Pelz V Rotella

[Farquod]

A show on how to read greens and breaks, when actually all he tells about is that people under read greens....

In his defense, he devotes an entire chapter to it in his putting bible, and does a nice job of it overall.

However, his discussion of how severely we underread breaks messed me up for a good while. Visible versus actual break...that we only see about 1/3 of the real break....that really screwed me up. I dumped that idea after 2 rounds.

Which is a point to be made...take what works for you, discard what don't....

Does he teach something new, like chipping the same, but with a different club? No.....

Cool, quick story. I took lessons down in Naples, FL a couple of years ago with a guy named Dennis Mayer. Pretty good, except he really wanted to change my draw to a fade, and man, I don't hit it that far. Anyway, this bit you note here, about chipping with different clubs, I picked up from Mike Adams in his book, How to Break 90. Anyway, I go through my chipping with Dennis, and he notes what I'm doing by figuring what club to use, and he's floored. Says I'm the first of his students to use the technique, and where did I learn it? So I tell him about the Mike Adams book, and he smiles. It turns out that he was taught by Paul Runyon ("Little Poison") whose short game was legendary, and that it was his system I was using. Runyon played in the 1930s and 40s. Pretty cool, no?

 

[Bravo]

GREAT story Farquod...I would love to hear more about it...where can I get more info?? I guess I will look up the book on Google..any other ideas?

 

[Farquod]

GREAT story Farquod...I would love to hear more about it...where can I get more info?? I guess I will look up the book on Google..any other ideas?

No need, Bravo, it's pretty simple. You break the chip into two segments: A) distance to the landing point on the green, and B) distance from the landing point to the cup. Divide B by A, round to the nearest whole number, and subtract from 12. That gives you your club.

F'rinstance, say you're 12 feet off the green. Generally, you'll want to land it a yard or so onto the green, then let it roll to the hole. I'll pace that off; say for argument's sake it comes to 5 paces or 5 yards. Then say there's another 10 paces to the hole. 10/5=2. 12-2=10, which means use a pitching wedge. You chip the ball to land on the spot, and it should run the remaining distance to the hole.

Try it. It may take a bit of getting used to, but with clean contact on the chip, it is a very accurate method.

 

[Farquod]

I'm guessing a pitching wedge...am I missing something?

Remember, KA, this scenario is for chipping, not pitching. The ratio adjusts for carry versus roll, and makes the presumption that, as irons get longer, carry decreases and roll increases, and visa versa. Also, remember that landing a ball on the green might not be the answer in all situations. So:

1. Pitch to the spot you describe using a lob or sand wedge, whichever has less bounce. That will help the ball to check if you hit it clean. Not my choice.

2. Depending on how closely the first cut is, er, cut, and taking the topography into consideration, you might pick a spot in the middle, say 6', and chip to that with your pitching wedge, which has about a 1:1 carry/roll ratio. If it's not shorn as closely as your native Scottish lambkins during shearing season, then maybe a 9 iron to get a little more roll.

3. However, for the scenario you describe, with all of 12' to a tight pin, I'm gonna putt it. My misses will be more manageable that way.

I tend not to use the system if the ratio is less than 1:1, because that situation is invariably a pitch, requiring more carry than roll. It also does not work for anything other than the first cut, or perhaps a good lie in the second cut. It does not work from the rough, again, where a pitch is indicated.

Or do you putt from the rough?

 

[Big Brother Dunk]

OK, I'll defend Pelz, since no one else seems to want to...

...He is a rocket scientist, so he employs the scientific method, as noted by the good Russian animal mechanic. Observation and measurement are key to that method. Ya gotta know what to fix before you can fix it...

I'm with Farquod on this one. I like what Pelz has to say. If you want to be technically sound, Pelz's method is solid.

That being said, I'm a big proponent of the "feel" approach to golf. However I think it's important to be technically consistent, then you can more easily trust your feel.

 

[Silver]

One more thing in "defence" of Pelz...a lot of the shows on TGC are parts of a series and seeing any one of them individually is usually useless. Put all together, they actually make sense...imo.

 

[dave.]

Each to their own I suppose,but all that analysis and science just takes the feel out of a very personal thing for me.I just take the view its 99% in the mind,putting,and Pelz is 99% technique.But he has made a lot of money and many swear by him,I accept that.

Bravo,a monk would be a superb putter,no question.Rotella insists you can't putt if you get in the way of yourself,any thoughts on technique will get in the way.A monk will be the most chilled out dude on the greens and i bet as good as anyone.

