Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: Dissecting “the short game”

Published

on

In follow up to my article week before last about your “Short Game Handicap”, I thought might add a bit of clarity and expand on the topic. To start, I probably shouldn’t have used the term “short game”, as it appears there are many different definitions (and no consensus) as to exactly what that means. Is it wedge play only? Does it include putting? And just how far out from the hole does “the short game” begin?

So, I’m going to ask for a bit of a “do-over” and offer a new term to define what I mean. Let’s talk, then, about “scoring-range performance”. Hopefully, we all can agree that this means the entire game inside 8- or 9-iron range, so it is different for every golfer. That could be inside 150-160 yards for a strong player, or as close as 100-120 yards for one with a lesser distance profile. Regardless of the distance, however, I think it is fair to say that once inside that “short range performance” zone, you should be able to take on the golf course more aggressively.

So, to start, I would like to suggest we can break down “short range performance” into five distinct categories:

1. Full swing or mostly full swing short iron and wedge shots. These are the shots you hit from the outermost ranges in what you define as your own “short range”. But when I say “full swing” with a short iron or wedge, please understand this doesn’t mean going at it like you would with a driver or even mid-iron. Shorter clubs call for more controlled swing pace and power, so that you can build a distance chart that is repeatable and reliable. From those “full” swings, you can grip down up to 1-1/2” to 2” to change distance and trajectory with each club, which will also reduce the length of your swing naturally. If you want, you can also experiment with opening the face a bit as well in order to achieve different ball flights and distances. These shots take us into the range of…

2. Pitch shots. I consider this term to define all those wedge shots that are hit with much less than a “full” swing. This is an area where you just have to spend time practicing in order to learn what kind of swing produces what yardage and ball flight with each wedge you carry. From there we go to…

3. Chipping. This is a very different technique than pitch shots, but good chipping is the key to greenside scoring. Regardless of your age or strength profile, you can learn to be a good chipper of the ball. And after any of these shots that has been well executed, we get to…

4. Putting. I believe all of us would agree that putting is an art in itself and calls upon a different set of motor skills. A putting stroke is not a “little golf swing”, in that it does not have the dynamic movements of the lower and upper body, etc. And finally…

5. Trouble shots. I will consider this category to include any shots in scoring range that don’t fall into the routine. This would include bunker shots, sidehill/uphill/downhill lies, deep rough, other tough lies such as hardpan, and low runners from under trees. Very few of us practice these, maybe other than bunker shots, so we get anxious and nervy when faced with one. Ben Hogan used to say that you should never try a shot on the course that you haven’t practiced. Pretty darn good advice.

So, there you have my take on the five parts of “scoring-range performance”. Over the next few weeks, I’ll take us into a deeper dive on each one of these aspects to see if I can’t give you some tips and advice on how to make that part of your game better. Understand of course, I’m offering general advice and counsel to a large audience, so I certainly expect some of you to find my suggestions too elementary, while others may find it too advanced. But I’m going to do my best to give each of you at least a few takeaways that you may find helpful.

Terry Koehler is a fourth generation Texan and a graduate of Texas A&M University. Over his 40-year career in the golf industry, he has created over 100 putter designs, sets of irons and drivers, and in 2014, he put together the team that reintroduced the Ben Hogan brand to the golf equipment industry. Since the early 2000s, Terry has been a prolific writer, sharing his knowledge as “The Wedge Guy”.   But his most compelling work is in the wedge category. Since he first patented his “Koehler Sole” in the early 1990s, he has been challenging “conventional wisdom” reflected in ‘tour design’ wedges. The performance of his wedge designs have stimulated other companies to move slightly more mass toward the top of the blade in their wedges, but none approach the dramatic design of his Edison Forged wedges, which have been robotically proven to significantly raise the bar for wedge performance. Terry serves as Chairman and Director of Innovation for Edison Golf – check it out at www.EdisonWedges.com.

9 Comments

9 Comments

  1. ChipNRun

    Jul 9, 2019 at 11:23 pm

    Let me see if I’ve got this right…

    After more than a decade of research, Dave Pelz in 2000 divided the short-game skills into distance wedges, pitches, chips and bumps, and sand shots. He included detailed instructions on each.

    In 2004 Debbie Steinbach sorts out the Venus pitch, chipping, sand sharking and the lob. Deb also included instructions.

    In 2012, tour veteran Dave Stockton and his sons parse the short game into low and high shots, bunkers, and trouble shots. Again, how-to tips abound.

    Further, Dave, Deb and the Other Dave all tell us how putting meshes with the short game.

    So, I’m struggling to find the value-added of our recent “Dissecting…” piece? If the Wedge Guy is having an off-week, it’s OK if he skips writing an article.

  2. Jamho3

    Jul 5, 2019 at 8:18 am

    Especially enjoyed this part.

    ““scoring-range performance”. Hopefully, we all can agree that this means the entire game inside 8- or 9-iron range, so it is different for every golfer. That could be inside 150-160 yards for a strong player, or as close as 100-120 yards for one with a lesser distance profile.”

    Keep going TK.

  3. Dan Coleman

    Jul 3, 2019 at 7:51 pm

    Why do most amateurs hit their wedges mostly on the toes of the face?

    Dan

  4. Jack Nash

    Jul 3, 2019 at 4:19 pm

    The only game I got is a buck’n a quarter in. Learned wedges following my old man around the course when I was a kid. He played with his buddies & I chipped around. Of course you know how long ago that was when you could do stuff like that. I’ve found the better you get the more aggressive you tend to be. Being avg. at best off the tee means you have to make up for your game closer to the hole. Very good article and totally agree with Utley’s approach.

  5. PSG

    Jul 3, 2019 at 10:15 am

    If anybody wants to read something with some actual thought behind it (“you just have to hit a bunch and see what you can do”… seriously?!) you should read Stan Utley’s “The Short Game Building Blocks of the Six Basic Pars”. Its really good. He defines them as tight lie long, tight lie short, fluffy sand short, fluffy sand long, tight sand long, deep rough long. he further theorizes that hard sand short and deep rough short are so hard they are not basic.

    I want to like “The Wedge Guy”‘s stuff, I post about wedges a lot on the forums, but come on dude. “Full Swing, Pitch, Chip, Putt, Other”. Forty years of experience and that’s the insight you can give us?

  6. Ugh

    Jul 2, 2019 at 4:08 pm

    Once again, I wasted my time clicking on this article.

    • Scotty B

      Jul 2, 2019 at 9:51 pm

      You wasted everyone’s time who read your comment.

    • Terry Koehler

      Jul 3, 2019 at 10:16 am

      Hello “Ugh”,

      I am sorry you did not find this article interesting. Would you mind sending me an email — Terry@TheWedgeGuy.com — and sharing your thoughts about why, and your ideas for what I could write about that you would find more interesting? As I’ve said, I’m writing for a very broad audience, and not everyone will find every article interesting. I get that. But it would help me if you and others would send me ideas for topics you would like me to address down the road.
      Thanks.

      Wedge Guy

  7. BigD

    Jul 2, 2019 at 11:48 am

    Matt Kuchar is a big donkey.

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.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending