Bobby Jones on the Pendulum Stroke

In putting, as in the full swing, there is more than one way to skin a cat--do people really skin cats?  We probably see more variations in grip, stance, posture, and stroke in putting than in any other part of the game.  It seems to me, that there continues to be a number of people who consider the perfect stroke to be a pendulum stroke.

That being the case, I think it is worthwhile examining what Bobby Jones had to say on the subject in his book Bobby Jones on Golf:

"There is one thing I wish people would stop talking about and writing about, because I think it causes much confusion in the beginner's mind.  I refer to the theory of the pendulum putting stroke.  It has been described and expressed in different ways, but when boiled down, each demonstration resolves itself into a thing absolutely impossible of accomplishment so long as human beings are built as we know them.

Unquestionably, a pendulum-like golf club with an absolutely true face, swung precisely along the line of the putt and suspended from a point exactly over the ball, furnishes the ideal conception of accurate striking.  But so long as human toes stick out in front, and until a golf club turns into a croquet mallet and can be swung backward between the legs, there is little hope that this can be attained.  For the present at least, it seems to me far better that we strive to find some way to improve our performance, using the method more or less familiar to us all...

The important considerations in putting are that the putter should be faced properly when it strikes the ball, and that, as it strikes, it should be moving in the direction of the hole.  If these two requirements are met, it makes no difference in the world whether or not the club was faced properly or moved along the projected line of the putt throughout the backswing."

There you have it; this advice is from, almost unquestionably, the greatest player ever to play the game, who also happened to have a degree in mechanical engineering, not to mention a degree in English literature from Harvard, and was a lawyer to boot--Mrs. Jones didn't raise no fool.  So, it might be wise to forget trying to make a pendulum stroke so long as your toes stick out in front of your body.  Better just to pick your line and knock it in the hole with a stroke that pretty much resembles your golf swing--only shorter.

Makes perfect sense to me.  But then, what do I know?  Take it from Bobby Jones, who wielded his famous putter, Calamity Jane, with pretty fair success.

Bobby Jones on Golf: Spotting the Line

I think there is a tendency to think that golf is a different game from the game played by Bobby Jones in the 1920's.  The reality is, the only thing that's changed is the equipment and the condition of the golf courses.  Because of improved technology, the game is easier; we may be hitting the ball a bit farther, and a bit straighter, and we may do a little better on improved greens.  But the game, and the challenge it presents, namely of knocking a ball into a hole that tends to be too small, with implements singularly ill-designed for that purpose, has changed not a bit.  

It's because golf is still the same game that I tend to spend so much time reading Bobby Jones' teaching.  It's as relevant today as it was when it was written.  The implements in golf may have changed, but the nature of the creature wielding them certainly hasn't.  And Bobby Jones understood golf, and golfers, as well as anyone ever has, or likely ever will.  

The Open at St Andrews should have once again reinforced the fact that golf will always be a game that is more about precision than power.  If you have to choose between being a long driver and a good putter, the choice becomes obvious when we remember who took home the Claret Jug this year on a course that was touted by some as a bomber's paradise.  

That's why I've gone back to reading Bobby Jones' advice on the subject of putting.  I have days, like today, when putting seems easy.  But generally, I feel like the most inadequate character I know with a putter in my hand.  I know much of that is attitude, but I also feel as though I still have much to learn, or remind myself, when it comes to putting.  In Bobby Jones on Golf, Bobby had this to say on the subject, under the heading Spotting the Line:

"Certainly, I lay no claim to having reduced the art of putting to anything approaching a science in which there is no variation from day to day, but I found my average performance on the putting green to be greatly improved by following a few principles, none of which has to do with form or the details of the stroke.  The first one is to resist the inclination to look up to the hole while in the act of striking the ball, an inclination that becomes stronger when one's putting becomes uncertain.  Other players have devised for themselves ways of guarding against this tendency.  It makes little difference how long the head is kept down so long as one makes certain that the ball has actually been struck before the eye leaves it.

Absolute concentration upon the ball is materially aided by substituting for the objective of the putt, instead of the hole itself, a spot on the green somewhere along the intended line.  For a putt of six to ten or twelve feet--of the length one would normally at least hope to hole--the spot selected should be about half way to the hole; for a putt of more than this length, the spot should be no more than fifteen feet from the ball.  It should then be the player's aim to strike the ball so that it will roll directly over this spot, and he should forget the hole entirely except insofar as his mental picture of the length of the putt will affect the force of his blow.  In order to become more consistent, the player should make up his mind to concentrate every effort upon striking the ball truly.  If he succeeds here, he cannot go far wrong.

Many good putters will declare that they putt well because they follow through straight toward the hole.  Whether or not the follow-through is a virtue, it certainly cannot be a prime cause, for when it takes place, the ball has started on its way.  I have never been a believer in a fixed putting style.  It has always been my idea that more attention should be given to gauging the effect of a slope, and to estimating the speed of a green--in other words, to training the eye--than to the mechanical perfection of the stroke.  It is evident that no matter how accurately the ball may be struck, it must be started on the right line and at the right speed.

As an indication that the line is the important thing, I can truthfully say that I have holed very few putts when I could not see definitely the path the ball should follow into the hole.  Sometimes this line seemed to be as clearly defined as if someone had marked it out with white paint; I cannot remember failing to at least hit the hole when I have been able to see the line this clearly.

