Connect with us

Instruction

Are you wasting your time on the putting green?

Published

on

As a teacher, I’m always investigating ways to help my players become more proficient both on the golf course and within their practice time. That’s why I am so excited to have come across one of the best books ever written on the subject of golf improvement, Mark Broadie’s Every Shot Counts, and if you are serious about moving your game to the next level I highly recommend that you find the time to read it.

Every Shot Counts tells the story of how conventional golf stats that we have all kept at one time or another can be misleading and can hamper your improvement. One of my favorite examples in the book is when Brody discusses the putts per round stat and how it can be flawed. Think about it: putts per round does not take into account the fact that many of a golfer’s putts might come after a chip shot, not an iron shot, and it doesn’t factor in how long or how short a putt is.

Brody suggests many other ways to look at putting in an effort to improve your approach and improve your scores. In this article, I’d like to show you how you might be diligently practicing your putting, but doing it in such a way that you are not improving as fast as you could or not improving at all!

There are two goals that every player should focus on while working on their putting:

  1. One-putting more often from the statistical distances that makes sense to your level of play.
  2. Eliminating three putts from the statistical distances that make sense to your level of play.

Here’s a chart that shows the probability of one-putting from different distances depending on a golfer’s ability level:

One Putting Table

Let’s examine a few of the data points in more detail:

  • For all players, any putt inside 2 feet is almost a guaranteed make.
  • For better players, 3-foot putts are almost a given unless something radical happens.
  • For golfers who shoot in the 90’s, 3-foot putts start to become an issue (84 percent success rate).
  • Between 5 and 8 feet, a tour professional’s proficiency drops off dramatically.
  • Between 5 to 8 feet, scratch golfers begin to show their putting weakness.
  • Outside of 5 feet, 90’s shooters have extreme difficulty one-putting.
  • At 10 feet, tour professional only make 40 percent of their putts.
  • At 20 feet, a 90’s shooter isn’t half as good as a scratch golfer, but the difference between a scratch player and a tour pro is a mere 1 percent.

The numbers show that tour pros should focus their practice on 8-to-10-foot putts and 90’s shooters are better off practicing putts of 4-to-10 feet. 90’s shooters should forget working on longer putts, with one putting short putts being their only goal.

Here’s a chart that shows the probability of golfers of different ability levels three-putting from different distances:

Three Putting Table

Let’s examine the data points in more detail:

  • Lag putting work from 20 feet and in is basically a waste of time for the tour pro and scratch player.
  • The idea of lag putting for 90’s shooters should begin at 20-to-25 feet.
  • For the tour pro and scratch player, the thought of lag putting should begin around 40 feet.
  • 50-to-60-foot putts for the average golfer spell “three putt.”

For the levels we have discussed, here’s the synopsis.

The tour pro does not have much to worry about until he gets to 50 feet, and if he can get the ball inside 8 feet on those putts he has a good chance of converting a two-putt. Secondly, on normal tour greens (a.k.a. not Augusta), a tour pro should not have that much trouble lagging the ball within 8 to 10 feet on even on the most difficult breaking putts, which still gives him a good chance to convert his two-putt.

Based on the data, tour pros should work on putts from 8 to 10 feet as well as those outside of 50 feet to use of their most effectively. .

Again, you can see that beginning around 55 to 60 feet tour pros need to become focused on lagging the ball close. However, these players have a buffer that’s unlike what you will see with the 90’s shooters. The 90’s shooters only make putts that are inside 5 feet 66 percent of the time. That’s why 90’s shooters should focus on becoming better short putters within the 5-to-10-foot range. Those putts will be much more important to their score than the putts they hit from 15-to-45 feet.

The 90’s shooters should instantly go into “lag mode” from 20 feet out, ensuring that they have the proper feel to snuggle the ball close to the hole from longer distances. Remember that the proficiency of the 90’s shooters from shorter distances basically states that until they get the ball within 5 feet, they will miss more than half their second putts.

So the key for the 90’s shooters is to become more proficient from 6-to-10 feet so that they have a better chance from longer ranges. As a 90’s shooter, if you don’t get your putts from 40 feet and out into a 5-foot circle around the hole, your chances of two putting diminishes greatly. That’s the pressure poor short putting puts on the lag putting for average golfers.

I hope by now you have seen the importance of understanding how to use the stats you can derive from charting your game based on the data provided by Broadie’s book.

The book also goes over stats for all parts of the game that you will find useful, but the one-versus-three-putting stuff hit me like a hammer. I, like you, practiced and wanted to become the best I could be, but it’s data like this that makes me just cringe thinking about how many wasted hours I spent on things that weren’t very statistically relevant to the big picture.

