True aim ball marker

[OspreyCI]

8 minutes ago, SE Gamer said:

 

 

Thanks! Really awesome to hear feedback on the fit and finish. Was curious what people would think, with this maybe being the first 3d printed item they've ever handled.

This does make sense, and is something @Z1ggy16 and I were chatting about in a PM conversation.

Essentially, what I equate it to is parallax. And I think there are a couple ways to remedy this (as it'd be an "issue" with any marker with indexing lines). 
 

The main way I think you can remedy this is how you use the marker. When you place it down to mark your ball, you index the center line at the hole. Then when you set your ball down, don't index off the center line and rotate to the desired indexing end point. Instead just set the ball down indexed off the desired line. 

The potential downside to this is that the ball may be ever so slightly placed in a different spot than when it came to rest. But we have to ask, does that matter? Can anyone say that (regardless of the marker they're using) that they're placing the ball in precisely the same location as where it came to rest? I seriously doubt it.

 

However, if this is something that you can't accept, I think the solution is to favor one side when first marking the ball. So if you know it's a left to right break. You can place the mark in a position where the ball is slightly right of center. That way it's already on the side of the indexing lines you'll be using. And should subsequently reduce the parallax. And I think this would really only be needed when indexing for extreme breaks (i.e. 3rd and 4th hash marks). 

Personally, I haven't found the parallax "issue" to be that big a deal. In doing some testing with a laser (and then comparing to my table), it's pretty darn accurate with alignment even with some slight parallax (which I personally need to really look for to notice). Accurate enough to the point that I think the human margin of error is far more impactful.

 

The above are just my thoughts. Maybe there's a better way or solution?

Well said!!! That’s exactly what I was trying to describe. I feel like I just want to line it up parallel instead of moving the ball. I will give it some trials this Friday during my practice session then playing Sunday. 

[sheppick.dan]

On 2/25/2023 at 11:56 AM, SE Gamer said:

 

Awesome to get some feedback on the chart. Anything you think would make it better? Few things I was considering are...

 

• Adding more distances at the low end. I know we'd all like to thing we're tour pros. But even if we were, once you get past 8 feet, their make percentage drops below 50%. At 10 ft it's 40%, and at 15 ft it's only 23%. So maybe it'd be good to have more POA values in closer increments inside 10 or 15 feet?
• For POA values that are very low inch values, would it be better if I converted that to "ball" values? For example, rather than putting a value of 3 inches, maybe it could be 2 balls from center.
• And on that topic, should I adjust the table values to be indexed off the edge of the cup? Personally, for anything outside the hole, I think in terms of outside the cup when estimating POA. 

Would love to hear your thoughts, or anyone else who wants to chime in an any of the above.

 

I like the idea of more numbers closer as well as talking about POA to the outside of the cup vs the middle of the cup. Then there is less room for error.

 

I appreciate all the work you have done on this. This is GREAT!

[OspreyCI]

37 minutes ago, sheppick.dan said:

 

I like the idea of more numbers closer as well as talking about POA to the outside of the cup vs the middle of the cup. Then there is less room for error.

 

I appreciate all the work you have done on this. This is GREAT!

I wanted to add the same comment about measuring from the edge of the cup. Just a comment. Otherwise it was working just fine for me the other day when I was using the chart. 

[Z1ggy16]

I think my solution to the parallax is just accepting the ball isn't going to be set back down in the very exact same spot as it was prior to marking, and move my ball very slightly left or right as needed. If I were to use this method in a very legit tournament, I'd use the chart cross referencing the POA vs the distance and slope % and use a regular ball marker or regular aim point. I can't recall if you can have those kinds of charts on you during a sanctioned event or not.

[OspreyCI]

37 minutes ago, Z1ggy16 said:

I think my solution to the parallax is just accepting the ball isn't going to be set back down in the very exact same spot as it was prior to marking, and move my ball very slightly left or right as needed. If I were to use this method in a very legit tournament, I'd use the chart cross referencing the POA vs the distance and slope % and use a regular ball marker or regular aim point. I can't recall if you can have those kinds of charts on you during a sanctioned event or not.

Good thoughts there. I know I’ll be using my green book, chart and marker in my skins game. That’s for sure! Let them tell me it’s illegal! Lol

[SE Gamer]

4 hours ago, sheppick.dan said:

 

I like the idea of more numbers closer as well as talking about POA to the outside of the cup vs the middle of the cup. Then there is less room for error.

 

I appreciate all the work you have done on this. This is GREAT!

 

3 hours ago, OspreyCI said:

I wanted to add the same comment about measuring from the edge of the cup. Just a comment. Otherwise it was working just fine for me the other day when I was using the chart. 

 

Cool. I'll work on that. Shouldn't be too difficult to adjust the table based on balls and/or outside the cup. 

[cfunk11]

I like what you are doing, how do I get my paws on one of these?

[SE Gamer]

31 minutes ago, cfunk11 said:

I like what you are doing, how do I get my paws on one of these?

 

Shoot me a PM and I'll get you set up. Working on another batch currently that'll be ready to ship early next week.

[SE Gamer]

In the process of making another batch, and thought it'd be fun to show just how OCD I am about putting these together. 

 

As you know, there's a magnet encased within the marker. Now, magnets are technically equally attractive. Regardless of which pole is facing the material it's sticking to. But I went down the rabbit hole. And some posit that, all things being equal, the north side could be slightly "stronger". 

So, why not ensure the north pole is oriented face down at the base of the marker? But how do you figure out which pole is which? Well, if you have young kids, this can be a fun little experiment for them...

 

Confirm what direction is north (I used my phone's compass). Fill up a bowl (non-metalic) with water. Grab your magnet and place it on a piece of styrofoam (or anything that floats). Set the styrofoam in the bowl. Viola! The magnet will orient itself north/south. 

Completely unnecessary. And is likely to make zero difference. But it was a fun little exercise nonetheless. 

[Z1ggy16]

Also, I know we have a DM going on about this but I figured there's maybe others who read this and I also forgot one detail about your POA calcs w.r.t. to the video posted from Tim's youtube.

 

In that vid, He's saying a 2% slope putt at 5ft is a 2 inch outside hole. Now, he did not say what stimp that is at (important-ish) so it's hard to say with total certainty if the index lines on the marker would totally line up perfectly with slope %.

 

So based on your POA table and the video , assuming the speeds were relatively similar, then index line one is a touch over 3% slope which doesn't really make sense?? It would mean that the 4th line is 12%, which obviously isn't true.

 

I found this formula online: Distance (feet) x Slope / 2 = inches of break for any distance

 

It assumes a stimp of 10 - using it we would get 5 * 2/2 = 5 inches of break at 2% which matches more closely to your marker than Tim's video.  It also states for "unusual speeds" you can use Slope x (Stimp / 20). So to get Tims example of 2inch of break at 2% slope at 5ft, stimp would need to be 4 lol... obviously it's not.

 

Question: I think it might have been stated on another page but based on comments above, it might seem like these POA are based on distance from mid point cup to POA. Since Tim is likely talking about outside edge (and probably how most of us think about POA) then in that case, we need to subtract 2.125 inches from all your numbers in the table. If we do that... then line 1 is about .9% slope which honestly is close enough to 1% and therefore matches up. Does that seem right?

 

I also found this, which corroborates my line of thinking. It's from this very long and totally not worth 99% of people time to read article online. At one point it states: 5’ (60”) breaks 6.0” (i.e., 3.9” above left or right / high side edge) assuming 2% slope.

 

So I would wager Tim is wrong about the 5ft putt breaking 2 inches outside of cup... The green in that case would have to be reeeeally slow or quite uphill... At least from this little thought I just had. The article I linked above also has a huge table at the very end which lists all the POA's for stimps 7-12 at slopes 1-4%. Since the speed you hit it at does also matter, they give a range of break over any given distance. I'll probably print these out and keep it in a yardage book or something.

Edited March 2, 2023 by Z1ggy16

[SE Gamer]

40 minutes ago, Z1ggy16 said:

Also, I know we have a DM going on about this but I figured there's maybe others who read this and I also forgot one detail about your POA calcs w.r.t. to the video posted from Tim's youtube.

 

In that vid, He's saying a 2% slope putt at 5ft is a 2 inch outside hole. Now, he did not say what stimp that is at (important-ish) so it's hard to say with total certainty if the index lines on the marker would totally line up perfectly with slope %.

