Instructor Dilemma ("Stack and Tilt" Style Guy)

I'll try to keep this as short as possible.

For the longest time, my swing has been inside and flat, which I then tend to re-route a bit steep down into the ball. When things go well, I hit the ball an okay distance and with a little cut. I can play to about a 2.x to 3.x index with that swing, but that's about it.

For the past few years I've worked on keeping the club away from me and in a better position at the top. For a short spurt in each of the past two years I was playing effortless golf and seeing the results. My short game (which I neglected to try to fix the long game) was then my limiting factor, but even without the greatest putting, chipping, and bunker play I managed to get to a 1.8 index.

But I haven't stayed there. I'm self-taught to this point, and I'm looking for an instructor. I don't care for the instructors at Lake View (they're great if you're 65 and you want to break 90, I guess), and Whispering Woods is going to have a new range later this year with a teaching academy at one end.

I understand the need to commit to a series of lessons - I don't need or really even want a "quick fix." I want to work hard, even if it takes a full summer, and get rid of some old habits.

My preferred ballflight with every club is a high fade. I say high, but really the height comes from good ballstriking. When I'm playing well, the height comes effortlessly because I get good power and make good contact.

So I found a guy who's going to be "the" instructor at the golf course three minutes from my house (Whispering Woods), and I just got off the phone with him. Potential problem: he's a "stack and tilt" guy, and I've never cared for the stack-and-tilt swing. I don't like the lower trajectory, I don't like hitting draws, and everything I've seen says there are problems with S&T; and the driver. A few of the S&T; guys on Tour (Aaron Baddeley for one) are moving away from S&T.; But at the same time, I've not really investigated things, so who knows whether I'm even right or what.

Now, I talked to him about that briefly, and he said by way of assurance that S&T; is more about good geometry, and developing a simple, repeating swing, and there are components of the swing that he can use to accomplish anything. He said there are components that can hit the ball higher or lower. He said, obviously a sound golf swing will let you move the ball in either direction, but you can take some S&T; pieces to build a golf swing and default setup that will produce a fade.

He told me he's good friends with Bennett and Plummer, and before they started working with Tour pros they developed the swing to work with beginners, because they make contact all over the ground, and the main thrust of their early work was to get people to make the low point of the swing in front of the golf ball (which hints at why it's not the best swing for the driver, potentially).

I told him that I'd probably like to use our first meeting as a sort of "get to know you" session. That I'd show him my swing, show him my old swing, show him what I've been trying to do, and see if we're a good fit, etc.

I know quite well that I really do not want to go full S&T;, but it sounds like he understands S&T; and just looks to apply pieces. I think that a good golf swing tends to have the same "pieces" throughout it, so I'm not worried about that - but if you're not an "S&T; Method Teacher" (for want of a better phrase), why tell a potential student that you're "A Stack and Tilt Certified Academy"? Why pigeon-hole yourself? Or maybe it's just marketing, with "S&T;" being kind of a hot (though cooling somewhat) phrase.

So there it is. This will be "the" guy at my home course, so developing a relationship with him will work out if I like what he does. But I have reservations... The first meeting will be key, and I suppose I don't really have any questions, but if anyone has any thoughts, I'd like to hear them.

P.S. The wife will also be taking lessons, but she's a beginner, so I'm not as concerned about the "swing methodology" she'll learn so much as that she has fun.

I agree with almost all you said. For a number of years I relished the challenge of figuring things out myself. Ben Hogan never had a teacher, after all.

And I kept improving, too, so it's not like I've been stuck for awhile. But two years now I've been stuck, so I'm moving on to get some help. I wouldn't go to an S&T; guy either, but in some ways he's the best/only choice (he's gonna be the guy at my club - we're not exactly swamped with great teachers in Erie, PA), and he did assuage my fears a bit when he talked about the "pieces." So I guess I'm kind of caught between "sign up and take lessons and see where I go" and "reject a guy based purely on three words: stack and tilt," which he may or may not apply "fully" or whatever. It's a weird position to be in: you basically have to jump ("commit to six-nine lessons") or not. You can't do it half-assed by signing up for one lesson from twelve different instructors. That might work if you're trying to find THE best instructor, but I don't have that kind of time and I don't want any instructor to feel like they have to show me immediate results. I want a lasting improvement, not a quick fix that gets me hooked. Like I said, I guess the middle ground is to go talk with him in that first lesson and see how I feel about it all after that. P.S. Thanks for the post and for helping me talk through it more. I realize perhaps nobody else will get anything out of this but me, so I appreciate the time you took.

That's the thing I'm trying to say: he says he'll use parts and pieces, and I'm pretty self-aware, so I'm still appropriately leery. In other words, I haven't talked myself into going this route - but for a variety of reasons I feel like the guy deserves a chance to have a conversation.

I did want to talk through it, though, so that I could make sure any flaws in my thinking or feelings were exposed, and I'm not sure any more have been. I'll approach this cautiously.

I think my years of being self-taught have put me on a pretty high level as far as understanding the golf swing. I've devoured literature, I've videotaped myself as far back as 1995 (thank $deity for digital video cameras!), and I've constantly tweaked things. I've gotten pretty far, and it HAS been rewarding. But yeah, that darn wall...

T.M., what "poor geometries" are you talking about, specifically? If the guy tells me to take the club way back to the inside and keep all my weight left, I'm pretty sure I'll realize what's going on and stop the lesson.

My putting's pretty good. My ballstriking tends to go through periods of extreme suckitude. Obviously you wouldn't know that having never seen me play, but my stats and observations back that up.

What you said about tweaking my existing swing versus "converting" me is at the heart of the issue. I think he can do the former, and that's why I'm meeting him at least once. I also sent him an email just now about my concerns - I'll post his response if it's appropriate. Thanks again for the thoughts and responses. No thoughts here have been bad (even if it seems like I'm disagreeing with you, Fat Slice, I'm not - because you made me think and confirm certain things - thanks).

An email exchange.

His response: