Golf Technique Challenged: When It Comes To Putting, Tiger Might Not Have The Best Advice
ScienceDaily (July 18, 2008) — Golfers who heed the advice of instructors to keep their heads perfectly still while putting may be hampering their game, according to a study that examined coordination patterns.
Tim Lee, professor of kinesiology at McMaster University and a golfer himself--says the findings run contrary to conventional wisdom, or at least conventional golf wisdom.
"Jack Nicklaus says the premier technical cause of missed putts is head movement; Tiger Woods believes that even a fraction of head movement can throw a putting path off course," says Lee. "Therefore, it would seem that based on what the experts say good putters keep their heads absolutely still from start to finish."
The putting stroke is used more frequently than any other during a round of golf, regardless of skill. In 2007, putts represented 41.3 per cent of total strokes taken by members of the PGA tour, and 40 percent for members of the LPGA.
Lee and his team assembled two groups of golfers: one group comprised 11 volunteers, aged 21 to 56, and with a handicap range of 12 and 40; and another group of professional and low-handicap golfers, aged 24-52.
Using an infrared tracking system, researchers recorded the putter head and the golfer's head during sixty putts.
Surprisingly, both expert and less-skilled golfers moved their heads about the same amount during the execution of putts. The big difference was in the direction: less-skilled golfers moved in an allocentric direction -- moving their head in the same direction and timing as the motion of the putter; the expert golfers moved in a tightly coupled but egocentric direction -- moving their head in the opposite direction as the putter, but timed similarly to reverse when the putter reversed.
"The exact reasons for the opposite coordination patterns are not entirely clear," says Lee. "However, we suspect that the duffers tend to just sway their body with the motions of the putter. In contrast, the good golfers probably are trying to maintain a stable, central body position by counteracting the destabilization caused by the putter backswing with a forward motion of the head. The direction of head motion is then reversed when the putter moves forward to strike the ball."
"These coordination patterns are similar to the fundamental coordination patterns that we use to move our upper and lower limbs every day," Lee adds. "So, from one viewpoint, the findings are very consistent with other research. The findings are just not consistent with what most golf instructors believe to be true".
The research appears in the July issue of the Journal of Motor Behavior.
The study was funded by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council.
This is exactly right. Please show it to some of your "biomechanics experts" as they teach putting to top pros. They don't listen to me.
Human motion that is accurate is reciprocating about centers of gravity of moving parts. Head "sway" is indeed fatal to putting, but proper head "motion" (i.e., reciprocating) is part of instinctive, natural putting, while holding the head motionless during the stroke causes specific problems that a golfer would be better served avoiding instead of having to fix.
Geoff .. I did a self-experiment on the 'allocentric' and 'egocentric' head movements to sense what happens. I applied somewhat large head movements to gain a kinesthetic feel of what was happening. It was awkward and stroke timing was disrupted. Perhaps what was being measure by the electrical engineers in the study were 'micro-movements' not perceptible to the human eye nor felt kinesthetically.
I also 'pinned' my head to a door, and tried to putt (on a carpet) with zero head movement. I could do it for putts up to 10 feet, but for longer putts I had to release my head so that it rotated with the followthru. I guess the displacement of masses and flow of momentum was the governing factors.
As for your 'reciprocating' head movement, perhaps you could provide some additional explanation as to what exactly you mean by that. Thanks.
I should have said "kinesiologists", not "electrical engineers" ... the latter group having experimented on human brain and body inconsistencies in the other article I posted.
(Premier Login aceputt) Forum Owner 75.177.117.145
Head Bone Connected to the .,.
July 21 2008, 2:09 PM
Dear sammy,
Like the song says: "The Head Bone's connected to the Neck Bone, the Neck Bone's connected to the Shoulder Bone... etc."
When the shoulder frame "rocks", the shoulder frame "carries" the head and neck with it. "Reciprocating" means that when the torso and shoulder frame rocks "back" in the backstroke the lead side goes "down and back under" and the rear side goes "up and forward over" and vice versa going the other direction (forward or thru-stroke). The "pivot" of the shoulder frame in terms of structural bone is the sterno-clavicular joint (where the clavicles meet the top of the sternum at the base of the neck), which rotates in place like a door knob as the shoulders "rock" in a see-saw manner about this pivot point. Above this pivot point, the neck and head extends in the manner of an "inverted pendulum", which is an energy state that does not compare well in gravity with a "flat tire" or a "water bed" energy state.