I hope this story saves you an hour or two during your life of golf!

Your Reaction?
  • 18
  • LEGIT4
  • WOW5
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB2
  • SHANK3

Tom F. Stickney II is the Director of Instruction and Business Development at Punta Mita, in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico (www.puntamita.com) He is a Golf Magazine Top 100 Teacher, and has been honored as a Golf Digest Best Teacher and a Golf Tips Top-25 Instructor. Tom is also a Trackman University Master/Partner, a distinction held by less than 15 people in the world. Punta Mita is a 1500 acre Golf and Beach Resort located just 45 minuted from Puerto Vallarta on a beautiful peninsula surrounded by the Bay of Banderas on three sides. Amenities include two Nicklaus Signature Golf Courses- with 14 holes directly on the water, a Golf Academy, four private Beach Clubs, a Four Seasons Hotel, a St. Regis Hotel, as well as, multiple private Villas and Homesites available. For more information regarding Punta Mita, golf outings, golf schools and private lessons, please email: tom.stickney@puntamita.com

54 Comments

54 Comments

  1. Dave S

    Jul 10, 2014 at 1:24 pm

    Great article! I love advanced statistics in golf… very eye-opening.

    As devil’s advocate, couldn’t it also be said that for 90 shooters (who presumably don’t have very much time to dedicate to practice) that their time would be best used practicing their Driving? Every un-biased statisical analysis indicates that poor driving accounts for more strokes lost than poor short game (which runs counter to the old school notion of “Drive for show, putt for dough”), at least with less talented players. Hitting more fairways (i.e. less penalty strokes) is the quickest way to improve your score. That said, I think putting is probably the easiest thing to practice and to improve upon, so if a person has the time available, they should probably spend 75% of it on Driving and 25% on putting from 4-10 feet.

    Do you agree?

    • tom stickney

      Jul 10, 2014 at 3:04 pm

      All depends on the strengths and weaknesses of the player in general…I’d suggest a 90 shooter take a series of lessons on ALL parts of their game

      • Dave S

        Jul 10, 2014 at 3:16 pm

        Fair point… tough to argue that. But if you HAD to choose what to spend your very limited time on, I would probably suggest driving over putting, at least for the 90s shooter. A missed putt will (usually) only costs you one stroke… a wayward drive will cost you two at most decent courses.

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 13, 2014 at 1:42 am

      It all depends on the player…but generally speaking you are correct.

      • Robert Erickson

        Jul 21, 2016 at 11:36 am

        I have played golf for most of my life. When I was young, I felt that I had to work on the “big” shots. However, as I have gotten older and have less time to practice and play, I feel that I should spend my practice time on 120 yards and in. You hit the driver 14-15 times a round and long and mid irons about the same. So you have hit 30-40 shots out of ninety or so. Anything you can do to improve on those 40-60 shots remaining will make you a better golfer. The putting message here is spot on.

  2. Rusty Carr

    Jul 9, 2014 at 3:28 pm

    Tom,

    Which would you say wastes more time on the putting green:
    A) Putting from the wrong distances
    or
    B) Putting with one or more of the following flaws
    -using a putter that is not fit for you,
    -putting using a wrong green read,
    -putting generating the wrong speed,
    -putting using flawed swing mechanics,
    -putting using a bad ball position?

    If you’ve got flaws, shouldn’t they be fixed before you try to “practice”? If you can’t read a green accurately, never heard of a lumpy doughnut, think that grain is a type of alcohol, don’t know which eye is dominant, haven’t got a clue whether you’re a screen door or pendulum putter, don’t have a routine, don’t know the difference between feel and method putting, don’t have a putter balanced to match your swing stroke type, start the ball rolling with a bounce and back spin, raise your head on contact, etc. then a lot of practice is a sure way to become a bad putter.

    Another way to interpret the statistics is that the methods they pros use to practice are better. Could it be possible that trying to change what is already working for them could make their statistics worse? Maybe there is a progression of things people should work on where putting from specific distances is the last thing on the list?

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 9, 2014 at 6:06 pm

      I’m always of the opinion that a better fit roller is a necessity but most players never get them fit for reasons I’ll never understand. Great point.

  3. Marc S

    Jul 9, 2014 at 1:42 pm

    Great book. Learn how to apply and lower your stroke ave at our science and stat data driven training center- EBC Elite Training, located at PGA National Resort.
    EveryBallCounts.com

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 9, 2014 at 1:56 pm

      Thx for your comments. Please don’t use this forum to advertise your services.