There is one thing a golfer should always remember and always practise.  In any round there are always numbers of times when the proper line to the hole is obscure; if it were always visible, we should miss few putts.  But it is always a good practice, when the correct line cannot be determined, to borrow generously from any slope and to attempt to cause the ball to pass a tiny bit above the hole. If the ball remains above the hole, there is always a chance that it will fall into the upper side, and it is certain that it will at any rate not stop far away.  But once a putt begins to roll below the hole, every inch it travels takes it farther from that precious cup.

The art of appraising slope and speed--that is, of reading a green--can be derived only from experience.  The player who sees only the greens on his home course is at some disadvantage because he comes to know these in spite of himself.  In order to broaden his experience, he should play other courses as often as possible."

So, from this short segment from Bobby Jones we get the idea of spot putting, trying to miss on the high side when the correct line isn't obvious, and not looking up at the hole until after the ball is struck. These principles have been, and are still followed by the best putters in the game.  

Unfortunately for me, spot putting has not worked very well because I seem to seldom be able to see the exact line a putt will take to the hole.  This may be because I am not a visual person.  I seem to be more feel oriented, tending to feel the break with my feet, rather than seeing it. I have also taken to looking at the hole when I putt, which stops my head and eyes from moving in an effort to follow the putter head, or to see where the ball is going. But, for those who are more visual, and able to visualize the line, you would be well advised to follow Bobby's advice about rolling the ball over a spot on the intended line, rather than worrying about the hole.  It worked for him, and was adopted by, among other top players, Jack Nicklaus. 

I intend to continue sharing Bobby Jones' teaching, because, in my opinion, many have copied it, but no one has managed to improve upon it.  Whenever I read modern instruction, except perhaps as it relates to swing mechanics, I am constantly reminded that Bobby not only said it first, he also said it better.  He was, and still is, as that young St Andrews caddie once exclaimed, a wonder. 

Bobby Jones on The Importance of Putting

Whether we like it or not, putting is a big part of the game.  In fact, Jordan Spieth's brilliance is built around his ability to make key putts, especially those in the fifteen to twenty foot range.  Good putters have the advantage of knowing they are able to turn three shots into two, by regularly holing putts well outside the proverbial leather.  I have always wished I could be a better putter, regularly envying players whom I've had beat me, not because they hit it better than I did, but because they putted so well.

Bobby Jones had an interesting take on the age old question posed by poor putters, namely, is there too much of a premium placed on putting?  In his book, Bobby Jones on Golf, Bobby said:

"The experiment of substituting eight-inch cups for the stand four and a quarter inch size brings us back to the old contention that too much of the game of golf is played on the putting green.  Someone is always trying to improve or reform something and golf has not escaped.

I remember some years ago a professional tournament played over an English course--Wentworth, I believe--in which an attempt was made to reckon points for accurate approach shots.  A series of concentric circles was laid out around each hole and the players were awarded so many points for score, and in addition, a varying number of points depending upon which circle they were able to hit with their second shots.  Like the Florida experiment, this was a protest against the importance of putting in golf as it has always been played. 

The argument runs something like this: Par is intended to represent perfect golf.  The average par of an 18-hole course is, roughly, 72, and par figures always allow two putts to a green.  Thus, in an18-hole round, par figures allow the player 36 putts and 36 other shots distributed among his remaining clubs.  Since one-half of the strokes of a perfect round of golf may be played with a putter, is there not too much premium placed upon skill with the club?  Would not the distribution be fairer if the hole could be made of such size as to make one putt per green, instead of two, a reasonable allowance?

One answer to this is, of course, that excellence in driving and in iron play receives its reward as certainly as does excellence in putting.  Often, bad putting can nullify the advantage gained in other departments, but certainly a long, straight drive makes the second shot easier, and an accurate second shot places the player in winning position.

The advocates of the larger hole would eliminate from the game the unfair result coming about when one player holes a long putt and 'steals' a hole from a man who has outplayed him to the green.  Their contention is that the hole should be large enough so that the holing of any reasonable putt after a fine second shot would be practically certain.  But they overlook the fact that the 'thief' would then be holing from off the green and from bunkers quite as often.

The dub hails the larger cup with delight, because he conceives that he will no longer be blowing the short putts and that all little ones that now rim the hole will begin to fall in.  But here again the thing is entirely relative.  Instead of rimming and missing from two, three, and four feet, he will experience the same disappointment when he misses from ten, twelve, and fifteen feet.  No matter what we do to the hole, we will never cease to hear about the ball that might have gone in but didn't.

It seems to me that the larger hole might have just the opposite effect from that claimed for it, for I believe it would make more difference in the putting game for the man who was continually leaving himself away from the hole than for the fellow who is always banging his second shots up close.  The second man seldom has to worry about taking three putts, even with the present hole size, and if he is at all a good putter, he will pick up a number of one-putt greens, whereas the other fellow, playing a bit wider on his approaches, will scarcely ever get down in one, except by accident and often, if his touch is not just right, he will be taking three.

I have no real fear that these experiments will lead to anything.  I do not think that making the hole larger would make the game any better, but even if it would, I should still recall what I consider the best argument advanced against a change.  I once heard someone say, when a discussion like this was going on, 'Surely, go ahead. And make the hole any size you please.  But. When you do, do not call the game golf.'"

Is it just me, or was that Bobby Jones not one seriously intelligent man?  I'll just have to quit complaining about the short putts I miss, and either learn to putt better or expect to keep getting beaten by guys who don't hit it as well as me, but can putt like stink.