All I can say is wow. Quite the rare feat.

4th and 4 from the goal line, down 9, 2 minutes left. Maths says it's better to go for it, but they'll always kick the field goal. If they go for the TD and fail, game is over. If they go for the field goal, hope is still alive for longer, even if winning becomes less likely.

For a putt, the line and speed that it leaves the putter face determine whether it'll go in or not. Math wise whether the putt will go in is known in the instant of contact. But from a players point of view, for a breaking putt, they don't know until near the end whether it's going in or not. A foot from the hole, you can still be wondering if it'll die into the hope or roll past. It feels like a better putt because it still has a chance (from the players point of view) so far into the putt even if it misses by 4 inches. A straight putt that misses by four inches--it could be obvious that's it's going to miss a foot into the putt, thus it feels like a terrible putt that never had a chance. Math-wise versus feel-wise are very different.

C'mon man, we both know that a good golfer can putt from the opposite side with little issue. I know I can putt better left handed than the typical 2 handicapper because I've done it.

False.


BO

Whoa, ship, c'mon man. This is not what I said at all and I'm extremely surprised and disappointed that you would twist my words so shamelessly in an attempt to further your position in a meaningless debate on the internet.

I never said that you were correct or that one is necessarily easier than the other. What I said, and what anyone with a modicum of objectivity would have easily understood me to have said, was that there are SOME specific breaking putts that CAN BE easier to make, then I used the extreme hypothetical of a funnel shaped green. HOWEVER, there are also many breaking putts that are far more difficult to make than flat ones (did you not read this part of my post), in fact there are undoubtedly putts involving ridges and pin positions that make them virtually impossible to hit.

As to which is easier, I have deliberately avoided giving an answer on that one because I think its largely irrelevant to the actual bet we are supposed to be discussing and because frankly I don't care. To use my post as a declaration of your correctness is just so low and disingenuous.

I'm literally rolling my eyes in real life. Please stop saying things like this, it's very disconcerting. This is why people on the internet can never have reasonable discussions and debates, because someone on the other side is always looking to twist any little concession you might make in the name of fairness objectivity and use it against you like a weapon to advance their position, like it's some game with a prize for "winning" and that is the goal at all costs.

I knew this thread would turn into break v straight, and I never wanted any part of it. I was actually enjoying the debate in here and thought maybe we could all learn something, but I'm now left with a bad taste in my mouth thanks mostly to people inserting words I never said into it.

Beg the question much?

Also lol @ "false". Love how you ignore several questions I've asked you which are apropos to the debate, yet cling to an obvious throwaway joke comment I make about Swede golfers and retort with a very authoritative, curt "false"

Nobody takes you seriously.

And the hits just keep on coming. What a ridiculous thing to say.

BO knows putting.

You don’t seem to grasp that, again, on a perfect putt both have roughly the same odds of going in. But if the breaking putt is hit off line there is still some chance it will go in. The straight putt does not have that.

At this point I can only assume I am being trolled as this is incredible how ignorant you sound by not grasping that.

That is exactly what I took you to mean, and you just stated it again. In this experiment one would be better served by choosing a putt with a correct amount of break. I don’t need a funnel hole for this to work, simply a reasonable break near the hole. I have never taken the position that all breaking putts are easier, and even offered a scenario for #9 at Augusta where a straight putt twice the length of a breaking putt would be easier.

I’m not twisting your words at all, I did not have the superintendent go out and cut some trick hole. I took the hole that was on the green and would be representative of a real world golf hole and have shown, which you agree, that it would be easier to make than a dead straight putt. What I find astonishing (not really I guess, I mean ARod is a ****ing idiot) is that NXT and others cling to the idea that my putt as described does not have advantages. I do believe I am having a reasonable debate and even agreeing with certain aspects of their position. They however seem incapable of acknowledging the basics of the discussion. Your concession is not any “little concession”, you stated that my putt is indeed easier than a straight putt. That comment seems relevant to my position and thus I used it. Ya know, cuz you agreed with me.

As for the Nobel in physics nonsense. It makes people feel smart and cool to make quips like “Math. Learn it” or “Physics says you’re wrong” because the obvious implication is that they have mastered physics and thus are your intellectual superior. When instead it simply makes you look immature and somewhat of a simpleton. Almost as lame as comments along the lines of “YOU JUST WON THE INTERWEBS!” I’m so original and funny!

If this breaking putt goes in, then it was, by definition, hit "on [one of several] line". In other words, it was not hit "off line" as you suggest. It was simply hit on a line you weren't aiming for, and if you happen to hit it at a speed you also weren't aiming for, and that speed aligns with that line to form one of the several combinations that will yield the ball falling in the hole, then that's great for you.

Doesn't prove you right. If you hit the breaker offline, you also have to **** up your speed to get it to go in. You have to err in both ways. There are more combos that go in but matching A SPECIFIC combo is much harder, so it evens the **** out.

