Dear Neville,
As always, yours is an excellent question! The word "target" does have a number of meanings, so we need to be more precise in the definitions meant.
For the startline of the putt, the "target" is a point straight out of the face of the putter thru the center of the ball on the ground some distance away so that the center of the ball and this point on the ground define the "line" the putt starts on. This point may be a spot a few inches out or a spot near or at the apex of the break (as appropriate) or a spot even with the hole or some other spot.
For the whole putt, the "target" of course is the hole itself, and more specifically the point on the rim where the ball ought to cross over into the hole.
There may be other "targets" also such as interim aiming spots or other visual anchors. And, the whole path of the putt needs to be "targeted" in the sense of "perceived," and certain key sections need to be separately "targeted" (e.g., the final three feet where most of the break occurs, the section on either side of the apex of the break, the more-or-less straight section from ball into the breaking area, and other aspects of the putt).
I separate distance from line in the targeting process. On a breaking putt, one can get a fairly useful and accurate sense of the distance by "targeting" the distance as if the putt were in fact straight from ball to hole along the "baseline." Then when you "read the break backwards out of the hole like a ball rolling in reverse," your eyes are targeting the whole path from entry point into the cup back thru the apex (where the curve parallels the baseline) and then following the curve from apex towards the ball as the curve straightens out to the ball. Fro the point where the path appears to line up straight back at the ball, one should feel square in the head and eyes and be able to feel a Ferris-wheel or Tilt-a-whirl gaze moving straight along the ground from there to the ball, delivering the line of the gaze over the ground perpendicularly or squarely thru the center of the ball into the putterface.
In effect, you are targeting distance in one way to get a close, accurate sense of distance, and then you are targeting the putt for curving path and startline. When I am targeting the path, I am in a setup that I believe starts the ball off correctly for the ball speed and break, start my eyes away thru the center of the ball on the line implied by my putterface orientation, follow this line until my gaze reaches the break area, sort of cheat my way thru this area "generally speaking" as my gaze curls along the imagined path to the lip, and then I get more focused on the exact curvature coming backwards from the lip back thru the break area. I find that a very vivid sense of the last two or three feet of the putt plus a firm commitment to squaring to the startline and sending the ball off along this startline is nore important than targeting the precise "apex" or even the exact shape of the curve thru the apex area. The startline and the final segment of the putt are the most treasured and vivid perceptions.
The brain when analyzing spatial relations works in a minimalist, "stick-figure and dots" sort of way. The essential components of the putt are more important than a hyper-realistic full portrayal of all details. To me, the energy pattern of the ball thru the break area is speed control plus starting line plus vivid sensing of the final segment of the putt into the hole. If I have a strong sense of the last piece of the path, a strong sense of setting up square for the start of the putt, and an accurate sense of touch or speed control, these are the essential components I need, and other visual anchors or details or "targets" subserve this general "gist" of the putt. That way, it is always about integrating speed with the imagined breaking curvature.
The apex itself is somewhat deceptive, because so many golfers have been trained to use the apex as a target for the startline. The actual role of the apex is that the target for the startline is never lower than the apex, and is quite frequently higher. That is because the apex is, strictly speaking, that point along the breaking curve where the ball is changing direction from uphill to downhill, and right at the apex, the tangent of the curve parallels the baseline, a direct line from ball to hole. Since an apex higher up the hill than the baseline cannot be reached without starting the ball uphill initially, and since the tangent of this startline cannot possibly parallel the baseline, then the startline cannot use the apex as a target. It only seems that way because the real aim spot is often near the apex on putts without much break or on long putts with modest break. In reality, the startline's aim point has to be along the tangent to the putt path right at the ball. Because there is not much curvature here, there is a tendency to use the apex, but this is too low an aim point. The aim point or target for the starline, then, has to be some point so that sending the ball off higher than the apex in a straight line ends up having the ball drop off this line with break and the ball turning downhill right at the apex. I think of this startline as a 'drop off" line, because the actual curvature of the putt curls off this line.
Approaching targeting this way, the "zero break line" and "spider" method for identifying a point along the fall-line thru the cup gives an aim spot or target for the startline. For example, if a ten-foot slightly uphill putt breaks right to left with an aim spot on the fall line three inches above the top lip of the cup, I have two things to look at with my eyes -- the "line" from ball to aim spot, and the curve of the breaking putt seen backwards out of the hole curving parallel to the baseline at the apex and then turning and merging with the starline as the imagined backwards-rolling ball travels the curve / path towards the real ball. Between these two, the imagined backwards putt is more accurate and precise, and the startline and aim spot is really only a good ball park approximation. If the imagining of the putt backwards shows me that the startline seems a little high or a little low, I will probably accept this and adjust. Ultimately, all of this is dependent upon an accurate sense of your speed control. Seeing the putt backwards out of the hole coordinates better with speed control than the aim spot and the startline, so I rely more on that.
For distance, I feel pretty safe using the baseline for a neck turn to register the distance, and I also feel safe using an aim spot on the fall line thru the cup for a straight neck turn from ball to aim spot. I also do not usually feel that later allowing my eyes to travel along the full, slightly longer curve of the real path endangers my sense of touch. When the break is very pronounced, however, so there is a big difference in distance along the baseline compared to along the real curve, then I think either in terms of delivering the ball to an aim spot on the fall line (and not further) or I look to a sweep of the eyes all along the real curve to generate a sense of distance touch.