  4. Stretch

    Jul 9, 2014 at 12:47 pm

    The stat I use for putting efficiency is 2 putts for greens hit in regulation or better and one putt for greens missed. A 24 putt day hitting 6 greens would be the equivalent of 36 putts when all 18 greens are hit. The total putts over are under the day’s putting par is the stat that shows the relationship between the short game and putting as a cohesive unit. Referred stat I call the “Short Game Index” or SGI for shortness.

    No matter what level of swing ability and physical talent, golfers all can learn how to score better by learning how to hit the short game shots as close as possible and then rely on the flat stick when not possible.

  5. Ben Peters

    Jul 9, 2014 at 12:30 pm

    Great piece. This was an eye opener for me. I’m a 12 handicap whose favorite thing on the practice green is to go out 20-30 feet and roll a few balls at the hole. My hope being that by the third ball seeing the read I might be able to knock one down. The reality is when I walk up to my three misses my two putt conversion rate is poor. I will still practice lag putts from time to time obviously, but this piece has convinced me that it makes way more sense for me to stay in that 5-10 foot range for the lions share of my practice time and increase my success rate there.

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 9, 2014 at 1:57 pm

      Thx Ben

    • Fred

      Jul 12, 2014 at 2:03 pm

      Excellent article, Tom, and I’ll be sure to check out Mark Broadie’s book.

      A while back, I was listening to Lee Trevenio talk about putting, and he mentioned how Ben Hogan never put too much emphases on that part of the game. Believe he said Snead was the same way. Hogan believed that what transpired on the fairway to be of more importance; he figured it didn’t matter how good you were with a putter if you couldn’t get the ball on the green in a timely manner. Of course, that will never keep me from the putting green.

      On another note: for those golfers who like to take two or three balls on the putting green, here’s something I learned from Ben Crenshaw during a Pro-Am at the AT&T championship in San Antonio. When you practice putting, only use one ball. Anyone can make puts after watching what the first ball does. But when you’re actually playing, you only have one chance. Go with what you feel is the correct read and see if you’re right.

  6. John J

    Jul 9, 2014 at 9:24 am

    Hi Tom,

    Interesting piece, however I would like to present a counter point / caveat to this analysis.

    To say that putting inside 5 feet is not a worthwhile exercise for the scratch or tour player is, in my opinion, not accurate. Your analysis falls short in that it does not take into account the total number of attempts from those distances. Based on the total number of attempts that actually occur within 5 feet of the hole, becoming extremely proficient in this area will absolutely help lower score. To present my case with data, the average PGA Tour player attempts about 11 putts per round inside 5 feet of the hole, however they only attempt about 3 putts in the 5 to 10 foot range. If you take the difference between the best and worst player statistically on tour in each of these two ranges, the difference is the same, about 0.85 strokes gained / lost per round. So they are identical in importance to score, and in fact I would argue that if I were to choose one, I’d rather practice those putts inside 5 feet because more is left up to my stroke than the rub of the green.

    If we take this out and compare an average scratch player to an average Tour player, the difference inside 5 feet is 1.06 strokes lost per round, whereas the 5 to 10 foot range is only a 0.49 strokes lost per round.

    One more analysis comparing the 90’s player to a scratch player, the difference inside 5 feet is 1.17 strokes per round, and the 5 to 10 foot range is only .46 strokes lost per round.

    The big caveat here is the number of attempts per round, and this is where this analysis fails in my opinion. Putts inside 5 feet happens so much more frequently that it becomes critically important to improving score.

    There is a saying “there are liars, there are damn liars, and then there are statistics!” I love the data driven direction that golf has taken but I would just caution players to sit down and analyze where their game falls short and set out a plan of action that involves reducing the absolute value of their score, not improving some percentage because we feel like its too low and can be improved easily.

    Hope this was helpful to everyone!

    • Stevo212

      Jul 9, 2014 at 10:10 am

      I completely agree, if a scratch golfer falls below the tour benchmark then they will lose a hell of a lot if they miss within 5 foot. Therefore it is definately beneficial to practice that length. Be aware that this is also only an average number, if you look at the guys making money on the PGA Tour with sub 105mph driver speeds (almost all amateur club golfers) there putts within the range of 3-5 feet are around 90-95% as this is the only area that can make up there score purely down to physical differences. Practising long distance putting is an area that will bring little benefit to your scores but if you can get 90%+ on 3-5 foot putts you will definately improve your scores, plus this will take a lot of pressure off chipping and pitching

      • Tom Stickney

        Jul 9, 2014 at 2:07 pm

        Agree to a point. Thx for your thoughts sir.