The golfer's job for accuracy during the stroke and especially thru the impact stage of the stroke is to keep the directionality of the base of the throat aimed in line with the leading edge of the putter face as oriented squarely down the line. Or in perpendicular terms -- keep the plane of the sterno-clavicular joint parallel to the target line. Doing this keeps the shoulders parallel. Doing that keeps the "dead hands" on plane and re-squares the putter face thru impact without effort.
This being the basic reality and need for the skill, what does "holding the head still" add or detract/ The head is held motionless by OPPOSING the natural motion of the rotation of the sterno-clavicular joint; otherwise the axis of the head extending up from the joint will "roll with the wave of the shoulder frame". If the axis of the neack and head is taken to be the center line of the neck out the top of the skull, this axis can be oriented either horizontally to the shoulder frame or on a tilt (top of head higher and back). When the shoulder frame "rocks" thru impact in a vertical plane and the neck is perpendicular and thus horizontal to the shoulder frame's plane of motion, the neck axis simply rotates in place and the top of the head stays in place like the spindle of a record player even though the album spins. But if the angle of the neck axis is titled up from the plane of motion of the shoulders, then the sterno-clavicular joint spins in place and its directionality is left undisturbed so the stroke stays straight down the line, but the top of the head "bobs" back like a Tootsie Pop being pivoted by the bottom of the stick.
When the head is allowed to "roll with the wave" of the shoulder frame, and the neck is horizontal or perpendicular to the motion of the shoulders, the "face" at first aims straight down at the ball but then aims to the rear as the backstroke occurs and then to the target-side of the middle of the stroke, and the top of the head simply spins in place. If the neck is angled up, the base of the neck preserves its orientation and the shoulder frame stays parallel, but the top of the head "swings" from side to side about the middle of the body, with greater amplitude left-right as the tilt angle steepens.
There are two basic ways to HOLD the head (whole head and top of head especially) motionless in opposition to these rolling / swinging influences: the neck muscles and gravity. An old magazine article from the 1950s teaches that "nodding" the head into gravity at setup fixes the mass and weight of the head out over the structural properties of the top of the spine and neck in a fashion that opposes movement of the head without involvement of muscle tension in the neck muscles. The other way is to tighten the "guy wires" of the neck muscles to dissociate the motion of the shoulder frame from the neck muscles securing the head against the swing / roll forces of the shoulders, relying upon inner-ear controls to handle and oppose the forces with a reciprocating timing. Ordinarily, the right side sternocleidomastoid muscle contracts to pull the face around to the left and vice versa, along with splenius muscles attaching to the back at the top of the spine. (See this anatomy lesson.) The neck muscles that "hold back" the face and neck and head from its natural rolling in the back and thru rocking of the shoulder frame are the levator scapula muscles attaching the head on each side to each shoulder. In particular, tightening in the lead-side levator scapula muscle "restrains" the head and face from rolling to the rear in the backstroke and then the rear-side levator scapula muscle tightens to "holds back" the head and face from rolling down the target line in the thru-stroke. (Usaually, neither of these muscles tighten alone, and the whole base of the neck tightens when this "holding back" tension is set.)
Levator Scapula Muscle
Anterior neck muscles, including Sternocleidomastoid Muscle
In the thru-stroke, tightening the rear-side levator scapula also "holds onto" the right shoulder as it is in the process of rocking rear-side down / front-side upward. This is the equivalent of placing a "virtual rock" between the lead-side rocker and the base of the skull next to the pivot. The shoulder frame acts like an upside-down rocker, and the pivot or middle is where the rocker meets the "floor" above the shoulder frame. Placing tension between the up-rocking shoulder and the base of the neck with the head staying put in the way of the rocking has one of two (or both) effects: the stroke gets misdirected out of plane into a 'pull" with the shoulder frame avoiding the 'rock" of tension by going off the rock to the rear, and / or the golfer learns to "crack the nut" with a "hit" stroke, jabbing thru the impasse with a little extra force thru impact. Both of these effects are stinko, harming line or touch or both.
