Thoughts on the Pelz Bibles

[Big Brother Dunk]

I found the Pelz Short Game Bible very helpful. My pitching and chipping improved immensely after reading it. I found the way he approaches playing the wedges very logical and helpful.

On the other hand, the Putting Bible messed up my putting to the point that I honestly had no idea where a 2-foot putt was going. I was snake-bit. Previous to reading the book, I averaged around 32 putts-per-round, with occasional rounds as low as 27. After reading the Putting Bible and applying the principles, I couldn't get around in under 36 putts, sometimes higher. I finally went back to my original putting style and things got back to normal.


I think that although there are useful nuggets in the the Putting Bible, it isn't for me. Perhaps that's because a great deal of putting is feel and there is more latitude for a personal touch.

Thoughts?

[Rockford35]

I personally think Pelz is bunk. Too much equipment and theoretical nonsense.

I think getting out there and learning to putt is just as much as a methodology. Find your stroke and use that to sink putts.

Question: How much of your short game improvement was from Pelz and how much was from getting out there and focusing on your short game?

I'm willing to bet heavy on the latter.

I'd take hitting balls (with or without a teacher) over watching a video or reading some instructional manual anyday.

Just my thoughts. To each their own, obviously.

R35

[Big Brother Dunk]

I think Pelz is a great analyst of the short game and his analysis provides a ton of information for anyone who can wade through it. His biggest problem, in my opinion, is that he's a former NASA scientist and he uses that approach to teaching. Harvey Penick he ain't!

In any event, it's obvious any teacher's methods aren't for everyone.

As far as my short game was concerned, my wedge play was inconsistent until I read Pelz's book. His approach was what I was looking for at the time.

[Pa Jayhawk]

I personally bought the Short-game bible and love the book. I will not buy the putting bible because I don't want to over analyze my putting, which has usually always been good to me. I am not sure I would disagree with Rock, contrary to most I personally like Pelz's analysis and bought the book mainly for a good read, however I have incorporated or at least given his technique some thought.

What I really want is his new one, "Damage Control", which is not in the stores yet. If there is anything that can help my game it is "Damage Control". The first day I find it in the stores, I will own a copy.

[Farquod]

Oooh, that kettle of fish. All I know is that he has a Lear, and Phil does have 3 majors....

I liked the putting bible. The one part of it that screwed me up was his insistance that we under-read putts by at least 1/3. After I read that, I was over-reading break like a madman, and was 3-putting everything I looked at. I ditched that concept pretty quick.

Otherwise, his basic putting concepts are sound. The straight back and through stroke does provide the truest line. And despite the ball-busting of his stuff (by me included) many of his training aids work quite well.

I liked the short game bible as well, and my only negative comment on it was that I was making changes to my full swing at the same time I was trying to implement his "dead hands" wedge swings. That didn't work too well either. One thing at a time.

Originally Posted by Big Brother Dunk

In any event, it's obvious any teacher's methods aren't for everyone.

Truer words were never writ, BBD. Take what works for you, and leave the rest behind.

You might even find that some of the refuse makes sense in time. Penick's "keep your head behind the ball" had me hitting fats for months. Then, it didn't.