So pros scores would not improve if they, on every putt, were allowed a non-counting test putt before making the actual putt?

Lol at people thinking line isn't a crapshoot for the pros at 100ft. It's just a pray and spray regardless of talent level. The only thing you can really control is your speed, which will improve drastically when you're hitting a bunch of balls in a row.

A consistent face angle will help, but even with your instant feedback you won't know if it was your face angle that was off or if the imperfect surface of the green bumped it off line. Or even the wind. So you're still guessing. Consistent speed will be a million times more important.


And 100ft is 33 yards. There's going to be at least a few of those on normal courses. Some courses the majority will have 33 yard deep or wide greens. It's not some rare thing. Finding a really flat one would be hard, though.

YB had a fancy (and clearly more intelligent) way of saying the same thing I did.

I truly believe that there is no chance of making over 1%. I'm going to see if I can try this today.

Someone posted earlier that pros make 1% according to shotlink, 1 shot presumably on fast undulating greens.

Please do. I'm brimming with anticipation.

You do realize that you don't have to make over 1% of 100 footers for the putter to be +EV in this bet right? Or have people still not figured that out?

If you think the actual odds are 1 out of 150(I think people are greatly underestimating how helpful it is to hit the same shot over and over and over again), then congrats you are eeeeeeeking out some very minimal EV betting against the putter. And by minimal I mean that for every $100 you bet, you would make $2.

my prediction: someone will try this out and the guy will make it on the 4th try, disappointing both sides of the bet

Yeah my home course has a practice green that is probably 45 by 15 yards with a bunch of holes. You can find a long putt with 10+ ft of break but its not multitiered. This is pretty common at private courses. I assumed this would be done somewhere like that, not on a hole on the course

Yes I realize that. 2 in 300 makes you a winner, LDO. The counter to your idea is the other side is raking EV I guess. It's not a debate of how much edge either side has, it is simply what side has the edge.

I picked a 100 footer that turned a bit at the end on the putting green. I had 10 balls and could average about 6 per try before I felt the hole might be blocked and retrieved them. I made 2 of 54 and they were numbers 46 and 50. I was actually surprised how decent my speed was within about a 5 foot circle of the hole overall. Some sat on the lip and others were nowhere close. I think if I had a person near the hole removing the blockers and throwing the balls back to me I would probably make about 4-6%. Maybe a tad higher, but not less than 4% overall.

Sooooo.....I really don't know what to think of a bogey golfers chances. I agree it isn't massive EV (I never did though) but I do think they would be -EV in this bet.

As for straight vs breaking, if they took a straight putt I would put them MASSIVELY -EV. You need a breaker in order to have multiple ways of the ball going in. Needing the putter to be perfectly square on the one that happens to come off with the right speed simply isn't going to happen outside of pure luck. That is why in the "I always chip a few in" scenarios mentioned as reasoning work.

Went through the thread, and I don't think it was mentioned what odds the op is getting. He wrote it was for $100, but not how much he loses if he fails to make it in 100 tries. Or is it a freeroll? Or $1 to win $100?

I'll give you 50 putts if you want some action, I live in scottsdale

So, what you're saying is that you're well over 99% to do it, but you think a bogey golfer is still a dog. You have one hell of a low opinion of the average player.

I understand that you're incredibly good at golf, and bogey golfers are bad, but I think you're taking it way too far to come to the conclusion that you have here.

Btw, thanks for doing this and providing the thread it's first real world data points. I look forward to more to come.

I think you would be hard pressed to find a putt that you are 4-6 times better than a bogey golfer at. Putting is just not that difficult.

For example, Tour pros make roughly 50% of 8 footers, I'd venture that bogey golfers can hack 8-12% of those. From 25 feet tour pros make 10%. Again I'll take the bogey golfer can manage better than 1.5-2% of those.

Also your small sample is signaling to how much better you are when hitting the same shot over and over again. According to shot link the PGA Tour player makes 1% of his 100 footers. You make 4-6%? And if I recall putting is not the strength of your game? Again I think people are massively over looking how much this benefits someone.

As for EV, this bet is massively +EV if the real odds are close to 100 to 1. For every $100 they bet they make $36.

