Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by DK » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 02:34:33


I just read the Pelz Short Game Bible. Lots of great insight into the short
game, but the book has caused a lot of debate as to whether people should
drop a long iron from their bag to make room for a 4th wedge, and Pelz goes
through a lot of effort in the book trying to convince people of why it's a
good idea to do that.

But it seems that very few pros have adopted his 4-wedge approach. Even
Pelz's star pupil, Tom Kite, uses only three wedges in his bag (see
http://www.thegolfchannel.com/core.aspx?page=17100&select=11192 ). To see
what others pros have "in the bag" see http://www.thegolfchannel.com/17300 .
It seems odd that Pelz goes into great detail in the book about how he's
helped many pros on their short game, but yet few use his "3x4" approach,
which is his basic premise for the whole short game system.

How do you think most pros approach the usual three wedges that they carry?
Instead of the 3x4  (3 back swing lengths with 4 wedges) system that Pelz
promotes, do you think most pros do some variation on Pelz's system? Maybe a
4x3 system? Or do they just open up the clubface more on their shortest
wedge to get more variations on distance?

--
DK

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Larry Bu » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 02:39:09

Quote:

> I just read the Pelz Short Game Bible. Lots of great insight into the short
> game, but the book has caused a lot of debate as to whether people should
> drop a long iron from their bag to make room for a 4th wedge, and Pelz goes
> through a lot of effort in the book trying to convince people of why it's a
> good idea to do that.

> But it seems that very few pros have adopted his 4-wedge approach.

I think the Pelz system is more about the setup, "dead hands" and
clock-face backswing rather than the number of clubs that one carries
that are called "wedges".

While I do carry 4 wedges and subscribe wholeheartedly to the system, I
also have calibrated the 9 o'clock swing to clubs down to my 7 iron.
It's great to know when you need to punch under a tree, and need an
idea of how far the club is going to fly.

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by oconn.. » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 03:28:44

[snip]

Quote:
> How do you think most pros approach the usual three wedges that they carry?
> Instead of the 3x4  (3 back swing lengths with 4 wedges) system that Pelz
> promotes, do you think most pros do some variation on Pelz's system? Maybe a
> 4x3 system? Or do they just open up the clubface more on their shortest
> wedge to get more variations on distance?

    In Tiger's book he talks about some shot, the flop I think, and he
mentions
he could do the shot with a variety of clubs but he likes his
sandwedge.
I think Phil is similar in that he's got a "favorite" wedge.  I suspect
that is
the wall Pelz runs up against in his approach.  Folks get comfy with
one or two of their wedges and since alot of these shots are alot about
feel, they can as easily execute them with 1 as 4.  If one had access
to
the TOURS Shotlink stats you could probably see who is using what
short irons the most and see that various guys have a "favorite"
wedge.

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by GolfPhysi » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 04:10:14

Pelz' data indicates that the closer you get to the green, the closer the
next shot will be to the pin.  That's almost certainly true for amateurs,
but many pros don't seem to believe it.  The reason (I think) is that pin
placements in PGA tournaments are so onerous that they feel they have to
have the option of having the ball coming down pretty steeply, with
backspin, so it will stop where it hits.  This is easier to do with a full
swing, trapping the ball against the turf, than the little "dead hands"
pitch that Pelz advocates.  Pros practice doing this from set distances (a
full swing with a wedge), and then instruct their caddies to create layups
at that distance.  I saw a golf channel episode once where they asked a pro
(forgot whom) what he'd do if he was left with 50 yards to the pin, and he
said "I'd fire my caddie".

GP

Quote:

>I just read the Pelz Short Game Bible. Lots of great insight into the short
>game, but the book has caused a lot of debate as to whether people should
>drop a long iron from their bag to make room for a 4th wedge, and Pelz goes
>through a lot of effort in the book trying to convince people of why it's a
>good idea to do that.

> But it seems that very few pros have adopted his 4-wedge approach. Even
> Pelz's star pupil, Tom Kite, uses only three wedges in his bag (see
> http://www.thegolfchannel.com/core.aspx?page=17100&select=11192 ). To see
> what others pros have "in the bag" see http://www.thegolfchannel.com/17300
> . It seems odd that Pelz goes into great detail in the book about how he's
> helped many pros on their short game, but yet few use his "3x4" approach,
> which is his basic premise for the whole short game system.