 

So based on your POA table and the video , assuming the speeds were relatively similar, then index line one is a touch over 3% slope which doesn't really make sense?? It would mean that the 4th line is 12%, which obviously isn't true.

 

I found this formula online: Distance (feet) x Slope / 2 = inches of break for any distance

 

It assumes a stimp of 10 - using it we would get 5 * 2/2 = 5 inches of break at 2% which matches more closely to your marker than Tim's video.  It also states for "unusual speeds" you can use Slope x (Stimp / 20). So to get Tims example of 2inch of break at 2% slope at 5ft, stimp would need to be 4 lol... obviously it's not.

 

Question: I think it might have been stated on another page but based on comments above, it might seem like these POA are based on distance from mid point cup to POA. Since Tim is likely talking about outside edge (and probably how most of us think about POA) then in that case, we need to subtract 2.125 inches from all your numbers in the table. If we do that... then line 1 is about .9% slope which honestly is close enough to 1% and therefore matches up. Does that seem right?

 

I also found this, which corroborates my line of thinking. It's from this very long and totally not worth 99% of people time to read article online. At one point it states: 5’ (60”) breaks 6.0” (i.e., 3.9” above left or right / high side edge) assuming 2% slope.

 

So I would wager Tim is wrong about the 5ft putt breaking 2 inches outside of cup... The green in that case would have to be reeeeally slow or quite uphill... At least from this little thought I just had.

 

Awesome info! 

And you're correct, the values in the table are measured from the center of the hole. Working on adjusting to the edge of the hole. Along with some "ball" figures for closer ones (e.g. inside edge, half a ball, etc.).

[Z1ggy16]

11 hours ago, SE Gamer said:

 

Awesome info! 

And you're correct, the values in the table are measured from the center of the hole. Working on adjusting to the edge of the hole. Along with some "ball" figures for closer ones (e.g. inside edge, half a ball, etc.).

Cool well I feel pretty good using each line as "close enough" to 1% of perceived slope. Honestly when I had a digital level I could barely tell between 1% of slope lol. 2% is obvious, especially when its 0 to 2% but anything less than that for me and Im just guessing anyway.

 

But I think it's cool to see how much break you actually need to play even from short distances. Around 4 inches of break from just 5ft is probably double or even triple the amount that most ams might play on a "gentle breaking putt" which is what I could consider 2% to be. 1% is "I just barely feel it but I know it's there" and 3%+ is "yeah this is definitely moving". That article also said that slopes over 3.5% are basically crap for hole locations. So, unless your greens keeper is a real dickbag or you play on a course with known "unfair breaks", I wouldn't ever play over 3.5 index lines.

 

Also, for those who won't read the article I linked, if you need to adjust for stimp, add or subtract 10% of break for every 1 foot of stimp. So in the case above, 4'' of break becomes 4.4'' on an 11 stimp green, all else equal. This is also useful for changing for POA based on uphill vs downhill putts. I'm still trying to figure this out in context but a putt that is 12ft long up a 4% slope will only go 7.5ft but down that same slope... it now goes 31ft 0_0. I might assume then at 4% perfect side hill slope might mean you should play 4x as much break downhill vs uphill over any given distance but I'll work that one out another time!

Edited March 2, 2023 by Z1ggy16

[SE Gamer]

1 hour ago, Z1ggy16 said:

Cool well I feel pretty good using each line as "close enough" to 1% of perceived slope. Honestly when I had a digital level I could barely tell between 1% of slope lol. 2% is obvious, especially when its 0 to 2% but anything less than that for me and Im just guessing anyway.

 

But I think it's cool to see how much break you actually need to play even from short distances. Around 4 inches of break from just 5ft is probably double or even triple the amount that most ams might play on a "gentle breaking putt" which is what I could consider 2% to be. 1% is "I just barely feel it but I know it's there" and 3%+ is "yeah this is definitely moving". That article also said that slopes over 3.5% are basically crap for hole locations. So, unless your greens keeper is a real dickbag or you play on a course with known "unfair breaks", I wouldn't ever play over 3.5 index lines.

 

Also, for those who won't read the article I linked, if you need to adjust for stimp, add or subtract 10% of break for every 1 foot of stimp. So in the case above, 4'' of break becomes 4.4'' on an 11 stimp green, all else equal. This is also useful for changing for POA based on uphill vs downhill putts. I'm still trying to figure this out in context but a putt that is 121ft long up a 4% slope will only go 7.5ft but down that same slope... it now goes 31ft 0_0. I might assume then at 4% perfect side hill slope might mean you should play 4x as much break downhill vs uphill over any given distance but I'll work that one out another time!

