Are you spending 70% of your practice time on your short game like Michael Breed implies you should?

[iacas]

I was looking through random GameGolf rounds and me it looks like there is a pattern for high handicap golfers when they get triple or quadruple bogeys they often hit 3 wedge shots in a row.

The stats don't really bear that out. More strokes are lost to the long game than the short game.

There's danger in trying to see trends by looking at them like this. It's incredibly tough to be completely objective.

[Kenny Lee]

I'm doing the opposite. My practice sessions comprise around 70% full swing, 30% short game.

I'm in the process of making some swing changes, so that's where I'm spending my time right now.

[colin007]

Wondering if on longer approach putts (50' +) or severely uphill if there is a diminishing relationship between length of stroke & speed at the bottom? I am finding that on these long ones, the backstroke is long enough to start feeling my left side muscles get a bit of that X-factor type stretch which feels as if it adds speed to the downstroke relative to dropping the putter with acceleration only from gravity. When I get back in this 'stretch' zone a small extra backswing length seems to result in a significant increase in ball travel relative to the less torquey feeling pendulum zone.

Have you found this to be a factor? How do you keep the left side muscles from adding anything on the longer putts to keep it pure pendulum?

its not a "pure" pendulum. theres going to be a little bit of a "hit" added especially on longer putts.

[natureboy]

If you're making 95% of your putts from 5 feet, dude, you are a phenomenal putter. I make 95% from 2 feet but probably 65 or 70 from 5 feet, and I think I'm a pretty good putter.

Sounds to me like you just have a speed problem from longer range but with a hcap like that and a 5-foot percentage so high, I think you're underestimating your putting skill.

Agree - see below.

I never thought about it this way.. now that I know my wife is a better putter than me .

BUT it is just tough. Statistics show it is the long game, better players typically feel like it is the shorter game. I separate myself in a bad way with putting. I feel like I am hitting as many greens as the next guy who may be leading the tournament. Can I learn to get closer to the hole? Absolutely, will it help me make more putts, I guess so since they are shorter but they better be within 5 feet. Most of my birdies are kick-ins and I make pretty much 95% of putts within 5 feet. Anything outside of that, I always just tell God that I am going to need some help on this one.

Plus 5-6 handicappers have a 75% make percentage at ~5'. Granted their stats may be knocked down a bit by tougher greens, but still. Maybe you just need to work on lagging it at least within 5' from any distance.

I think what happens is that good golfers develop this nice straight drive and good shots and then all of a sudden the short game matters a lot so they think its the problem for everyone. For me, I pretty much hit out of bounds on my drives 50% of the time and am taking a mulligans to get a decent shot (I am learning which is why I am doing it) and taking 3-4 shots to get on the green on par 4 holes. I might 3 putt a few holes but man if I could fix my swing I would be a sub 10 handicap and thats with no work on my chipping/putting right now and my average score is 103 for the last month. My drives slice and when they are good they are only 200 yards. I am taking lessons and doing everything to fix it but its been months and a good consistent drive is still ways a way for me. I spent an afternoon working on my chipping a few weeks ago and its 100% better. I havent really had a problem chip shot since but that chip shot doesn't help me when I am chipping for 4 or 5 on a par 4 hole. A good swing is the first thing you need to get down before you worry about that chip/putt. Heck my wife has never played golf in her life and she could 2-3 putt most holes just from playing miniature golf a few times a year.

I think that has merit. I also wonder if what happens is it gets quite hard to make significant improvements to an already good swing...diminishing returns on effort. So while it remains as important statistically, it becomes harder (unless you work even more ) to achieve even small gains from long game alone. However, if you've worked diligently on your long game and maybe not as effectively as short game, there might be some 'slack' that is easier to take up especially now that you are hitting it closer to the pin with a better long game foundation.

[GHIN0011458]

Agree - see below.

Plus 5-6 handicappers have a 75% make percentage at ~5'. Granted their stats may be knocked down a bit by tougher greens, but still. Maybe you just need to work on lagging it at least within 5' from any distance.

I

Where did you get that stat?

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.403.html

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.403.2014.html

I have just played 90 competitive holes in an 8 day stretch and missed one three footer and two at 4-5 feet and multiple 8 footers that I feel like I should have made(irrelevant),  made I think 12 putts outside of 5 feet so 3/78 missed = 96.1%

[natureboy]

Where did you get that stat?

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.403.html

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.403.2014.html

I have just played 90 competitive holes in an 8 day stretch and missed one three footer and two at 4-5 feet and multiple 8 footers that I feel like I should have made(irrelevant),  made I think 12 putts outside of 5 feet so 3/78 missed = 96.1%

I built a putting baseline curve out of the data in Every Shot counts. It's not perfect, but well in the ballpark, I think. Similar to the one below. The number I stated isn't the best putters' performance, but the long-term tour average at (not inside) that distance. Make % climbs up steeply from ~ 75% each foot closer to the hole.

