Dear Jerry,
I'm pretty sure I've missed a lot more putts than you!
The answer is: I'm not sure, but I hope I know how to think about the issue.
The BIG PROBLEM is that in your question, the assumption is that the initial READ was not correct and that the target spot used for the startline with a putt to deliver the ball across the fall-line into the cup with the usual deliver speed would miss. (Specifically, in your example, the READ is too high initially and the miss is on the high side of the center of the hole. It is possible also to consider a READ that is too low and a miss on the low side of the center of the hole.) But this basic posing of the issue leaves undetermined the delivery speed used to visualize the READ to start with and hence how the initial aim spot is identified. This in effect renders the initial aim spot useless for correcting the problem and generating or identifying an aim target (higher or lower than this initial target spot) for the comeback. One MUST assume the ability to visualize a READ with the usual delivery speed accurately, and visualizing the READ with some OTHER delivery speed is simply not useable without KNOWING what delivery speed is being used in the visualization, as the golfer will have to know this delivery speed when he re-assesses the comeback putt. It is better altogether to assume the golfer CORRECTLY identifies the initial aim spot but misses the putt due to executing the putt with a delivery speed that was either too fast or too slow compared to the delivery speed used to visualize the READ.
This being the case, here is the analysis ("buckle up your seat belts -- it's going to be a bumpy ride"):
CLARIFYING TERMINOLOGY:
First, some helpful designations:
SU= your usual delivery speed that was (or should have been) implicit in the read for identifying A;
SM= the delivery speed at the fall-line over B in the actual / missing putt, defined to be the same used by Jerry to mis-read the putt initially and identify J1 as the incorrect aim spot on the fall-line;
A= initial aim spot (A inches above the center of the cup) on the fall-line thru the cup (correctly visualized with the usual delivery speed);
B= spot B inches above or below the center of the cup on the fall-line where the actual / missing putt delivered with some speed other than the usual speed crosses the fall-line thru the real cup, with B's sign + when B is below the center of the cup and - when B is above the center of the cup;
C= spot on the real hole's fall-line C inches above or below the center of the cup where a comeback putt aimed at B but delivered with the usual delivery speed (PC-imaginary2) would cross the fall-line thru the cup;
D= spot D inches below the center of the cup on the real hole's fall-line where a comeback putt aimed at the center of the real hole and delivered with the usual delivery speed (PC-imaginary3) would cross the fall-line thru the cup;
E= correct aim target spot E inches above the center of the cup located on FL-real for the comeback putt with the usual delivery speed SU for sinking the comeback putt in RH (PC-real);
J1= spot on the fall-line J1 inches above the center of the cup visualized with a delivery speed other than the usual (Jerry's initial aim / target spot on the fall-line), resulting in the PI with the usual delivery speed missing with the ball crossing the fall-line at B;
JM= spot JM inches above or below the center of the cup where an imaginary putt aimed at J1 but delivered with the usual delivery speed SU would cross the fall-line (PC-imaginary4);
J2= spot J2 inches above the center of the real hole to aim at for the comeback putt in the "Jerry method" resulting in aim spot J2, determined by adding or subtracting from J1 the distance from JM to center of the hole RH such that J2 = J1 +/- JM;
IH-far= an imaginary hole location beyond the real hole that would have been correct for the actual delivery SM speed over B;
IH-near= an imaginary hole location closer to the initial address position of the ball that would be correct if B is used as the comeback target and the ball is delivered over B with the missing speed SM used the first time;
FL-far= the fall-line thru IH-far;
FL-near= the fall-line thru IH-near;
RH= the location of the real hole;
FL-real= the fall-line thru RH;
PI= the initial putt with target A and delivery speed SM;
PJ= the initial Jerry putt with target J1 and delivery speed SU;
PC-real= the comeback putt that uses target E to deliver the ball into the real hole RH with the usual speed SU;
PC-imaginary1= the comeback putt that uses target B so that the ball would cross the real hole's fall-line FL-real with the SAME too-fast speed SM used in PI;
PC-imaginary2= the comeback putt that uses target B so that the ball would cross the real hole's fall-line FL-real with the usual delivery speed SU;
PC-imaginary3= a visualized putt aiming at the center of the real hole RH and crossing the fall-line FL-real with the usual delivery speed SU;
PC-imaginary4= a visualized putt aiming at J1 and crossing the fall-line FL-real at JM with the usual delivery speed SU -- this is the SAME as PJ above;
PC-Jerry= a comeback putt using target spot J2 but delivering the ball across the real cup's fall-line with the usual delivery speed SU.
