65/20/15 Practice Ratios: Where to Devote Your Practice Time

[Golfingdad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

That is not true.

There's evidence out there that handicaps HAVE DROPPED. I've linked to this before and I'll link to it again:

None

Source: www.golfdigest.com/golf-equipment/hot-list/hotlistevolution_0902

Is that the reason simply because you say it is? Have you read this thread?

As will the guy who finishes 10th.

When Phil doesn't win, it's his long game that hurts him. When he does win, his long game contributes positively and well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seniorgolfpro

In the past 25 years the golf industrie have invested millions into clubs to make the ball fly further.They have been successful and the average player hits it longer than before.He also hits it straighter through the more forgiving of the club.But most golf courses havent changed in Length.

It is a fact that the Handicap average world wide has not improved by 1 stroke.And the reason for this ,is the golfer spends just as less time working on their short games as before.Unless your consistant from 100 yards then you havent a chance

Now on the Tour scores have improved considerably,because the guys are bombing it out their 300 plus and the fairway bunkers dont come into play.And scores of more than 20 under par,which was rarely heard of before,are winning tournaments.A round of 62 happens most weeks.

So the difference is with the Pros is they are longer than before,and there short games a red hot,as always.Phil Mickelson says that in practice for every long shot he hits,he hits 3 short ones,not suprised hes hot from 100 yards.I garentee who wins the masters holes lots of putts -

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

That is not true.

There's evidence out there that handicaps HAVE DROPPED. I've linked to this before and I'll link to it again:

None

Source: www.golfdigest.com/golf-equipment/hot-list/hotlistevolution_0902

Is that the reason simply because you say it is? Have you read this thread?

As will the guy who finishes 10th.

When Phil doesn't win, it's his long game that hurts him. When he does win, his long game contributes positively and well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seniorgolfpro

oh sorry my mistake.Handicaps have improved by an average of 2 shots since early 90s,wow,massive difference.

IACAS this is a forum,and i would have thought you would realise as an expert that its peoples opinions and there is no reasonto be rude.Thankyou

OK, let me get this straight. ...

1.  You offer up an opinion as to why the theory of this thread is wrong, based on unsubstantiated facts.

2.  Erik simply disagrees with you, points out why your opinion is incorrect, and includes sources showing that your "facts" are, in fact, not.

3.  You backtrack and try to flippantly claim that 2 shots difference in handicaps don't count, then say that Erik is the one being rude.

I don't get it.  What did he say, exactly, that was rude?

[Jakester23]

I had my best round of my life last summer shot a 84 from the tips at a course I never played before and my round is living proof of what the OP is talking about. I hit hybrid of most tees not knowing the course in doing so I hit 10-12 fairways dont remember exactly but I also hit 14 GIR which is why that round was so good I didnt make any crazy putts or chip but I didnt have to. If your not in the fairway you have to work your ass off  for pars.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by Jakester23

I had my best round of my life last summer shot a 84 from the tips at a course I never played before and my round is living proof of what the OP is talking about. I hit hybrid of most tees not knowing the course in doing so I hit 10-12 fairways dont remember exactly but I also hit 14 GIR which is why that round was so good I didnt make any crazy putts or chip but I didnt have to. If your not in the fairway you have to work your ass off  for pars.

What happened on the other 4 holes?  On average, 14 GIR should put you a lot closer to a 74 than an 84.  Are you like me and hit wild tee shots that lead to triples and quads? :)  (My last round was an 88 with a double, two triples, and a quad ... all products of crappy tee shots.  I only had 8 GIR)

[Jakester23]

Went ob on the first hole a par 5 had a triple. Had 3 three putts. Went ob on the last hole also a par 5 Had a double. I looked at the card last night I had 12 gir not 14 I was on fire on my approach shots that day. I'm like u when I struggle off the tee I'm a mid 90's guy when I'm ok off the tees its high 80's to low 90's. If I'm stripping it I can get down around 85

[susane]

hi guys new here.just had fun watching masters.been reading what seniorgolfpro wrote.Everyone has an opinion.But it seems some people who disagree with his idea,are only the ones who run this site.staff member,etc.Anyway.

my hubby went to a seminar from Dr Bob Rotella,who says you must practice short game a lot.since then his handicap came down from 16 to 9 in 4 months.

mike weir won the masters.

anyway,i play with high handicap players a lot.They kind a get it away of the tee,bit of slice,not long,then knock a hybrid down there,but after that its another 5 shots for them to get the ball in the hole.

I hear all the time from experts,that ams spend too much on the range and not on the putting green.

I got down my handicap by working on my short game.my h,cap started coming down,as soon as i worked at it.

still everyone has their own opinion,shame the staff here dont agree..

[iacas]

Originally Posted by susane

hi guys new here.just had fun watching masters.been reading what seniorgolfpro wrote.Everyone has an opinion.But it seems some people who disagree with his idea,are only the ones who run this site.staff member,etc.Anyway.

my hubby went to a seminar from Dr Bob Rotella,who says you must practice short game a lot.since then his handicap came down from 16 to 9 in 4 months.

mike weir won the masters.

anyway,i play with high handicap players a lot.They kind a get it away of the tee,bit of slice,not long,then knock a hybrid down there,but after that its another 5 shots for them to get the ball in the hole.

I hear all the time from experts,that ams spend too much on the range and not on the putting green.

I got down my handicap by working on my short game.my h,cap started coming down,as soon as i worked at it.

still everyone has their own opinion,shame the staff here dont agree..

Far more people than just "staff" disagree with seniorgolfpro. I've provided plenty of statistics and thoughts on why I chose 65/25/10.

Interesting that you're from Austria, "susane."

[David in FL]

[SIZE=14px]hi guys new here.just had fun watching masters.been reading what seniorgolfpro wrote.Everyone has an opinion.But it seems some people who disagree with his idea,are only the ones who run this site.staff member,etc.Anyway.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]my hubby went to a seminar from Dr Bob Rotella,who says you must practice short game a lot.since then his handicap came down from 16 to 9 in 4 months.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]mike weir won the masters.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]anyway,i play with high handicap players a lot.They kind a get it away of the tee,bit of slice,not long,then knock a hybrid down there,but after that its another 5 shots for them to get the ball in the hole.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]I hear all the time from experts,that ams spend too much on the range and not on the putting green.[/SIZE] I got down my handicap by working on my short game.my h,cap started coming down,as soon as i worked at it. still everyone has their own opinion,shame the staff here dont agree..

Good grief. You're kidding, right? If you want to debate a point honestly, then do so. Don't insult the membership here though....

[Golfingdad]

[SIZE=14px]hi guys new here.just had fun watching masters.been reading what seniorgolfpro wrote.Everyone has an opinion.But it seems some people who disagree with his idea,are only the ones who run this site.staff member,etc.Anyway.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]my hubby went to a seminar from Dr Bob Rotella,who says you must practice short game a lot.since then his handicap came down from 16 to 9 in 4 months.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]mike weir won the masters.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]anyway,i play with high handicap players a lot.They kind a get it away of the tee,bit of slice,not long,then knock a hybrid down there,but after that its another 5 shots for them to get the ball in the hole.[/SIZE] [SIZE=14px]I hear all the time from experts,that ams spend too much on the range and not on the putting green.[/SIZE] I got down my handicap by working on my short game.my h,cap started coming down,as soon as i worked at it. still everyone has their own opinion,shame the staff here dont agree..

I agree with you susane. Mike weir did, in fact, win the masters. ;) Austria, huh?? Very interesting. :)

[14ledo81]

"Mike Weir won the masters"????? What does that have to do with anything? Jack Nicklaus won the masters...

[mmoan2]

I hear the complaint against Dave Pelz often that because he teaches the short game, he is biased toward showing how important it is. From my reading up on Pelz (getting his "Scoring Game" books, reading articles, etc.), I learned that he came to teach the short game because he believed it would have a more profound impact on the average golfer's score. I think it was in chapter four of his "Short Game Bible" where he said he watched two guys warming up - an unknown new pro who had a powerful, model swing that looked like the second coming of Ben Hogan, and Gay Brewer, who won the 67 Masters, but had an absolutely awful looking swing. At the end of the round, the new guy had shot a 73 and Brewer a 69. Pelz, who was a Big Ten college golfer himself, said he threw up his hands and had his Socratic "I know nothing" about golf moment. Then he began to analyze short game statistics and realized that a lot of the big money winners on tour had pretty good short games. So, he gave up his belief in the full swing as the way to achieve the best scores, and delved into the short game- i.e. he doesn't preach short game as important because he teaches it, he teaches it because he thinks it's important.

It's funny, I've been reading this forum for quite a while now, and I think I've changed my mind a bit on it. I don't think there's any denying that GIRs lead to low scores, and therefore, a great full swing tee to green is the best way to score better. Even though Pelz, who was a NASA physicist for 15 years, says the stats support the idea that the short game gurus take home the cash, I think many modern golf statisticians have debunked this theory. I was fully on board with the 65/25/10 concept for a long time after reading most of the forum hosts. I think for a mid-handicapper like myself, though, I've begun to notice that although my ball striking has improved drastically recently through proper lessons, my scores have not dropped all that much because I've neglected my short game and putting. My last three rounds I've shot two 83s and an 82 at 6400 yard muni courses. For the 82, I eagled the first hole by dropping a 50 yard pitch in the cup on two bounces on a par 5, and ripping a 6 iron 190 yards uphill to 3 feet from the pin on 18 for a birdie. Between that I had two triples, a host of bogeys, a few pars, and no other birdies or eagles. The reason? I four putted one hole, and my normally stellar chipping let me down several times. I didn't hit awful chips, but instead of leaving me within 5 feet to ensure at least a few par saves, I was around 10 feet away and didn;t hit ANY saves. I also shanked a bunker shot 30 yards over the green to lead to one triple, and hit a 30 yard pitch fat (in my defense, I played it buried in a friggin swamp).

What's my point? I think 65/25/10 makes sense for people with handicaps above 15 or below 5, but for the tweeners, more emphasis on short game and putting will subtract the strokes necessary to turn an 83 into a 79 or 78. I drive the ball between 280 and 300 consistently, hit my 4 iron about 210, and 7 iron about 170. I fight a hook constantly and rarely hit a totally awful full swing shot any more. I usually miss left, but my distance is pretty good. For me to markedly improve my full swing will take ALOT of work, I think. Adding 3 more GIRs per round on average seems like a lot to ask right now. Trust me, I've hit tens of thousands of balls with every club in my bag since I started playing this game about 3 years ago (though I've only played about 20 full rounds of golf). I believe, though, if I spent two months grinding out my short game and putting to go from good to excellent, it would benefit me more. I think it's better to have a good full swing and excellent short game/putting stroke than an excellent full swing, but only good short game/putting stroke. An average, decent swing can get you near the green, but short game woes can balloon a score in a hurry, not to mention break you mentally (God, how many times can I hit driver/8 iron to the fringe, only to chip to 10 feet and 2 putt for bogey. If I could only chip to 4 feet (or putt like a stud), I'd par 75%+ of these buggers...).

So, I'm going to be a martyr for the 40-30-30 school of practice for two months. If I don't break 80 a few times by then, I'll repost here with a picture of my foot in my mouth!

[sker]

Hi mmoan2.

I think the first post is pretty clear, and makes exactly this point.

Originally Posted by iacas

Unless you have a glaring weakness or a facet of your game which far outshines the others, you should spend 65% of your time practicing the full swing, 25% of your time practicing the short game, and 10% of your time practicing putting.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by mmoan2

Then he began to analyze short game statistics and realized that a lot of the big money winners on tour had pretty good short games. So, he gave up his belief in the full swing as the way to achieve the best scores, and delved into the short game- i.e. he doesn't preach short game as important because he teaches it, he teaches it because he thinks it's important.

As stated above, Pelz's research was old. If he had instead focused on the types of things Broadie and the like have done recently, we might be twenty years farther down the road to true analysis. You can have the best short game in the world but you're not shooting under par unless you can hit a lot of greens.

You basically say the same thing later on in your post, I just wanted to provide a short summary.

Originally Posted by mmoan2

I think for a mid-handicapper like myself, though, I've begun to notice that although my ball striking has improved drastically recently through proper lessons, my scores have not dropped all that much because I've neglected my short game and putting. My last three rounds I've shot two 83s and an 82 at 6400 yard muni courses. For the 82, I eagled the first hole by dropping a 50 yard pitch in the cup on two bounces on a par 5, and ripping a 6 iron 190 yards uphill to 3 feet from the pin on 18 for a birdie. Between that I had two triples, a host of bogeys, a few pars, and no other birdies or eagles. The reason? I four putted one hole, and my normally stellar chipping let me down several times. I didn't hit awful chips, but instead of leaving me within 5 feet to ensure at least a few par saves, I was around 10 feet away and didn;t hit ANY saves. I also shanked a bunker shot 30 yards over the green to lead to one triple, and hit a 30 yard pitch fat (in my defense, I played it buried in a friggin swamp).

"Neglecting your short game" does not sound like 35% of your practice time.

Originally Posted by mmoan2

What's my point? I think 65/25/10 makes sense for people with handicaps above 15 or below 5, but for the tweeners, more emphasis on short game and putting will subtract the strokes necessary to turn an 83 into a 79 or 78. I drive the ball between 280 and 300 consistently, hit my 4 iron about 210, and 7 iron about 170.