The reason the make percentage is so high for shots inside 5' on the PGA stats page is the category is a very wide bucket that includes a lot of short and very short putts which are up in the high to very high 90's. If you made over 96% inside 5' then you are putting with the pros - unless your greens are significantly easier. If you only had 12 out of 78 (15%) putts outside 5', and you had relatively few GIR (78 putts in 90 holes?), your scrambling game must have been spot on for those 5 rounds. I can only imagine how nice that must feel...maybe someday.

[GHIN0011458]

I built a putting baseline curve out of the data in Every Shot counts. It's not perfect, but well in the ballpark, I think. Similar to the one below. The number I stated isn't the best putters' performance, but the long-term tour average at (not inside) that distance. Make % climbs up steeply from ~ 75% each foot closer to the hole.

The reason the make percentage is so high for shots inside 5' on the PGA stats page is the category is a very wide bucket that includes a lot of short and very short putts which are up in the high to very high 90's. If you made over 96% inside 5' then you are putting with the pros - unless your greens are significantly easier. If you only had 12 out of 78 (15%) putts outside 5', and you had relatively few GIR (78 putts in 90 holes?), your scrambling game must have been spot on for those 5 rounds. I can only imagine how nice that must feel...maybe someday.

Something is off- either I explained wrong, or you interpreted wrong. So I ended up hitting 58/90 GIR, or 64%. I ended up hitting 158 putts total. I ONLY made around 12 putts outside of 5 feet, but inside of 5 feet, I made around 96 percent. I was talking about the 78 putts that were lagged towards the hole, tapped in, 1 footers, 2 footers, 3, 4 5 footers. That happened 78 times. I missed 3 of those. The rest were outside of 5 feet, and put up close to the hole. My scrambling was actually horrible. Different rough three tourneys in a row, different greens(firmness), etc. I also factor in every MG in my scrambling, so not sure if that is correct. Meaning- if I hit behind a tree and I need to pitch out and I am still 150 out, if I don't get that up and down then I count it as not scrambling. My Scrambling percentage was only 41% using that method. Getting up and down around the green itself, more like 65 percent.

[natureboy]

Something is off- either I explained wrong, or you interpreted wrong. So I ended up hitting 58/90 GIR, or 64%. I ended up hitting 158 putts total. I ONLY made around 12 putts outside of 5 feet, but inside of 5 feet, I made around 96 percent. I was talking about the 78 putts that were lagged towards the hole, tapped in, 1 footers, 2 footers, 3, 4 5 footers. That happened 78 times. I missed 3 of those. The rest were outside of 5 feet, and put up close to the hole. My scrambling was actually horrible. Different rough three tourneys in a row, different greens(firmness), etc. I also factor in every MG in my scrambling, so not sure if that is correct. Meaning- if I hit behind a tree and I need to pitch out and I am still 150 out, if I don't get that up and down then I count it as not scrambling. My Scrambling percentage was only 41% using that method. Getting up and down around the green itself, more like 65 percent.

Good clarification - makes much more sense for your skill level now. I thought your initial post was referencing make % at 5' not inside it.

[RandallT]

REPOST from another thread (http://thesandtrap.com/t/82074/strokes-gained-mcilroy-wells-fargo-pgatour-com#post_1144389):

	Total	Driver	Approach	Short	Putt
Wells Fargo	2.8	0.8	0.7	0.4	0.9
Players	2.4	0.5	0.8	0.4	0.8
RBC Heritage	2.9	0.3	1.0	0.4	1.2
Zurich	2.4	0.5	0.7	0.3	1.0
Shell Houston	2.4	0.7	0.7	0.2	0.9
Honda Classic	2.7	0.3	1.5	0.3	0.6
Arnold Palmer Inv	2.7	0.3	0.9	0.5	1.0
Valspar	2.6	-0.1	1.1	0.3	1.2
WGC Cadillac	2.2	0.5	0.8	0.3	0.5
Valero Texas	3.2	0.7	0.8	0.3	1.4
Northern Trust	2.7	0.4	0.8	0.5	1.0
ATT Pebble Beach	3.9	0.2	1.3	1.1	1.3
TOTAL	2.7	0.4	0.9	0.4	1.0

Thought this was interesting.  Every week, the PGA puts out the average strokes gained from the Top 10 or so (sometimes top 9, sometimes top 12) players in the tournament.  This chart summarizes those PGA charts from each tournament. I only did a random sample of some tournaments.

