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

[14ledo81]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RFKFREAK

Oh, Breed, you just keep bringing it.

I wonder where he got his 70% figure from.

It should be obvious from this that you want to hit more GIR!!!!!!!  You only do that by practicing the long game more than the short game.

Either that or Breed is stating that short game practice will raise your GIR??

[Golfingdad]

Either that or Breed is stating that short game practice will raise your GIR??

No, it's just that he's looking at the band aid solution, not the root problem.  "Amateurs miss 80% of their greens THEREFORE they should become proficient at the short game."  The logic is there, but it's just looking from the wrong angle.

Many of us here subscribe to the idea that leans a lot more towards the common sense side of things ... "Amateurs miss 80% of their greens THEREFORE they should become more proficient at HITTING MORE DANGED GREENS."

[Shindig]

Here's a thought: what if roughly one-third of TOUR players spend 35% of their practice time on short game (including putting) and the rest on long swing mechanics, while the rest spend a much higher fraction than 90%? That would make Breed's statistics true. And it wouldn't surprise me if some mix like this were true, and if the [i]vast majority[/i] of TOUR winners came from the first category (the 1989 Chattanooga Classic being an anomaly, wherein a player won through a vastly superior short game).

[shortstop20]

But what if the person is good with driver and long irons/H/W, not long but accurate, but 3 putts all the time, chips short/over the green constantly, takes two to get out of bunkers, and rarely gets it up and down? how many strokes can they really save by getting longer?

I see it all the time.

I don't. I cannot recall ever playing with someone like that.

… they're not that common. In other words, "no you don't." You don't see it all the time. You don't see a guy regularly hitting 9-10 GIR and shooting 89 because he's such a lousy putter. It just doesn't happen often at all.

Exactly. Looking back at my scorecards, I actually did that once. Shot an 89 and hit 9 greens. Had four 3 putts and 39 putts total. LOL

Hence the reason I went and got fit for a putter. I've been making more putts than ever before, but I have hardly practiced my putting this year!

[mvmac]

Also, PGA Tour pros do not spend 70% of their time practicing their short games.

Just got back from watching the pros in San Francisco and I can easily attest that they don't spend anywhere near 70% of their practice time on the short game. For Breed to say that is beyond ridiculous.

[Aguirre]

If I hear Michael Breed's voice for longer than thirty seconds I strangle a kitten.

[Valleygolfer]

No, I spent 70% of my time inside during winter. It kills your short game.

[joekelly]

Mike.  You watched the pros immediately prior to a tournament for only 2 or 3 days and yet you can draw such a strong conclusion?  When these pros retreat behind the gated walls of Orlando and practice golf in solitude, what do we know?  Darn little.

GHIN...58 reminds us how important is the mental game of golf.  If the short game will increase the confidence level faster or more efficiently than pounding the driver or 3 iron, seems to me that gaining that confidence will help in all aspects of the game, including the long ball.

Erik has, in the past, told us that he as a teacher sees very little increase in club head  speed from any individual golfer regardless of practice.  This probably esp true for an adult learner.  Sure, solid contact good but even the best contact at SS of 88mph won't carry the ball 240 yards, except off the cart path. So improvement of the long game v. the short game vital but much more difficult, IMO.

Hope i have not erroneously paraphrased Erik here but that's what i recall.

[turtleback]

No, it's just that he's looking at the band aid solution, not the root problem.  "Amateurs miss 80% of their greens THEREFORE they should become proficient at the short game."  The logic is there, but it's just looking from the wrong angle.

Many of us here subscribe to the idea that leans a lot more towards the common sense side of things ... "Amateurs miss 80% of their greens THEREFORE they should become more proficient at HITTING MORE DANGED GREENS."

Yeah, the purpose of the short game is to fix the mistakes you made in the long game.  So does it make more sense to focus on making fewer mistakes or getting better at fixing them?

Breed is saying that because the  long game is so bad the outcome of your short game makes up a high percent of the strokes you take therefore you should focus on that.  But common sense says that as you increase your GIR you are decreasing the overall importance of the short game because you are, essentially, reducing its role in your game.

Every time you hit the green there is another hole where you didn't need the short game. FWIW I do not think of the putts after a GIR as part of the short game.

Mike.  You watched the pros immediately prior to a tournament for only 2 or 3 days and yet you can draw such a strong conclusion?  When these pros retreat behind the gated walls of Orlando and practice golf in solitude, what do we know?  Darn little.

I think he can.  During the pre-event on-site practice a player might be fine tuning his swing or doing routine full swing practice, but what he does in the short game is more particular to the course.

He is not so much practicing his short game as he IS learning how that particular course's greens roll, how chips react out of the rough, what kind of lies he can expect around the greens, how the sand is, etc.  He spends more time on the short game because he is acclimatizing himself to the conditions.  No such acclimatization is needed for the long game.  For the long game the acclimatization is more strategic than swing.

