Any better books on putting and the short game than the Dave Peltz Bibles?

[rosskoss]

The Dave Peltz books are fantastic and thoroughly researched but I was wondering if there were any modern books that are better? Or has Dave Petlz himself written any thing recently that's more up to date with his latest research?

[taylormadefan]

Stan Utley just put out books on short game and putting. They're the complete antithesis to Pelzian philosophy, but I liked them much better, much more from a feel point of view rather than science and fact.

[nellski2004]

stan utleys books are much better,pitching and putting made simple.

[BeautifulNice]

I'm reading Utley's book on the short game right now. http://www.amazon.ca/Art-Short-Game-Stan-Utley/dp/1592402925

 

Very easy read. Makes you want to take a lesson with the guy. Has a great attitude about the game and explains things well. His teaching fits in nicely with one plane and stack and tilt proponents.

[DeaconEsq]

I'm gonna check the Utley book out.

 

I wanted to love the Pelz Short Game Bible, but my high-handicap mind felt like it had a LOT of filler I wasn't interested in. Maybe all that extra information will be relevant once I'm a mid/low capper, but right now I want simple instructions and techniques I can practice.

[d0n]

I've only been playing golf for a little over a year now. Stan's books both helped me around the green. I got less out of his putting book than I did out of the short game book. I really like his putting grip and it's made quite a difference for me (very seldom do I have a 3-putt.) The short game book has got a lot of good info. I actually get excited about sand bunkers now and since implementing his bunker techniques I have gotten out of the sand and on the green with every attempt. It's incredible. The pitching and chipping techniques are equally impressive though they go against my instructors teachings. IMO The books would be 10x better if there was a DVD to go along with each. The books were a little hard to understand or comprehend but once I read and did the drills int he back, it all made sense.

 

btw, I too was thinking about taking a lesson from Stan (or one of his people) after reading the book. :cheesy:

[bignose]

You have to remember that first and foremost, Pelz was a scientist. And, his text really reflects that. (I've only read Pelz's short game books and Utley's short game book, neither of their books on putting.) The way Pelz presented his theory was to present an idea, then present evidence -- in this case a lot of evidence -- that backs up his theory. And also present a lot of evidence or reasons why he feels other methods are inferior. This is exactly how many scientific journal articles or doctoral thesis are organized. It is excellent scientific writing. But, a large percentage of people are very unfamiliar with this style of writing.

 

But, I do think that Pelz lost a lot of his target audience. His books seems to have been written for very low handicappers and pros, when his true target audience should have been high handicappers and beginners. Almost everyone needs some help with their short game, but I'd be willing to wager that most low handicappers have most of the basics down -- accelerating through impact, and at least feel for how far back to backswing their wedges, etc. But, all the evidence and extra information is overwhelming. Most people were not looking for evidence or proof as to why a method works -- they were looking for what to do to make it work and drills to help ensure that they are doing the method as well as possible.

 

Pelz probably should have released his info in two different books. A first on basic information and techniques, and a second with advanced techniques and all the extra evidence. Having it all together leads to much confusion. Compare Pelz's book with Tom Watson's Getting Up and Down. In terms of techniques, they are almost identical. Yet, Watson's book is just a tiny fraction the size of Pelz's.

 

Both Watson's and Utley's books I think are very, very good. I really like that they are both from former players, both of whom were very well-known for their short games. The techniques they both teach are different, but both are based on what worked for them.

 

Finally, I'd like to say that when you've figured out a lot of the short game techniques, then I think that going back to Pelz's book and re-reading it would be of some real value. There is a lot of info in there that is not in other books -- like how the ball will behave if pitching or chipping from above the green, or from below the green. Why, if it is at all possible to aim to chip/pitch into a valley and not a hill. Stuff like why if your greens are fast and pins tucked and you need to chip the ball up in the air a lot it is better to use a higher lofted club rather than just open the face because the back spin and side spin from a cut-chip is less predictable than just the backspin from using a higher lofted club. Pelz's book is full of evidence about little things like that, so much that I think that the main points probably got lost in the mix, but once you've got a good grasp on the main points then you can start to think about the finer details -- and those details are also in Pelz's book.

[TaylorDog]

I'm definitely going to check out the Utley books as well. Should I get the putting book first then the short game book when I'm done? I DEFINITELY need help w/ the putting so I'm leaning in that direction.

[taylormadefan]

I'm definitely going to check out the Utley books as well. Should I get the putting book first then the short game book when I'm done? I DEFINITELY need help w/ the putting so I'm leaning in that direction.

 

Putting book for sure. The chipping and pitching swings build off the putting stroke.

 

If you're really serious, I think the Learning Curve is a good investment as well.

 

http://www.eyelinegolf.com/content/view/12/217/

[SadTrombone]

You have to remember that first and foremost, Pelz was a scientist. And, his text really reflects that. (I've only read Pelz's short game books and Utley's short game book, neither of their books on putting.) The way Pelz presented his theory was to present an idea, then present evidence -- in this case a lot of evidence -- that backs up his theory. And also present a lot of evidence or reasons why he feels other methods are inferior. This is exactly how many scientific journal articles or doctoral thesis are organized. It is excellent scientific writing. But, a large percentage of people are very unfamiliar with this style of writing.

