Why have I always been told to work most on my short game?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by WUTiger

I agree that the short game is the No. 1 most important part of the golf game.

I'm not sure who you're agreeing with. I didn't say that.

[Shindig]

On days when I get most of my tee shots in the fairway or first cut of rough, I break 90. But if I'm wild off the tee, it's a long day.

This is true for me as well. Hitting my driver well any given day means I'm going to hit greens. I shoot mid-80s when I drive well. I shoot low to mid 90s when I don't. I think I've broken 90 once this year on a poor driving day, and have yet to fail to do so on a good driving day .

[Deryck Griffith]

I'm stunned at how many cannot wrap their head around the importance of ball striking.

The last couple of rounds I have played with my friend who's a pro has been interesting.  He has a STUNNING short game but has been struggling with his ball striking.  I've been within a couple of strokes of him the last 5+ rounds we've played together.  Why?  Because his ball striking is poor right now due to a swing change and that part of his game is ALL that's he's working on right now.

Conversely, my improved ball striking in the last 3 years is the ONLY reason why I'm within a couple stokes of him.  I'm hitting 5 more greens per round today than I was 3 years ago.

The second my friend gets his swing back to where he wants it to be, he'll be back to shooting 67s and 68s which has nothing to do with his short game.  He still sinks crazy putts, hits good sand shots and chips it close most of the time.  The only difference right now is that he's doing that saving pars & bogey's vs. hitting GIR close to the hole and making birdies from 10-15 feet like he used to.

[sean_miller]

I had 4 strokes yesterday added because of overclubbing on recovery shots and flying the green into hazards. I missed short par putts on 3 holes including a par 5 that I almost reached in 2. I came up short on a chip shot that didn't release down the slope, then proceded to putt the ball off the green for an extra couple strokes.  I lost a ball in the rough between the fairway and a fairway bunker for a couple strokes (the ball was about 6 feet off the fairway, struck with a 3-wood, and a 3-iron on the same line would have been in the middle of the fairway at the 150 marker). Ball striking might have put me in a couple positions I shouldn't have been in, but club selection, chipping, and putting were my nemesis yesterday.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

I had 4 strokes yesterday added because of overclubbing on recovery shots and flying the green into hazards. I missed short par putts on 3 holes including a par 5 that I almost reached in 2. I came up short on a chip shot that didn't release down the slope, then proceded to putt the ball off the green for an extra couple strokes.  I lost a ball in the rough between the fairway and a fairway bunker for a couple strokes (the ball was about 6 feet off the fairway, struck with a 3-wood, and a 3-iron on the same line would have been in the middle of the fairway at the 150 marker). Ball striking might have put me in a couple positions I shouldn't have been in, but club selection, chipping, and putting were my nemesis yesterday.

One-round stats continue to be fairly pointless, wouldn't you agree? Pros can and do shoot 65 when they hit 9 greens in regulation, but they're way more likely to shoot 74. Their short games and putting aren't magically worse the day they shoot 74.

[TheDude27]

Was watching netflix the other night and they had a golf vid on there where it followed a pro around for 9 holes or so.  It was actually quite enlightening and showed him making every shot/etc.  I can tell you that the guy's short game saved his azz continuously.  Granted he's hitting a lot more fairways than I am by far, but he's not as prescice off the tee as I imagined by watching golf on TV. The thing is that if he was anywhere near the green with an approach shot he was pretty much guaranteed a real good chance at a 1 putt.  On one hole in particular that I remembered (since it looked a lot like me lol) he drove a par 4 with 50 yds of the green but the ball ended up in the long stuff.  He then makes his shot out of the long (2ft long) grass/weeds, catches it wrong and dumps it into the bunker on the side of the green... Its at this point I would guarantee myself at least a bogey(I would have been on the green but almost certain 2 putt, because I would have just been happy on the green after all that), but this guy tosses his sand shot 2ft from the cup and pars the damn thing.  He had quite a few saves like that where his short game turned what would have been bogey or double for me into par.  It really gave me an idea of what actually goes on with a round for theses guys and why the short game is important they make a lot of saves like its a "normal"part of play and having a real good short game is what allows them to save par or to birdie a lot more often than us mortals.  Granted if you are hitting 50 yards into the weeds or 150 yds on your drive you need to work on that because the short game isnt going to save you there, but the ability to be near the flag on the approach and give you one putt opportunities fairly frequently can shave a lot of strokes.  How many times are you happy just to be on the green and then end up 2-3 putting, thats what kills your score (or lost balls/unplayable/penaly stuff).  If you can get reasonably competent off the tee then I think there are a lot of strokes to be gained by a good short game

