The article is about a _green reading_ technique called Aim Point rather than the putting stroke itself. In the title, "putting technique" might be interpreted as "putting stroke" and I would consider green reading and putting technique separate albeit very closely linked skills.
Aim Point is the brainchild of a software developer. It reminds me golf as a game is deserving of more attention on HN. Technology has changed the way the game is played and consumed significantly in recent years. Here are just a few examples:
- Most courses all over the world are mapped and available in a variety of GPS devices, including smart phones and watches allowing players to determine distances to the green (and intermediate obstacles) on every shot
- Sensors can be attached to clubs that, when paired with GPS, allow software to help the average player track with precision how far they hit each club
- Tracking shots over the years has yields millions of data points which now inform ideal course management strategy
- Launch monitors can measure the ball at impact to provide near instant readings and predictions of ball flight like distance, ball speed, club head speed, club path, angle of attack, spin rate
- "Shot tracing" technologies have emerged that provide video of a golf shot with an overlay of the ball flight (which I find make the game more enjoyable to watch)
- Design and production of clubs and golf balls themselves have undergone massive amounts of research and analysis—some manufacturers now claim AI driven design—to produce longer, straighter shots
At its core, golf is a physics problem. Player swings a device, imparts a force on an object, and observes the result. It lends itself very well to empirical analysis. And yet, despite this simplicity and all the technological weight thrown at the game, average players scores have failed to improve. There is still an art to the game that can’t be mastered with technology alone.
Beautiful game.