I teach that the throat line (i.e., parallel orientation of base of neck) cannot "swing" or "sway" across the midline (sqaure putter face orientation) thru impact, and THEREFORE the up-rocking of the lead shoulder is allowed to spin the base of the neck in place and in plane EVEN IF the top of the head not only spins but also "SWINGS OR SWAYS" to the rear in an inverted pendulum Tootsie Pop manner. holding this throat line combines with the natural inertial trajectory of the putter head and constrains the trajectory of the putter head into the vertical plane of motion of the shoulders and also constrains ONLY a vertical up-rocking of the shoulders thru impact. This causes a putter face the re-squares and stays square thru impact as it slightly rises in a vertical plane right down the line. No effort except "let the head roll" if it wants.
Note the head-roll backward with the shoulder rock of these players when the head and neck are tilted up and the shoulder frame in the thru-stroke moves in a vertical plane:
Freddy Jacobson
Phil Mickelson
Here is Johnny Miller ca. 1973 showing that when the neck is perpendicular to the shoulder motion (or horizontal to the surface), the top of the head spins in place. The left ear rolls high and the right ear rolls low but the top of the head is without "swing" or "sway" left of right of the middle where it started.
Here is a head being held against the shoulder rock, which promotes the lead shoulder pulling backwards out of plane:
This stroke is a bit wooden and requires more "attention to prevention" of a bad thing -- a pull.
Nuff said.
Dry Bones
Ezekiel cried, "Dem dry bones!"
Ezekiel cried, "Dem dry bones!"
Ezekiel cried, "Dem dry bones!"
"Oh, hear the word of the Lord."
The foot bone connected to the leg bone,
The leg bone connected to the knee bone,
The knee bone connected to the thigh bone,
The thigh bone connected to the back bone,
The back bone connected to the neck bone,
The neck bone connected to the head bone,
Oh, hear the word of the Lord!
Dem bones, dem bones gonna walk aroun'
Dem bones, dem bones, gonna walk aroun'
Dem bones, dem bones, gonna walk aroun'
Oh, hear the word of the Lord.
The head bone connected to the neck bone,
The neck bone connected to the back bone,
The back bone connected to the thigh bone,
The thigh bone connected to the knee bone,
The knee bone connected to the leg bone,
The leg bone connected to the foot bone,
Oh, hear the word of the Lord!
Cheers!
Thank you Geoff for explaining what you meant by 'reciprocating' motion as it relates to the shoulder span. Also thank you for the anatomical primer (btw .. the link to 'See this anatomy lesson' doesn't work.)
I would think that 'reciprocating' motion is restricted with thick-necked individuals and this creates a 'unison' motion between the head and shoulders. People must adapt to their body structure.
In the article I posted, there is reference to 'allocentric' and 'egocentric' movement as follows:
Surprisingly, both expert and less-skilled golfers moved their heads about the same amount during the execution of putts. The big difference was in the direction: less-skilled golfers moved in an allocentric direction -- moving their head in the same direction and timing as the motion of the putter; the expert golfers moved in a tightly coupled but egocentric direction -- moving their head in the opposite direction as the putter, but timed similarly to reverse when the putter reversed.
What is your opinion on this scientific finding?
...........
When I was attempting to conquer the game of golf as an older man, I would go on the local course in the evening with a 7 iron, a SW and and pocketfuls of balls .. and would trudge the course by myself to dusk and even darkness when the moon and the course maintenance workers were out. I would sing this song .. while heading off the course:
By the light, of the silvery moon,
I want to spoon,
To my honey I'll croon love's tune.
Honey moon, keep a-shinin' in June.
Your silv'ry beams will bring love's dreams,
We'll be cuddlin' soon,
By the silvery moon.
(I have an excellent short game .. torqued putting included!)
Surprisingly, both expert and less-skilled golfers moved their heads about the same amount during the execution of putts. The big difference was in the direction: less-skilled golfers moved in an allocentric direction -- moving their head in the same direction and timing as the motion of the putter; the expert golfers moved in a tightly coupled but egocentric direction -- moving their head in the opposite direction as the putter, but timed similarly to reverse when the putter reversed.
has some key "weasel words" as we used to call them in law school -- i.e., technical sounding terms that disguise imprecise thinking and analysis. In this passage, the suspect terms are:
"expert" golfers, "less skilled golfers", "moved their heads", "execution of putts", "about the same amount", "tightly coupled", "allocentric direction", "egocentric direction".
Let's take these terms one at a time:
1. "Expert" and "less skilled" golfers: "Lee and his team assembled two groups of golfers: one group comprised 11 volunteers, aged 21 to 56, and with a handicap range of 12 and 40; and another group of professional and low-handicap golfers, aged 24-52."