As for 'not everyone is a Bobby Locke',well why not? Putting isn't physically demanding,so why can't we all be that good? Locke spent 2 seconds in his entire life worrying about technique,he just focused on holing out,EVERY time.But so few golfers do that,its all about technique so they will never be good putters.

How many players console themselves in the bar about how good thye played but the putts didn't drop? Or how bad they are at putting? Its almost as if its ok to say you are a shit putter,its just ego.

Is the yips technical? No,its 100% mental,yet Pelz will still try and solve it via analysis,thats the main reason I have such a beef with him.

 

[Loop]

Nice story Farq
Getting some of the history of the game is truly awesome.

 

[Bravo]

As for 'not everyone is a Bobby Locke',well why not? Putting isn't physically demanding,so why can't we all be that good? Locke spent 2 seconds in his entire life worrying about technique,he just focused on holing out,EVERY time.But so few golfers do that,its all about technique so they will never be good putters.

dave:

There is one guy I play with regularly who is without a doubt - the best putter of the group. And everyone recognizes it.

He has said repeatedly, "No matter how far away, no matter how many breaks or how big the break - I am always trying to make it".

And dammit if he doesn't make 1-2 long ones each round. Drives me nutz. And like Locke, once he has made up his mind on break and speed - he very promptly pulls the trigger. There's no standing over the ball...boom boom...

 

[Bravo]

No need, Bravo, it's pretty simple. You break the chip into two segments: A) distance to the landing point on the green, and B) distance from the landing point to the cup. Divide B by A, round to the nearest whole number, and subtract from 12. That gives you your club.

F'rinstance, say you're 12 feet off the green. Generally, you'll want to land it a yard or so onto the green, then let it roll to the hole. I'll pace that off; say for argument's sake it comes to 5 paces or 5 yards. Then say there's another 10 paces to the hole. 10/5=2. 12-2=10, which means use a pitching wedge. You chip the ball to land on the spot, and it should run the remaining distance to the hole.

Try it. It may take a bit of getting used to, but with clean contact on the chip, it is a very accurate method.

I am going to try this. It makes sense and this is a weakness in my game.

 

[dave.]

dave:

There is one guy I play with regularly who is without a doubt - the best putter of the group. And everyone recognizes it.

He has said repeatedly, "No matter how far away, no matter how many breaks or how big the break - I am always trying to make it".

And dammit if he doesn't make 1-2 long ones each round. Drives me nutz. And like Locke, once he has made up his mind on break and speed - he very promptly pulls the trigger. There's no standing over the ball...boom boom...

yep,and we can all be like that,providing we can free our minds

the red pill,or the blue pill?

 

[Farquod]

Always the red pill, Morpheus. Gotta know how far the rabbit hole goes....

I just take the view its 99% in the mind, putting, and Pelz is 99% technique.

I don't know if that's true. Again, his philosophy is to practice like crazy until it becomes automatic, so that, at that point, you become technically proficient without having to think about it, and can just make a good stroke. But in the beginning, it has to be technical to identify the fault, then correct it.

As for 'not everyone is a Bobby Locke', well why not?

'cause I don't hook my putts. rop:

Is the yips technical? No, its 100% mental, yet Pelz will still try and solve it via analysis.

Not 100%. It can be functional, particularly if you're older. In these cases, a long putter can be a big help. But I wouldn't go to Pelz for an answer to a mental issue. I don't know that I'd go to Gio Valente (is that his name?) either. I can't take his voice.

Personally, dave, I think that all really good golfers do a lot by feel. They also know all of their distances, and can adjust those distances on any given day based on personal and environmental conditions. But to do that, you gotta hit it clean, and to do that takes practice. All Pelz is trying to do is make sure that the practice is technically correct, so you don't have to unlearn something you've been grooving. Practice makes permanent, or damn hard to change, anyway.

 

[Farquod]

I am going to try this. It makes sense and this is a weakness in my game.

Good luck, B. Whattaya say, if it works out, slide me 10% of your weekend nassau?

 

[Farquod]

I think it's important to be technically consistent, then you can more easily trust your feel.

What he said. Nicely put.

 

[dave.]

I disagree,I don't think technical proficency has anything to do with it.I would bet my mortgage on a a guy with the right attitude against a guy with the a 'techbical stroke'.The guy with the right mind would win 100 out of 100,even if he putted standing on his head.