Video of Tom Kite Pitch-Chip from Down The Line High FPS Entire Ball Flight

[Mac62]

...I agree a wide shallow arc may have a consistency bonus - esp if you want to be sure of a high trajectory, but do you think there are likely lies from 15-60 yards where a narrower U arc may be potentially useful for distance consistency relative to a wider / flatter arc?...

I'm not seeing where distance consistency (at least for the majority of golfers) is improved in a swing which involves more moving parts (double pendulum) and acceleration ("throwing" the clubface), as opposed to a simple swing such as the 'quickie pitch' where it's a simple motion with only gravity providing the acceleration.  Using the 'quickie pitch', my only concern is how far back to take the club - which is much easier to gauge than how fast/hard to accelerate and at what point to actively release the wrists to time the proper AoA at impact.  I'd have to agree with Erik's assessment that it would take significantly more practice to keep that kind of motion in tune.  I'd rather rely on gravity, which is consistent no matter what my physical state at the moment is.  If I'm worn down toward the end of a round on a hot day, or jacked up because it's an important shot, my feel for the acceleration may be entirely different.  In either situation, I have to feel that my results would be more consistent if I'm doing nothing more than taking the club back and letting gravity do its thing.

[natureboy]

I'm not seeing where distance consistency (at least for the majority of golfers) is improved in a swing which involves more moving parts (double pendulum) and acceleration ("throwing" the clubface), as opposed to a simple swing such as the 'quickie pitch' where it's a simple motion with only gravity providing the acceleration.  Using the 'quickie pitch', my only concern is how far back to take the club - which is much easier to gauge than how fast/hard to accelerate and at what point to actively release the wrists to time the proper AoA at impact.  I'd have to agree with Erik's assessment that it would take significantly more practice to keep that kind of motion in tune.  I'd rather rely on gravity, which is consistent no matter what my physical state at the moment is.  If I'm worn down toward the end of a round on a hot day, or jacked up because it's an important shot, my feel for the acceleration may be entirely different.  In either situation, I have to feel that my results would be more consistent if I'm doing nothing more than taking the club back and letting gravity do its thing.

To clarify, I am not critiquing the 'quickie pitch'. I think it's a very solid and forgiving stock shot. I am interested in details of other methods too and think those details are important in making comparisons.

What I am saying is that the intentions behind the 'Pelz distance wedge' method with 'dead hands' (that I think Kite is using from the '8:30' position) is essentially the same as the bolded text in your quote. It is by design not full swing mechanics. It's from a more vertical plane, but like with the image of the model double-pendulum doesn't necessarily require timing or a throw to square the club / engage the bounce through the ball. It's possible that Kite is adding a little 'throw', but relative to the intentions of the method it is likely to be small (more 'toss' feel than 'throw'). Both methods involved a synchronized turn with no active restriction of release on the downswing so the L & R shoulders are both equally engaged through the club during the swing. Or is the 'quickie' method completely one-sided such that you could drop one hand off the grip completely with equal results?

The 'quickie' method with the shallower / lower path to the ball involves less club movement, engages earlier and more bounce and may be more consistent as a result. IMO, lies in deep rough at larger pitching distances would require a significantly longer swing or faster turn (due to less wrist hinge) with a shallow approach that interacts with the grass longer before the ball is contacted. That may or may not be a distance consistency factor relative to Pelz' method.

[Mac62]

...The 'quickie' method with the shallower / lower path to the ball involves less club movement, engages earlier and more bounce and may be more consistent as a result. IMO, lies in deep rough at larger pitching distances would require a significantly longer swing or faster turn (due to less wrist hinge) with a shallow approach that interacts with the grass longer before the ball is contacted. That may or may not be a distance consistency factor relative to Pelz' method.

The bolded part is moving the goalposts a little bit, don't you think?

[Phil McGleno]

The 'quickie' method with the shallower / lower path to the ball involves less club movement, engages earlier and more bounce and may be more consistent as a result. IMO, lies in deep rough at larger pitching distances would require a significantly longer swing or faster turn (due to less wrist hinge) with a shallow approach that interacts with the grass longer before the ball is contacted. That may or may not be a distance consistency factor relative to Pelz' method.

Yep when you have to hit a longer pitch you make a longer swing, not really news. Have you made your point yet? Or do we have to suffer through more of your "theories"? btw Pelz is extremely overrated and he's flat out wrong about a lot of things. There's a reason Phil never worked on technique with him.

[natureboy]

The bolded part is moving the goalposts a little bit, don't you think?

Lies in the rough around the green & 'tweener' are a significant part of my current game so it's relevant in understanding any possible tradeoffs or optimal ranges between methods / techniques relative to what may or does work best in different situations for my own game and skill. Also important if I decide to use different techniques to know the details that differentiate them so I don't create a bad mashup blend.

[mvmac]

Lies in the rough around the green & 'tweener' are a significant part of my current game so it's relevant in understanding any possible tradeoffs or optimal ranges between methods / techniques relative to what may or does work best in different situations for my own game and skill. Also important if I decide to use different techniques to know the details that differentiate them so I don't create a bad mashup blend.

I don't think there is anything to be gained by copying what Kite is doing. Not saying it can't work but it requires more maintenance and timing than most pitching techniques.

[natureboy]

I don't think there is anything to be gained by copying what Kite is doing. Not saying it can't work but it requires more maintenance and timing than most pitching techniques.

So don't use a synchronized turn when pitching? That's a pretty didactic dismissal of Kite's game. I continue to disagree that it takes much active timing. All pitching techniques require some maintenance for precise distance touch.

[iacas]

I don't think there is anything to be gained by copying what Kite is doing. Not saying it can't work but it requires more maintenance and timing than most pitching techniques.

I second this. This thread is not a discussion of the Pelz method you [i]think[/i] Kite is using, @natureboy . You are the same guy who thinks Hogan is punch or push elbow after all.

[mvmac]

So don't use a synchronized turn when pitching? That's a pretty didactic dismissal of Kite's game. I continue to disagree that it takes much active timing. All pitching techniques require some maintenance for precise distance touch.

That's not what I said so please don't put words in my mouth. You disagree it's a more complicated motion, that's fine, I know what the best players do, I know what the best instructors teach. I think it's time we moved on.

[natureboy]

I second this.

This thread is not a discussion of the Pelz method you think Kite is using, @natureboy. You are the same guy who thinks Hogan is punch or push elbow after all.

How is this snarky comment based on posts in another thread not off-topic? Do you aim to apply the forum principles / rules to yourselves or only non-mods?

I think I have good reason to believe it is the technique that is most likely being used by Kite in the video. My point was relevant to the topic and points raised that he was actively releasing / 'timing' with the trail hand where the Pelz described technique of letting gravity release the club is actually similar to the 'quickie' (while the wrist motion, plane and vertical club path differ significantly). I think there are a great many swing technique nuances that pictures and videos alone won't reveal if you don't also have a description of the intentions of the technique (and sometimes the feels - even when not 'real') being employed. For example, would someone looking at a visual only of the quickie technique (without any of the helpful explanations) be able to conclude with accurate certainty that gravity was releasing the club vs. the trail side or a mix of the two? To my eye, letting the club go with gravity looks a little like an R hand / arm throw there too, but I know it's not because of the described intentions of the technique.

I have been working with the quickie pitch technique and find it very intuitive and effective inside 30 yards. Contact is usually very good from Fwy or Rgh and it's not hard to gauge the extra rough effort within that distance for me. It's probably helping me with consistent delivery of loft. Outside 25-30 yards I am sticking (for now) with the Pelz Distance wedge technique, because I personally find it easier to be consistent with the distance with the constant arm position & wrist cock (I use 9:00 only) to power the swing vs. a more sped-up and longer quickie technique. As I get better with the quickie technique I may shift.

Besides using longer / faster swings with quickie technique as you move away from the hole, how many clubs up do you apply it with or do you stick with wedges only or do you primarily flight it down for longer pitching carries?

[iacas]

How is this snarky comment based on posts in another thread not off-topic? Do you aim to apply the forum principles / rules to yourselves or only non-mods?

Since you asked (what, weeks after it was posted), it goes to your credibility or your ability to properly categorize or describe what you're seeing. That's all. And… all but the last sentence is directly on topic.

I'll plainly admit to only skimming the rest of your post, and though on a subconscious level the first part of your post likely had some effect, consciously it's not because of any ill will or distemper or anything like that toward you, but simply because this topic is now months old and I've moved on. I feel I've said all I can really say about Tom Kite's method as seen in that single, not-great-angle video clip.

Summary of my position on the Tom Kite video: I don't care what technique he's using (whether it's "Pelz" or "Peanuts" or "Pippi Longstocking")… I prefer to teach it differently than what I see him doing (as best as I can see given the camera angle, etc.). I feel that Kite's throwing the clubhead and that his motion requires a bit more timing to engage the bounce/glide rather than letting it occur more naturally.

P.S. I edited your post, too, as a favor to you. You had some rogue text before your "Quote:" bit. I removed it for you.

[mvmac]

I feel that Kite's throwing the clubhead and that his motion requires a bit more timing to engage the bounce/glide rather than letting it occur more naturally.

@natureboy you can use whatever technique you want but this is summarizes our position perfectly. There really isn't much more to discuss.

[natureboy]

Since you asked (what, weeks after it was posted), it goes to your credibility or your ability to properly categorize or describe what you're seeing. That's all. And… all but the last sentence is directly on topic.

I'll plainly admit to only skimming the rest of your post, and though on a subconscious level the first part of your post likely had some effect, consciously it's not because of any ill will or distemper or anything like that toward you, but simply because this topic is now months old and I've moved on. I feel I've said all I can really say about Tom Kite's method as seen in that single, not-great-angle video clip.

Summary of my position on the Tom Kite video: I don't care what technique he's using (whether it's "Pelz" or "Peanuts" or "Pippi Longstocking")… I prefer to teach it differently than what I see him doing (as best as I can see given the camera angle, etc.). I feel that Kite's throwing the clubhead and that his motion requires a bit more timing to engage the bounce/glide rather than letting it occur more naturally.

P.S. I edited your post, too, as a favor to you. You had some rogue text before your "Quote:" bit. I removed it for you.

The comment I made about Hogan in the other thread was intentionally sarcastic hyperbole pointing out how relatively close IMO the elbow positions appeared to the spine angle from DTL between Rory and one of the 'models' for the stone skipping leading elbow. I will be sure to use an emoticon next time I attempt some humor. Thanks again for editing my post.

@mvmac , I understand your position and accept it's possible - likely even - that your recommended technique requires even less timing than Kite's. But I agree to disagree that he's throwing the clubhead vs. a gravity driven release.

I also think it's valuable to compare and contrast differences and similarities in a forum like this rather than just say, "this all bad / this all good", because (for me anyway) the partial similarity of the Pelz / Kite approach underscores the value of the gravity release that is part of the technique you endorse.

[mvmac]

@mvmac, I understand your position and accept it's possible - likely even - that your recommended technique requires even less timing than Kite's. But I agree to disagree that he's throwing the clubhead vs. a gravity driven release.

Gotcha, Erik and I disagree. I think we can move on now

[iacas]

I think we can move on now

Well, you and I will.

@natureboy , @mvmac and I have said all we intend to say on this. You're welcome to remain and keep typing out more stuff, but I think even if you try to bait a response from Mike or I you'll find we're going to be able to resist.