> How do you think most pros approach the usual three wedges that they
> carry? Instead of the 3x4  (3 back swing lengths with 4 wedges) system
> that Pelz promotes, do you think most pros do some variation on Pelz's
> system? Maybe a 4x3 system? Or do they just open up the clubface more on
> their shortest wedge to get more variations on distance?

> --
> DK

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Howard Braze » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 04:24:11

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:10:14 GMT, "GolfPhysix"

Quote:

>Pelz' data indicates that the closer you get to the green, the closer the
>next shot will be to the pin.  That's almost certainly true for amateurs,
>but many pros don't seem to believe it.  The reason (I think) is that pin
>placements in PGA tournaments are so onerous that they feel they have to
>have the option of having the ball coming down pretty steeply, with
>backspin, so it will stop where it hits.  This is easier to do with a full
>swing, trapping the ball against the turf, than the little "dead hands"
>pitch that Pelz advocates.  Pros practice doing this from set distances (a
>full swing with a wedge), and then instruct their caddies to create layups
>at that distance.  I saw a golf channel episode once where they asked a pro
>(forgot whom) what he'd do if he was left with 50 yards to the pin, and he
>said "I'd fire my caddie".

Some of the best pros have switched strategies.   Phil Mickelson has
stated that his strategy is to hit it far and get as close as he can.
Of course, his short game is extraordinary.   It appears that this is
Tiger Wood's strategy as well.

I wonder what people here have observed with different pros' styles.

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Howard Braze » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 04:34:38

Some pros pick 4 wedges for occasional use.   Or 4 woods.   They are
competent with more clubs than most of us have, and select what they
think they will need.

I'm curious - who did Peltz study for his book?

I suspect that the better you are, the smaller the advantage is using
Peltz's methods.    The best players have tremendous feel.   They
don't need a 90 back-swing with their 56 wedge to go 42 yards (or
whatever).  

So the advantage of having an extra club that makes it easier to do
this isn't as great as it is for us.    And the cost is that they
wouldn't carry a club designed for a longer distance.

If I gave up my 6I, it wouldn't make a lot of difference - my full 6I
shot is trying to hit the green.   Switching to a 5I or a 7I would
still be pretty much trying to hit the green.  

But my chips and pitches are designed to get me to within one-putt
distance.    

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Bill H » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 05:10:32

I think it boils down to the fact that you'd have to carry one less club
somewhere else, which many pros probably aren't willing to do.

Amateurs, on the other hand, aren't usually as accurate with their long
irons, and for them it might make more sense to drop the 3/4 irons, get a
fairway wood, and add another wedge for when they miss the green and are an
awkward distance to the pin.  Reality battles with ego when it comes to long
irons, and I think most amateurs will give in to reality if they know, deep
down, that they'll score better because of it.

Also, I suspect that Pelz isn't really taken that seriously among the
golfing elite.  He's more of a theorist than a coach, and is probably
something akin to the Bill James (baseball theorist) of golf.

Quote:

>I just read the Pelz Short Game Bible. Lots of great insight into the short
>game, but the book has caused a lot of debate as to whether people should
>drop a long iron from their bag to make room for a 4th wedge, and Pelz goes
>through a lot of effort in the book trying to convince people of why it's a
>good idea to do that.

> But it seems that very few pros have adopted his 4-wedge approach. Even
> Pelz's star pupil, Tom Kite, uses only three wedges in his bag (see
> http://www.thegolfchannel.com/core.aspx?page=17100&select=11192 ). To see
> what others pros have "in the bag" see http://www.thegolfchannel.com/17300
> . It seems odd that Pelz goes into great detail in the book about how he's
> helped many pros on their short game, but yet few use his "3x4" approach,
> which is his basic premise for the whole short game system.

> How do you think most pros approach the usual three wedges that they
> carry? Instead of the 3x4  (3 back swing lengths with 4 wedges) system
> that Pelz promotes, do you think most pros do some variation on Pelz's
> system? Maybe a 4x3 system? Or do they just open up the clubface more on
> their shortest wedge to get more variations on distance?

