Dear Hans,
Thanks for the info on the
Science and Motion folks in Munich! I hope to learn a lot more about their approach, theory, and technology.
BIGGEST PROBLEM IN PUTTING
I personally believe that the biggest problem in putting is putting the ball straight. A "straight putt" is one that sends the ball rolling straight the same way the putter face is aimed at address. Poor putter paths and poor putter face squaring during the stroke make this a HUGE problem, even for pros. If the golfer does not have a reliable "straight putt" stroke, he'll have a very hard time disentangling poor aim from poor stroke from poor rerads from poor distance control.
Distance control ranks right at the top with a straight stroke, though. When the golfer has good distance control AND a straight stroke, putting starts to get a lot clearer. Every miss tells an accurate tale in terms of feedback that narrows the focus either to the read and target selection or to the aiming of the putter face. Once the aiming of the putter face becomes an accurate skill, putting boils down to effective putt reading and target selection.
In a sense, I think the disentangling of the different main elements of putting is the real underlying problem: picking a target, aiming at the target, putting straight, with good touch. When these performance skills are all conflated, the feedback is very difficult to use in a beneficial way. The meaning and clarity and efficacy of the feedback only improves when the skills are isolated, either by separately practicing the fundamental skills or by reaching a level of competence with the skills that makes poor performance on one aspect readily apparent.
HIGH-TECH PUTTING MONITORS
With respect to the Science and Movement putting monitor, the system works with a soundwave emitter on the putter shaft aimed at a triangle of receivers. When properly calibrated and set up, the soundwave technology appears capable of measuring putter motion to within 1/10th of a millimeter in a number of parameters.
This sort of measurement is not really new or unique. What is important is whether the USE of the device as a training and diagnostic tool is effective. Here's where the theory of movement and the neuroscience debate comes in.
Apparently, the SAM system is designed by neuroscientist Dr Christian Marquardt in associaition with the Institute of medical Psychology at Munich. The underlying theory of the SAM training improving the putting stroke is that the accurate, immediate feedback helps the golfer learn incrementally more correct movement patterns as a motor control matter and also develop movement strategies as a cognitive matter. In a sense, it's a little more than the standard feedback-plus-repetitions = automatic skill learning approach of the motor skills folk in the 1970s (e.g., Dave Pelz).
The difficulty I have with this is that the missing ingredient is how the golfer processes the feedback. If the golfer simply looks at the technical readout of a stroke and then tries to make the stroke look better in the feedback, what exactly is the golfer trying the second time and why and what does the golfer know or think about what he is trying? This all appears ad hoc and trial-and-error to me, so I don't see any basic instruction that is imparted to help the golfer improve the feedback. The bottom-line question ends up being: Which is more efficacious -- a golfer simply using trial-and-error to get the feedback looking good and then trying to play with whatever sticks in his motor memory, or a golfer applying a fundamental approach to how to move and seeing whether he can make that approach look good in the feedback and then using this approach to putting in his game?
I am distrustful of the former approach, and would have been distrustful of the "high priests" in ancient civilizations as well -- they are all sort of like the Wizard of Oz yanking levers and turning dials behind a curtain. I think it is best to know what you are doing and why, if you can.
That said, to address your precise question of whether this sort of technology helps only pros because so specific: I think it helps pros and amateurs in the same way, but it helps pros a little quicker because they already start from a good base of what they are trying to do and sometimes even have an idea of why, but amateurs do not have either a good movement base or much knowledge about movement technique. But I stick with my main observation -- feedback plus repetitions is insufficient for maximum improvement of putting skill.
Besides, the SAM only works on the stroke mechanics, and not touch and tempo, distance control, aiming, or target selection and putt reading. As someone wise once said, don't worry too much about the quality of your fishing rod if you don't know much about catching fish.
Cheers!
Geoff Mangum
Putting Theorist and Instructor
Geoff Mangum's PuttingZone
Golf's most advanced and comprehensive putting instruction.
Over 770,000 visits and growing strong ...
518 Woodlawn Ave
Greensboro NC 27401
336.230.0612 home
