Pelz wedge system

[lars]

do the 730, 900, 1030 shot measurements help?

I have a friend who swears by the Pelz system on measuring the different swing lengths and how far the ball flies. When I tried it, it seemed a bit much, too mechanical.



Anyone else have thoughts/experiences on the Pelz methodology v. a feel approach?



thanks



L

[HipCheck]

It's too mechanical and too impractical...unless you have a friend with goalie equipment who likes to stand in the middle of a range with a laundry basket for kicks.

[ultra45]

i think it takes a while to learn the different swings and get the exact yardages but once you do (or at least close enough) i think it works pretty well

[lars]

once you "learn" the swings, is it fairly automatic? Ultra45, I take it you have used this and have learned and use this system?

[taylormadefan]

once you "learn" the swings, is it fairly automatic? Ultra45, I take it you have used this and have learned and use this system?

 

It's not that hard to learn the Pelz wedge swing. It's pretty simple and relies on a stable lower body and smooth arm swing.

 

The issue is maintaining it. Some people don't need to swing the club every day to keep things consistent. However, for me I need to practice a lot to maintain it since it's so different from my full swing.

 

I'm a Hardy One planer for my full swing, and switiching to Stan Utley's similar short game methodology, I've noticed a huge improvement in my short game from chipping to pitching, to 50 yard half swings. Much more feel based, and I'm more of a feel player especially around the greens.

 

Different strokes for different folks. However I do think it's important to pick a system, learn as much as you can about it, and practice, practice, practice.

[littlepoison]

I can honestly see where one would think that Pelz's approach to the wedge game might be a bit "mechanical," but consider this... he reccomends "dialing in" clock positions with each wedge you carry in order to get a feel for "standard" distances that you can rely on when the pressure is on out on the course. I consider myself more of a "feel" player, but when I'm faced with short pitch shots, I get the yardage and then "feel" what lenght of swing and follow through I'll need to get the ball close to the pin... which is essentially the same process that Pelz walks you through... :D I know that someone will be able to interject with a comment about the "type" of wedge swing one would have to make given certain conditions, but if you've seen Pelz's "Fundamentals of Wedgeplay" DVD or video, assessing landing conditons and "feeling" the shot at hand (based on your "clock swing") is heavily emphasized. So essentially, Pelz takes the approach of a rocket scientist versus the approach of the artist, yet they achieve essentially something very, very similar

[Ridgeback]

At the beginning of this season I decided to put some real work in on my "inside 100" game. I got the Pelz book and hit many hundreds of balls while recording distances. It made an immediate impact on my confidence when confronted with shots inside 100 yards. A couple of months later, for my birthday I got a Skycaddie unit. Between knowing the inside 100 yardages (as opposed to estimating them) combined with the Pelz system, I am getting up and down an average of 3-4 more times a round than before.

 

I'm a fan.

[Sam-Tee-Time]

At the beginning of this season I decided to put some real work in on my "inside 100" game. I got the Pelz book and hit many hundreds of balls while recording distances. It made an immediate impact on my confidence when confronted with shots inside 100 yards. A couple of months later, for my birthday I got a Skycaddie unit. Between knowing the inside 100 yardages (as opposed to estimating them) combined with the Pelz system, I am getting up and down an average of 3-4 more times a round than before.

 

I'm a fan.

 

I've got to echo these comments. I swear by the Pelz Clocking system, and my instructor and I have even refined it further with distances calibrated with my Hands at my Thigh / Hip / Lower Ribcage / Armpit positions. I calibrate this for my LW / SW / PW for carry distances (roll varies depending on green conditions).

 

To make it even more precise, I do this for both Chipping, and Pitching distances. So - it may be too detailed for most golfers, but I have an EXACT distance for chipping & pitching with all my wedges. As others will testify, this does require maintenance and practice.

 

For Full Swings - I calibrate all my short irons for full swing, and 3/4 swing (armpit) distances as well.