Uh, even if you're lying only a little bit, you have a glaring weakness, and I addressed that already in the bold text quoted by sker.

If you came for a lesson, I saw your Flightscope numbers and your swing, and you told me you shoot 83, we'd be on the putting and chipping green before you could put your driver back in your bag.

C'mon. You're not applying anywhere close to 35% of your practice time to the short game and putting.

Originally Posted by mmoan2

I think it's better to have a good full swing and excellent short game/putting stroke than an excellent full swing, but only good short game/putting stroke. An average, decent swing can get you near the green, but short game woes can balloon a score in a hurry, not to mention break you mentally (God, how many times can I hit driver/8 iron to the fringe, only to chip to 10 feet and 2 putt for bogey. If I could only chip to 4 feet (or putt like a stud), I'd par 75%+ of these buggers...).

I still disagree. You almost never take penalty shots with the short game, and again, hitting behind trees, into fairway bunkers, or nasty rough, missing greens, etc. are the fastest way to bloat your scores.

In fact, this is borderline fact - a PGA Tour player who plays every shot an 18 handicapper has from 50 yards and in will lose to the PGA Tour player who hits every shot outside of 50 yards and lets the 18 play the ones within.

The long game matters more, is more complex, and requires more effort to maintain and improve at the same pace as the short game. I'd rather strike the ball awesome and have an average short game than have to rely on every hole on my short game giving me a chance.

---

At the end of the day, you're using your completely goofy golf game which HAS a glaring weakness (you've "neglected" your short game and putting, and have not put in the 35% time) as if it debunks my point.

I would say that it is closer to proving it.

Going forward, for a brief time, you might do 40 full swing 60 short game/putting. But very quickly it should normalize and you should resume an actual 65/25/10 type schedule.

[mmoan2]

It's fine for you disagree with me, and I know you have more experience and time to look into it to back it up. As to Pelz, I agree with you, but I just get tired of people saying he's only espousing the short game because that's what he teaches. I think he's got his niche as a short game guru, and that's fine. People should take from it that short game is more important than most people think. It pains me to watch beginning golfers who probably do a 65/25/10 ratio of warm ups, but chip and putt with absolutely awful form and it kills their game. Maybe his overemphasis on short game has been overestimated and even counterproductive, but I think he has his place. Many people could benefit from reading his short game book.

I also still agree with my initial post on this forum that in the beginning. I firmly believe a brand new golfer should do a ratio of more like 40-40-20, only because it is easier to learn the short game/putting stroke, and it's more like riding a bike. Once you've got them down, they need more maintenance than anything else. After a few months of that, I'm all for a 65/25/10.

Rereading my post and thinking it over, I think I've given the impression that my game is goofy, but "neglect" probably isn't the word for the short game. I've neglected it recently because I spent so much time on it earlier that it was by far the strength of my game. For example, when I was warming up before my round last week, my first five chips I made from about 20 yards with a sand wedge, I hit all of them within two feet of the cup. Two of them hit the pin, and the last one I sunk earning an applause from two guys watching me. So that I actually have something constructive to say here and I'm not just defending myself, I think the advice I want to give to people is this: 65/25/10 is generally about right, but you need to PLAY more. I'm on a limited budget, so I practice far more than I play, but that approach has given me false confidence in my short game and putting. Chipping on a practice green where you know the contours like the back of your hand is different from chipping to a green with bigger contours you've maybe seen once before. Those pars become bogeys really quickly.

So in summary, Erik, you're right as usual, but I guess I love golf so much that I just love to argue with people more smarter than me just to feel better:) Also, all you range rats - go play more so you can really know what it's like to play golf and not just swing a golf club. P.S. go easy on Pelz, people. If I had a dollar for every guy I saw on the range who would improve their short game immensely by reading his book for five minutes, I could play Troon every week instead of munis.

[anthony]

If you're hitting GIR's, you're going to score better. Putting is the easiest part of the game. My grandma can putt, my 5 year old nephew can putt, anyone can putt. Putting the ball in the fairway and striking consistent irons is many times more difficult. Having a good pitch and chip game is important, obviously. Those shots are still easier to master compared to the full swing.

As an aside, I don't think I've ever played with someone who struck the ball great, but had a crap short game.

[mvmac]

Just take the last round of the Masters for example.  The guys that were making bogies down the stretch, Day and Snedeker, were missing greens and missing fairways.  Brandt had to lay up on 5 and 10 after poor drives.  Scott and Cabrera were hitting fairways and greens, giving themselves more birdie putts.  Jason Day hits the green on 16 and 17, pretty good chance he's in the playoff.

