Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

274 Excellent

About bluesmandan76

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

650 profile views
  1. 200cc might be a little too small maybe, but I think you’re on the right track. 460cc is just too big. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  2. Yes, middler, you’ve got it figured right. It takes some awkward manipulation to achieve sbst. It’s unnatural to keep the putter head on the target line, since our body and arms aren’t on it. Everyone has at least some arc, meaning the swing plane is not vertical. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  3. No. Let me explain. Toe hang can increase the likelihood of blocking a putt IF your tempo is too fast (think of a push stroke with a short backswing and long follow through) where you accelerate too much. That is NOT the case here. He has an easy flowing tempo, not rushed, not accelerating hard. With a stroke that has a slower easier tempo, a face balanced putter wants to open up a bit because its face balancing causes it to want to point the face to the sky. It’s gravity interacting with the putter head. A face balanced putter is better for someone with a push stroke or a fast tempo, especially if they have a quick transition, because the face wants to stay in line with the shaft. It stays stable during a fast transition or a harder acceleration, whereas a toe hang putter would fly open. Slower tempo, easy flowing, swinging stroke needs some toe hang, especially if they “release” the putter head through impact, or if they have a light grip (not gripping it very tightly, I mean). If they release early (and pull it) a face balanced putter can help correct this a little. This is NOT about how much you roll the putter open and close it through impact— that is always wrong!!! The putter should always stay square to your arc, which is really about how upright or flat the plane is on which the putterhead moves. Square to the plane is square to the arc. The more upright the plane, the less arc, and the less toe hang you will need. The flatter the plane, the more arc, and thus the more toe hang you will need, because of the way gravity pulls at the putter head — which makes the face balanced putter want to open up and face the sky, an effect that is more noticeable the flatter the plane is. (Lay a face balanced putter on the edge of a table and watch how quickly it flops open. The putter that has toehang has its center of gravity closer to the shaft and not so rearward, so gravity doesn’t affect it quite as much.) Gravity affects the slower stroke more, and pulls the toe of the putter down, squaring it up. Think about it this way: it’s the same reason that antislice drivers have a lot of offset... as you swing the driver the toe pulls out away from you, closing the face. It’s the same principle here. Most toe hang putters have a shaft of offset, with the shaft axis at the heel (like a driver) that interacts with the toe and gravity to help close the face. The shaft axis of the face balanced putter is through the face center, not the heel. Your plane is affected by your height and by how you hinge or rotate to power your stroke. A tall man who swings from the shoulders will have a very upright plane and little arc. A short man who hinges from the elbows or has a handsy stroke will have a flat plane and lots of arc. But the tempo of the stroke, speed of transition, how much acceleration, and how tightly one grips it can be more important than the plane or arc. All of these elements interact and need to be accounted for in a full fitting. Based on what I can see in the video, he needs a bit of toe hang because of his easy flowing stroke. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  4. One other comment on this, about managing expectations. When I started using percentage of miss to measure my success, I found that I had been getting upset about the wrong shots! Plenty of the shots I used to think were bad were actually pretty good, and a lot of the shots I thought were acceptable were quite bad! It really did change my expectations and goals. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  5. I’ve posted about this several times. A 10% margin of error gets you to scratch. Pelz says the pros average around 8%. And that’s really interesting how their margin gets lower and lower the shorter the shot is. I’ve only been using a static percentage as a standard to measure my game so maybe I should adjust my standard on shorter shots. I’ve used this 10% rule as my means for examining my game for a while now. When I see any part of my game (whether it’s chipping, pitching, full approaches, or putting) start to trend upwards, I know I need to work on that part of my game. If I can keep it generally below 15% I’m fairly happy. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  6. I’ll echo golfspy up above. Your stroke has too much arc for a face balanced putter. That’s partly why you miss putts to the right. Toehang helps the face close. Face balanced putters want to stay the way they are in motion so if you take it back inside, the face points to the right and wants to stay that way. You need a little toe flow to help square it up at impact. Apart from that it’s hard to say much because we can’t see you, only the putter head. But from what I could tell the stroke itself seemed fine as far as tempo, length of backswing and forward swing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  7. I practice with a mat that is aligned to my target, so that when I play on the course correct alignment feels right. Always practice with an alignment stick or something, and always hit to a target. If you don’t, then bad alignment WILL sneak up on you! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  8. Mine is with the gapping at the top end. 3W, 5W, 2i, 3h, 3i. