The misperception of the short game.

[Mike_Young]

As I was reading the "greens leveller" thread it got me to thinking again about how we so often ignore the short game and putting as it pertains to the great ones.  Greens complexes are what separate the good from the bad.
We can talk about ball strikers all day long and we all know some regional or even local guy that can hit the ball as well as anyone on tour.  We all see young guys at our clubs who the unknowing consider to be the next great one because of their swing.  We discuss TW various swing coaches over the last few years but rarely does anyone mention his putting.
But let's face it.  All the great ones that have played the game had a short game well above average.  Don't tell me Nicklaus had some parts lacking or Hogan could not putt etc....Many people starting at a young age can be taught a swing serviceable to a high level of golf but the touch and short game of the big time boys is not taught.   Course length is overrated when compared to great green complexes.IMHO

[Padraig Dooley]

Mike

The four keys to success on tour are strokes gained putting, driving effectiveness, 10-20 yards around the green and 175-220 approaches.

I doubt there's many local guys who hit the ball as well as anyone on tour. Touch and short game can be taught and learned. What truly separated Hogan and Nicklaus, Norman, Tiger etc is how they hit the ball.

[Mike_Young]

Mike

The four keys to success on tour are strokes gained putting, driving effectiveness, 10-20 yards around the green and 175-220 approaches.

I doubt there's many local guys who hit the ball as well as anyone on tour. Touch and short game can be taught and learned. What truly separated Hogan and Nicklaus, Norman, Tiger etc is how they hit the ball.

Padraig,
I disagree.  There are not "plenty" but there are kids out there that strike the ball as well as the tour players.  Also I don't consider Norman the same as the others...I've caddied several tour events over the last 35 years and one can easily watch a superior striker of the ball all day and ask how he was beat by some guy that looked like he could not even make contact.  A good example is Allen Doyle.  Ask Norman if he would play him straight up....    JMO

[JMEvensky]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

[Mike_Young]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

That's what I was trying to say....

[Padraig Dooley]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

They just happen to have good short games? Nothing to do with putting in hours of work? Would you consider Padraig Harrington to have/had a great short game? Ask him, how he got it.

[mike_beene]

I think it is more complicated.There are good ball strikers and good short games that are world class but don't make it.The increments are so small and the mind, confidence,and luck all play huge parts.If Daly had not gotten in that PGA would we ever have heard of him? One stroke a round is the difference between success and failure at the highest levels.That small difference is difficult to ascertain .

[Bill Brightly]

As I was reading the "greens leveller" thread it got me to thinking again about how we so often ignore the short game and putting as it pertains to the great ones.  Greens complexes are what separate the good from the bad.
We can talk about ball strikers all day long and we all know some regional or even local guy that can hit the ball as well as anyone on tour.  We all see young guys at our clubs who the unknowing consider to be the next great one because of their swing.  We discuss TW various swing coaches over the last few years but rarely does anyone mention his putting.
But let's face it.  All the great ones that have played the game had a short game well above average.  Don't tell me Nicklaus had some parts lacking or Hogan could not putt etc....Many people starting at a young age can be taught a swing serviceable to a high level of golf but the touch and short game of the big time boys is not taught.   Course length is overrated when compared to great green complexes.IMHO

Mike,

I agree 100%. Great green complexes do not simply punish misses, they dramatically increase the level of creativity and touch a player must have to save par. This can be achieved by tiers or severe slopes on greens, or by significant elevation changes around the greens, or a combination of both. I think that is what I like most about Tillnghast's green complexes.  

Flat greens, on the other hand, merely test a player's ability to "hit a spot" on the green with their recovery shots. And just like hitting driver or full iron shots, a player with a robotic, mindless, repeating pitch shot will be rewarded. This is NOT the case with greens and surrounds that present a wide variety of challenges.

[Mike_Young]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

They just happen to have good short games? Nothing to do with putting in hours of work? Would you consider Padraig Harrington to have/had a great short game? Ask him, how he got it.

Of course.  If you are on the tour for any length of time , you have a great short game.  It's like pitchers who can throw 95 miles per hour.  there are plenty but how many can pitch?

[Bryan Icenhower]

Mike

The four keys to success on tour are strokes gained putting, driving effectiveness, 10-20 yards around the green and 175-220 approaches.

I doubt there's many local guys who hit the ball as well as anyone on tour. Touch and short game can be taught and learned. What truly separated Hogan and Nicklaus, Norman, Tiger etc is how they hit the ball.