[susanne]

mmoan,

enjoyed reading your post.Fully agree with you.If a 18 handicapper took lessons from a ´´Good techer´´ anbd worked on the short shots,his or her handicap would come down.

putting - give the player a better teqnique,teach him about reading greens he would improve,maybe only 1 putt less a round.

chipping and pitching - improve hs technique,so where as before he would top a couple over the green each round or hit it fat,he can hit it more consistantly.-would save him a couple of shots a round.

Bunker - teach him better set up,etc,so now can get out of the trap on 1st gowill knock a shot off his game.

So all in all, with some practice he would save 3 shots a round.

Now lets take the long game,lets improve his swing,lets get the player to have the club in the perfect positon at the top,great turn through the ball,great rythem,i mean really sound technique.He will still hit it in the trees every other hole.If Snedeker and co cant average better than 12 greens in reg,hows a Amature going to.

For all you experts,these are my  personal thoughts,and everyone is free to have their own,but unless you have any better ideas to write on a forum,then just leave it.the guy who says about me making a spelling mistake,(which i find a bit unfair as for a german my english isnt that terrible) :And what the point of the quote that i come from austria,wow how interesting.....sad.

[Mordan]

Originally Posted by susanne

mmoan,

enjoyed reading your post.Fully agree with you.If a 18 handicapper took lessons from a ´´Good techer´´ anbd worked on the short shots,his or her handicap would come down.

putting - give the player a better teqnique,teach him about reading greens he would improve,maybe only 1 putt less a round.

chipping and pitching - improve hs technique,so where as before he would top a couple over the green each round or hit it fat,he can hit it more consistantly.-would save him a couple of shots a round.

Bunker - teach him better set up,etc,so now can get out of the trap on 1st gowill knock a shot off his game.

So all in all, with some practice he would save 3 shots a round.

Now lets take the long game,lets improve his swing,lets get the player to have the club in the perfect positon at the top,great turn through the ball,great rythem,i mean really sound technique.He will still hit it in the trees every other hole.If Snedeker and co cant average better than 12 greens in reg,hows a Amature going to.

For all you experts,these are my  personal thoughts,and everyone is free to have their own,but unless you have any better ideas to write on a forum,then just leave it.the guy who says about me making a spelling mistake,(which i find a bit unfair as for a german my english isnt that terrible):And what the point of the quote that i come from austria,wow how interesting.....sad.

An 18 handicapper can save 3 shots per round by working on putting, short game and sand shots. So there must be 15 shots to be saved between that and a scratch golfer in the longer game. But then you seem to say that they shouldn't bother with this, because an amateur can never get better than hitting it in the trees on every second hole. Huh?

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by susanne

mmoan,

enjoyed reading your post.Fully agree with you.If a 18 handicapper took lessons from a ´´Good techer´´ anbd worked on the short shots,his or her handicap would come down.

putting - give the player a better teqnique,teach him about reading greens he would improve,maybe only 1 putt less a round.

chipping and pitching - improve hs technique,so where as before he would top a couple over the green each round or hit it fat,he can hit it more consistantly.-would save him a couple of shots a round.

Bunker - teach him better set up,etc,so now can get out of the trap on 1st gowill knock a shot off his game.

So all in all, with some practice he would save 3 shots a round.

Now lets take the long game,lets improve his swing,lets get the player to have the club in the perfect positon at the top,great turn through the ball,great rythem,i mean really sound technique.He will still hit it in the trees every other hole.If Snedeker and co cant average better than 12 greens in reg,hows a Amature going to.

For all you experts,these are my  personal thoughts,and everyone is free to have their own,but unless you have any better ideas to write on a forum,then just leave it.the guy who says about me making a spelling mistake,(which i find a bit unfair as for a german my english isnt that terrible):And what the point of the quote that i come from austria,wow how interesting.....sad.

Originally Posted by Mordan

An 18 handicapper can save 3 shots per round by working on putting, short game and sand shots. So there must be 15 shots to be saved between that and a scratch golfer in the longer game. But then you seem to say that they shouldn't bother with this, because an amateur can never get better than hitting it in the trees on every second hole. Huh?

Yeah, seriously ... huh?  You (Susanne, Susane, whatever your name is) admit that all the practice in the world on short game and putting can only save 3 shots per round for an 18 handicapper, yet that they should not work at all on their long game.

So, what you are saying is that an 18 handicapper is completely hopeless and can never improve past 15?  Yikes, thats idiotic.

Just as an FYI, I've gotten from a 10 to an 8 (and still dropping) in the last few months practicing almost exclusively on the long game.