Something overlooked in the debates about arc v. SBST is that Pelz agrees that as the stroke gets longer, it is necessary to have some arc in the stroke or it becomes to difficult bio mechanically. Pelz also does not say you can't putt very well with an arc stroke. He simply says that it is an advantage to have a SBST putter path, and that it is achievable without too much difficulty. Even if someone believes ardently in the arc stroke, it is still to that person's advantage to make the radius of the arc as large as possible, because it minimizes directional errors.
But Pelz is under no delusions about what makes great putters: It isn't path. It is face angle at impact, center face contact, and speed. Pelz's books state in very specific, quantitative ways why these things are true. In some cases the attacks on Pelz and SBST putting just miss the mark. He merely asserts that this is the ideal way, regarding path. It isn't an imperative or the only way or is it the most important or even third most important thing!
Having said that.....
Originally Posted by iacas
If your back is horizontal, specifically the part between your shoulder blades, you can swing a putter SBST without manipulation. In virtually every other situation it requires manipulation.
Arguing this is like a political or religious argument....nobody moves. But I think in a golf forum such as this, if someone is going to make a statement like iacas' above, form a position of authority, it's important to dispute it if one thinks it's incorrect.
Pelz has shown with exhaustive photos and demonstrations that iacas's statement is false. It is possible to execute a SBST stroke for a stroke length that accommodates putts of up to 20-25' without any compensatory movements. If the hands hang directly below the shoulder joint (on a plumb line directly below), and the arms are swung in a pendulum motion from the shoulder socket, the face will stay precisely square throughout the stroke, if it was square to start. There is no need to do anything to hold it square.
It's in his book. The explanation is there, with pictures, along with answers to all the usual arguments against him.