This is research done by Rich Hunt and is based solely on statistics from the PGA TOUR
http://www.golfwrx.com/145065/four-key-factors-to-success-on-the-pga-tour/

I would guess that the keys to success would be vastly different as handicaps go up but have no data to back up.  

[Padraig Dooley]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

They just happen to have good short games? Nothing to do with putting in hours of work? Would you consider Padraig Harrington to have/had a great short game? Ask him, how he got it.

Of course.  If you are on the tour for any length of time , you have a great short game.  It's like pitchers who can throw 95 miles per hour.  there are plenty but how many can pitch?

Good striking can mask a poor short game, a great short game can't mask poor striking.

[Bryan Icenhower]

I doubt there's many local guys who hit the ball as well as anyone on tour.

I am always astonished at how many people can absolutely pure the ball on a consistent basis when there is little to no pressure. Its way more thqn i would have thought prior to getting close to the game at its highest levels. Case in point, the gentleman that owns the trackman combine record is Steven Tiley. Show up at a PGA TOUR range and look at how many pros own their own unit to see how many now use this technology.  Steven is making a living at the game and is clearly helluva player, but certainly not a household name, and certainly better than just about every local guy, but don't underestimate how many guys hit it well.

[Bill_McBride]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

They just happen to have good short games? Nothing to do with putting in hours of work? Would you consider Padraig Harrington to have/had a great short game? Ask him, how he got it.

Of course.  If you are on the tour for any length of time , you have a great short game.  It's like pitchers who can throw 95 miles per hour.  there are plenty but how many can pitch?

Good striking can mask a poor short game, a great short game can't mask poor striking.

I don't know, Padraig.  I played on my college golf team for a couple of years with a godawful swing and a short game where I got up and down from anywhere.   

Of course that was back in the days when we played all head to head matches until the conference championship and the NCAA Regional.   It can be to ough to play a guy that you think you're going to win every hole from and lose 1 down.   

[Padraig Dooley]

I doubt there's many local guys who hit the ball as well as anyone on tour.

I am always astonished at how many people can absolutely pure the ball on a consistent basis when there is little to no pressure. Its way more thqn i would have thought prior to getting close to the game at its highest levels. Case in point, the gentleman that owns the trackman combine record is Steven Tiley. Show up at a PGA TOUR range and look at how many pros own their own unit to see how many now use this technology.  Steven is making a living at the game and is clearly helluva player, but certainly not a household name, and certainly better than just about every local guy, but don't underestimate how many guys hit it well.

Don't underestimate which guys that hit it well?

As for the Trackman Combine test, it puts a heavy weight on the yardages of 60, 70, 80, 90, 100 which have little bearing on success on tour. 

[JMEvensky]

Hopefully Pat Burke and Mike Clayton will chime in. Their opinions would settle some arguments.

[Padraig Dooley]

I don't know, Padraig.  I played on my college golf team for a couple of years with a godawful swing and a short game where I got up and down from anywhere.   

Of course that was back in the days when we played all head to head matches until the conference championship and the NCAA Regional.   It can be to ough to play a guy that you think you're going to win every hole from and lose 1 down.   

It is possible to become World No.1 with a below average short game eg. Lee Westwood, yet all of the world no 1s were way better then average ball strikers.

[Bill_McBride]

I don't know, Padraig.  I played on my college golf team for a couple of years with a godawful swing and a short game where I got up and down from anywhere.   

Of course that was back in the days when we played all head to head matches until the conference championship and the NCAA Regional.   It can be to ough to play a guy that you think you're going to win every hole from and lose 1 down.   

It is possible to become World No.1 with a below average short game eg. Lee Westwood, yet all of the world no 1s were way better then average ball strikers.

Agreed, but also with great short game.  You gotta have it all to be #1.   Tiger's short game was/is magic. 

[Jud_T]

Mike,

No question.  There's a local pro in town who Ray Floyd says was the best ball striker he's ever seen.  Guy couldn't make a 5-footer to save his life.  There's a lot more guys who can hit it 300 down the middle than there are guys who can consistently make 5 foot sliders with $100,000 on the line.

[JESII]

I don't know, Padraig.  I played on my college golf team for a couple of years with a godawful swing and a short game where I got up and down from anywhere.   

Of course that was back in the days when we played all head to head matches until the conference championship and the NCAA Regional.   It can be to ough to play a guy that you think you're going to win every hole from and lose 1 down.   