So it is reasonable to conclude that pre-event practice at the tourney site represents the peak of the short game time spent, percentage wise, because of the need to acclimatize.  If THAT is way under 70% we can conclude that in general short game practice must be way under 70% for pros.  Unless Breed is using some expanded definition of short game, as may be the case based on some of the posts.

[DrvFrShow]

It's all in the definitions, guys. Short game practice begins with hitting the green from your 8 iron distance, then start moving in.

Is that Breed's definition, or yours? It doesn't really ....

That was a joke.

[Golfingdad]

I think he can.  During the pre-event on-site practice a player might be fine tuning his swing or doing routine full swing practice, but what he does in the short game is more particular to the course.

He is not so much practicing his short game as he IS learning how that particular course's greens roll, how chips react out of the rough, what kind of lies he can expect around the greens, how the sand is, etc.  He spends more time on the short game because he is acclimatizing himself to the conditions.  No such acclimatization is needed for the long game.  For the long game the acclimatization is more strategic than swing.

So it is reasonable to conclude that pre-event practice at the tourney site represents the peak of the short game time spent, percentage wise, because of the need to acclimatize.  If THAT is way under 70% we can conclude that in general short game practice must be way under 70% for pros.  Unless Breed is using some expanded definition of short game, as may be the case based on some of the posts.

Not to mention that Mike is "inside the ropes" at these events, talks to the players, talks to their coaches, and has done this on numerous occasions, not just for "2 or 3 days."  He also has recently caddied for an aspiring tour player, as well as coaches a myriad of players, including exceptionally good ones.

Translation:  He knows of which he speaks.

[jimmyc]

90% of your practice should be on the short game. Period. Everyone can hit a ball 125 yards or better. It's what you do to get it in the hole from there. End of discussion.

[14ledo81]

90% of your practice should be on the short game. Period. Everyone can hit a ball 125 yards or better. It's what you do to get it in the hole from there. End of discussion.

Are you serious?

[billchao]

That was a joke.

Sorry, I missed it. I'm dense

[iacas]

Mike.  You watched the pros immediately prior to a tournament for only 2 or 3 days and yet you can draw such a strong conclusion?  When these pros retreat behind the gated walls of Orlando and practice golf in solitude, what do we know?  Darn little.

I can vouch that what Mike says here is accurate.

Erik has, in the past, told us that he as a teacher sees very little increase in club head  speed from any individual golfer regardless of practice.  This probably esp true for an adult learner.  Sure, solid contact good but even the best contact at SS of 88mph won't carry the ball 240 yards, except off the cart path. So improvement of the long game v. the short game vital but much more difficult, IMO.

Hope i have not erroneously paraphrased Erik here but that's what i recall.

Golfers can increase clubhead speed 5-8 MPH. Better technique helps.

But that still doesn't mean much. You only have to hit the ball about 250 to be a scratch golfer. If you have a repeatable pattern, you can shoot some GREAT darn scores even if you're hitting hybrids from 160 (like, I could point out, many LPGA Tour players). Heck, I could make a case that the lower your swing speed, the more important the full swing stuff is because you really can't afford to be giving away shots with poor mis-hits or out-of-pattern misses.

90% of your practice should be on the short game. Period. Everyone can hit a ball 125 yards or better. It's what you do to get it in the hole from there. End of discussion.

Yeah, uhhh, no. The opposite is far, far closer to the truth.

[jsgolfer]

90% of your practice should be on the short game. Period. Everyone can hit a ball 125 yards or better. It's what you do to get it in the hole from there. End of discussion.

Huh!  You obviously haven't been on here long to know that is not the case.

Are you serious?

Hopefully jimmyc is not!

[natureboy]

Either that or Breed is stating that short game practice will raise your GIR??

Yeah that is a verrrry misleading graphic.

The day or two before a tournament, I'll practice my short game 70% of the time. Does that count?

Just got back from watching the pros in San Francisco and I can easily attest that they don't spend anywhere near 70% of their practice time on the short game. For Breed to say that is beyond ridiculous.

Are you talking about total practice time in the days leading up to the event (and post round work), or pre-round warmup too. Given the above post and the possibility that Breed was focused on pre-round warmup is there a possible advantage to doing a bit more short-game touch stuff just before the round, esp. for gauging how the greens are reacting / rolling?

I assume that pros know how important their long games are and spend close to 66% of total practice time on their long games, but is there possible value to flipping the ratio just before a round, assuming your warmup has demonstrated a fairly locked in full swing?

[Shindig]

FWIW I do not think of the putts after a GIR as part of the short game.

Can you clarify what you mean here? You count your birdie putt as something other than a short game shot? I'm legitimately confused, not attempting to challenge you. [quote name="jimmyc" url="/t/81674/are-you-spending-70-of-your-practice-time-on-your-short-game-like-michael-breed-implies-you-should/72#post_1135519"]90% of your practice should be on the short game. Period. Everyone can hit a ball 125 yards or better. It's what you do to get it in the hole from there. End of discussion. [/quote] Even TOUR players -- even those that win TOUR events -- don't hit the ball as well from 125 yards as you must be imagining for that statistic.