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 9, 2014 at 2:05 pm

      Couldn’t agree more but if a tour player has 11 five footers they better hit more greens 🙂

      • John J

        Jul 9, 2014 at 3:38 pm

        Tom, I think you may have missed part of my point here. According to PGAtour.com stats, the average tour player in 2014 takes 11 shots per round inside of 5 feet. They only take an average of 3 shots per round in the 5 to 10 foot range. Think about it this way, if you were to create a scatter plot of your putts in a round, the data points (each putt taken) would get much more dense and concentrated as you get nearer to the hole. To demonstrate this point, according to PGAtour.com, an average tour player is just as likely to have a 3 to 5 footer as a 5 to 10 footer.

        Practicing 5 to 10 footers is just as important as the 3 to 5 footers, it just may seem that you miss more 5 to 10 footers but that’s because they are in fact harder to make! Luke Donald putts the lights out and he leads the tour at 68% of putts made in that range. The reason those putts are so much harder is that more is left up to variability in the greens, your read of the break, putt speed starts to become a factor and the fact that there is less room for error when hitting the putt (i.e. 1 degree of mis-hit gets larger as you get further away from the putter blade).

        • Gerald

          Jul 16, 2014 at 7:49 pm

          But many of those 11 shots inside of 5 feet are actually in tap-in range. And they are probably already very good at that range hence they are tour players. If they can make 1 more of those 5-10 footers each round they can gain much more on their competitors.

          In ESC Brodie points out that even though 50% of your shots come on the green (theoretically) many are tap-ins others are from such a long distance that making them is very unlikely so putting really makes up only about 15% of the game.

          Also the article is arguing that to become better than a 90-golfer then one ahould practices putts of distance that they can reasonably improve upon. Especially given the limited practice time for most recreational golfers.

  7. Dennis Clark

    Jul 8, 2014 at 7:06 pm

    Tom Nieporte, great pro and player at the Winged Foot Club for many years,(and a wonderful man) believed that the most important shots in the round were the 18 first putts! An interesting way to think about it. He won on Tour so I listened 🙂

  8. Putting Pro

    Jul 8, 2014 at 3:21 pm

    Good artcile

    Practice short putts, medium putts and long putts. Keep it simple.

    Place an alignment stick behind the hole and try not to hit the stick. This teaches pace and speed.

    • tom stickney

      Jul 8, 2014 at 8:02 pm

      Simple is usually better when working on feel for sure…

  9. Pingback: Are you wasting your time on the putting green? - I'd Rather Be Golfing

  10. RobG

    Jul 8, 2014 at 11:26 am

    Back in college me and a buddy couldn’t afford to play but we would go to the nearest course and spend hours on the practice area. We would play a game where we would each take turns picking a spot around the practice green to hit from (different thickness of grass, different lies)and picking which hole we would play to sometimes we even took it a step further and we stipulated which club we had to use and the idea was to get up and down in the fewest strokes possible.

    Being in college the going rate was a beer a hole.

    My short game, especially my putting, was always my weakness and when we first started practicing together it wasn’t pretty. Eric was a good hockey player with great hands and even though he didn’t play nearly as much as I did he had me down a couple of cases of beer in no time.

    Being broke college students, playing for beer definitely cranked up the pressure (especially when I pressed) and it made those putts inside 12 feet so much harder to make. They say you have to practice like you play, and practicing the way we did definitely mimicked true play on the golf course. Now when I’m faced with a tough up and down or a 12 footer for par I imagine I’m playing against Eric and I’ve pressed twice and I need to make it or I’m down a case of beer.

    No amount of time aimlessly slapping putt after putt on the practice green can prepare you for those types of situations.

  11. AJ Jensen

    Jul 8, 2014 at 11:09 am

    How many times have you heard ‘I read a break that just wasn’t there?’ Overanalysis. And I have never ONCE seen a plumb-bobber sink one from twenty feet or further. Overthinking. The only thing that ever made a difference in my putting was to go with my first instinct and just hit the ball, trusting my eyes to read the breaks. If anything I’ve learned that people overcompensate for breaks more than they underestimate breaks.

    In every scramble I’ve ever played I’m the best putter, and everyone is mystified at why I want to have the first whack at every putt. I have learned that my brain works against me on putts for the longer I think them over, and I second-guess good decisions.

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 8, 2014 at 2:16 pm

      You must gravitate to what works best for you under the gun

    • 8802

      Jul 8, 2014 at 5:28 pm

      Ben Crenshaw plumb bobbed.