[vthokie1157]

its just too mechanical i think, i mean im a pretty good wedge player and from 100 yds and in i dnt even think about looking for a ydage marker because it is all feel

[ultra45]

I do use the "pelz" system and the reason i said you have to learn the swing is that growing up i had a very long swing (daly is my fav player) and to me... feeling a 3/4 swing still got to parallel or past...so it was not easy for me to learn the 7:30 swing...i'll also admit that i don't practice it enough or have it dialed in as well as i would like... but for me i know my 7:30 LW goes about 50 yards... if i hit it 48 or 52 i'm still +/- 6 feet. you still do have to know your touch/feel (which pelz describes in the book...they are different) because say for example i was very dialed in with my LW and i was 53 yards away... i'd obviously need a little longer backswing than 7:30 to get it there... not saying this system should be law.. but i do like it

[Amicus]

It is a great system. Thank you Dave! For me, it seems it was worth the time to study the technically written book to understand the ideas.

 

Then, I decided that I needed to apply it to me. First, with a wedge, 10:30 is pretty much my full swing. I have spent the time learning my 9:00 distances.

They are:

50 yards with my 60* wedge,

62 with my 56*,

75 with my 52* and

100 with my 47* PW.

The 10:30 distances are:

75 with the 60*,

85 with the 56*,

95 with the 52* and

118 with the PW.

 

I do not use the 7:30 action because it is harder for me to repeat than the others. I simply try to handle shots within 50 yards by practice swing and feel. Happily, most shots within that range are chips and not pitches, so I am not improvising too often. Also, I am more focused on flighting different shots within this range, so it is not just carry distance, but how the ball releases inside 50 yards.

 

I learned my distances without a helper by using some nylon twine I bought at a hardware store. There is a public course near me with a flat area around the practice green. I go there early enough in the AM to have the green to myself 2-3 times in the Spring and whenever I need a confidence boost. I have tied ribbons to knots in the twine at 10 yards intervals. I tie the twine to a flag. Then I unravel the twine back to a certain yardage and tie the twine to an old shaft I stick in the ground or to my bag. Then, I hit balls from my shag bag from different yardages from about 120 yards in. I guess a range finder is easier to use, but the twine and ribbon was a solution for under $10.

 

I would say that I get many more shots within 10 feet than I did 4 summers ago when I first bought the short game bible. My puts per round fell pretty steadily until my swing got better a year or two ago. Then, hitting more greens in regulation increased my putts, but still lowered my score. Most importantly, I feel that I am not greatly disadvantaged when I miss a green. Especially, when I just miss it. I chip almost as well as I lag putt. I think I am better than most at landing pitches within the scoring range and I am aiming to have makeable putts with any shot within 100 yards. I make maybe 40% of up and downs on an average course. When I get to play fast, contoured greens at resorts, private clubs and expensive daily fee courses, it is harder to get close and 6 footers are much harder to make. Still, even then, I make a lot of comfortable, routine bogeys from just missed par putts.

 

Pelz would look even smarter if I was a better putter. Unfortunately, I didn't find his Putting Bible to be as much of a book of revelations.

[bjackson]

I used the system...but have gotten sloppy to say the least...it helps when you get it down, but it needs maintaining...

[nearfall152]

I think the people that find it too mechanical might be reading the instructions too closely. Varying the length of the backswing is the key issue...the important thing to remember is that it's up to you to take his lesson and make it your own.

 

I think it works very well; it gives you a hard yardage number from weird locations on the course. Much less guesswork is great in tournaments. :friends:

[Cspe]

I have used the system since 10 years ago and it has been very helpful. My score has gone down about 5 to 10 strokes after practicing it for a few months 10 years ago. Now that I have GPS and have not been playing for many years, I still can dial in the same distance and know that it is right due to GPS. Only thing is sometimes my 9 is a bit too close to my 10:30 distance if I am not careful on my tempo. Overall, I think pelz wedge system works and I want to try his wedges to replace my old Titleist wedges.

