way to learn is to learn from others who have experience. Should you take all things as presented? Certainly not, but when you are wrong the best way to stop being wrong is to be open to the possibilities being presented. To show your age and post gifís and sweet internet sayings is simply pathetic. Is it cool in a different context or debate maybe I guess, but in an intelligent conversation it is out of place and awkward. To top it off the Ē Seriously Ship, flat out embarrassingĒ is the best. I hope at this point you can accept how incredibly stupid you look. I get your continuing to think youíre right, but I hope in hindsight when you realize you are wrong you feel as foolish as you look. Learn, grow, prosper.

This is very well written and completely accurate in the real world. I think my noting the gradual uphill nature of the end of my putt exemplifies this further for people to get it.

Anyway, good luck all. I hope the best for each of you, including A Rod. No reason to go through life mad itís far too short and exciting.
I guess people quote things so they don't get deleted.

And now I'm done!

In all honesty guys, good luck. Check out some Jim Rohn and Tony Robbins stuff, might change your life!
farewellyeship is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 11:32 AM   #123
farewellyeship
stranger
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 8
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Damn it, one last thought. To take the straight uphill putt to a NXT style extreme of a 6” breaking 3 footer. Imagine a dead straight putt that is uphill at a 45 degree angle from 5 feet. If that putt is pushed just a nuthair it will not be a straight putt, it will actually be breaking right and therefore misses are AMPLIFIED. NXT’s gibberish reply to my original noting this phenomenon was not correct, I was simply too fired up on the main topic to remember to reply. Now, if you take that putt from the absurd NXT style 45 degree angle to a normal grade it still has the same effect on the putt. So, as noted before, a dead straight uphill putt is 100% harder to make due to this effect happening if the putt is either pushed or pulled. Is it a massive 40% harder putt, no, but I never said it was. Simply that you lose equity in the putt due to its being dead straight. And THAT is why Tiger Woods and other professionals do not like dead straight putts. That is a fact, one that since I have played with multiple major champions and PGA Tour winners I learned at an early age when I thought I knew everything and simply assumed that a straight putt was easiest.

Please use math to refute this.
farewellyeship is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 11:32 AM   #124
farewellyeship
stranger
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 8
Re: Putting prop bet: 100 tries @100ft for $100

Quote:
Originally Posted by farewellyeship View Post
Damn it, one last thought. To take the straight uphill putt to a NXT style extreme of a 6Ē breaking 3 footer. Imagine a dead straight putt that is uphill at a 45 degree angle from 5 feet. If that putt is pushed just a nuthair it will not be a straight putt, it will actually be breaking right and therefore misses are AMPLIFIED. NXTís gibberish reply to my original noting this phenomenon was not correct, I was simply too fired up on the main topic to remember to reply. Now, if you take that putt from the absurd NXT style 45 degree angle to a normal grade it still has the same effect on the putt. So, as noted before, a dead straight uphill putt is 100% harder to hit make due to this effect happening if the putt is either pushed or pulled. Is it a massive 40% harder putt, no, but I never said it was. Simply that you lose equity in the putt due to its being dead straight. And THAT is why Tiger Woods and other professionals so not like dead straight putts. That is a fact, one that since I have played with multiple major champions and PGA Tour winners I learned at an early age when I thought I knew everything and simply assumed that a straight putt was easiest.

Please use math to refute this.
Quoted, ldo.
farewellyeship is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 11:38 AM   #125
Brocktoon
Unreada Bill
 
Brocktoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,535
Ship,

I attempted to send you a PM yesterday but you can't receive while banned. I will resend it tonight. This is just in case you'd like to read it before hitting the kill switch on your acct.

I know it won't change your decision, but I hope you don't leave the forum. I think everyone appreciates you being here and enjoys reading your posts. This thread just got a little out of control, it happens.
Brocktoon is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online