The Art of the Putting Stroke

Firstly, I’m back. I faced some problematic technical issues which involved my old laptop shuffling off the mortal coil, but this has been solved. Obviously. Anyway, back to the article at hand.

This is probably the most debated topic when it comes to golf, as there are two main contradicting schools of thought when it comes to the putting stroke. One is known as the ‘screen door’ stroke, while the other is known as the ‘PILS’ stroke.

‘Screen Door’ stroke

This involves the putter face rotating through the swing like so:

This is a method of putting that seems to have gained popularity over the years. It used to be frowned upon in the late 2000’s for reasons we will get into later.

Advantages:

• Rotation matches the natural movement of the body
• It’s physically possible

Disadvantages:

• Face-angle control & path control is dependent on timing of the stroke
• Face-angle control & path control is dependent on ball position
• Face-angle control & path control is dependent on length of stroke
• Face-angle control & path control is dependent on stroke tempo

‘PILS’ stroke

This stands for perfect-in-line-square stroke and involves the putter face staying completely square to the target line at all times during the stroke duration, as shown in the diagram below:

Advantages:

• Face-angle control & path control is not dependent on anything as it remains constant throughout the stroke

Disadvantages:

• It is unnatural
• It is physically impossible when attempting longer strokes

The main (only) user of this method is Perfy, as seen below:

As you may be able to tell, Perfy is a robot that Dave Pelz has built to illustrate this concept. I was fortunate to visit Pelz’s headquarters in Dublin, and bore witness to Perfy’s many abilities which include being a model of peak performance, but do not include singing, dancing or stand-up comedy.

Alternatively, many golf professionals believe that the type of putter used should greatly influence the type of stroke used. This can be summed up by the following figure:

Personally, I have been using a PILS stroke for a few years now, (or as close as I could) as I was taught putting by a subordinate of Dave Pelz, who was the pioneer of the stroke. However, in early 2019 I attended a lesson with a subordinate of Harold Swash who believed that a PILS is a good stroke to aim for, but is unattainable. Moreover, he provided me with a arc, that was custom made to tailor my stroke similar to the one shown below:

Over the past few weeks I have begun to adapt and improvise my stroke to match Swash’s school of thought after a recent tournament impelled me towards change.

In conclusion, I remain inconclusive regarding the thoroughbred affair of which putting stroke is best. I do believe that the type of putter used plays a role in determining the optimal stroke, although the significance of this is up for debate.

Hopefully this entry has been engaging & informative, and I’ll see you next time my laptop dies, with another post. Bye!