[againstthegrain]

Good system if you're willing to put in the time at the range w a rangefinder. It mprphs from a mechanical system to a feel system pretty readily. To me it's like cooking - use the recipe for a while and then adjust to your liking.

[larrybud]

[quote name='HipCheck' timestamp='1149170622' post='205495']
It's too mechanical and too impractical...unless you have a friend with goalie equipment who likes to stand in the middle of a range with a laundry basket for kicks.
[/quote]

Or have access to a driving range... I don't understand what's impractical of lasering off where the majority of your shots end up, especially since we're only talking 50-100 yards. The Pelz wedge system works perfectly for me.

[HitEmTrue]

[quote name='larrybud' timestamp='1288649339' post='2769407']
Or have access to a driving range... I don't understand what's impractical of lasering off where the majority of your shots end up
[/quote]

What do you aim the laser at? Also, it seems you'd want roll/spin to be ignored, since you aren't hitting to a green.

I've been wanting to make a rope like Amicus described in his post above...hit shots down the rope and see where they land to get distances. ( light bulb moment ) maybe add flags at my standard distances, after those have been figured out, so those become the targets.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='lars' timestamp='1149170318' post='205489']
I have a friend who swears by the Pelz system on measuring the different swing lengths and how far the ball flies. When I tried it, it seemed a bit much, too mechanical.



Anyone else have thoughts/experiences on the Pelz methodology v. a feel approach?

thanks

L
[/quote]

I couldn't follow Pelz's suggestions even if I tried.. That clock method could only come from a scientist's linear mind. I am a feel player - when I can't feel it, it's not happening. After attending a few Pelz seminars a friend relies upon exact yardages for wedge shots. He has four wedges and 12 swing lengths which translates to supposed yardages; he still comes up short or too long, 8/10 times, mostly because he very seldom ever realizes one of those yardages into the green.

I rely a great deal upon hand eye coordination, visual and feeling the shot. If a shot feels like it's going to play shorter or longer I trust that far more then actual yardage. I look at the shot and assess as if throwing a golf ball underhanded at a target; and then choose a wedge based upon influential conditions.

To add, I use the reverse overlapping grip for "ALL" my irons shots; but it's especially influential with a wedge in my hand, as it allows my right hand to be the dominate hand of my grip; as though I am throwing the golf ball underhanded at the target. Also another benefit of reverse overlap grip is to keep the ball down with all clubs. Reverse overlap allows greater control over a punch shot, keeps the ball low and allows me to use spin to stop the ball. The only times I use a Vardon grip is with driver and woods, or times when I face a condition that requires me to get the ball up fast and high. Vardon grip allows the wrist to release quicker, and it's that quick release that derogatorily affects creative wedge shots of many people.

[sertshark]

Nothing. And I mean NOTHING has helped me lower my scores more than Pelz' wedge system. I have only recently started using it (the last 4 golf games) and there are times I feel like it is soooo easy and simple that I can't believe I never did it before. For me, personally, I so much more confidence in shots 100 yards and in. His system is simple. Maybe not perfect for guys like Phil Mikelson, or other accomplished players, but for a high-handicapper, it will shave strokes off your game because it gives you a short game. You can say that it gives you some vital game within the game.

[dpark]

I am also a big believer in the Pelz system. I don't think it makes you become mechanical, I think it makes you more confident on distance on less than full swings.

I think people who try to modulate tempo and clubhead speed independent of club position (also known as "feel players") are the crazy ones.

For the same reason you want to know that a full, normal swing with your 7-iron goes 150 yards, why wouldn't you want to know that a normal 1/2 swing with your sand wedge goes 60 yards and a normal 3/4 swing goes 75 yards?

Knowing your distances with partial swings gives you even more confidence to hit tweener shots IMO.