Does handicap level necessarily correlate with putting skill? That's an assumption. In good science, the researcher would baseline the putting skills and then define the groups of "good" versus "not as good" according to the skill under investigation. There are other ways to "control" this variable.
2. "Moved their heads": Actually, the golfers did not voluntary move their heads but their heads "got moved" during their putting motion. This is much more a "whole body" issue than an issue of "what the golfers are doing specifically with their heads". There is no analysis here so far as I can tell about the physiological, anatomical, biomechanical, and neurological processes involved in "moving" or "not moving" a head. The news item refers to infrared technology to monitor the movement ("Using an infrared tracking system, researchers recorded the putter head and the golfer's head during sixty putts.") There are different points one can take as "the head", such as the head's center of gravity (there is an anatomical standard for this), the top of the head, and other reference points. The focus COULD have been upon the base of the neck or the upper torso as a whole. This would be closer to the truth of the "whole body" action under examination. So there is a conceptual problem in the research design and there is a dearth of baseline analysis of how the head gets moved in different "whole body" actions required to disentangle or dissociate what exactly are the group differences.
3. "Execution of putts": The movement patterns occur solely in the context of specific putts with specific levels of violence in the stroke. The news item simply says each golfer executed sixty putts. Presumably, these putts are all the same for each golfer, and probably are all the same putt (e.g., 60 putts from 20 feet). At least they should be the same set of putts (e.g., 10 from 6 feet, 10 from 20 feet, etc.).
4. "About the same amount": This implies the putts were all one distance, requiring golfers to generate the same objective force for the conditions. The "amount" being referred to here appears to be "amplitude of sway off a center line" as the motions go in two directions for both groups of golfers -- first one way, then the other. Presumably, the "same amount" also means that the amplitude of motion in the first direction for a given golfer matched the amplitude of motion in the second direction.
5. "Tightly coupled": This is a phrase usually meant to convey a close correlation in time between moving parts. The notion of "coupled" is an abstract concept that suggest a mechanical connection (as in engineering terminology for "coupling" two parts together) when there is none, so it is slightly misleading language. This description in the news account is confusing because unclear: "The big difference was in the direction: less-skilled golfers moved in an allocentric direction -- moving their head in the same direction and timing as the motion of the putter; the expert golfers moved in a tightly coupled but egocentric direction -- moving their head in the opposite direction as the putter, but timed similarly to reverse when the putter reversed." The less-skilled golfers appear by this account to have their timing also "coupled" because the term "same" is used to describe the timing of the head motion and the putter motion. The description of the "expert" golfers (i.e.,golfers with lower handicaps than the other group), are described in terms that suggest a more precise timing coordination in the head and putter motions, but it is difficult to have better coordination than 'the same", now isn't it? So that's confusing and obviously an inaccurate recounting of the actual research data.
6. "Allocentric direction" versus "Egocentric direction": The terms "allocentric" and "egocentric" are usually meant to refer to a "frame of reference" and not to a "direction". A "direction" is simply a "direction". Using an "allocentric" frame of reference means that the golfer is keyed in not to his body position in space but primarily to the immediately perceptible external environment and then to the body secondarily in that setting. Using an "egocentric" frame of reference means the golfer is keyed in primarily to the body position in space and then to external reality. These concepts don't really fit this situation analytically or in terms of what is the phenomenon at work in the different motion patterns. Basically, academic researchers tend to perpetuate helpful organizing conceptual frameworks and carry them from one discussion to another for the sake of apparent consistency and command of the phenomena and the "science." In this particular case, the "allocentric / egocentric" terminology is a holdover of other discussions about external and internal focus of attention from a core set of standard academic studies about skill performance. Even there, the terms are imported from more serious neuroscience research not completely without conceptual bending, folding, and mutilating. In the internal / external focus studies, these terms are used to "gussy up" the discussion a bit and make it look more scientific than it really is. (Jargon mongerers ALWAYS use latinate terms to make their discussions appear more "scientific" than they really are.)