  12. Tom

    Jul 8, 2014 at 11:05 am

    Thanks for the article Tom. It confirms how i’ve been practicing is correct.
    I’m pretty mechanical and my practice is the same way, for lag putting I have target distances that I take the putter back a certain length for. Walk off 12yards (36feet) it gets a certain length backstroke. Walk of 18yards (54feet) and that gets a certain length backstroke. As long as my tempo and contact is consistent the putts roll out consistently the same. I can adjust from there for in between distances.

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 8, 2014 at 2:17 pm

      Nice to have the data to back it up…great work.

  13. Mike

    Jul 8, 2014 at 9:13 am

    There is a book out called “Lowest Score Wins” that goes over this too. I am so glad that guys like you and others are bringing this to our attention to help us practice better.

    I’m a 5 and rarely putt from 3-20ft instead focusing on putting 3ft putts and 20’+. Guess how well I get up and down?! I have to chip it to 3′ every time to get up and down and so I focus on chipping it closer which isn’t bad, but you can’t get it to 3′ every time and being better inside 10′ will alleviate the stress on your round. This reminds me of someone asking Harvey Penick for help putting and he told them to go grab their 7i and come with him. When the person reiterated that he needed help with his putting Penick told him that his problem was he wasn’t hitting it close enough to the hole!

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 8, 2014 at 10:06 am

      Mike– I have not seen that one; I’ll pick it up. Thx

      • snowman

        Jul 8, 2014 at 1:43 pm

        Lowest Score Wins is a great book; the authors cite a few of Broadies findings, but they have a lot of original stats and thoughts as well.. Website Below:
        http://lowestscorewins.com

  14. Pingback: Are you wasting your time on the putting green? | Spacetimeandi.com

  15. Justin

    Jul 7, 2014 at 8:41 pm

    Great article!! Always nice to get some stats to help practice more efficiently.

  16. Matt

    Jul 7, 2014 at 8:28 pm

    Tour players but in perfect greens every week

    Scratch players put on perfect greens a couple times of year unless they belong to an elite club

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 8, 2014 at 12:02 am

      Agree but the same general ideas still work.

    • MHendon

      Jul 8, 2014 at 12:05 am

      Definitely makes a difference especially on short putts.

      • Tom Stickney

        Jul 8, 2014 at 1:09 am

        MH- sometimes shorter putts are easier if the greens are slower. Bang it in there.

  17. Philip

    Jul 7, 2014 at 8:13 pm

    Thanks, I guess I have been too hard on myself as I was putting 90-95% from 5 feet for the first month of the season and felt I should have been able to maintain it.

  18. Jeremy

    Jul 7, 2014 at 8:08 pm

    Rancho Park, woo!

    I always wondered about this kind of thing. Not long ago decided my time would best be spent ensuring that I convert those rare birdie chances from close range, and doing my best to two-putt from long range. Putts in that middle range sort of take care of themselves; either I two-putt without much difficulty or I get lucky and sink it. Nice to see that data backs this up.

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 7, 2014 at 8:24 pm

      The data is solid for sure. Great book

  19. Dan P

    Jul 7, 2014 at 7:53 pm

    I read the book earlier this year and took the same thing away. Altered my practice routine on the green to focus on putts 6-10 feet (I’m a 5 handicap) as increasing my make percentage here is huge. I used to focus on 3-5 foot range almost exclusively outside of lag putting. His drills for lag putting are great too! Can’t recommend it enough, nice article.

    • Tom Stickney

      Jul 7, 2014 at 8:24 pm

      Thx.

      • John

        Jul 7, 2014 at 9:54 pm

        If you watch your average amateur golf on the practice green, you will see 99% of them practicing 20 footers because that’s how the holes are spaced on the green. This gets people nowhere, and maybe even worse than than that because they are using three balls most of the time. If their first putt isn’t effective they compensate who know’s how, alter stroke, unknowingly change their stance, some sort of instant compensation. I never see anyone read a putt. They are basically just slapping it around.
        I quit doing this a few years ago because it didn’t make any sense to me. Now I take 5 balls and throw them down just off the fringe and use a variety of clubs to bump and run them up to the various holes, and then grab my putter and carefully try and putt them in. I keep track of my “ups and downs”. I do this 50 times, i.e. 5 balls x 10. I am a single digit and these approaches are not difficult shots so I end up with a lot of 6 foot and in putts. This has really helped my scoring.Now my course allows this sort of low impact chipping, but others may not, but it’s a great drill to do that seems to be backed up by the research in this book reinforced by Tom’s article.
        This is an excellent piece, Tom, and can lead to substantial improvement for many golfers. You can’t say that about too many instructional articles in my opinion.