And once you put in the time and effort to get dialed in, my experience is that you can be a weekend golfer and still have reasonably decent distance control with partial wedge shots.

I was a "feel player" for years, and unless I played a lot, my ability to control distances on partial shots was flat-out bad. After going to the Pelz system about 4 years ago, my wedge game improved significantly and has remained good even though I play much less than I did back then.

[MadGolfer76]

I don't see how Pelz's method is [i]not[/i] feel. It takes feel to know when you are in the right positions. Feel is what lets you repeat them and add or subtract yards from the basic positions. I spent about a week getting the basics of this method down, and I feel it is easy to maintain. The swing itself is nothing difficult. My wedge game improved dramatically since I have been using it. Nothing is safe inside 100 yards. I actually prefer to lay up on par 5's and birdie them 3x's more often.

[ultra45]

[quote name='sertshark' timestamp='1288654550' post='2769530']
Nothing. And I mean NOTHING has helped me lower my scores more than Pelz' wedge system. I have only recently started using it (the last 4 golf games) and there are times I feel like it is soooo easy and simple that I can't believe I never did it before. For me, personally, I so much more confidence in shots 100 yards and in. His system is simple. Maybe not perfect for guys like Phil Mikelson, or other accomplished players, but for a high-handicapper, it will shave strokes off your game because it gives you a short game. You can say that it gives you some vital game within the game.
[/quote]

so if pelz uses a few different swings and goes to a full finish... where as phil uses different backswings and stops half way through.. isn't he still using the "clock method"?? IMO the whole point of the clock system is to give you some specific reference points in trying to "feel" the right swing for the shot you want to hit

[HitEmTrue]

[quote name='ultra45' timestamp='1288706203' post='2770248']
so if pelz uses a few different swings and goes to a full finish... where as phil uses different backswings and stops half way through.. isn't he still using the "clock method"?? IMO the whole point of the clock system is to give you some specific reference points in trying to "feel" the right swing for the shot you want to hit
[/quote]

I don't believe the full finish is relevant to the clock method. Pelz uses that to help players ensure that they accelerate the club rather than decelerate.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='ultra45' timestamp='1288706203' post='2770248']
[quote name='sertshark' timestamp='1288654550' post='2769530']
Nothing. And I mean NOTHING has helped me lower my scores more than Pelz' wedge system. I have only recently started using it (the last 4 golf games) and there are times I feel like it is soooo easy and simple that I can't believe I never did it before. For me, personally, I so much more confidence in shots 100 yards and in. His system is simple. Maybe not perfect for guys like Phil Mikelson, or other accomplished players, but for a high-handicapper, it will shave strokes off your game because it gives you a short game. You can say that it gives you some vital game within the game.
[/quote]

so if pelz uses a few different swings and goes to a full finish... where as phil uses different backswings and stops half way through.. isn't he still using the "clock method"?? IMO the whole point of the clock system is to give you some specific reference points in trying to "feel" the right swing for the shot you want to hit
[/quote]

Pelz's program is basically about four wedges with 3 different lengths of back swing. The clock method is about swinging the club back to one of those pre-determined points which equals a practiced distance. The problem with Pelz disciples whether admitted or not - they seldom lay up to a specific yardage, and they can't rely upon a missed shot to give them a leave that's practiced; that's where creativity and feel plays a serious roll in getting up and down. I am sorry, but for the most part mechanical short games only help momentarily; they can't be relied upon to save par.

AS for Phil's short game, he grew up with green and bunker in the back yard - he was creative short game player before he ever heard of Pelz's name. Using him as a clock example isn't a good argument.