ISSUE
So, what are the relationships among
A (correct / initial target spot on the real hole's fall-line for delivery speed SU),
B (the spot on the real hole's fall-line where the missing / too-fast putt crossed the fall-line with delivery speed SM),
C (the spot on FL-real where a comeback putt that starts aimed at B would cross the FL-real above the center of RH with SU);
D (the spot on FL-real where a comeback putt that starts aimed at te center of RH would cross the FL-real below the center of RH with SU);
E (the correct aim or target spot on the real hole's fall-line for sinking the comeback putt with the usual delivery speed SU);
J1 (Jerry's initial aim spot from using SM in mis-reading the putt);
J2 (Jerry's comeback aim spot above or below J1 by B inches); and
WHETHER D is the same as J2, an aim spot above the center of the real hole RH as determined in the "Jerry method"?
UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS AND NECESSARY CONSEQUENCES
Assuming the same surface contour and green speed AND that the comeback putt will be delivered to the cup with the "usual" speed (SU, which is the same used to correctly identify the initial target) AND that the initial "read" and resulting aim target A on the fall-line was in fact correct AND that the aim of the putter face was at this target and the stroke rolled the ball on the correct start line, the following should then be the case for the comeback that misses ABOVE the original target spot on the fall-line:
1. The reason the initial putt PI misses is due solely to the delivery speed SM being faster than the usual speed SU, which is the only speed that corresponds to the initial target A, start line, and distance to the real hole's fall-line FL-real;
2. The actual (missing / too-fast) delivery speed SM determines how high above the original target on the fall-line the initial putt crosses the fall-line at B;
3. Given this specific, actual delivery speed SM at the fall-line FL-real over B, there is only one possible distance past the fall-line the ball will roll;
4. The above 2 and 3 together mean that there is a 1-to-1 correlation between the spot the actual / missing putt PI crosses the fall-line at B and the distance of the comeback putt;
5. For the initial / missing / too-fast delivery speed SM, there is an imaginary OTHER hole IH-far elsewhere than the real hole that would have been correct for the actual delivery speed used so that the arrival of the ball at this imaginary hole IH-far would occur with the usual delivery speed SU;
6. If this OTHER imaginary hole IH-far for the initial putt is to have the usual delivery speed SU (e.g., 2-3 revolutions per second or thereabouts at the lip of IH-far), than this OTHER hole IH-far will not be located on the initial fall-line thru the real cup but will be located on another fall-line FL-far BEYOND the fall-line thru the real cup FL-real, since the delivery speed across the real hole's fall-line FL-real is faster than this SU;
[7. Aiming the comeback at the spot B the actual / missing putt crossed the real cup's fall line and then putting a distance on this line that represents how far past the imaginary cup and FL-far the initial ball would have rolled if it had arrived at this imaginary cup IH-far with the usual delivery speed SU is the formula for sinking a comeback putt in this imaginary cup and its fall-line FL-far] -- interesting but probably not relevant;
8. Aiming the comeback at the spot B the actual / missing putt crossed the real cup's fall line FL-real and then putting so that the comeback ball crosses the real fall-line FL-real with the SAME delivery speed SM that the initial / missing putt had over this fall-line spot would result in the comeback putt arriving with the usual delivery speed at an imaginary cup beyond the real cup IH-near (closer to the ball's original location for the initial putt PI), with another fall-line FL-near corresponding to this imaginary closer cup -- this is PC-imaginary1;
9. Aiming the comeback at the spot the actual / missing putt crossed the real cup's fall line at B and then putting so that the comeback ball crosses the real fall-line FL-real with the SAME delivery speed SM that the initial / missing putt had over this fall-line spot -- again, PC-imaginary1 -- would result in the comeback putt crossing the fall-line FL-real thru the center of the real hole RH but with a delivery speed of SM;
10. The comeback putt described in 9 above -- PC-imaginary1 -- will work so long as SM is not too fast for you and is not otherwise "counter-indicated" by the possibility of a 3-putt or even a 4-putt;
11. In order to use SU for the comeback putt instead of SM as in 9 above -- PC-real, B is too high up the FL-real, so the aim spot for PC-real will be located lower than B;
12. Aiming at B and then putting with SU -- PC-imaginary2 -- will result in the comeback putt crossing the real hole's fall-line FL-real at a spot lower than B, crossing in fact at C;
13. The distance from C to the center of the real hole RH down FL-real is the distance BELOW B to aim for the comeback so that the comeback putt enters the real hole RH with the usual delivery speed SU, such that D is below B this same difference of C to center of RH -- making D the correct target spot on FL-real for PC-real with SU;
14. Starting from the comeback's ball position and aiming at the center of the real hole RH and visualizing a putt that cross FL-real with the usual delivery speed SU -- PC-imaginary3 -- will indicate (intuitively) exactly how far BELOW the center of RH such a putt would cross FL-real at a spot E;
15. Adding this distance E is below the center of RH up FL-real identifies an aim spot above the center of RH for delivering the comeback putt into the RH with the usual delivery speed SU -- i.e., PC-real;
16. Because PC-real can have only ONE aim spot on FL-real, the aim spot identified in 15 MUST be the same aim spot D identified in 13;
17. Aiming at J1 and delivering the ball across the fall-line with SU (PC-imaginary4) will intuitively identify JM as the spot JM inches above or below the center of the real cup on the FL-real where the ball cross the FL-real;
18. Adding or subtracting JM from J1 will identify J2 as the target spot on the FL-real to aim at and deliver the ball across the fall-line with SU in order for the ball to sink into the center of the RH (PC-real);
19. For the "Jerry method" to be correct, and to result in a comeback putt that delivers the ball into the RH with SU -- which is PC-real -- then the Jerry target (J2) on the fall-line that is J2 inches distance above the center of the RH (and is J1 +/- B) must be the same as D ... IS IT?