 

So I threw a quick model together to determine the impact of a .1 degree variance has on POA. I know slope and degrees are different figures. But if you're saying that line one would be 1% slope, and knowing it's a 3 degree angle, a tenth degree difference would equate to an even smaller figure in slope variance. So using degrees for this exercise should be a good enough indicator of whether it'll matter. At 30 feet, a .1 degree deviation would mean missing your POA buy a half inch. So I'd say that's well within any margin of user error.

 

I definitely agree with you about seeing the POA figures on paper. I think I posted earlier that when I made the table, I looked at some numbers and thought, "man that seems like a lot of break". But when I actually mocked it up in the real world, the POA didn't look unusual at all. 

[SE Gamer]

Not sure if this would be helpful for folks. But I pulled an image of the model I created when extrapolating the POA figures. 

Don't think I'd extend it much beyond 15 ft, if at all. But will be adding additional foot increments to fill in the gaps. Basically, if you're more of a visual person, this could be a lot easier to use. As everything is to scale.

 

Just like with the table, I'd be happy to hear any feedback or suggestions.
 

[sheppick.dan]

How have you all worked on getting a good feel of slope on the greens? What tools have you used?

 

green reading is my weak point in my game. 

[SE Gamer]

1 hour ago, sheppick.dan said:

How have you all worked on getting a good feel of slope on the greens? What tools have you used?

 

green reading is my weak point in my game. 

 

I've messed around with it a little. But I know there are other guys in here who've gone through the full-on aimpoint training.

 

Short version, get yourself a digital level with a slope readout. And practice, practice, practice with getting the feeling of different slopes. As in, take it to the putting green. Find a known slope of 1%, 2%, 3%, and 4%. Then practice straddling the line to learn what each percentage feels like. 

 

Personally, I expect I'll be using the marker more based on my instinct of green reading (which is pretty well developed having played since I was 5). So I'll determine how far outside the hole I want to play a putt, and then use the marker to precisely index the ball's alignment accordingly. 

 

Alternatively, and similar to the "instinct" method. You essentially assign generic values to the 4 hash marks/lines. Something like subtle, average, moderate, severe. Then gauge each putt's break based on those values. And index accordingly. I'll be playing around with this as well. I'd think this will be more trial and error to build that perception of what each break would look like. But it could prove to be a quick and effective method for guys who don't do aimpoint.

But if the aimpoint guys find this marker significantly enhances their use of the system, I may just have to pony up the cash to take an aimpoint class.

[GriperRiper]

i am ready to join this journey with you guys......what do you need from me @SE Gamer?......this whole idea is right up my alley with how i approach the game.

[SE Gamer]

1 minute ago, GriperRiper said:

i am ready to join this journey with you guys......what do you need from me @SE Gamer?......this whole idea is right up my alley with how i approach the game.

 

Sounds good! Just shoot me a PM and we can chat. 

[Z1ggy16]

9 hours ago, sheppick.dan said:

How have you all worked on getting a good feel of slope on the greens? What tools have you used?

 

green reading is my weak point in my game. 

Just like SEGamer said but it can also be even easier sometimes. If you play on "older" greens, like courses built 50-60+ years ago (like most here in the north east) then almost every green breaks back to front. So as far as direction goes, you can easily guess the overall break direction just based on that. As far as the amount of break, it's easy to tell where the flat putt is, so you'll never play 0 break unless you're right below. Stand halfway between your ball and the hole... Lock out both your legs then quickly let them relax. I guess the percentage of slope based on how much the leg on the side of the break bends. It's subtle but I find it easier than trying to "feel" something in your feet. When in doubt, use 2%. 

 

Don't forget about pace and get really narrow focused on line. Your putt will never go in if you don't hit it hard enough 😉

[sheppick.dan]

9 hours ago, SE Gamer said:

 

I've messed around with it a little. But I know there are other guys in here who've gone through the full-on aimpoint training.

 

Short version, get yourself a digital level with a slope readout. And practice, practice, practice with getting the feeling of different slopes. As in, take it to the putting green. Find a known slope of 1%, 2%, 3%, and 4%. Then practice straddling the line to learn what each percentage feels like. 