[ultra45]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1288712648' post='2770411']
[quote name='ultra45' timestamp='1288706203' post='2770248']
[quote name='sertshark' timestamp='1288654550' post='2769530']
Nothing. And I mean NOTHING has helped me lower my scores more than Pelz' wedge system. I have only recently started using it (the last 4 golf games) and there are times I feel like it is soooo easy and simple that I can't believe I never did it before. For me, personally, I so much more confidence in shots 100 yards and in. His system is simple. Maybe not perfect for guys like Phil Mikelson, or other accomplished players, but for a high-handicapper, it will shave strokes off your game because it gives you a short game. You can say that it gives you some vital game within the game.
[/quote]

so if pelz uses a few different swings and goes to a full finish... where as phil uses different backswings and stops half way through.. isn't he still using the "clock method"?? IMO the whole point of the clock system is to give you some specific reference points in trying to "feel" the right swing for the shot you want to hit
[/quote]

Pelz's program is basically about four wedges with 3 different lengths of back swing. The clock method is about swinging the club back to one of those pre-determined points which equals a practiced distance. The problem with Pelz disciples whether admitted or not - they seldom lay up to a specific yardage, and they can't rely upon a missed shot to give them a leave that's practiced; that's where creativity and feel plays a serious roll in getting up and down. I am sorry, but for the most part mechanical short games only help momentarily; they can't be relied upon to save par.

AS for Phil's short game, he grew up with green and bunker in the back yard - he was creative short game player before he ever heard of Pelz's name. Using him as a clock example isn't a good argument.
[/quote]

as i keep trying to say... the only "mechanical" part is learning the swings... which give you different baselines/reference points to start with... whether you use 7:30, 9:00, 10:30.... or thigh, hip, armpit.. whatever... they are very good starting points to try and hit a specific number...

one of the drills is to try and hit a specific number... but right after impact guess how for far you actually hit the shot before getting the feedback as to what the shot actually went.

now... not to slam all you feel players out there.. but a friend of mine who claims to be a feel player laughs at me when i pull out the range finder from 40 yards... so over 2 rounds when we'd pull up to my ball i'd ask him what he thought the distance was to the pin... he was usually at least 10 yards off

how do you "feel" a shot when you don't even know how far you need to hit it...

[stryper]

FWIW, I do sort of a modified Pelz system...a comfortable pitch shot-type swing--approximately a 9:00 backswing--with a pre-set Mickelson hinge and hold, switching clubs for different distance requirements. In my case, anything inside 40 yds is my 60* wedge; 40-55 yds is my 56*; 55-70 yds is my 51*; and outside of 70 yds is my 47*. In windy conditions I'll even add a nine or eight iron into equation for more predictable knockdowns.

So using a skycaddie to get my numbers and playing to the center of my established ranges, [i]if I'm playing well[/i], I can pretty much give myself a chance at a makeable putt every time.

Obviously I would like to tighten those numbers quite a bit, but right now at this stage in my development, one swing for those 4-6 different "pitching" clubs is a lot easier to manage than the three swings that Pelz advocates.

Not sue how well I explained it, but I hope this helps.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='ultra45' timestamp='1288716563' post='2770490']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1288712648' post='2770411']
[quote name='ultra45' timestamp='1288706203' post='2770248']
[quote name='sertshark' timestamp='1288654550' post='2769530']
Nothing. And I mean NOTHING has helped me lower my scores more than Pelz' wedge system. I have only recently started using it (the last 4 golf games) and there are times I feel like it is soooo easy and simple that I can't believe I never did it before. For me, personally, I so much more confidence in shots 100 yards and in. His system is simple. Maybe not perfect for guys like Phil Mikelson, or other accomplished players, but for a high-handicapper, it will shave strokes off your game because it gives you a short game. You can say that it gives you some vital game within the game.
[/quote]

so if pelz uses a few different swings and goes to a full finish... where as phil uses different backswings and stops half way through.. isn't he still using the "clock method"?? IMO the whole point of the clock system is to give you some specific reference points in trying to "feel" the right swing for the shot you want to hit
[/quote]

Pelz's program is basically about four wedges with 3 different lengths of back swing. The clock method is about swinging the club back to one of those pre-determined points which equals a practiced distance. The problem with Pelz disciples whether admitted or not - they seldom lay up to a specific yardage, and they can't rely upon a missed shot to give them a leave that's practiced; that's where creativity and feel plays a serious roll in getting up and down. I am sorry, but for the most part mechanical short games only help momentarily; they can't be relied upon to save par.