It's like you think no matter what line you hit the breaker on, you will just so happen to hit the correct speed to match that line. Don't you realize you are hitting a speed for a line you are aiming for? So if you mess up and hit it off this line, your speed is probably wrong. You literally have to get LUCKY to **** up both the line and the speed to have it go in on a line you were never aiming for. You don't know in advance which line your error will end up on. Please understand this.

Seriously Ship, flat out embarrassing

We're not even arguing that more lines find their way into the breaking putt. We realize that is true. What we're saying is that this benefit is negated by the fact that getting the speed right FOR A SPECIFIC LINE is commensurately more difficult. For the millionth time... it's a wash. The benefit is negated by a detriment that Ship and BO cannot seem to understand or grasp.

Just noticed this. It takes some incredible balls to post such a comment after everything you've posted in this thread. Make fun of my 26 handicap all you want but LOL if you think you are smarter than me.

In before BO challenges me to an IQ test.

I know, let's have a spelling contest!

docBO

But if the breaking putt is hit with the wrong speed there is no chance it goes in. That's the advantage the straight putt has. A lot of speeds match a single line.

I don't think I am smarter than you, but I certainly have a better grasp of this particular concept than you.

As for intelligence though, I certainly find myself intelligent enough to be successful in the real world. Furthermore, since actually being able to apply intellect via ability to reason out problems I would venture a guess that even in light of your clearly superior intellect I am more successful than you. The people in life that understand how to make and entire scope of problems work together is who employs a person like you who is merely good at some menial task.

Ok ok ok ok, even I'm offended by myself on that one. LOL!

I don't know how successful you are being a door-to-door electricity salesman and I don't care. I didn't call you unsuccessful. You called me a ****ing idiot though and I take offense to that.

But this makes me wonder...how much money did you spend chasing those $11k earnings on the Hooters tour in 1998? Are you even in the black lifetime at golf? I'm probably down $1-$2K in my life in greens fees. Not too successful.

Oh hell no, I'm in the red for sure in golf. Shoot, I spent probably $250k in 2008-2011 having some fun playing golf. But it's all relative, I don't consider that anything more than fun money.

Having a passion and having some fun while chasing a dream and living life is worth way more than what $250k can buy you. You'll figure that out too one day.

Then why don't we get back to the discussion at hand?

Which marble box do you choose?

Uh oh, it's gonna get real....

Is this a racist comment?


BO

Also, my point was that your high intelligence you cling to so hopefully is not what makes something of you in this world. You become something by being a fully rounded person who can take an idea and deliver a product. Typically raw intelligence relegates you to being and engineer and stuck making a couple hundred grand a year.

And yes, I'm literally crying I'm laughing so hard right now while typing this.

Happy holidays all, best to you!

All right, I'm going to lock this tire fire until I can figure out what to rightly do about it. I'm legitimately at a loss for words to describe what went on in here.

Ship & BO, if this is how you're going to handle math discussions then please don't comment on them.

To quote CW: All right, I'm going to lock this tire fire until I can figure out what to rightly do about it. I'm legitimately at a loss for words to describe what went on in here.

Ship & BO, if this is how you're going to handle math discussions then please don't comment on them.




CW, in all honesty, can you show me where MATH disproves my assertion?

This is not a math question, it is physics. And quite irrefutable physics at that. The one poster who actually took the time to think eventually agreed that the specific putt as described is in fact easier than a dead straight putt from 100 feet.

As for A-Rod's absurdly juvenile question about marbles I'll let him answer it "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."

A-Rod, I'm sorry for not answering that question, but I thought it would be along the lines of answering what is 2 + 2 (aside from an internet forum full of donkey's of course). It's like he just got home from 8th grade where the teacher put that problem on the board and he got it wrong. However, once the teacher showed the work he thought holy **** that's incredible! I'm going to use this information ASAP and show some people how smart I am, they will never know what hit them!!!!

Oh well, I was bored so I thought I would log in and see what you guys have been up to. I saw what I thought was an interesting bet so I thought I would chime in with what I *think* would happen in the bet. Clearly not realizing that I would be amazed at how clueless, void of logic, and apparently illiterate some forum members are.

Best wishes all, happy holidays!

For what it's worth, I found the whole discussion very entertaining.

I think the only way to resolve it would be to set up a trial - get a few golfers to hit a series of dead straight putts vs. putts with a normal break from the the same distance and see which are made with a higher frequency.

I had to read the Malmuth AQ vs JJ thread people were talking about, and I have to say that that thread wasn't nearly as bad, embarrassing, or as entertaining as what this 100 foot putt thread spawned into.

Depends on what that normal break is. If its right lip for a righty or left lip for a lefty, I would bet on the "normal break" side and print money