[Pa Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by Bignose

Thanks for the review, Pa

That is what my suspicions were about the book from the excerpts on Pelz's website. It is good to get it straight from someone who has actually read it.

Not that a book full of common sense things is necessarily a bad read.

I would bargain to guess that this book would be very useful for a beginner, or someone who in the past has been so terrified of playing out of a bad lie, that they would simply take a drop. Probably someone like my wife, who rarely misses a fairway, and when she finds herself in a lie like this she usually just has no experience or concept on what to do as it is just out of her realm of being in good lies 99% of the time. She plays golf for the fun, and could really care less about the science behind the game. The problem is, that same person likely would not have the patience for Pelz in reading the book for the same reason, and would likely have given up before the first 30 pages and just said "I'll take my chances, or take the penalty". In the same sense that they don't have the patience to really practice shots like that, and hearing it from Pelz that they should is not likely going to change matters.

I probably would have liked the book for when we moved up here to our current home course, although after having played on this course for over 5 years, what is mentioned in this book is just second nature to someone that finds this trouble on a regular basis. ... and the rest is really just common sense on listening to your head and not your ego to find your way out.

Originally Posted by Slingblade61

PA, you have never been able to say anything in only one sentence.

Sure I can, I even did with "This book has a little useful information, but really doesn't stretch the bounds of common sense by too much." I just had a hard time leaving it at that without

Originally Posted by The Salt Vampire

I really liked Pelz's first book, "Putt Like the Pros". It was thin, gave some great info about green conditions and getting the ball inside 8 feet. Everything else is too long-winded and really dull. I don't need to see an entire study, just tell me the results.

What does it say when Pelz promotes the square-to-square stroke, but his star pupil (Mickelson) uses an arc stroke? I think Phil keeps him around for his course setup observations.

Had he simply taken the last 50 pages, and maybe another 10-20 to explain the rest, it probably would have been much more effective IMO