Regarding straight vs breaking putts, every putt is more or less "Straight". There is a perfect line + speed for every putt and you can only stray so far from each for a putt to go in.

My favorite ship--this quote over the years is "scratch golfers suck". Extrapolate what you will from this.

BO

Another thing related to hitting the same putt multiple times in a row is how big of a role misreads play in make %'s.

I'm sure just about everyone here makes that "2nd chance putt" way more frequently then they "theoretically" should. Because you learned the break and pace from your first putt. A lot of people SUCK at reading greens and hitting putts the correct speed. However once our bodies feel the speed and see the line we become much better at gauging them, shockingly its not just + handicap golfers that benefit from this phenomenon.


And I am the complete opposite of Ship. Give me the dead straight putt. Ship can spend the first 10-20 putts trying to match the line and speed of a 100 footer, I'll go into the challenge knowing the line thus completely eliminating one of the variables.

No odds, just a straight $100 bet. Fwiw, we make $100 bets all the time so the money wouldn't affect me.

I don't know if there is any way to truly have a perfectly straight 100ft putt. Once the putt slows down, even the grain will influence it one way or another.

Of course not, the point is more I would rather have a putt where I can very quickly determine the line.

Yeah I would like a straight putt but I would still rather putt even if there was a significant break unless the hole was right below a ridge or something

BO,

Since you're always so quick to appeal to your own authority, I feel the need to point this out. Here are some quotes in this thread from two members of your oft referenced plus handicap club:
Duly noted.

This is then posted after ship actually goes out and hits putts on a real green:
Using 5%, ship is effectively stating that his success rate for this challenge is an Ivory-like 99.4%.

This means that one, and only one, of the following two things is true:
a) ship-this, who acknowledges that ball striking is the strength of his game, is a VASTLY better putter than pro golfer and short game guru BO, or;
b) one of you has their numbers WAY wrong (I'm looking at you BO).

On this particular exercise at least, probably not as much as you think.

Brocktoon continues to win this thread.

Both ship and myself agreed on the following from the outset,

-we were both +EV
-OP was -EV
-you don't want a straight putt

Now if ship or stads or trout etc. disagreed with the above I'd reconsider my position, but since that's not the case why in the world would I even give it a second thought?

The last point is telling seeing as everybody else is hollering for a perfectly straight putt to "eliminate that variable". This is the difference between knowledge (which some here are trying to apply/misapply) and wisdom (which golfers of a certain caliber have).

Ship has now attempted this, I have not. Before he attempted we both had very similar outlooks about our own chances, now he feels more confident about his own game. His game, not some hacker. The fact he made 2 of 54 is a testament to his ability, not that he misjudged a hack's chances at this.

Most here underestimate the putting ability of a player of his caliber. Hell, the ball sounds different coming off his putterface than an amateur just like a driver does. Just because he has +EV in this means nothing as far as a hacker is concerned.

So seeing as how most ITT don't even understand what kind of conditions are ideal for this prop, how are they ever going to understand the odds of success on a real green with actual humans putting? Answer, they aren't. Hell, I would even bet that some here have never attempted a 100ft putt.

BO

fyp

BO

BO,

You're ignoring my entire point, and in this case it is an inarguable one.

Truths:

-You said you were 50-75% to succeed.
-Ship-this says he is 99.4% to succeed.

Thus, either ship-this can putt better than you could ever dream on your best day, or one of you plus handicappers is not as sage as you (ntnBO) like to boast about to us pleebs.

Whether or not a bogey golfer is +EV, whether you or ship is +EV, or whether or not a straight putt is preferable, is not germane to this particular aspect of the discussion. You already knew that though, which is why you decided to focus on those things and attempt to obfuscate the facts I mentioned above.

BO vs Math is my favorite time in the golf forum. Never disappoints.

While this is true, the phenomenon would diminish the longer the putt gets imo.

To hit a putt 100 feet, on average speed greens (say 7.5-8 on a stimp) requires a massive physical effort.

I'm sure you've seen enough SAM data to understand the inconsistencies in bogey golfers strokes on short putts. Extrapolate that out to a super long stroke and they have little to no control of anything. There is no gaining a feel for anything when it's requiring a near max physical effort. That's exacerbated even more by bad putters instinct to hit putts and not stroke them.