"Stimp meter" info of Links 2003

[Pappy]

I don't recall ever seeing data like this so will put it up. I used Easy Swing to get the most accuracy (took a few mins to figure it out lol - just set distance with stick and click - it'll will be hit the same if you set it the same distance. I set it for 19' for the various hardnesses of the green (hit it the same in other words - with Easy Swing it's much easier). This is not true stimp but close. Here it is --

1.05 speeds
MM - 20'
S - 17'
F - 24'
SS - 15'
FF - 28'
SF - 20'
FS - 20'

Challenge speeds
MM - 39'
S - 32'
F - 53'
SS - 24'
FF - 63'
SF - 39'
FS - 39'

One thing that stands out that most of you know is SF and FS speeds are same as MM.

[gibby]

Or dig out some old charts! LOL!!

[Colin_Rommel]

Hi Pappy, yes what you've come up with there is about the same as my findings when I checked speeds quite a while (well, years actually) ago.

However, although I have never tested it properly, it has since seemed to me from playing in a lot of different events that speeds of greens can depend on which course you're playing. Greens on one course seem to play either slightly faster or slightly slower than the exact same conditions on another course. Maybe it has something to do with different textures, or something that a designer can input I don't know but I'm pretty sure I'm not imagining it.

That said, I don't use charts these days (haven't in a long while) like the ones shown by Gibby and my putting and chipping is all done on "feel."

[gd5150]

100's died smuggling those valued charts to the LSPN.

[Pappy]

I didn't do the "stimp" meter to be used as a playing chart - I realize there are plenty of personal putting charts out there. This for mainly newbies, I guess, showing differences of various speeds in a readers digest form. Using Easy Swing was an attempt to make it as accurate as possible. I actually didn't realize how much difference between 1.05 and Challenge (and this after almost 20 years playing Links (and some others before that going in 1980's). FF in Challenge for example you hit it 20' in 1.05 it goes 21 yards in Challengs (whew). Anyway take it for what it's worth - not much effort expended on my part.

[Acrilix]

The problem is your results don't equate to stimp meter figures at all, do they? The fastest greens in the world tend to be around 15 while your fastest is 63!!

[Pappy]

The problem is your results don't equate to stimp meter figures at all, do they? The fastest greens in the world tend to be around 15 while your fastest is 63!!

I give up!! Whatever......

[Blade]

The problem is your results don't equate to stimp meter figures at all, do they? The fastest greens in the world tend to be around 15 while your fastest is 63!!

Lez, so that's the reason why Guy's that play Challenging conditions say that the Mod makes the Game more realistic!! ROFLMAO

[rwoodworkr]

I don't know if challenging makes the game more realistic, but it certainly makes the scores more realistic.

[Joe Bradley]

I think one of the better, sometimes overlooked, aspects of "challenging" is the need for strategy in "firm" conditions to avoid rolling off the fairway knowing you'll never stop it on the green if you then had to hit from the rough. Or the converse - making sure you come in with a longish iron when hitting into a sloping green in fast/soft to avoid spinning back off the green. Makes you think a little more on the tee and not always whack it with the driver. Also not always to simply aim for the pin but to think ahead (if you know the course well enough) to avoid those dreaded side-slopes that can soon rack up a four-putt. That said, with some of the green slopes you encounter - I recall one this week at Kap Village - putting in firm/medium can become Crazy Golf at times with the ball trickling back to your feet several times if you fail to hit the hole. Either the mod's speed is way too fast, the slopes way too steep, or the pin positions way too malicious, but whichever way, it ain't realistic. Still fun though!

[gd5150]

I don't know if challenging makes the game more realistic, but it certainly makes the scores more realistic.

Its makes gameplay look and feel like professional golf. 1.05 just doesn't play or look as real. Yes challanging can be frustrating, its inredibly unforgiving. So are the greens on the PGA tour. For example, Tiger Woods famous shot on the 16th at Augusta in which he chips to the top half and then rolls 50' down the hill into the hole would be impossoble on 1.05. So for me the look and feel for challanging is just better.

[rwoodworkr]

I agree Greg. I think it's all a function of course design and green slope. Courses that were built 1.07 friendly play very nicely at challenging, whereas some of the earlier course made for 1.05 are just not practical to play at the faster speeds. Fc/fc may be a bit unrealistic in most cases, but some of the softer, slower conditions seem just about right. I know that it's entirely possible to hit a putt 100+ft irl if the green is quick enough. It's all relative regarding the swing meter. You just need to adjust your stroke accordingly.

[Acrilix]

The problem is your results don't equate to stimp meter figures at all, do they? The fastest greens in the world tend to be around 15 while your fastest is 63!!

I give up!! Whatever......

No need to spit your dummy out, Pappy!
Passing on information is a great thing. I just think your title "Stimp meter" info is misleading. If it had said Green Speed Info I wouldn't have been disappointed when I looked at the results. Just be glad you're not the designer of "The worst course ever", kindly commented on by Drpinseeker. Then you would have cause to feel upset!!

[Pappy]

The problem is your results don't equate to stimp meter figures at all, do they? The fastest greens in the world tend to be around 15 while your fastest is 63!!

I give up!! Whatever......

No need to spit your dummy out, Pappy!
Passing on information is a great thing. I just think your title "Stimp meter" info is misleading. If it had said Green Speed Info I wouldn't have been disappointed when I looked at the results. Just be glad you're not the designer of "The worst course ever", kindly commented on by Drpinseeker. Then you would have cause to feel upset!!

I guess you didn't notice the quote marks around "Stimp meter" (which means not the true meaning and you have to read the explanation). I know what a stimp meter is and agree that it wasn't a true one. About the only similarity I guess was showing the speed differences of different hardnesses of greens. That's all really.

[Joe Bradley]

Whatever the terminology, I found this information really useful, so many thanks Pappy.