 

But, I do think that Pelz lost a lot of his target audience. His books seems to have been written for very low handicappers and pros, when his true target audience should have been high handicappers and beginners. Almost everyone needs some help with their short game, but I'd be willing to wager that most low handicappers have most of the basics down -- accelerating through impact, and at least feel for how far back to backswing their wedges, etc. But, all the evidence and extra information is overwhelming. Most people were not looking for evidence or proof as to why a method works -- they were looking for what to do to make it work and drills to help ensure that they are doing the method as well as possible.

 

Pelz probably should have released his info in two different books. A first on basic information and techniques, and a second with advanced techniques and all the extra evidence. Having it all together leads to much confusion. Compare Pelz's book with Tom Watson's Getting Up and Down. In terms of techniques, they are almost identical. Yet, Watson's book is just a tiny fraction the size of Pelz's.

 

Both Watson's and Utley's books I think are very, very good. I really like that they are both from former players, both of whom were very well-known for their short games. The techniques they both teach are different, but both are based on what worked for them.

 

Finally, I'd like to say that when you've figured out a lot of the short game techniques, then I think that going back to Pelz's book and re-reading it would be of some real value. There is a lot of info in there that is not in other books -- like how the ball will behave if pitching or chipping from above the green, or from below the green. Why, if it is at all possible to aim to chip/pitch into a valley and not a hill. Stuff like why if your greens are fast and pins tucked and you need to chip the ball up in the air a lot it is better to use a higher lofted club rather than just open the face because the back spin and side spin from a cut-chip is less predictable than just the backspin from using a higher lofted club. Pelz's book is full of evidence about little things like that, so much that I think that the main points probably got lost in the mix, but once you've got a good grasp on the main points then you can start to think about the finer details -- and those details are also in Pelz's book.

I would agree with this. I loved Pelz' books (both bibles and Putt Like The Pros) but I've always enjoyed that type of writing and I always ask "WHY". I need to know "WHY" something should be done a certain way. It drives my teaching pro insane because he'll say "put the ball HERE" "Why?" "You'll hit it better." "Why?" "you'll make better contact" "Why?", etc.

 

-mini

[SkiHound]

Stan Utley just put out books on short game and putting. They're the complete antithesis to Pelzian philosophy, but I liked them much better, much more from a feel point of view rather than science and fact.

 

I agree that Utley and Pelz are completely incompatible. Pelz teachs the use of multiple clubs and wedges for the short game, Utley basically uses a single club for most shots around the green. Utley teachs a longer putter with flatter lie angle and a swing gate type of putting stroke, Pelz likes a short putter and a "straight back and through" stroke. Utley basically emphasizes feel and every shot is basically a mini golf swing (e.g., a chip is simply the bottom of the full swing). Pelz is very technical. FWIW, the person I've been taking lessons with has convicned me that straight back and straight through is impossible without manipulating your hands. I personally like the Utley approach better in terms of the putting, chipping, and pitching swings. But I do think a lot of what Pelz has to say about greens and how balls roll on greens can really help golfers manage there expectations. Sometimes we make a perfect read and a perfect stroke and the ball still doesn't go in the hole, and it really isn't our fault.

[Noncenx]

Sometimes we make a perfect read and a perfect stroke and the ball still doesn't go in the hole, and it really isn't our fault.

 

 

You wouldn't be Sergio would you???

 

:drinks:

[TaylorDog]

I got the Utley book and you were all right - it's great. It's completely gotten me to a new grip, stance, posture and stroke. The timing was perfect b/c I got the book the same day I got my new putter (Rife Barbados), so I'm learning to use the two together. So far I've only been to the practice green w/ the new putter and techniques, but am playing tomorrow, Thur. & Fri - can't wait!

[BeautifulNice]

Good luck. Let us know how you do!

[rosskoss]

Thanks for all the advice. FWIW, I think Dave Peltz's Short Game Bible is fantastic. I'm a Mechanical Engineer in my spare time when I'm not golfing so I found his book very interesting and easy to digest. Dave makes a very compelling case in many areas but I'm not sure if many of the things that he wrote about are still valid today. For instance, many players now don't use multiple clubs for chipping around the greens and only adjust their ball position and swing length.

 

It'd be nice if Peltz would come out with some new books that incorporate everything he has learnt (he is after all, a very smart man and great thinker of the game) since he wrote the original bible books.

 

However, I'm going to check out Stan Utley's books next.

[jeffy]

IMO The books would be 10x better if there was a DVD to go along with each. The books were a little hard to understand or comprehend but once I read and did the drills int he back, it all made sense.

 

btw, I too was thinking about taking a lesson from Stan (or one of his people) after reading the book. :drinks:

 

An excellent putting dvd by Stan is available through www.eyelinegolf.com, which markets "The Learning Curve". I've taken lessons from Stan, and watched him give a lesson to Jim Hardy, and the one danger of his putting method is to "overdo it": too much wrist, too much arc, etc. The dvd makes it clearer how subtle these elements are in his stroke.