[Deryck Griffith]

Originally Posted by TheDude27

Was watching netflix the other night and they had a golf vid on there where it followed a pro around for 9 holes or so.  It was actually quite enlightening and showed him making every shot/etc.  I can tell you that the guy's short game saved his azz continuously.  Granted he's hitting a lot more fairways than I am by far, but he's not as prescice off the tee as I imagined by watching golf on TV. The thing is that if he was anywhere near the green with an approach shot he was pretty much guaranteed a real good chance at a 1 putt.  On one hole in particular that I remembered (since it looked a lot like me lol) he drove a par 4 with 50 yds of the green but the ball ended up in the long stuff.  He then makes his shot out of the long (2ft long) grass/weeds, catches it wrong and dumps it into the bunker on the side of the green... Its at this point I would guarantee myself at least a bogey(I would have been on the green but almost certain 2 putt, because I would have just been happy on the green after all that), but this guy tosses his sand shot 2ft from the cup and pars the damn thing.  He had quite a few saves like that where his short game turned what would have been bogey or double for me into par.  It really gave me an idea of what actually goes on with a round for theses guys and why the short game is important they make a lot of saves like its a "normal"part of play and having a real good short game is what allows them to save par or to birdie a lot more often than us mortals.  Granted if you are hitting 50 yards into the weeds or 150 yds on your drive you need to work on that because the short game isnt going to save you there, but the ability to be near the flag on the approach and give you one putt opportunities fairly frequently can shave a lot of strokes.  How many times are you happy just to be on the green and then end up 2-3 putting, thats what kills your score (or lost balls/unplayable/penaly stuff).  If you can get reasonably competent off the tee then I think there are a lot of strokes to be gained by a good short game

But he's a pro....

We are talking about the majority of mid-high handicaps who want to see improvements.  Give mid and high handicaps the short game of a pro and they are saving bogey's and doubles.

To get your handicap to the point where you are a "low" handicap, you must be a good ball striker.  Once you get to that point, you can refine your short game even more to play like what you saw on TV.

Put that pro next to a mid handicap on the range you will instantly see why he's a pro by the way he strikes the ball.

[McKee]

Originally Posted by iacas

One-round stats continue to be fairly pointless, wouldn't you agree? Pros can and do shoot 65 when they hit 9 greens in regulation, but they're way more likely to shoot 74. Their short games and putting aren't magically worse the day they shoot 74.

If statistical data collected by a research scientist is "cooked" and the details of Sean's round yesterday are "pointless" then it seems your point of view is unshakeable.

What amazes me is the degree in which the short game has been devalued in the presence of the long game.  It can't be because short game practice is tedious and boring? Or perhaps because a great short game is not as impressive as a straight tee shot?

It's fun to play with high handicap strangers when your having a great long game day.  They could care less if you five-putt every green (best to pick up after two) as long as you stripe it down the middle and hit the green. The moment you miss a green they say "he's human" - in other words "not professional" - and lose interest.  Could moments like these influence our practice regimen?

Originally Posted by Deryck Griffith

I'm stunned at how many cannot wrap their head around the importance of ball striking.

The last couple of rounds I have played with my friend who's a pro has been interesting.  He has a STUNNING short game but has been struggling with his ball striking.  I've been within a couple of strokes of him the last 5+ rounds we've played together.  Why?  Because his ball striking is poor right now due to a swing change and that part of his game is ALL that's he's working on right now.

Conversely, my improved ball striking in the last 3 years is the ONLY reason why I'm within a couple stokes of him.  I'm hitting 5 more greens per round today than I was 3 years ago.

The second my friend gets his swing back to where he wants it to be, he'll be back to shooting 67s and 68s which has nothing to do with his short game.  He still sinks crazy putts, hits good sand shots and chips it close most of the time.  The only difference right now is that he's doing that saving pars & bogey's vs. hitting GIR close to the hole and making birdies from 10-15 feet like he used to.

