Aimpoint as Poor Science, and Templeton is better but ...
Physics profs make terrible putting instructors. What ridiculous hubris to think that juggling a few standard formulae from their graduate school notes or a colleague's textbook can actually engage the perception and movement skills of REAL putting situations!
But of course golfers are absolute STOOGES for anyone claiming to solve golf skill issues with "science" and "numbers" with a substitute for skill. Grow up, folks. Science doesn't work like this, at least not in the form of a "modeled" green and putt (i.e., a dumbed-down cartoon simplification of real greens to a perfectly flat and uniformly tilted surface that comes only in INTEGER slopes and green speeds and distances in jumps of 2.5 feet or 5 feet and nothing in between). Aimpoint is not real physics -- it's a "model" version of real physics that gives calculations of "model" putts, and these calculations are NOT the aim for your specific putt on your specific green or your specific touch.