Here is the researcher, kinesiologist Tim Lee at Canada's McMaster University:
What is actually happening here is a difference between skill sets. The better golfers have (as a group) harkened more assiduously to standard instruction and whether it helps than have the lesser golfers (as a group). Simple "rules" from conventional lore like "don't move the head" and "keep the triangle intact" and use "unchanging grip pressure" and "keep the lower body still" and "keep the shoulders aligned parallel" and "don't let the lead wrist flip or breakdown thru impact" and "keep the putter face square and online thru impact" etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum REALLY get incorporated into a golfer's "whole body" movement as the skill level progresses such that the excessive upper torso involvement of the less-skilled golfers is damped out over time. Once the upper torso is tamed out of the movement, there's an immediate change in the character of the head motion. so the different patterns observed in this research basically is explained by: better golfers don't make "whole body" sways to generate the stroke but leave the upper torso more or less squarely oriented to the target line during the stroke.
There is a faint suggestion that better golfers know what they are doing with the head. They don't. My students do, however, since it is explicitly discussed how and why the head has a certain movement pattern with an efficacious stroke movement. As the golfer learns to leave the "chest" more or less squarely oriented (parallel side-to-side to the target line), as opposed to "swinging" or "swaying" the upper torso back around in the backstroke and then forward around in the thru-stroke, the movement settles down to a pivoting of the shoulders and/or arms about a central position in the body (i.e., the base of the neck). When the shoulder frame pivots on the base of the neck, the shoulder frame carries the head in exactly the manner observed with the better golfers. The REALLY good golfers don't much care about the "head" so much as about the base of the neck and its orientation with respect to the line of the putt.
This attempt at explaining the phenomenon is pretty ham-handed (my comments in brackets):
"The exact reasons for the opposite coordination patterns are not entirely clear," says Lee. "However, we suspect that the duffers tend to just sway their body with the motions of the putter. [TRUE ENOUGH, BUT WHY?] In contrast, the good golfers probably are trying to maintain a stable, central body position [SO FAR, SO GOOD] by counteracting the destabilization caused by the putter backswing with a forward motion of the head [OOPS, THIS IS OFF THE RAILS HERE -- YES THE GOLFER SEEKS BALANCE AND EQUILIBRIUM DURING THE STROKE, BUT HE IS NOT COUNTERACTING SO MUCH AS HE IS "ACTING WITH" THE INFLUENCES OF THE STROKE FORCES -- IT'S NOT A BLOOMIN' FIST-FIGHT!]. The direction of head motion is then [THE OLD "PASSIVE VOICE" ALWAYS CROPS UP WHEN CAUSE-AND-EFFECT UNDERSTANDING WANES AND FLICKERS OUT] reversed when the putter moves forward to strike the ball."
The essential point that golfers do not actually hold their head still during the stroke is what the study should look more closely at: how is the head held still, is it good or bad for golfers to hold their heads still, can we test one group of still-head-better-golfers versus another group of moving-head-better-golfers to see who gets better results, what is the explanation for the difference if any? That would be meaningful. To me, it is "supportive" of my position that the head should not be held still due to problems injected by holding the head still as opposed to focusing on the base of the neck without worrying about the head, but not directly "proof" that my analysis and understanding and preferred technique is correct.
I would not use this study to argue with someone teaching "hold the head still" that this study proves they are incorrect to teach that. It doesn't. That would be doing the same thing Christian Marquardt and Phil Kenyon have been arguing: since golfers move their heads, not moving the head must not be good advice. Unh-uh -- incorrecto as a matter of reasoning and logic. Their argument is the same flawed pattern: since top golfers don't use a gravity-based timing pattern, the gravity-based timing pattern must not be good advice. Error with terror.
Do you think then that the eyes should also move? when making a stroke
Also i think that bringing up Phil and Christian in alsmost every response you are currently posting seems to be going a bit overboard, theres no need imo to go that route unless its in a direct response.
The eyes should gaze straight at the grass. This gaze will stay fixed on the grass even though the head moves, since the eyes will "un-move" in the opposite direction of the head motion in order to maintain the gaze on the location of fixation. this is called the Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex of VOR. The VOR tracks head motion (via neck and inner ear processes) and moves the eyes in the opposite direction when there is an intention to keep the gaze fixed on a single point despite the head motion. The eyes sit in a fatty pocket in the eye sockets so that the person does not normally notice the eyes move when the head moves. This has the undesirable effect in putting of "masking" head movement, so that the movement is not especially noticeable from eye motion in the cushiony sockets.