        • paul

          Jul 7, 2014 at 10:40 pm

          I do something similar. I use one ball at a time and try and get up and down to each hole on the practice green. Once I make it up and down to each hole I move my bag and clubs 5-8 steps around the green clockwise. Takes an hour to go all the way around the green. Lots of variety.

          • Tom Stickney

            Jul 8, 2014 at 12:03 am

            Keeping things fun is the key

          • John

            Jul 8, 2014 at 2:26 am

            Paul, I like your routine better than mine, and I’m going to do that myself. It simulates “on the course golf” better than my approach. I mean, how many times do you hit 5 chips in a row in actual play?

            Thanks for the suggestion.

        • Tom Stickney

          Jul 8, 2014 at 12:02 am

          Thx!!

        • Tom Stickney

          Jul 8, 2014 at 12:03 am

          Thx John!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Instruction

Clement: Best drill for weight shift and clearing hips (bonus on direction too)

Published

on

This is, by far, one of the most essential drills for your golf swing development. To throw the club well is a liberating experience! Here we catch Munashe up with how important the exercise is not only in the movement pattern but also in the realization that the side vision is viciously trying to get you to make sure you don’t throw the golf club in the wrong direction. Which, in essence, is the wrong direction to start with!

This drill is also a cure for your weight shift problems and clearing your body issues during the swing which makes this an awesome all-around golf swing drill beauty! Stay with us as we take you through, step by step, how this excellent drill of discovery will set you straight; pardon the pun!

Your Reaction?
  • 2
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP5
  • OB5
  • SHANK13

Continue Reading

Instruction

Confessions of a hacker: Chipping yips and equipment fixes

Published

on

There’s a saying in golf that, paraphrasing here, it’s the person holding the weapon, not the weapon. Basically, if you hit a bad shot, it’s almost certain that it was your fault, not the fault of the golf club. It has a better design than your swing. And while that truism is often correct, it ain’t necessarily so.

For example, if I were to try to hit one of those long drive drivers, I’d probably mis-hit it so badly that the ball might not be findable. That stick is way too long, stiff, and heavy for me. Similarly, if I were to use one of those senior flex drivers, I’d probably hit it badly, because it would be too floppy for my swing. It’s clear that there are arrows that this Indian can’t shoot well. Maybe a pro could adapt to whatever club you put in his hand, but there’s no reason he would accept less than a perfect fit. And there’s little reason why any amateur ought to accept less than a good fit.

I was never a competitive athlete, although I’m a competitive person. My path led a different direction, and as my medical career reached its mature years, I was introduced to our wonderful and frustrating game.

Being one who hates playing poorly, I immediately sought instruction. After fifteen years, multiple instructors, a wallet full of videos, and a wall full of clubs, I am finally learning how to do one particularly vexing part of the game reasonable well. I can chip! But as you may have guessed, the largest part of this journey has to do with the arrow, not the Indian.

We may immediately dismiss the golf shaft as a significant issue since chipping generally involves a low-speed movement. And as long as the grip is a reasonable fit for the hands, it’s not a big deal either. The rubber meets the road at the clubhead.

Manufacturers have worked hard to get the best ball spin out of the grooves. Their shape is precisely milled, and then smaller grooves and roughness are added to the exact maximum allowed under the rules. Various weighting schemes have been tried, with some success in tailoring wedges to players. And some manufacturers market the “newest” designs to make it impossible to screw up wedge shots. And yet, nothing seemed to solve my yips.

So I went on a mission. I studied all sorts of chipping techniques. Some advocate placing the ball far back to strike a descending blow. Others place it near the center of the stance. The swing must have no wrist hinge. The swing must have a hinge that is held. It should be a short swing. It should be a long swing. The face should be square. The face should be open. There should be a “pop.” There should be no power added.

If you are confused, join my club. So I went on a different mission. I started looking at sole construction. Ever since Gene Sarazen popularized a sole with bounce for use in the sand, manufacturers have been creating massive numbers of “different” sand wedges. They have one thing in common. They are generally all built to 55 or 56-degrees of loft.

The basic design feature of the sand wedge is that the sole extends down and aft from the leading edge at some angle. This generally ranges from 6 to 18-degrees. Its purpose is to allow the wedge to dig into the sand, but not too far. As the club goes down into the sand, the “bounce” pushes it back up.

 

One problem with having a lot of bounce on the wedge is that it can’t be opened up to allow certain specialty shots or have a higher effective loft. When the player does that, the leading edge lifts, resulting in thin shots. So manufacturers do various things to make the wedge more versatile, typically by removing bounce in the heel area.