> --
> DK

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Andy » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 06:10:19

Quote:

> Also, I suspect that Pelz isn't really taken that seriously among the
> golfing elite.  He's more of a theorist than a coach, and is probably
> something akin to the Bill James (baseball theorist) of golf.

IMO, Pelz isn't writing his books for the top pros although his
original premise was proven with Tom Kite.  He is writing them for
recreational players with this simple message, "If you want to score
lower, focus on 100 yards and in."  His books offer a method to address
that statement.

Andy
--
3 is a good score on any hole.

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Andy » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 06:24:01

Quote:

> I just read the Pelz Short Game Bible. Lots of great insight into the short
> game, but the book has caused a lot of debate as to whether people should

Why don't they?  Because they don't have to.  Pros have distance
control that recreational players can only dream of.

IMO, Pelz's books aren't written for pros, they are written for
recreation players and offer a method to improve scoring inside 100
yards.  Most people end up some distance away from the hole and those
distances vary.  Professionals practice hitting the same club different
distances and can vary that distance because they practice it so much.

For mere mortals, his method offers this: learn three swings, apply it
to these 4 clubs, know those distances and you'll have a much better
chance of getting a makeable putt when you are inside 100 yards.

Andy
--
3 is a good score on any hole.

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Larry Bu » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:36:14

Quote:

> Some pros pick 4 wedges for occasional use.   Or 4 woods.   They are
> competent with more clubs than most of us have, and select what they
> think they will need.

> I'm curious - who did Peltz study for his book?

For which part?

Pelz tooks years of data trying plotting a variety of players (whoever
he would walk with on practice day), taking note of club, distance, and
where the ball ended up.

What he discovered was this:  On non wedge shots, the majority of the
error was due to direction, however with the wedges it was due to
distance.

The plot of data he described as the "bra" effect, as the location of
the balls looked like a bra.  However for wedges, you still had the bra
effect, but now the "cups" were placed in front of and behind the hole
instead of to each side.

Therefore he decided the best way to improve the wedge game was to
focus on distance, and not direction, so he came up with his
wedge/clock system.

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Annika198 » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:06:07

90% of Tour pros hit 90% of their shots around the green with one club.

The theory being that it's easier to learn to hit one club harder or
softer than it is to learn the various shots and trajectories with all
the clubs you might chip or pitch with.
As for DP's 3x4 system, I've always thought that a 3x3 system is
simpler for me.  The 4th club, a very high lofted (64o) wedge will get
you in as much trouble as it will get you out of.

 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by Steve Gavett » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:26:10


Quote:
> Also, I suspect that Pelz isn't really taken that seriously among the
> golfing elite.  He's more of a theorist than a coach, and is probably
> something akin to the Bill James (baseball theorist) of golf.

He coaches Mickelson, arguably the best short game going.
 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by jeff » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:15:55


Quote:

> Some of the best pros have switched strategies.   Phil Mickelson has
> stated that his strategy is to hit it far and get as close as he can.
> Of course, his short game is extraordinary.   It appears that this is
> Tiger Wood's strategy as well.

> I wonder what people here have observed with different pros' styles.

Back in the day, it seems they wanted specific layup distances.  Now there
seems to be more getting as close as possible.
 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by jeff » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:21:40


Quote:
>I think it boils down to the fact that you'd have to carry one less club
>somewhere else, which many pros probably aren't willing to do.

That's partly because of the long par 3s they play, and their approach shots
into par 5s.  They can actually hit those reasonably close.  But a 2 or 3
iron really isn't as useful to me.  Just because I *can* hit them doesn't
mean I should.
 
 
 

Why don't pros use Pelz's 4 wedge system?

Post by jeff » Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:13:58

Quote:

> It seems odd that Pelz goes into great detail in the book about how he's
> helped many pros on their short game, but yet few use his "3x4" approach,
> which is his basic premise for the whole short game system.

He didn't "invent" the "system", he discovered it.  Pros were already doing
it.  The number of wedges isn't so important, although he'll recommend one.
The overall idea of multiple wedges and multiple swing distances with the
same basic swing is the idea.