AS for Phil's short game, he grew up with green and bunker in the back yard - he was creative short game player before he ever heard of Pelz's name. Using him as a clock example isn't a good argument.
[/quote]

as i keep trying to say... the only "mechanical" part is learning the swings... which give you different baselines/reference points to start with... whether you use 7:30, 9:00, 10:30.... or thigh, hip, armpit.. whatever... they are very good starting points to try and hit a specific number...

one of the drills is to try and hit a specific number... but right after impact guess how for far you actually hit the shot before getting the feedback as to what the shot actually went.

now... not to slam all you feel players out there.. but a friend of mine who claims to be a feel player laughs at me when i pull out the range finder from 40 yards... so over 2 rounds when we'd pull up to my ball i'd ask him what he thought the distance was to the pin... he was usually at least 10 yards off

how do you "feel" a shot when you don't even know how far you need to hit it...
[/quote]

That's fine and dandy. However most of the disciples I've encountered do not look at the clock the same as you. IMO most struggle with it even though many have good things to say about it, and some even use range finders. Again, they seldom if ever layup to the correct yardage after miss hitting their shot into the green. Whether Feel or mechanical - realizing results is IMO about effectively using hand eye and body coordination.

You might have a friend that's isn't very good at visually measuring distances, lot's of people are not. I, on the other hand am still reasonably good at guesstimating yardage and wind-age of a moving target out to 600 meters. During my younger years and eyes to 900 meters; that was a skill of mine back then. So measuring 40yds or 15 is no big whoop. It's not about knowing yardage either, it's about sticking the ball where the user plans using hand eye coordination on short shots.

Some of us have it - while others use Pelz. If you can't visually connect what you see to what your hands and body need to do, (hand - eye - body coordination) my guess is you're not a very good basketball shooter, quarter back or good enough to determine with your eyes how far a target is away from you without using a range finder. Good luck with that....

[ultra45]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1288718997' post='2770551']
[quote name='ultra45' timestamp='1288716563' post='2770490']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1288712648' post='2770411']
[quote name='ultra45' timestamp='1288706203' post='2770248']
[quote name='sertshark' timestamp='1288654550' post='2769530']
Nothing. And I mean NOTHING has helped me lower my scores more than Pelz' wedge system. I have only recently started using it (the last 4 golf games) and there are times I feel like it is soooo easy and simple that I can't believe I never did it before. For me, personally, I so much more confidence in shots 100 yards and in. His system is simple. Maybe not perfect for guys like Phil Mikelson, or other accomplished players, but for a high-handicapper, it will shave strokes off your game because it gives you a short game. You can say that it gives you some vital game within the game.
[/quote]

so if pelz uses a few different swings and goes to a full finish... where as phil uses different backswings and stops half way through.. isn't he still using the "clock method"?? IMO the whole point of the clock system is to give you some specific reference points in trying to "feel" the right swing for the shot you want to hit
[/quote]

Pelz's program is basically about four wedges with 3 different lengths of back swing. The clock method is about swinging the club back to one of those pre-determined points which equals a practiced distance. The problem with Pelz disciples whether admitted or not - they seldom lay up to a specific yardage, and they can't rely upon a missed shot to give them a leave that's practiced; that's where creativity and feel plays a serious roll in getting up and down. I am sorry, but for the most part mechanical short games only help momentarily; they can't be relied upon to save par.