At my last count, I have eight 56-degree wedges in my collection. Each one was thought to be a solution to my yips. Yet, until I listened to an interview with Dave Edel, I had almost no real understanding of why I was laying sod over a lot of my chips. Since gardening did not reduce my scores, I had to find another solution.

My first step was to look at the effective loft of a wedge in various ball positions. (Pictures were shot with the butt of the club at the left hip, in a recommended forward lean position. Since the protractor is not exactly lined up with the face, the angles are approximate.)

I had no idea that there was so much forward lean with a simple chip. If I were to use the most extreme rearward position, I would have to have 21-degrees of bounce just to keep the leading edge from digging in at impact. If there were the slightest error in my swing, I would be auditioning for greenskeeper.

My appreciation for the pros who can chip from this position suddenly became immense. For an amateur like me, the complete lack of forgiveness in this technique suddenly removed it from my alleged repertoire.

My next step was to look at bounce. As I commented before, bounce on sand wedges ranges between 6 and 18-degrees. As the drawing above shows, that’s a simple angle measurement. If I were to chip from the forward position, a 6-degree bounce sand wedge would have an effective bounce of 1-degree. That’s only fractionally better than the impossible chip behind my right foot. So I went to my local PGA Superstore to look at wedges with my Maltby Triangle Gauge in hand.

As you can see from the photos, there is a wide variation in wedges. What’s most curious, however, is that this variation is between two designs that are within one degree of the same nominal bounce. Could it be that “bounce is not bounce is not bounce?” Or should I say that “12-degrees is not 12-degrees is not 12-degrees?” If one looks below the name on the gauge, a curious bit of text appears. “Measuring effective bounce on wedges.” Hmmm… What is “effective bounce?”

The Maltby Triangle Gauge allows you to measure three things: leading-edge height, sole tangent point, and leading-edge sharpness. The last is the most obvious. If I’m chipping at the hairy edge of an adequate bounce, a sharp leading edge will dig in more easily than a blunt one. So if I’m using that far back ball position, I’ll need the 1OutPlus for safety, since its leading edge is the bluntest of the blunt. Even in that position, its 11-degree bounce keeps the leading edge an eighth of an inch up.

Wait a minute! How can that be? In the back position, the wedge is at 35-degrees effective loft, and 11-degrees of bounce ought to be 10-degrees less than we need. The difference here is found in combining all three parameters measured by the gauge, and not just the angle of the bounce.

The 1OutPlus is a very wide sole wedge. Its tangent point is a massive 1.7″ back. The leading edge rises .36″ off the ground and is very blunt. In other words, it has every possible design feature to create safety in case the chip from back in the stance isn’t as perfect as it might be. Since a golf ball is 1.68″ in diameter, that’s still less than halfway up to the center of the ball. But if you play the ball forward, this may not be the wedge for you.

Here are the measurements for the eight sand wedges that happen to be in my garage. All are either 56-degrees from the factory or bent to 56-degrees.

A couple of things jump out from this table. The Callaway PM Grind at 13-degrees has a lower leading edge (.26 inches) than the 11-degree Bazooka 1OutPlus (.36 inches). How can a lower bounce have a higher leading edge? Simple geometry suggests that if you want a higher leading edge, you will need a higher bounce angle. But it gets worse. The Wishon WS (wide sole) at 6-degrees (55-degree wedge bent to 56-degrees) has a leading-edge height of .28 inches, higher than the Callaway which has over twice the nominal bounce angle!

One thing is missing from this simple discussion of angles.

If I place one line at 34-degrees above the horizontal (loft is measured from the vertical), and then extend another at some angle below horizontal, the height above ground where the two join depends on how long the lower line is. This means that an 18-degree bounce with a narrow “C” grind will raise the leading edge a little bit. A 6-degree bounce on a wide sole may raise it more because the end of the bounce on the first wedge is so close to the leading edge.

 

Let’s look at this in the picture. If the red line of the bounce is very short, it doesn’t get far below the black ground line. But if it goes further, it gets lower. This is the difference between narrow and wide soles.

This diagram describes the mathematical description of these relationships.

Our first task is to realize that the angle 0 in this diagram is the complement of the 56-degree loft of the wedge, or 90 – 56 = 34-degrees since loft is measured from vertical, not horizontal. But the angle 0 in the bounce equation is just that, the bounce value. These two angles will now allow us to calculate the theoretical values of various parts of the wedge, and then compare them to our real-world examples.

My PM Grind Callaway wedge has its 3rd groove, the supposed “perfect” impact point, 0.54 inches above the leading edge. This should put it 0.8 inches back from the leading edge, roughly matching the measured 0.82 inches. So far, so good. (I’m using the gauge correctly!)