What makes the eyes useful in detecting head motion is "decoupling" the gaze from the VOR by suppressing the VOR and allowing the "fixed gaze direction" to be carried with the head motion. Doing this "shows" the earth sway beneath the head when the head rocks from side to side. It's a learned trick. Another way to overcome the masking of head motion from visual detection by the VOR is paying attention to focus: if the head sways from side to side, this lengthens the distance between the eyes and the location on the ground being focused upon, and that makes the spot on the ground go out of focus briefly as the head sways. This takes training to notice, but I train it often in students.
So in a sense the eyes don't change (they stay focused on a single location) but the eyes "move" without the golfer noticing it unless properly trained. Is eye motion wanted? Sort of -- to keep the gaze focused on the single spot. Why? To "kill" vision during the stroke to stop the steady stream of "problem identification and suggestions for change" that is the common function of the eyes (detecting problems and threats and suggesting changes in behavior). That's not at all desirable at the time the putt comes down to making the stroke. A little awareness of hand and putter position is desirable for stroke accuracy, but that comes in fine thru peripheral vision without 'watching the putter head" or otherwise shifting the gaze or attention with the motion of the putter head.
Tim Lee has kindly sent me his paper in the Journal of Motor Behavior:
Timothy D. Lee, Tadao ishikura, Stefan Kegel, Dave Gonzalez, and Steven Passmore (2008). Head-Putter Coordination Patterns in Expert and Less Skilled Golfers. Journal of Motor Behavior (2008), vol. 28, no. 1.
Those interested in reading the full paper may do so here: Lee Paper.
Thank you Geoff and Dr. Lee for providing the paper on Head-Putter Coordination Patterns. I've studied the scientific findings to the best of my ability and these things pop out for me:
1. Lateral average head movement for less skilled putters was 16.6mm (9/16") while for skilled putters it was 11.2mm (7/16").. and not a significant trend. I wonder if there was any head rotation or was it just linear movement.
2. Head movement was egocentric for the skilled golfers while it was allocentric for the less skilled golfers. This is a puzzler indeed. I wonder if this has any implications for the Vickers "Quiet Eye" study.
If the Lee study had tracked eye movement as well as head movement, I think the results would have been more meaningful.
Geoff ... what are your thoughts on the two points from the Lee study?
What these folks are studying is "natural" movement patterns. Putting is a trained pattern of movement, and this training comprehends the head movement that results from good technique. So the study stops short of where the putting instructor takes over. The study basically means nothing to me. To answer your first question directly, yes, there is head rotation in addition to lateral motion. The fixed point of reference on the head was on the bill of a baseball cap. That's not a very good choice and makes detection of rotation versus lateral sway very problematic, confounding the separate information. But yes, the head rotates some and sways laterally some.
The terms "egocentric" and "allocentric" suggest more than they really mean. In particular, there is nothing suggestive from these terms in the golfer's intention or awareness about whether his movement is 'egocentric" or "allocentric" so the terms have little functional significance for a teacher or a golfer. The implication for Vickers is that she shopuld monitor both the eye aim and the head motion, as eye aim alone is not what the brain uses for understanding space and movement. You are correct that her study of eye aim alone does not detect head motion of even VOR, if the "gaze" she is referring ti is an external spot on the ground. So her students were actually / probably experiencing eye motion while making the stroke, and she erroneously though the gaze was "quiet" (whatever that metaphor is supposed to mean). But it doesn't matter because her science is bad from the start and hence irrelevant to teaching and performing. It is only confusing and detracts golfers from finding out the right information about "killing" vision in favor of somatosensory / proprioceptive / kinesthetic movement focus when making the stroke. learning that is about going BEYOND vision, not fixating on keeping the eyes in a certain aim. Citing Vickers without critical appraisal of the shortcomings of her work indicates the paucity of research on these issues: Lee is just citing her work in passing, because no one else addresses these issues at all (except of course me).
Thanks for all the work and explanation you have provided on this topic. As usual you are thorough and comprehensive in your comments.
Even though we differ on stroke dynamics (gravity vs torqued) I appreciate your 'holistic' approach to putting that so-called academic or scientific 'experts' cannot produce with their narrow studies or toy golf gizmos ... and magical animistic putters too.
I'm not sure we actually differ that much. It seems to me our sticking point is not that I teach A and you believe in B and not A, but that you believe B is better than A, and I teach both A and B but you don't really know the benefits of A. If someone cannot or will not do A effectively, then I teach them how to do B better. I teach that knowing A inside and out makes you better at B.