That stunning short game of his is what kept him from shooting 80.  It allows him to swing freely so when he does miss the green it was not because of fear of making bogey.  He may not be working on his short game now but I am sure he put a lot of time into developing it.

Salvaging a bad round with a great short game is just as noble, and necessary, as shooting 67 and never touching a chipper.  BTW - making 5 birdies and not three-putting has a lot to do with short game.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by iacas

One-round stats continue to be fairly pointless, wouldn't you agree? Pros can and do shoot 65 when they hit 9 greens in regulation, but they're way more likely to shoot 74. Their short games and putting aren't magically worse the day they shoot 74.

My post was in response to one that did the exact same thing yet supported your opinion, but even so, I don't disagree with ball striking as numer uno. From 65 to 74, we're talking about 9 strokes. High handicappers are trying to trim 30 strokes. They need to work on every aspect of moving the ball from point A to point B, and making crisp powerful contact is number 1. Call it ball striking or whatever, the end result is the same.

[Deryck Griffith]

Originally Posted by McKee

What amazes me is the degree in which the short game has been devalued in the presence of the long game.

Of course the short game is important. I don't think anyone is "devaluing" the short game.

The debate is based around how important it is to practice and develop a swing that can consistently allow you to strike the ball vs. just spending a disproportionate of time on chipping, pitching and putting.

When I practice, I spend a good amount of time putting and a good amount of time chipping and pitching.  But you better believe the CORE of my practice time (not all of it but I would say 60%) is my full swing PW through driver.   I've taken this approach for the last 2 years and the results have been stellar.

When I play now, whether there are tree lining a fairway, water, hazards, whatever the course throws at you, I am confident that I can execute the shot required.  That, is probably the best feeling when standing on the tee or on the fairway.

Now that my handicap is where it is, I can refine my short game a bit more to get closer to scratch....but the initial point still applies -->  My ball striking is what got me to single digits.

[ND Fan]

If you honestly think the short game is not an important facet of the game I am not going to try to change your mind.  There is no such thing as a scratch golfer without at least a decent short game and there is no worthy professional golfer without a great short game.  Guys who can 14 greens and shoot in the mid 70's are a dime a dozen.  If that's all you want to do have at it.  If you really have any interest in being a a good player one needs to hone every aspect of the game.  Getting up and down for par is just as important as hitting it close for birdie.  I believe each shot counts the same.  No body hits 18 greens every time out.  Short game should be 50% of practice, this includes putting.

[McKee]

Originally Posted by Deryck Griffith

Of course the short game is important. I don't think anyone is "devaluing" the short game.

My ball striking is what got me to single digits.

That is what I mean by devaluing.

[McKee]

http://www.lvrj.com/golf/hitting-long-is-fun--but-short-game-more-important-99448189.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/apr/08/masters-2011-luke-donald

- some other article -

What Pelz discovered was that full club PEIs for a given player are essentially the same. A player with a 5.4% Driver PEI (250 yard drive --> 13.5 yard error) has about the same PEI of 5.6% with a 9-iron (130 yard 9i --> 7.6 yard error).

The range of full-swing PEIs went from about 5% to 9%. The wedge PEIs went from 13% to 26%. Putting PEIs varies from about 5% to 10%. He found that the large errors for wedges was a result of distance control.

Full-swing shot errors are mainly attributed to direction. The player mainly misses the target left or right but has very little error in distance. For instance, a player may hit a 150 yard shot and miss it 11 yards left but only be 1 or 2 yards long or short.

Wedge shot errors are mainly attributed to distance. The player mainly misses the target long or short but has very little error in direction. Have you ever hit that 80 yard wedge shot that is all over the pin yet it falls 9 yards short or long?

To Pelz, his results amplified the importance of the wedge game. He found no correlation between full-swing shot errors and money made. In fact he noted that the lowest full-swing PEI over a 3 year period was from a player that didn't make much money and fell off the tour. He did, however, find a strong correlation between money earnings and wedge PEIs.

[newtogolf]

Everyone can and should have a good short game.  The short game to me is like the basics or fundamentals.  You need to pitch, chip and putt well if you're going to achieve your highest potential.  Ball striking is also important, but not everyone is capable of hitting driver 300+ yards, or a 3 iron 225+.