It is possible to become World No.1 with a below average short game eg. Lee Westwood, yet all of the world no 1s were way better then average ball strikers.

Luke Donald?

[Mike_Young]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

They just happen to have good short games? Nothing to do with putting in hours of work? Would you consider Padraig Harrington to have/had a great short game? Ask him, how he got it.

Of course.  If you are on the tour for any length of time , you have a great short game.  It's like pitchers who can throw 95 miles per hour.  there are plenty but how many can pitch?

Good striking can mask a poor short game, a great short game can't mask poor striking.

Padraig,
Again I disagree.  Nothing "mask" anything for long on the tour.  At the average scratch golfer level you may be able to mask poor short game but not out there.  But there are plenty of guys out there that you don't know they have a short game becuas eof the way they strike it UNTIL they need it....JMO

[Padraig Dooley]

I don't know, Padraig.  I played on my college golf team for a couple of years with a godawful swing and a short game where I got up and down from anywhere.   

Of course that was back in the days when we played all head to head matches until the conference championship and the NCAA Regional.   It can be to ough to play a guy that you think you're going to win every hole from and lose 1 down.   

It is possible to become World No.1 with a below average short game eg. Lee Westwood, yet all of the world no 1s were way better then average ball strikers.

Luke Donald?

Luke Donald isn't a less then average striker.

[Tom_Doak]

Mike:

Thanks for your post.  Seems to me there are two discussions and we're only having one of them.

1.  Greens complexes are the key to great golf architecture.  I agree with this.  I think it's what separates the best courses from the rest, and I don't think there are a lot of people that can build great green complexes.

2.  You have to have a great short game to be a great player.  Generally, I agree.  You have to have a well-above-average short game just to make cuts on Tour, because the level is generally so high, but then there are guys like Crenshaw who others were in awe of, and Ben was in awe of Seve.  Nicklaus was a great putter, even by Tour standards; he was not so great around the greens but he made up for it by NEVER leaving himself in stupid places.  I assume Hogan was the same.  Tiger and Phil have all-world short games; there really isn't anyone on Tour the past 15 years who matches up well with them.  Watson had an all-world short game when he won all his majors; now he's more of a ball-striker.

Here's a question that may help sort things out:  Nicklaus vs. Seve.  Obviously Jack had the MUCH better game tee to green, and Seve had the MUCH better short game.  But if you give Jack a "10" for long game and Seve a "10" for short game, what were they each in the other's category?  And how does that compare to which of them was better overall?

[Padraig Dooley]

Good/serviceable short games can be taught, but great putters,chippers,and bunker players are born.No amount of practice will make you Crenshaw or Ballesteros.That's God-given talent.

They just happen to have good short games? Nothing to do with putting in hours of work? Would you consider Padraig Harrington to have/had a great short game? Ask him, how he got it.

Of course.  If you are on the tour for any length of time , you have a great short game.  It's like pitchers who can throw 95 miles per hour.  there are plenty but how many can pitch?

Good striking can mask a poor short game, a great short game can't mask poor striking.

Padraig,
Again I disagree.  Nothing "mask" anything for long on the tour.  At the average scratch golfer level you may be able to mask poor short game but not out there.  But there are plenty of guys out there that you don't know they have a short game becuas eof the way they strike it UNTIL they need it....JMO

Mike, one year Bob Heintz led the Tour Stats in both number of putts per round and putts per GIR and lost his card. The most important skill on Tour is ball striking not short game. Better ball striking makes the short game easier, better short game doesn't make ball striking easier.

[Tom Bacsanyi]

I don't know, Padraig.  I played on my college golf team for a couple of years with a godawful swing and a short game where I got up and down from anywhere.   

Of course that was back in the days when we played all head to head matches until the conference championship and the NCAA Regional.   It can be to ough to play a guy that you think you're going to win every hole from and lose 1 down.   

It is possible to become World No.1 with a below average short game eg. Lee Westwood, yet all of the world no 1s were way better then average ball strikers.

Luke Donald?

Luke Donald isn't a less then average striker.

Disagree.  He is short and crooked, and relies on a flippy, timing oriented swing.  The guy can get it in the hole though.  

[Padraig Dooley]

Disagree.  He is short and crooked, and relies on a flippy, timing oriented swing.  The guy can get it in the hole though.  

Why is he not number 1 anymore, is it because his short game got worse or because his striking got worse?