AS for Phil's short game, he grew up with green and bunker in the back yard - he was creative short game player before he ever heard of Pelz's name. Using him as a clock example isn't a good argument.
[/quote]

as i keep trying to say... the only "mechanical" part is learning the swings... which give you different baselines/reference points to start with... whether you use 7:30, 9:00, 10:30.... or thigh, hip, armpit.. whatever... they are very good starting points to try and hit a specific number...

one of the drills is to try and hit a specific number... but right after impact guess how for far you actually hit the shot before getting the feedback as to what the shot actually went.

now... not to slam all you feel players out there.. but a friend of mine who claims to be a feel player laughs at me when i pull out the range finder from 40 yards... so over 2 rounds when we'd pull up to my ball i'd ask him what he thought the distance was to the pin... he was usually at least 10 yards off

how do you "feel" a shot when you don't even know how far you need to hit it...
[/quote]

That's fine and dandy. However most of the disciples I've encountered do not look at the clock the same as you. IMO most struggle with it even though many have good things to say about it, and some even use range finders. Again, they seldom if ever layup to the correct yardage after miss hitting their shot into the green. Whether Feel or mechanical - realizing results is IMO about effectively using hand eye and body coordination.

You might have a friend that's isn't very good at visually measuring distances, lot's of people are not. I, on the other hand am still reasonably good at guesstimating yardage and wind-age of a moving target out to 600 meters. During my younger years and eyes to 900 meters; that was a skill of mine back then. So measuring 40yds or 15 is no big whoop. It's not about knowing yardage either, it's about sticking the ball where the user plans using hand eye coordination on short shots.

Some of us have it - while others use Pelz. If you can't visually connect what you see to what your hands and body need to do, (hand - eye - body coordination) my guess is you're not a very good basketball shooter, quarter back or good enough to determine with your eyes how far a target is away from you without using a range finder. Good luck with that....
[/quote]

well... as for the friend... we play a short par 70 course... and he's shot 65 2x this year... some people are just gifted...

as for me... was athlete of the year in high school... shooting guard on the bball team... and pretty good free throw shooter too

[DaveLeeNC]

I guess I am a 'semi-Pelz'.

I 'calibrate' specific yardages, but I found that my body just "can't tell time" on the backswing. I would swing back to 9:00 and it would be 10:30. Then what felt like 10:30 wouldn't be much different than my supposed 9:00 swing.

So I know what kind of swing hits a 60* wedge 40 yards. But I have no idea how far back the associated backswing really is. For me only under exceptional conditions do I intend to carry the ball (around the green) more than 30 yards with anything except my 60* LW.

OTOH, I regularly go out to my 'shag ball area' where I will put a marker every 10 yards from 20 to 50 yards and hit to those markers with my 60* LW.

What is interesting for me is that I would rather have a blind shot where I know the distance vs. a shot where I can see the target area but don't have an accurate distance to my landing spot. I have often wondered if this would change if when I do my 20 to 50 yard drill I used actual golf course flags instead of just some little markers thrown on the ground. But for now I can judge 50 yards better with my swing than with my eyes.

dave

ps. Given that data it is obvious that a laser rangefinder is critical to my golf game.

[jameslacy3509]

I tried the Pelz system for a while. The particular question you are asking with the 730,9,1030 swing I would say YES! It at least absolutely worked for me. I don't think it is too mechanical or technical because once you get used to actually swinging with these shortened backswing with Pelz ideas on the short game swing, they are automatic. It is a smooth, not much effort or thought kind of swing. And I found my distances were really about the same as the examples in the book for the distances with the lofts of the wedges. And I am much better from 120-40 yard with his thoughts on the distance wedges. But, none of the other stuff in the book was helpful for me. I basically got used to swinging the way the book teaches and went off the yardages listed in the books for the lofts of the wedges and I am usually just about right. The hardest part was getting used to the swing. So I still use Pelz distance wedges approach.

For the rest of the short game, Stan Utley's short game books were tops for me. I have never been better out of the sand, chipping, or pitching after reading his books. But I am swear by Pelz book only in the distance wedge teaching.