Seems pros spend a lot of time working on their short games.... BUT the top 10 of each week achieve "Separation Value" from the field using the full swing skills (drive+approach=1.3 strokes per round) and putting (1.0 strokes per round).  Their short games represent only 0.4/2.7 of their separation from the field.

[iacas]

Seems pros spend a lot of time working on their short games.... BUT the top 10 of each week achieve "Separation Value" from the field using the full swing skills (drive+approach=1.3 strokes per round) and putting (1.0 strokes per round).

One thing important to note here, too: the putting being 1.0 is often what separates a player from the other top-ten players that week that allows him to win. If he holes a few more putts than the next guy, he wins, but that's quite often simply a matter of luck. I'm not saying putting is a matter of luck, but whether two or three extra putts fall so that the player can win versus finishing T3 that week is the lucky part.

So what you historically see is that people who have a good ballstriking week (lots of GIR) put themselves in a place where, if they're lucky, a few extra putts fall and they have a chance to win. Otherwise, maybe they finish T5. Or if they have an unlucky week on the greens, T9 or 14th or something.

[RandallT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandallT

Seems pros spend a lot of time working on their short games.... BUT the top 10 of each week achieve "Separation Value" from the field using the full swing skills (drive+approach=1.3 strokes per round) and putting (1.0 strokes per round).

One thing important to note here, too: the putting being 1.0 is often what separates a player from the other top-ten players that week that allows him to win. If he holes a few more putts than the next guy, he wins, but that's quite often simply a matter of luck. I'm not saying putting is a matter of luck, but whether two or three extra putts fall so that the player can win versus finishing T3 that week is the lucky part.

So what you historically see is that people who have a good ballstriking week (lots of GIR) put themselves in a place where, if they're lucky, a few extra putts fall and they have a chance to win. Otherwise, maybe they finish T5. Or if they have an unlucky week on the greens, T9 or 14th or something.

Yes good point. The PGA lists each of the top 10' players' specific breakdown as well, and the variability within that group is significant. When you view chart after chart from different weeks, nothing jumps out at you immediately.

For example, Gary Woodland (T4 at Wells Fargo this week) gained 2.5 strokes PER ROUND putting this week and lost ground to the field driving (not how many of us think of Gary Woodland). That's pretty impressive putting to gain 10 strokes over the tournament on the green. Sometimes a guy wins with the best putting stats, sometimes driving/approach. So within those top 10 players, it's anybody's guess which category gives the winner the edge.

But the overall averages do seem somewhat consistent week to week. Some variations in the distribution week to week, of course, which is interesting. I wonder why Valspar didn't reward good driving overall, and why Pebble Beach rewarded the short game so much. Curious if those distributions hold true from year to year.

But back on point for the thread, even though occasionally you see a guy in the top 10 whose best category was Short Game (Phil Mickelson T4 at Wells Fargo gained 1.4 of his 1.5 per round with short game), overall the numbers above show that the guys who break through week to week do it without separating themselves with short game.

Is it wise for PGA Players at the top of their game to practice short game so much when they don't typically separate themselves in a tournament that way?  Maybe if your short game is off, then you have no chance, so it's basically a tuning exercise to make sure that part of your game does no harm.

[Gunther]

Seems pros spend a lot of time working on their short games.... BUT the top 10 of each week achieve "Separation Value" from the field using the full swing skills (drive+approach=1.3 strokes per round) and putting (1.0 strokes per round).  Their short games represent only 0.4/2.7 of their separation from the field.

I find it interesting that the driver and the short game are equal. It's really the approach and putting that get it done week after week.

[rehmwa]

Quote:

I find it interesting that the driver and the short game are equal. It's really the approach and putting that get it done week after week.

Are you really going to light that firecracker again with this crowd?

(I'll bite with this - "Considering that better drivers have shorter approaches and also better lies and angles.......Would you think you will get better approach shots and putts if you drive well?")

[Gunther]

Are you really going to light that firecracker again with this crowd?  :-P (I'll bite with this - "Considering that better drivers have shorter approaches and also better lies and angles.......Would you think you will get better approach shots and putts if you drive well?")

Jesus no but I'm sure there are those that believe that's why I wrote it. It is truly interesting. I buy into the long game practice at our level. What this I believe tells us is that at the Pro level, those guys can get it on the green from anywhere which diminishes the significance of their driver. We cannot so need to focus there which will lead to improved approach shots, which really is the key metric of the 4, in my opinion. Putting is equal in terms of importance but a much easier skill to master. I'm all in.

