Pelz Short Game Bible Techniques

[MrSandman]

Does anybody else use these methods?

I don't swear by them, I still use some creativity, but I have found the consistency from 30-100 yards to be fantastic applying the techniques found in the Pelz Short Game Bible.

The book reads like a text book, but I found it to be very interesting and it has helped my game.

[bm303]

I have never read this book, but I am considering purchasing it. I am going to one of Dave Pelz's short game clinic's and then I will probably purchase the book, because I am tired of being on in regulation and 3 putting.

[iacas]

Does anybody else use these methods?

The book has about 100 different methods. It has methods for hitting out of waste bunkers. For hitting out of tall grass from the short side. For the 3x4 and 4x4 wedge system.

I suspect it's the latter you're referring to, but you didn't really say. If that's what you're talking about, yes, I use it.

[dfresh]

I have never read this book, but I am considering purchasing it. I am going to one of Dave Pelz's short game clinic's and then I will probably purchase the book, because I am tired of being on in regulation and 3 putting.

Have a look at Stan Utley's Art of the Short Game/Art of Putting, as well. Both are very good.

[iWALK18]

I read the entire book cover to cover and really enjoyed it. I sort of use his techniques, but my set up differs some. I am not square the the target line, i set up a little bit open to get my front hip out of the way, and my back knee is in a bit, so I'm closer to my full swing impact position. These tweaks seemed to help my consistency in terms of contact.

The biggest things that helped me were the 3x4/4x4 and suggestions about ball position for finesse shots. Some of the details on specific shots or situations were overkill for almost all of us I should think, but its nice that he took the time to give them for the lowest handicappers out there.

I am generally a terrible short game player, but I have seen some real improvement since I read his book, even if i don't use every method he proposes.

Also, if you are going to his short game school, it might be worth reading the book first... that way you'll already have some idea of the basics of his philosophy, and you'll be able to fine tune things and not waste any time during that oh so expensive day of golf.

[MrSandman]

iacas, yes, I am talking about the 4x3 method.

Knowing exactly how far you hit your 60 degree at 7:30; 9:00; 10:30, etc....

I mix it up a bit, but I have found this to be my guide for distances.

I am not a fan of Utley's work. I think he does a good job giving overview of reading greens and such, but I think his teaching in the technical portions of the short game is weak. I think many people who opt for Utley over Pelz's book are doing so because Utley's are only 100 pages long and Pelz's are upwards of 400 pages.

I was not too high on Pelz's Putting Bible. I found his Short Game Bible to be a revolutionary addition to my game, but his Putting Bible was not as helpful.

[804golfer]

i have never read the book

[Shindig]

I think many people who opt for Utley over Pelz's book are doing so because Utley's are only 100 pages long and Pelz's are upwards of 400 pages.

Some of us wish Utley would expand on his ideas and tell us more.

I know I'm not the only one on this board to be very disappointed with Pelz's "Putting Like the Pros" and avoided his other books, suspecting they might be more of the same. Having said that, it now seems silly to judge all his books by one. Should I find myself in a bookstore with 15-30 minutes to kill at some point in the near future, I'll sit and check out Pelz's short game bible and see if I think I should pick it up.

[MrSandman]

If you have avoided a Pelz book because of one bad read, go back and check the Short Game Bible.

Utley's books aren't great, IMO. Not that Utley doesn't know what he is talking about, but he does not do a good job sending his message regarding technical aspects (which is why they are such a short read). His story telling is good, his overview of stuff (such as how to read greens, etc...) is quality. But when he gets down to fundementals, I find him to be lacking in description. And he often over exagerrates what he is saying. I had a friend recently switch to the swinging gate method, and it was the worst stroke I had ever seen. He had the putter head so far inside right off the start, poor kid missed every putt from outside of 2 feet (no joke) for the entire golf trip. When I showed him the Utley training aids and how little the "curve" actually is, it opened his eyes a bit. He was pivoting his hips on 4 foot putts (he even once said, "I forgot to pivot back" as he missed a 3 footer).

Pelz and Utley are simply different in experience level. Utley is used to teaching experienced players little subtleties on the putting green. While Pelz has been doing this for decades, and before this he was a rocket scientist for NASA. Pelz has much more data, for a wider range of skill level players, and has had much more experience honing his theories and expressing his teaching thoughts in a way that the reader can understand.

[dfresh]

Pelz and Utley are simply different in experience level. Utley is used to teaching experienced players little subtleties on the putting green. While Pelz has been doing this for decades, and before this he was a rocket scientist for NASA. Pelz has much more data, for a wider range of skill level players, and has had much more experience honing his theories and expressing his teaching thoughts in a way that the reader can understand.

You put your finger on the glaring weakness of Pelz: He treats golf, which is supposed to be a game, as though it was rocket science. Anyone who plays less than three or four times per week is going to find it almost impossible to ever assimilate all of the technical, mechanical aspects of Pelz's tomes.

Utley teaches basic mechanics, and then tries to enable you to allow feel to govern your shots. The fact that your buddy was incapable of properly applying the inside-square-inside stroke is not an indictment of the method as a whole. The vast majority of recreational golfers will never have the time required to learn and master Pelz's system. It's simply too involved, too mechanical, and too hard to retain unless you are playing and practicing a LOT. Utley has simple, easy to learn, easy to retain methods for the short game that will be a huge help to most weekend players, IMHO. My short game is much better since I read Utley's books. My worst short-game shots today are better than my average was before, and I'll happily recommend Utley to any who will listen. If you're a feel player, read Utley. If you're a technician who wants to have labels on the shafts of your wedges telling you the four yardages with that club depending on which of four swings you employ for that shot, and pictures from four angles of every conceivable variety of bunker lie, read Pelz. No one can cite Pelz for not being thorough enough.