DISCUSSION
The original READ in your example used SM, and the PI used SU. This unfortunately confuses things because J1 will not be the same as A (the initial Jerry target J1 visualized with SM cannot be the same as the correct target A visualized with SU).
FIRST THINGS FIRST -- READ RIGHT, SPEED WRONG
The first issue is to assume a correct READ and then consider what happens if the delivery SPEED is not the usual. Is there in this case a "modified Jerry method" of identifying the comeback target E such that E is +/- B inches above or below A (E = A +/- B)?
This translates into the specific issue of whether D inches is the same as A +/- B, because E is simply the center of the hole + D.
In the case of a miss at B above the center of the cup, E = A - B and E = RH + D, where RH = 0 so RH = (A - B) - D. Hence, D = (A - B).
In the case of a miss below the center of the cup, E = A + B and E = RH + D, where RH = 0 so RH = (A + B) - D. Hence, D = (A + B).
So, YES, the "modified Jerry method" appears to work when the READ was correct but the SPEED was wrong: add or subtract the crossing spot B from the initial target A and putt the comeback with the usual speed at the new target E.
SECOND THINGS SECOND - READ WRONG, SPEED RIGHT
So how does this work when the READ was wrong but the SPEED was the usual? This translates into the specific issue of whether J2 is the same as E inches above the hole RH, when J2 = J1 +/- JM and E = RH + D.
If J2 and E ARE the same (i.e., J2 = E), then J1 +/- JM = RH + D, with RH = 0, so D = J1 +/- JM. This is the same as saying D = J2, and what's the sense of that? D is always A +/- B, so A - B (B above cup) = J2 and A + B (B below cup) = J2. So the difference between J1 and A is J1 = J2 +/- JM, with J2 = A +/- B, so that J1 = A +/- B +/- JM, and J1 - A = +/- B +/- JM. [Check: when J1 and A are the same, then B is the same as JM.] The DIFFERENCE between J1 and A is the same DIFFERENCE between JM aiming at J1 with the usual speed and B aiming at A with the usual speed. That seems to make sense.
I am probably out of analytical gas at this point, so I have to call it -- YES, it appears the "Jerry method" makes sense.
NOW WHAT?
Now, you have to check the above (which amounts to a theoretical "guess" or "prediction") with experiments to see if the prediction is real.
We'll see. Which is the same as saying all the above is worthless -- just try it and see.
The trick is not to get confused about a CORRECT READ and an INCORRECT READ. To me, this means an experiment will have to PICK one specific SM and use ONLY that. Using SM to get an INCORRECT READ and then putting at J1 with SU will result in missing +/- JM inches above or below the center of the hole and the adjustment for a new aim target J2 is J2 = J1 +/- JM. Then aim at J2 and putt with SU and see how it works out.
Then compare this to the case where the READ was CORRECT and the SPEED was wrong. Aim at A and putt with SU and watch to see B, then adjust A +/- B for a new E. Aim at E and putt with SU and see how it works out.
Are J2 and E the same -- yes or no?
We obviously have a little work to do to answer this question definitively. And even then, the whole still rests upon the assumption that the surface is "FLAT but tilted" over the relevant surface and not "tilted with a contour wrinkle here or there out of flatness" and is otherwise not dotted with irregularities affecting line and speed.
Incidentally, I teach always putting as far vas the fall-line to arrive with the usual delivery speed, plus never miss lowside, so that a "good leave" is high-side slightly shy of the hole but tracking into the heart. One safety feature of this is that if you miss high or low but with good (close but not perfect) distance control, the missing ball will roll very near the edge of the cup as it curls onto a fall-line that is a) paralell to the fall-line thru the hole's center and b) not far offset left or right of the center fall-line. this means that nearly ALL comeback putts that result from primary focus on distance are practically STRAIGHT putts only slightly to the side of the central fall-line.
Cheers!
Geoff Mangum
Putting Coach and Theorist
PuttingZone.com