[mvmac]

It is truly interesting. I buy into the long game practice at our level. What this I believe tells us is that at the Pro level, those guys can get it on the green from anywhere which diminishes the significance of their driver. We cannot so need to focus there which will lead to improved approach shots, which really is the key metric of the 4, in my opinion. Putting is equal in terms of importance but a much easier skill to master. I'm all in.

Ballstriking is what allows players to separate themselves, not putting. Brad Faxon was one of the best putters on tour for years, and struggled to make cuts the last 5-10 years he was on tour.

[natureboy]

REPOST from another thread (http://thesandtrap.com/t/82074/strokes-gained-mcilroy-wells-fargo-pgatour-com#post_1144389):

Total

Driver

Approach

Short

Putt

Wells Fargo

2.8

0.8

0.7

0.4

0.9

Players

2.4

0.5

0.8

0.4

0.8

RBC Heritage

2.9

0.3

1.0

0.4

1.2

Zurich

2.4

0.5

0.7

0.3

1.0

Shell Houston

2.4

0.7

0.7

0.2

0.9

Honda Classic

2.7

0.3

1.5

0.3

0.6

Arnold Palmer Inv

2.7

0.3

0.9

0.5

1.0

Valspar

2.6

-0.1

1.1

0.3

1.2

WGC Cadillac

2.2

0.5

0.8

0.3

0.5

Valero Texas

3.2

0.7

0.8

0.3

1.4

Northern Trust

2.7

0.4

0.8

0.5

1.0

ATT Pebble Beach

3.9

0.2

1.3

1.1

1.3

TOTAL

2.7

0.4

0.9

0.4

1.0

Thought this was interesting.  Every week, the PGA puts out the average strokes gained from the Top 10 or so (sometimes top 9, sometimes top 12) players in the tournament.  This chart summarizes those PGA charts from each tournament. I only did a random sample of some tournaments.

Seems pros spend a lot of time working on their short games.... BUT the top 10 of each week achieve "Separation Value" from the field using the full swing skills (drive+approach=1.3 strokes per round) and putting (1.0 strokes per round).  Their short games represent only 0.4/2.7 of their separation from the field.

Great / interesting post.

One thing important to note here, too: the putting being 1.0 is often what separates a player from the other top-ten players that week that allows him to win. If he holes a few more putts than the next guy, he wins, but that's quite often simply a matter of luck. I'm not saying putting is a matter of luck, but whether two or three extra putts fall so that the player can win versus finishing T3 that week is the lucky part.

So what you historically see is that people who have a good ballstriking week (lots of GIR) put themselves in a place where, if they're lucky, a few extra putts fall and they have a chance to win. Otherwise, maybe they finish T5. Or if they have an unlucky week on the greens, T9 or 14th or something.

Well said. It must drive top players crazy to get so close and basically chalk it up to fate. Is this why the phrase 'give myself opportunities' is kind of a mantra in interviews?

Yes good point. The PGA lists each of the top 10' players' specific breakdown as well, and the variability within that group is significant. When you view chart after chart from different weeks, nothing jumps out at you immediately.

For example, Gary Woodland (T4 at Wells Fargo this week) gained 2.5 strokes PER ROUND putting this week and lost ground to the field driving (not how many of us think of Gary Woodland). That's pretty impressive putting to gain 10 strokes over the tournament on the green. Sometimes a guy wins with the best putting stats, sometimes driving/approach. So within those top 10 players, it's anybody's guess which category gives the winner the edge.

But the overall averages do seem somewhat consistent week to week. Some variations in the distribution week to week, of course, which is interesting. I wonder why Valspar didn't reward good driving overall, and why Pebble Beach rewarded the short game so much. Curious if those distributions hold true from year to year.

But back on point for the thread, even though occasionally you see a guy in the top 10 whose best category was Short Game (Phil Mickelson T4 at Wells Fargo gained 1.4 of his 1.5 per round with short game), overall the numbers above show that the guys who break through week to week do it without separating themselves with short game.

Is it wise for PGA Players at the top of their game to practice short game so much when they don't typically separate themselves in a tournament that way?  Maybe if your short game is off, then you have no chance, so it's basically a tuning exercise to make sure that part of your game does no harm.

Was Pebble windy (sea breeze)? More missed greens throughout field rewards better short games?

[mvmac]

Well said. It must drive top players crazy to get so close and basically chalk it up to fate. Is this why the phrase 'give myself opportunities' is kind of a mantra in interviews?

Probably, also why the great players, who are also the great ballstrikers can put themselves "in the mix" so often.

[MSDOGS1976]

Practice? I do very little at this point in my life. I stroke a few warm up putts before my round and that's about it. During the winter I hit some range balls as I do not like cold weather golf. Just a fast way to get some reps. I'm a geezer, cold weather is a a no go for me.