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  9. Strongish, but its neutral for me. My left thumb runs down the shaft about 30* to the right of top dead center. That’s around 1 oclock. 3:00 would be with your thumb on the very back of the shaft at 90*off top dead center. 1:30 is half that at 45*. 1:00 is 30*. (Or 360 degrees in a circle and 360/12 = 30) To check your grip, grip the club normally, then remove your trail hand . Then lift the club and point it straight out from you. Then turn the handle til your thumb is top dead center. Where does the clubface point? Note the second picture below. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  10. Huh. The first one, sure, but the second... I didn’t realize there were so many good stunts in it. Don’t remember it that way. Have to pay attention to that next time. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  11. So have you seen it yet? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  12. Yes indeed. And I think one of the questions the movie intends to raise is to what degree is society (we/us) responsible for these people and their acts? In Joker it is quite clear that everyone — from the bullies to the mother to the father to the counselor to the show host — no one cared except a figment of his imagination, and so they all shared some degree of culpability in his metamorphosis. One gets the sense that if at any point someone had reached out to him in genuine friendship to notice him, pay attention to him, care for him then his descent from despair into madness would have stopped. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  13. If i can piggyback on your “alienation and helplessness” line, the movie also serves as an interesting critique of existentialism and existential nihilism. The way he transitions from not being sure he even existed and not knowing who he was to finding his purpose and “real” identity — as a murderer... the world was harsh and didn’t make sense so he just followed his heart and did what made him happy, defining his own life, despite what others thought. Good advice, right?! Oops. But isn’t that what everyone says today? [stands up and gets on soapbox]: I despise existentialism and nihilism and am glad when anything critiques these horrible worldviews. Every idiot college philosophy professor seems to think these empty evil philosophies are wonderful, even though it is the proliferation of these views that has led to many of our current societal problems. They claim these views are liberating, but they only “work” if everyone around you is still living with a somewhat unified worldview and morality. When everyone around you turns existential & nihilistic too then chaos ensues, society falls apart and institutions crumble because everyone is subjectively defining their own purpose & reality - and that is philosophical, religious, and moral anarchy. [Gets off soapbox] I appreciate movies that have an intentional philosophical purpose... something deeper to say about the way people think or the way our culture understands (or misunderstands) things. Sadly most movies unintentionally (and some very intentionally) promote bad philosophies instead of critiquing them. I think many people find Joker too dark in part because they themselves have adopted an existential & nihilistic worldview and the movie dethrones that view as empty and absurd without supplying a better alternative worldview to replace what it has so harshly criticized. Not that people intellectually grasp this when they watch a movie; they just feel the darkness of the way the character is thinking and changing. But the fact that they were able to sympathize with the character means they were at some level thinking and feeling like him, and that is disturbing to them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  14. Wow. I came to the opposite conclusion. The movie explains specifically how he became a murder loving psychopath who kills for fun — that’s the main thrust of the plot— and did it in a way that seemed somewhat real/plausible/current by placing him in the current climate of insane mass shootings. He wasn’t “passed off” as a man with undefined mental illnesses; that’s a core part of the Joker character! Frequent stays at Arkham Asylum as criminally insane is kind of a big part of the Joker story. Even Ledger’s Joker had undefined mental illness—if you’ll recall when he is first identified it’s noted that he had previously been in Arkham but it doesn’t say why, which is... the plot relying on undefined mental illness. I kinda knew from the get-go that this was going to be a Talented Mr. Ripley take on the Joker, getting you to sympathize with the main character before he really twists off into evil, so I was prepared for the darkness of the film. That is, I knew the trick already so I didn’t get tricked! I think that’s what people find so dark and disturbing about the film more than anything else: the fact that they emotionally invested their sympathy in the character... who turns out to be EVIL. You root for the poor underdog to succeed and then he does but... “oh crap I was rooting for evil!” It’s a great plot device. Used in classic flicks like The Shining. The Godfather. Citizen Kane. Anyway it’s the opposite of redemption, where you start with a bad character who becomes good (like the original Star Wars trilogy). Though in the Joker he doesn’t “become” crazy and evil, but finds out this is what he really was all along. And the fact that you follow only the main character for the whole movie—there’s no side characters or side plots to follow, you’re always with Joaquin— that is a movie making challenge and it is really pulled off well. Kudos to the director. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  15. Yep. Ask them what kind of ball they are playing; don’t tell them what kind of ball you found. Gotta do what you can to keep the cheaters honest! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Create New...