Triangulation?
 

V.J,

What are your thoughts on Mike Shannon's theory about triangulation as the reason for aiming issues?

Which do you think is the more important reason for aiming?
1. Triangulation;
2. Proper gaze control;
3. Various visual features of the putter(as espoused by David Edel.

Mike is a good friend and a wonderful instructor. I feel his concept of triangulation and aiming are good. He can get anybody aiming the putter better very quickly.

Tony Sills and Geoff Mangum believe the gaze is very important. I have met Geoff and of course I have the pleasure of seeing Tony everyday. There is no doubt the gaze of the eyes have an effect on aim. It is slightly more difficult to achieve than Mike's way, but the effect is the same. The only difference is the ball is not moved around during the set-up to achieve good aim.

Putter head style definitely makes a difference. You, I, and everyone else will aim better and worse depending on the putter that is front of us. So, getting a "good looking" putter in front of us is important.

All three have merit. All three will help. All three are concerned only with aim.

Great Post VJ..

David Edel is not only concerned with Aim but also it's relationship to loft, hosel design, offset,head design, lie, length, line configuration, shaft flex, head weighting, counterweighting, grip size, and grip type...

I personally believe that you could follow all three or one of the above to improve your Aim..It's up to hard hard you wnat to work....Leat amount of work is Putter Fitting...Retrainng your gaze might take a little more effort and Traingulation will require some assistance....

I'm not an expert in this field ...BUT I am persoanl friends with David Edel and I know his stuff is "red smoke and mirrors" aka...a laser and mirrors on your putter face... Unfortunately it shows what the facts are..."it is what it is...

If you aim left...you aim left..now it's your choice how you handle it...

Triangulation, Gaze Control, or Putter Fitting?

Thanks guys!

So we fix people's aim...so what's next?
Do we go after their stroke mechanics?
Or their speed control?
Or do we let the dust settle, let people work on their aim awhile, then get back to them?

Homerson,

Good question. There are two different philosophies on aim. I will not get into my opinions yet; I will just simply give the different philosophies.

A bent plane line, lack of hinging, and very little speed control leads to bad aim by necessity. Meaning if the stroke is akward and mis-aligned the aim will need to be just to make a putt.

Bad aim on the other hand can take a person with great mechanics and begin to bend their plane line, mess with their hinging, and throw their lag pressure off. However, if the person is constantly monitoring these imperatives it would preserve some of their aim.

Think of it in terms of the full swing. A bent plane to the left with vertical hinging or throw-away will lead a player to aim right. The computer is a wonderful thing.

So do you work from mechanics to aim, or from aim to mechanics?

So movement or perception? Aim or stroke mechanics?

I think that the mechanics of putting straight with good touch should come first!

Interesting segue into the full swing...Lots of full swing teachers are going to emphasise 'fundamentals' like grip, stance, allignment, and posture first, which undoubtedly are crucial. TGM seems to stress Basic and Acquired Motion with the above fundamentals blended in as necessary...as an order!

Putting Basics
 

Putting is/has four factors. (1) Read the green. (2) Aim the read. (3) Stroke the aim. (4) Control the distance. If you can't control distance, you'll never really understand the Read, thus Aim will be suspect, resulting in blaming everything on the Stroke. If you look at any individual's full stroke, it is usually remarkably the same, so are most putting strokes. If you want proof, next time you play have each member tell his/her starting aim and from on line with the cup, see if he/she starts the putt as desired and the result. Was it read, start or distance control???

I like your post and know well Geoff Mangum's research on putting. Putting has three imperatives, a straight plane line (whether vertical or inclined), lag pressure (for distance control), and a shaft which is vertical to the ground (or slightly leaned forward) at low point. These are the mechanical imperatives to putting.

Tony Sills introduced me to visual training some three years ago. The shift I see coming in putting will be to the eyes and the alignment of the putterface. There is a lot of research (Geoff has a good bit on his site) pointing to the importance of understanding the way in which the eyes work to help or hinder good alignment of the putter. But, this work belongs in the in Zone 1 for the golfing machine, not in Zone 2 or 3.

Again, we retrace our steps and we find that unless the pivot does its job, the arms and the hands will constantly compensate for the pivot. However, the better the mechanics, the better the compensation. In other words, the more educated the hands, the better off we are with the flat stick in our hands. Uneducated hands can be the whole problem and never even be suspected.

So............stay pigeon holed while while we research.