 

Personally, I expect I'll be using the marker more based on my instinct of green reading (which is pretty well developed having played since I was 5). So I'll determine how far outside the hole I want to play a putt, and then use the marker to precisely index the ball's alignment accordingly. 

 

Alternatively, and similar to the "instinct" method. You essentially assign generic values to the 4 hash marks/lines. Something like subtle, average, moderate, severe. Then gauge each putt's break based on those values. And index accordingly. I'll be playing around with this as well. I'd think this will be more trial and error to build that perception of what each break would look like. But it could prove to be a quick and effective method for guys who don't do aimpoint.

But if the aimpoint guys find this marker significantly enhances their use of the system, I may just have to pony up the cash to take an aimpoint class.

 

1 hour ago, Z1ggy16 said:

Just like SEGamer said but it can also be even easier sometimes. If you play on "older" greens, like courses built 50-60+ years ago (like most here in the north east) then almost every green breaks back to front. So as far as direction goes, you can easily guess the overall break direction just based on that. As far as the amount of break, it's easy to tell where the flat putt is, so you'll never play 0 break unless you're right below. Stand halfway between your ball and the hole... Lock out both your legs then quickly let them relax. I guess the percentage of slope based on how much the leg on the side of the break bends. It's subtle but I find it easier than trying to "feel" something in your feet. When in doubt, use 2%. 

 

Don't forget about pace and get really narrow focused on line. Your putt will never go in if you don't hit it hard enough 😉

Thanks for the information.

 

The greens at my course aren't too bad. I currently avg around 30-32 putts and am a 4 handicap. The goal is to drop the putts by 2-4 per round, if possible. I think its fairly feasable. 

 

I have watched the aimpoint dvd but nobody around me I have found is teaching it really. 

 

Thanks for the advice on knees locked out then bent to feel it!

[Z1ggy16]

42 minutes ago, sheppick.dan said:

 

Thanks for the information.

 

The greens at my course aren't too bad. I currently avg around 30-32 putts and am a 4 handicap. The goal is to drop the putts by 2-4 per round, if possible. I think its fairly feasable. 

 

I have watched the aimpoint dvd but nobody around me I have found is teaching it really. 

 

Thanks for the advice on knees locked out then bent to feel it!

One common misconception I feel like that exists is that number of putts being a good indicator of your putting skill. It's not. You may feel that you leave meat on the bone with putting but you can't be sure until you know your sg18 average putting.

 

Often times #of putts is more closely related to iron play and short game than it is for putting. If you 3 stab from 60 feet, are you a bad putter or are you not getting the ball close enough to the hole on the shot before? If you have 20 putts but you knocked everything to 5-6ft because you're a god with your irons and wedges, are you a good putter?

[OspreyCI]

2 hours ago, Z1ggy16 said:

One common misconception I feel like that exists is that number of putts being a good indicator of your putting skill. It's not. You may feel that you leave meat on the bone with putting but you can't be sure until you know your sg18 average putting.

 

Often times #of putts is more closely related to iron play and short game than it is for putting. If you 3 stab from 60 feet, are you a bad putter or are you not getting the ball close enough to the hole on the shot before? If you have 20 putts but you knocked everything to 5-6ft because you're a god with your irons and wedges, are you a good putter?

Good point. Doesn’t GIR and putts per round go hand in hand. I had 22 putts recently because I could not hit a green, but chipped well. 

[Z1ggy16]

12 minutes ago, OspreyCI said:

Good point. Doesn’t GIR and putts per round go hand in hand. I had 22 putts recently because I could not hit a green, but chipped well. 

Generally, yes and GIR is also one of the most, if not the #1 metric linked to score and handicap. 

[sonvolt22]

SE, I really like the color coded image you posted above. The visual is much easier for me to work with than the chart. However, the colors on the image don't jibe with your current marker. On the marker, we have the red center line, then white, blue, white and red.

 

When you do update the image, it would great if it's consistent with the marker lines.

 

As always, thanks for all your efforts here. 

Edited March 2, 2023 by sonvolt22

[SE Gamer]

1 minute ago, sonvolt22 said:

SE, I really like the color coded image you posted above. The visual is much easier for me to work with than the chart. However, the colors on the image don't jibe with your current marker. On the marker, we have the red center line, then white, blue, white and red.

