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

[Lihu]

Even as a novice golfer, the 65/25/10 practice works for me. I need to learn to relax on all parts of the drive. I am getting for the feel of each part and stopping at each section of the swing to get comfortable. It takes me 2 minutes to hit each drive doing this at the range. Then full FW/hybrid/iron swings I take one practice swing and two or more turns at setup. This takes me about a minute each swing, most of the time is waiting for the muscles to relax. Pitches and chips I take a practice swing to loosen up and swing. This takes me about 15 seconds. Putting is more or less the same. I am glad you posted this. Thanks.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by mvmac

Not to speak for Erik but yes I would say the short game is easier to learn.  I feel most golfers, with the right information and time, can have a stellar short game.  The motion and sequencing for chips and pitches is just more simple.

Uhhhh, this. :)

[Lihu]

Uhhhh, this. :)

I don't practice my short game that much, lately. It seems that if I can get my full swing good with irons, everything else seems to fall in place. Is that normal?

[Norm3333]

Originally Posted by ladders11

No!

First point is that the clubs used the most are 1) putter, 2) driver,3) LW, 4) SW, and 5) PW, followed by the 3W and irons.  Good wedge players don't start leaving their wedges in the trunk because they don't need them.

Second point is that what saves strokes is getting the ball close enough to make the first putt.  Basically, this means within 15 feet to have a 10% chance, or within 6 feet to have a 50% chance.  Nobody, including pros, can get the ball within this range from over 100 yards on a consistent basis.

I would venture a guess that most people can learn not to three putt - another way of saying this would be I like my chances of getting down in two from anywhere on the green.  Get it close, and then tap it in.  So given that it is heretofore impossible to get long irons into the make-able range most of the time, a better use of practice time is getting our wedges more consistently within 15 feet.

Why would a 20 handicapper give advice on how to get better at golf, when he/she isn't good at golf?  That would be like me asking my wife how I can get my subordinates to do a better jobs of following my orders when she has never been in the Navy.  Doesn't make any sense.

Let the players that are good, tell you how they got good.

[dsc123]

Why would a 20 handicapper give advice on how to get better at golf, when he/she isn't good at golf?  That would be like me asking my wife how I can get my subordinates to do a better jobs of following my orders when she has never been in the Navy.  Doesn't make any sense.  Let the players that are good, tell you how they got good.

You must know that your response is completely illogical. Right?

[saevel25]

Because ability to play golf has nothing to do with knowledge of the golf swing. It might just mean they can't put mind to body and effectively swing the club. If so then Butch Harmon would have won a ton of majors in his golfing career, why would tiger woods take lessons from him, apparently tiger knows more of the golf swing because he's a better player.

[ejimsmith]

Originally Posted by saevel25

Because ability to play golf has nothing to do with knowledge of the golf swing. It might just mean they can't put mind to body and effectively swing the club. If so then Butch Harmon would have won a ton of majors in his golfing career, why would tiger woods take lessons from him, apparently tiger knows more of the golf swing because he's a better player.

i doubt butch harmon is a 20 handicap

[saevel25]

Still doesn't matter, to be able personally put knowledge to ability is not a measure of knowledge of ability to teach golf.

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by saevel25

Still doesn't matter, to be able personally put knowledge to ability is not a measure of knowledge of ability to teach golf.

If you are a golf instructor with a 20 handicap, I doubt you would have many students. If you are not able to "show" a student (not "tell" a student) how to correctly make a golf swing, you have nothing to offer.

How much confidence would your student have in your instruction if you couldn't make a decent golf shot yourself?  Not much, I'd wager. The student might as well just get a golf instruction book or video.

[Deryck Griffith]

Originally Posted by saevel25

Still doesn't matter, to be able personally put knowledge to ability is not a measure of knowledge of ability to teach golf.

I see what you are saying but I'm somewhat on the fence.

Almost all good instructors I've seen who "teach" Golf regardless of what their golf swing philosophy is, are more than competent at hitting the ball.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

If you are a golf instructor with a 20 handicap, I doubt you would have many students. If you are not able to "show" a student (not "tell" a student) how to correctly make a golf swing, you have nothing to offer.

How much confidence would your student have in your instruction if you couldn't make a decent golf shot yourself?  Not much, I'd wager. The student might as well just get a golf instruction book or video.

... with obvious exceptions allowable for injury and/or old age. Harvey Penick might not have broken 150 from the short tees but his instruction was still sought.

[dsc123]

The point is that ad homenium attacks are logically invalid--his handicap does not invalidate his point.

[dsc123]

Originally Posted by iacas

... with obvious exceptions allowable for injury and/or old age. Harvey Penick might not have broken 150 from the short tees but his instruction was still sought.

And ladders is a 20 to norm's 8.  Butch is probably a 3 to tiger's +10.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by dsc123

And ladders is a 20 to norm's 8.  Butch is probably a 3 to tiger's +10.

So? My wife probably knows more about how to make a proper golf swing than a lot of 18 handicappers I've met, and quite a few six handicappers too. :)

[dsc123]

Originally Posted by iacas

So? My wife probably knows more about how to make a proper golf swing than a lot of 18 handicappers I've met, and quite a few six handicappers too. :)

I think I quoted the wrong post.  My point was just that the retort "I doubt butch harmon is a 20 handicap" isn't helpful even if you accept that HC is indicative of the value of the teacher.  Harmon may be a good golfer, but he's teaching the best.  Harmon probably isn't any closer to Tiger's ability than ladders is to norm (who dismissed ladder's points based on his hc).

[ejimsmith]

Originally Posted by saevel25

Still doesn't matter, to be able personally put knowledge to ability is not a measure of knowledge of ability to teach golf.

that wouldn't matter if someone had a track record, or other type of resume, that shows they are a master of golf.  however here, we only have someone's handicap to judge them by.  and i feel that someone that's a 20 handicap shouldn't be spouting off that we should be spending all our time putting and chipping.  i'll go w/ the advice of the single-digit handicap as they are speaking from their experience.

any you know what?  i found this thread a few months ago, and have gotten the results i'm looking for.  my iron striking has gotten much, much better.  i'm hitting many more greens, which has led to more birdie opportunities, and many more pars.  and while i sometimes still need to chip to get onto the green, i'm chipping from just a few yards away instead of 30.    i spend time chipping and putting still (as the ratios suggest), and those have improved as well.  but i know that the iron striking is the main reason why my scores are going down.

[dsc123]

Originally Posted by ejimsmith

here, we only have someone's handicap to judge them by.  and i feel that someone that's a 20 handicap shouldn't be spouting off that we should be spending all our time putting and chipping.

You have his statement and his explanation for it.  You know, what he actually said .

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by iacas

... with obvious exceptions allowable for injury and/or old age. Harvey Penick might not have broken 150 from the short tees but his instruction was still sought.

True enough. Penick at 90 probably was not the golfer he was at 19, when he became head professional at Austin Country Club. I would wager he could strike the ball OK when he was physically able. By the time he could no longer play golf, he had over 50 years golf teaching experience, with great results for individuals (Kite, Crenshaw, Mickey Wright, Kathy Whitworth, and others) and teams (Texas'  21 SWC championships).

There is a difference between Penick and a guy who has never been a good golfer (20 cap) teaching the game.