My goal when I play a round is to keep the ball in the fairway and not worry so much about distance.  I may not ever be able to hit a long par 5 green in 2 shots, but if I can get close enough so that my 3rd shot is a 9i or wedge I want my short game good enough to get me close to the the flag for a 1 or 2 putt at worst.

[Deryck Griffith]

Originally Posted by ND Fan

If you honestly think the short game is not an important facet of the game I am not going to try to change your mind.  There is no such thing as a scratch golfer without at least a decent short game and there is no worthy professional golfer without a great short game.  Guys who can 14 greens and shoot in the mid 70's are a dime a dozen.  If that's all you want to do have at it.  If you really have any interest in being a a good player one needs to hone every aspect of the game.  Getting up and down for par is just as important as hitting it close for birdie.  I believe each shot counts the same.  No body hits 18 greens every time out.  Short game should be 50% of practice, this includes putting.

I guess you missed this part of my post?

"Now that my handicap is where it is, I can refine my short game a bit more to get closer to scratch ." .". ."

Originally Posted by McKee

http://www.lvrj.com/golf/hitting-long-is-fun--but-short-game-more-important-99448189.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/apr/08/masters-2011-luke-donald

- some other article -

What Pelz discovered was that full club PEIs for a given player are essentially the same. A player with a 5.4% Driver PEI (250 yard drive --> 13.5 yard error) has about the same PEI of 5.6% with a 9-iron (130 yard 9i --> 7.6 yard error).

The range of full-swing PEIs went from about 5% to 9%. The wedge PEIs went from 13% to 26%. Putting PEIs varies from about 5% to 10%. He found that the large errors for wedges was a result of distance control.

Full-swing shot errors are mainly attributed to direction. The player mainly misses the target left or right but has very little error in distance. For instance, a player may hit a 150 yard shot and miss it 11 yards left but only be 1 or 2 yards long or short.

Wedge shot errors are mainly attributed to distance. The player mainly misses the target long or short but has very little error in direction. Have you ever hit that 80 yard wedge shot that is all over the pin yet it falls 9 yards short or long?

To Pelz, his results amplified the importance of the wedge game. He found no correlation between full-swing shot errors and money made. In fact he noted that the lowest full-swing PEI over a 3 year period was from a player that didn't make much money and fell off the tour. He did, however, find a strong correlation between money earnings and wedge PEIs.

Regarding the first article.

All of the suggestions made are what I already do and practice.  So what am I missing?  Don't make it seem like I said that I don't practice my short game, because I do.  Also, I don't care to hit it LONG as the article suggested.  My goal is to hit is straight.

Regarding the second article.

Using professional golfers who are already excellent ball strikers isn't a good enough example to base your argument on. At that level, they all can hit the shots that most mid and high cappers can only dream of, SO, at the PGA level, of course short game is highly critical.  But we aren't talking about pros in this debate, we are talking about the majority of amateur golfers who can't get any better than being a bogey golfer.

To me, based on your handicap which says Zero, you have devalued how well you hit the ball.  I'm sure there are mid to high cappers who have seen you hit a ball and wish that they could hit the ball as good as you.  And their games would be much better if they could.

About Pelz.  He's a salesman who "sells" his teachings...Do you really think he's going to look at someone in the eye who takes 5 strokes to get to the green and tell him "all you need to do is work on your short game to get to scratch."

A player with a 5.4% Driver PEI (250 yard drive --> 13.5 yard error) has about the same PEI of 5.6% with a 9-iron (130 yard 9i --> 7.6 yard error).

Lastly,  how many mid to high cappers do you know that can consistently hit a 250 yard drive???...GPS'd of course.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by McKee

If statistical data collected by a research scientist is "cooked" and the details of Sean's round yesterday are "pointless" then it seems your point of view is unshakeable.

Nope. A few years ago I was a big "short game" guy. My opinion's changed. And I don't place any value in one-round stats, whether they support my view or not. ;-)

Originally Posted by McKee

What amazes me is the degree in which the short game has been devalued in the presence of the long game. It can't be because short game practice is tedious and boring? Or perhaps because a great short game is not as impressive as a straight tee shot?

