ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2023
Can golfers choose low-risk routes in steep putting based on visual feedback of ball trajectory?
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to clarify why the aiming method in golf putting in risky situations differs based on skill level. This study set up a difficult challenge (steep slopes and fast ball rolling greens), which required even professional golfers to change their aim. A total of 12 tour professionals and 12 intermediate amateurs were asked to perform a steep-slope task with no visual feedback of outcomes (no FB) followed by a task with visual feedback (with FB). The aim of the task was for the ball to enter the hole in one shot. Additionally, the participants were told that if the ball did not enter the hole, it was to at least stop as close to it as possible. The participant's aim (as an angle) and the kinematics of the putter head and ball were measured. The results indicated that professionals' highest ball trajectory points were significantly higher than that of amateurs, especially with FB. Additionally, professionals had higher ball-launch angles (the direction of the ball when the line connecting the ball and the center of the hole is 0 degrees) and lower peak putter head velocities than amateurs. Furthermore, the aim angle, indicating the golfer's decision-making, was higher for professionals under both conditions. However, even with FB, the amateurs' aim angles were lower and the difference between trials was smaller than that of professionals. Therefore, this study confirmed that the professionals made more drastic changes to their aim to find low-risk routes than the amateurs and that the amateurs' ability to adjust their aim was lower than that of professionals. The results suggest that the reason for the amateurs' inability to find low-risk routes lies in their decision-making. The professionals found better routes; however, there were individual differences in their routes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.