 

When you do update the image, it would great if it's consistent with marker lines.

 

As always, thanks for all your efforts here. 

 

Yeah. I like the RWB colors, but didn't even think about pairing them up in the diagram so that they match the marker. Will be an easy fix. And will update it when I add in some additional distances inside 15 feet.

[SE Gamer]

@OspreyCI @sheppick.dan @Z1ggy16 @sonvolt22

Going to be adding more distances to the chart/diagram. Want to fill in the gaps between 0 and 15 (or 20) feet.

 

What increments would you vote for. Currently have... 2ft, 5ft, 8ft, 10ft, 15ft. And then 5ft increments all the way out to 40ft.  

[Z1ggy16]

4 hours ago, SE Gamer said:

@OspreyCI @sheppick.dan @Z1ggy16 @sonvolt22

Going to be adding more distances to the chart/diagram. Want to fill in the gaps between 0 and 15 (or 20) feet.

 

What increments would you vote for. Currently have... 2ft, 5ft, 8ft, 10ft, 15ft. And then 5ft increments all the way out to 40ft.  

To me it doesn't matter bc that paper I linked has a chart for inches of break per foot given slope %, so I can make my own table in excel down to whatever amount of fidelity I need. But I think I general table that ppl might find useful could go by 1 foot increments out to 10ft, then maybe switch to 5ft spacing after? 🤷‍♂️

[sheppick.dan]

4 hours ago, Z1ggy16 said:

To me it doesn't matter bc that paper I linked has a chart for inches of break per foot given slope %, so I can make my own table in excel down to whatever amount of fidelity I need. But I think I general table that ppl might find useful could go by 1 foot increments out to 10ft, then maybe switch to 5ft spacing after? 🤷‍♂️

 

9 hours ago, SE Gamer said:

@OspreyCI @sheppick.dan @Z1ggy16 @sonvolt22

Going to be adding more distances to the chart/diagram. Want to fill in the gaps between 0 and 15 (or 20) feet.

 

What increments would you vote for. Currently have... 2ft, 5ft, 8ft, 10ft, 15ft. And then 5ft increments all the way out to 40ft.  

 

I would agree, 1' increments to 10' then 5' from there.

[SE Gamer]

5 hours ago, Z1ggy16 said:

To me it doesn't matter bc that paper I linked has a chart for inches of break per foot given slope %, so I can make my own table in excel down to whatever amount of fidelity I need. But I think I general table that ppl might find useful could go by 1 foot increments out to 10ft, then maybe switch to 5ft spacing after? 🤷‍♂️

 

Yeah, I think for folks who are going to be more technical with it, the visual diagram might not be as critical. 1 foot increments for the first 10 feet sounds good though. 

 

1 hour ago, sheppick.dan said:

 

 

I would agree, 1' increments to 10' then 5' from there.

 

Appreciate the input. I put together one in the interim that has 2 foot increments from 0-20 feet, then 5 foot increments out to 40ft. 

Will do another with the 1 foot increments from 0-10 feet. PGA Tour make percentage at 10 ft is 40%. So would make sense to really target precision at the closer distances. As that's really where we can realistically hope to take advantage of better alignment. 

[Z1ggy16]

26 minutes ago, SE Gamer said:

 

Yeah, I think for folks who are going to be more technical with it, the visual diagram might not be as critical. 1 foot increments for the first 10 feet sounds good though. 

 

 

Appreciate the input. I put together one in the interim that has 2 foot increments from 0-20 feet, then 5 foot increments out to 40ft. 

Will do another with the 1 foot increments from 0-10 feet. PGA Tour make percentage at 10 ft is 40%. So would make sense to really target precision at the closer distances. As that's really where we can realistically hope to take advantage of better alignment. 

Exactly. I noticed that for me when it comes to making small improvements to my score, it came down to making 5-6 footers for par. Making half your knee knockers or more can shave at least 3 strokes off per round.

 

Whenever I go back to look at my stats, rounds under 80 almost always have several 4-6foot putts made for par. Making an 8 footer or 10 for birdie is nice but you can easy shoot a 76 with only 1 birdie, which I think a decent player could do regularly. I'm a 9 (got down to 6 but went back up) and my bird average was like .9