If it's been de-valued by some, it's because we feel it's currently over-valued by others. And fwiw, short game practice is far less tedious and boring than long game practice to me. You get to make the ball go in the hole. Less drills, more "real life" motions. Full swing practice is by far more "tedious" to me... that I try to enjoy the tediousness ("I'm getting better each time I do this drill!") is irrelevant. ;-)

Originally Posted by McKee

Salvaging a bad round with a great short game is just as noble, and necessary, as shooting 67 and never touching a chipper.  BTW - making 5 birdies and not three-putting has a lot to do with short game.

Less than you seem to think.

I'm not "under-valuing" putting. Putting is, compared to the full swing, relatively easy to become "quite good" at. It's simpler. It doesn't require a lot of time.

Originally Posted by sean_miller

High handicappers are trying to trim 30 strokes. They need to work on every aspect of moving the ball from point A to point B, and making crisp powerful contact is number 1. Call it ball striking or whatever, the end result is the same.

Yes, they need to work on every aspect. We agree on that, and on what #1 is. And again, to be clear, any one round is lousy. Dave shot 72 (+1) hitting 17 GIR and not missing a read or a putt. If we had some luck (or a foot to move the golf ball at the hole), he'd have shot 63. His long game was on that day, and so was his short game... except for "luck."

Originally Posted by Deryck Griffith

Now that my handicap is where it is, I can refine my short game a bit more to get closer to scratch....but the initial point still applies -->  My ball striking is what got me to single digits.

Yeah. It's anecdotal, experiential evidence (i.e. not really "evidence" at all), so discount it virtually entirely... but I've yet to meet a guy who strikes the ball well enough to be a 6 but who is a 10+ because he's got a lousy short game.

Originally Posted by ND Fan

If you honestly think the short game is not an important facet of the game I am not going to try to change your mind.

Nobody's saying any such thing. We're simply saying that dedicating 50% or more of your time to "short game practice" is likely not the optimal path.

Originally Posted by McKee

To Pelz, his results amplified the importance of the wedge game. He found no correlation between full-swing shot errors and money made. In fact he noted that the lowest full-swing PEI over a 3 year period was from a player that didn't make much money and fell off the tour. He did, however, find a strong correlation between money earnings and wedge PEIs.

Yeah, and again, Pelz is a guy who doesn't teach full swing stuff at all, so don't you think there's a chance his numbers are biased? And even if they weren't, take 15 minutes, learn your wedge distances, write 'em down and tape 'em to your shafts, and move on.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Everyone can and should have a good short game.  The short game to me is like the basics or fundamentals.  You need to pitch, chip and putt well if you're going to achieve your highest potential.  Ball striking is also important, but not everyone is capable of hitting driver 300+ yards, or a 3 iron 225+.

That's not what others are calling ballstriking. That's power. Ballstriking is more about consistent power (whatever your number is) and consistent direction.

Originally Posted by Deryck Griffith

Regarding the second article.

Using professional golfers who are already excellent ball strikers isn't a good enough example to base your argument on. At that level, they all can hit the shots that most mid and high cappers can only dream of, SO, at the PGA level, of course short game is highly critical.  But we aren't talking about pros in this debate, we are talking about the majority of amateur golfers who can't get any better than being a bogey golfer.

A player with a 5.4% Driver PEI (250 yard drive --> 13.5 yard error) has about the same PEI of 5.6% with a 9-iron (130 yard 9i --> 7.6 yard error).

Lastly,  how many mid to high cappers do you know that can consistently hit a 250 yard drive???...GPS'd of course.

Agreed. Plus, how many of them have only a 13.5 yard error?

[ochmude]

Originally Posted by iacas

If it's been de-valued by some, it's because we feel it's currently over-valued by others. And fwiw, short game practice is far less tedious and boring than long game practice to me. You get to make the ball go in the hole. Less drills, more "real life" motions. Full swing practice is by far more "tedious" to me... that I try to enjoy the tediousness ("I'm getting better each time I do this drill!") is irrelevant. ;-)

I agree 100% with this. Short game practice is MUCH more fun, a lot less frustrating, and typically free.

[McKee]

Originally Posted by iacas

Yeah, and again, Pelz is a guy who doesn't teach full swing stuff at all, so don't you think there's a chance his numbers are biased? And even if they weren't, take 15 minutes, learn your wedge distances, write 'em down and tape 'em to your shafts, and move on.

I trust his numbers and have no desire to be skeptical.

15 minutes, really?  Is that not trivializing the short game?