Oddly, I find that between moving the gaze along the ground from ball to target versus moving the eyes from target back to ball, the move back to the ball is the more important and salient of the two moves for accuracy. The move away from the ball is mostly a matter of having the "horizon" line across the two eyes connecting the two pupils match the startline of the putt implied by the putter face's square positioning thru the ball's center. I check to make sure the eye line matches the startline before I start the head turn away. Then I keep a sense of whether the head turn is generating a straight look along the ground. I then wait to see if the head turn in fact delivers the look of my dominant eye's gaze accurately to the startline's target or aim spot. If it does, and the head turn felt regular, then I feel squarely setup and accurately aimed at the aim spot that defines the startline. From here, if the aim spot is (say) four inches up the fall line, my eyes would skip these four inches to the point on the lip where I have previously seen the putt running back out of the hole. From this initial point, I trace the curve of the putt backwards over this final crucial segment into the apex area, sense the curve turning to parallel the baseline, then sense the curve turning back to coincide with the starline. from this point back to the ball, I want to feel nice and square to the starline and look the line of the putt with my fixed gaze and head turn straight and square into the putter face, passing thru the center of the ball. This final look has to draw a line on the ground that meets the front dimple of the ball that is directly opposite the back dimple I intend to contact with the stroke.
Basically, on straight putts, the startline and the actual path are identical, so sensing the startline, the path, and the distance are all accomplished with the same look and head turn. In the case of a breaking putt, sensing the final segment of the path comes first, perhaps combined with an aim spot on the fall line above the lip. Then there are slightly different processes for sensing the startline, the path, and the distance. Setting up square to a startline and using the dead-eye gaze to look away from the ball lets you know in physical terms when your gaze needs to curve off line thru the apex area, and the final segment shows you what exactly to look at over the final two or so feet to the point on the lip where the ball will enter the cup. Keeping the feet and hips square while looking at this final-segment curvature, and then looking along this curvature backwards from the hole, you again sense in physical terms when the putt path straightens out and heads back to the front dimple of the ball. This allows you to putt straight out of your setup every time, regardless of the break.
Because the distance sense for touch comes from many processes, only the last of which is keyed to the head turn and gazing along the path, the sense of touch is more durable and certain than many golf teachers suggest. There is a notion frequently used by many golf teachers that the sense of distance is fragile, elusive, and decays rapidly if not "refreshed." In my experience, this is hokum. Every golfer gets massive doses of distance information repeatedly while on the green, and this sense is often so deep and durable that the golfer could get the distance right even if he took a half hour break before putting and then putted blindfolded. The brain actually learns the whole green in a fairly short while, and can map the various distances nicely. For tournament golfers on an unfamiliar course, there are some neat tricks to facilitate this learning process that I will be describing based on the way the brain learns an area. Lee Trevino made the brilliant observation that every course a golfer plays needs to feel like his home course. I am sure you are throroughly familiar with the size, shape, and contours of your practice green, so I would invite you to verify what I am saying by just throwing as ball down some good distance away from a hole, closing your eyes (thus bringing up a sense of where everything is from memory), turning the head toward the hole as if your eyes could see it, turning back to the ball, and putting with eyes closed. You should see the ball go the correct distance, even if the line is slightly off. So the fragility and supposed short shelf-life of a sense of touch for putts on familiar greens is something of a false bugaboo. Golfers aren't usually short or long because of a poor perception of distance so much as from poor tempo control or unsteady muscle activation from casual or indifferent technique, worry, doubt, or anxiety.
All of this is to say that one can fairly safely separate distance targeting from line targeting from path targeting and yet the speed and line can be nicely integrated in a putt that follows the intended path. mentally, indeed, one can engage in these targeting processes in a physical routine and then just have an empty brain without any verbal thoughts or worries at all -- just putt. The planning of the putt shows itself in the putter face orientation, the square setup, the plan to stroke the ball straight away out of the setup with good touch, and a steady and reliable sense of tempo. Mentally, if the planning and face aiming and setup to the ball have all gone well, and the many doses of distance are still potent in you, there is nothing you CAN worry about other than getting out of your tempo and not making a straight stroke. At this point, all you can do is putt.
I'm sure this seems unduly complex and perhaps even unclear, but it is probably the most important part of putting. I really appreciate your prompting me to make this run at getting this stuff across. I'm sure I'll have to return to this problem a lot.
--
Cheers!
Geoff Mangum
Putting Theorist and Instructor
The PuttingZone.com
http://puttingzone.com
The Future of Putting Now -
Golf's most advanced and comprehensive putting instruction.
Over 40,000 page visits each month and growing strong...
518 Woodlawn Ave
Greensboro NC USA 27401
336.230.0612 home
336.402.1602 cell
geoff@puttingzone.com
Join the PZ for the free Newsletter, Tips, and Updates: just send me an email with "yes" or "ok" or "subscribe" or "sure" etc. in the subject or body and I'll add you. Or, go here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PuttingZone/join