Build Better Putting Evidence

Putting produces more countable, low-ambiguity data than almost any other part of golf: a putt either goes in or it does not, and a leave distance is a simple measurement. That makes putting an ideal place to build a small, honest evidence habit, and this resource walks through what to record, how to interpret it, and just as importantly, what an observed rate from your own data does and does not support.

Makes versus attempts: the foundation

Before any rate means anything, it needs both halves of the fraction. The Putting Round Review captures the simplest version of this during an actual round, total putts, and optionally first-putt distance and outcome, while the Putting Make-Rate Map lets you accumulate makes and attempts by distance band across practice sessions or rounds, suppressing any rate where the attempt count is zero.

Distance bands: your own, not a fixed scheme

There is no universally correct way to bucket putting distances. A three-foot band matters a great deal to some golfers; others care more about a broad "inside ten feet" bucket. Every tool in this cluster lets you define your own bands, matching however you actually think about your putting rather than forcing a generic scheme onto your data.

Lag leaves: measuring longer first putts

On longer putts, the more useful measurement is often not whether you made it, but how close you left it. The Lag Putting Analyzer groups your recorded leave distances into bands and reports count, mean, and range, letting you compare an optional personal target leave against what actually happened. It cannot, and does not try to, assess your green-reading quality; it only records outcomes.

Observed three-putt share, not predictive risk

The Three-Putt Risk Explorer divides your entered three-putts by your entered first-putt opportunities within each distance band. This is described deliberately as an observed share, a description of what already happened in your recorded attempts, never a predictive risk model for your next putt. Treating an observed share as a forecast is a common way this kind of evidence gets misused; this resource asks you not to.

Calibration: a repeatable distance-control test

The Putting Distance Calibration tool structures a simple, repeatable test: pick a target distance, putt to it, and measure the actual leave. Doing this across a range of distances builds a calibration record showing whether you tend to leave putts short or long on average, and by how much, retaining every attempt including the outliers.

Directional labels: self-reported, never inferred

The Putting Dispersion Map tallies miss directions using labels you choose yourself, left, right, short, long, or a custom label that matches how you experience a miss. This tool never infers a direction from video or a device; every count comes from your own read of what happened.

Comparable sessions: aligning before comparing

The Putting Progress Review only compares a session against the immediately preceding one when the format and distance band match exactly. A change in either breaks the comparable chain rather than being pooled into a misleading trend; the tool flags the change instead.

Sample-size limits: the honest caveat behind every rate

Every make rate, three-putt share, and calibration mean in this cluster carries a sample count alongside it, and a small sample is flagged rather than hidden. A rate built from three attempts is real data, but it is far less stable than the same rate built from thirty; treat the warning as a reminder to keep collecting, not as a reason to distrust the number entirely.

A session template

A simple putting practice session might log: 20 attempts from 3 feet (make/miss), 15 attempts from 6 feet (make/miss), and 10 lag putts from 40 feet (leave distance in feet). Recording this consistently across sessions, even without every possible field, builds a much more useful evidence base than an inconsistent attempt to track everything perfectly once and never again.

A worked rate table

Notice that even a well-recorded session like this one gives each band a modest sample; a single session rarely settles a question. Building this table across several sessions, using the Putting Make-Rate Map, is what turns a snapshot into evidence you can act on.

What none of this replaces

None of these tools give green-reading instruction, diagnose a stroke fault, or compare your numbers with a tour or scratch-golfer benchmark. They are a private, honest record of your own putting, useful on their own terms and as a foundation for deciding where to spend limited practice time, covered next in Turn Limited Practice Time Into a Plan.