The 13-degree bounce at 1.14″ calculates out to 0.284″ of leading-edge rise. I measured 0.26″, so Callaway seems to be doing the numbers properly, until I realize that the leading edge is already .45″ back, given a real tangent of .69″. Something is out of whack. Re-doing the math suggests that the real bounce is 20-degrees, 40 min. Hmmm…

Maybe that bounce angle measurement isn’t such a good number to look at. Without digging through all the different wedges (which would make you cross-eyed), we should go back to basics. What is it that we really need?

Most instructors will suggest that striking the ball on about the third groove will give the best results. It will put the ball close to the center of mass (sweet spot) of the wedge and give the best spin action. If my wedge is at an effective 45-degree angle (about my right big toe), it will strike the ball about half-way up to its equator. It will also be close to the third groove. But to make that strike with minimal risk of gardening, I have to enough protection to keep the edge out of the turf if I mis-hit the ball by a little bit. That can be determined by the leading edge height! The higher the edge, the more forgiveness there is on a mis-hit.

Now this is an incomplete answer. If the bounce is short, with a sharp back side, it will tend to dig into the turf a bit. It may not do it a lot, but it will have more resistance than a wider, smoother bounce. In the extreme case, the 1OutPlus will simply glide over the ground on anything less than a ridiculous angle.

The amount of leading-edge height you need will depend on your style. If you play the ball forward, you may not need much. But as you move the ball back, you’ll need to increase it. And if you are still inconsistent, a wider sole with a smooth contour will help you avoid episodes of extreme gardening. A blunt leading edge will also help. It may slow your club in the sand, but it will protect your chips.

There is no substitute for practice, but if you’re practicing chips from behind your right foot using a wedge with a sharp, low leading edge, you’re asking for frustration. If you’re chipping from a forward position with a blunt, wide sole wedge, you’ll be blading a lot of balls. So look at your chipping style and find a leading-edge height and profile that match your technique. Forget about the “high bounce” and “low bounce” wedges. That language doesn’t answer the right question.

Get a wedge that presents the club to the ball with the leading edge far enough off the ground to provide you with some forgiveness. Then knock ’em stiff!

Your Reaction?
  • 12
  • LEGIT8
  • WOW2
  • LOL4
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP4
  • OB2
  • SHANK12

Continue Reading

Instruction

Golf 101: What is a strong grip?

Published

on

What is a strong grip? Before we answer that, consider this: How you grip it might be the first thing you learn, and arguably the first foundation you adapt—and it can form the DNA for your whole golf swing.

The proper way to hold a golf club has many variables: hand size, finger size, sports you play, where you feel strength, etc. It’s not an exact science. However, when you begin, you will get introduced to the common terminology for describing a grip—strong, weak, and neutral.

Let’s focus on the strong grip as it is, in my opinion, the best way to hold a club when you are young as it puts the clubface in a stronger position at the top and instinctively encourages a fair bit of rotation to not only hit it solid but straight.

The list of players on tour with strong grips is long: Dustin Johnson, Zach Johnson, Bubba Watson, Fred Couples, David Duval, and Bernhard Langer all play with a strong grip.

But what is a strong grip? Well like my first teacher Mike Montgomery (Director of Golf at Glendale CC in Seattle) used to say to me, “it looks like you are revving up a Harley with that grip”. Point is the knuckles on my left hand were pointing to the sky and my right palm was facing the same way.

Something like this:

Of course, there are variations to it, but that is your run of the mill, monkey wrench strong grip. Players typically will start there when they are young and tweak as they gain more experience. The right hand might make it’s way more on top, left-hand knuckles might show two instead of three, and the club may move its way out of the palms and further down into the fingers.

Good golf can be played from any position you find comfortable, especially when you find the body matchup to go with it.

Watch this great vid from @JakeHuttGolf

In very simple terms, here are 3 pros and 3 cons of a strong grip.

Pros

  1. Encourages a closed clubface which helps deloft the club at impact and helps you hit further
  2. It’s an athletic position which encourages rotation
  3. Players with strong grips tend to strike it solidly

Cons

  1. Encourages a closed clubface which helps deloft the club at impact and can cause you to hit it low and left
  2. If you don’t learn to rotate you could be in for a long career of ducks and trees
  3. Players with strong grips tend to fight a hook and getting the ball in the air

 

Make Sense?

 

Your Reaction?
  • 29
  • LEGIT1
  • WOW2
  • LOL4
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP3
  • OB2
  • SHANK4

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending