"Count Gravity -- If your stroke tempo uses gravity to set the pace of acceleration down of the putter head (from the top of the backstroke to the bottom of the stroke arc), then the principle of ISOCHRONY in the physics of a pendulum's action means that EVERY stroke, regardless of backstroke length, always reaches the bottom of the stroke arc in exactly the same amount of time.
A putt with a backstroke that is 1.5 feet in length, and a putt with a backstroke that is 3.5 feet in length, take EXACTLY the same time from top of backstroke to bottom of stroke arc. And this time period does not at all depend upon you or a sensitive touch or feel.
The time your stroke takes depends only upon the length of your putting pendulum, which is the length from the pivot of your system to the end of your putter.
For EVERY normal-sized adult with a conventional length putter, this time is approximately 1/2 a second.
ANY golfer can simply observe this time directly by lifting his arm back as if to putt and then just relaxing so the arm drops back to the side, and watch the timing.
The deep meaning of this fact of life is that a gravity-based stroke tempo teaches the golfer how to count to two.
Instead of just saying "one .. two," the whole trick is to observe the spacing between the two that is GRAVITY'S SPACING and learn to count so that your pace of count matches what gravity is doing. That way, your "two" will always match perfectly the moment in the stroke's free-fall when the putter head reaches the EXACT bottom of the stroke arc.
Knowing IN ADVANCE when this point in the stroke will occur is invaluable in learning and using am accurate and repeating stroke motion. Distance control and impact squareness then begin to grow into your game like a welcomed fungus! So learn how your putter counts to two."
May I inquire if your "New" tip was inspired by our detailed discussion about the Newtonian physics of the putting stroke .... and my contention that gravity is a negligible factor in the swinging of the putter ... and your contention that gravity does have an influence in the "feel" of the putting stroke ??
Your conditional opening statement:
"If your stroke tempo uses gravity to set the pace of acceleration down of the putter head ... "
... seems to suggest that you may not be fully convinced that gravity is a major factor .. and if so do you acknowledge the "torqued" putting stroke principle that I advance is an alternative putting method ??
I have two outstanding questions of you from two other threads. Instead of continuing there, I have brought the questions to this topic thread to keep them together.
Re: V1 Putt .... November 2 2006
Hello Geoff:
Just perused the V1 Putt system and I see they determine the velocity-acceleration of the putter head and produce a graph too.
If the velocities of the putter head can be determined then acceleration due to gravity and acceleration due to applied force can also be determined.
Have you tested the 'gravity-sponsored' putting stroke for the gravity force component and any additional force due to applied force? If you did, what were your results?
.........................................................
Final Requests ..... November 1 2006
Thank you Geoff for your detailed explanations of your 'gravity-sponsored' putting method, and the supporting science and experiences you have with teaching this method. I have been attempting this style of putting, with satisfactory results. Actually I find little difference in the results between a 'gravity-sponsored' stroke and a 'torqued' putting stroke. I believe my arms are kinestheically superior based on my training in sports and music (playing the violin enhances proprioceptiveness ... as well as rhythm and tempo ..
Can you please share with us your measured data on backswing arc length for varying lengths of putts, together with your usual full explanation of your testing method? This information will provide an interesting comparison for my putting efforts. Thanks and I hope this is a reasonable final request.
................................................
Another issue that seems to crop up with gravity-sponsored putting is the elevation of the putter head at stroke reversal for different length backswings. I have done some trig calculations perfect circle elevations for various backswing lengths. The numbers have been rounded and massaged slightly and should be used for illustrative purposes.
.. where: bswg = backswing length .... circ ht = circular height at end of backswing .... sag ht = adjusted estimated height ... above the ground.
I have made the trig calculations based on a 54 inch swing radius and tilted back 15º from vertical. In my experience, the putter head does not achieve these pure circular heights particularily for longer backswings.
In practice I believe the putter head stays closer to the ground, and on longer backswing, the putter substantially flattens out ... and I call this the "sag height" ... which may better represent actual putter head elevations. It seems that the longer the putt, the more the putter head settles down and "sags" .. which means the swing radius increases. Perhaps measuring instruments like the V1 Putt and SAM would better quantify these heights.
This putter elevation sag may be due to two reasons .. (1) the weight of the putter depresses the backswing height, and (2) there may be slight but significant articulations of the joints in the shoulders, elbows and wrists which extend the arms and hands for longer backswing lengths.
I present these putter heights to you because they govern the height of the pendulum stroke that is subject to the gravity force. In my putt stroking I do not exceed a 14" backswing and most of my putt strokes are in the 10" length, with less than a 1 inch elevation rise ... not much potential for gravity to influence the putt .. !!!!
As you may have surmised, I do not truly believe in a 100% gravity-sponsored stroke, and the challenge is to determine when, where and how much of the putting stroke it subject to an applied force. Once all the forces are determined, then the putting stroke can be fully understood ...
The above first two question are applicable to this research.