Jump to content
IGNORED

"Method Teachers" and "Method Instruction"


Note: This thread is 4671 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

  • Administrator

I posted this on Facebook in regards to "method instruction" being bad or close-minded or fixed or whatnot, and I disagree entirely. And I wanted to share it here as well, as it's important and relevant.

Quote:
Every good instructor has a method. A method is "a procedure, technique, or way of doing something, especially in accordance with a definite plan." Who would admit to not having a plan for a student?

In golf "method teacher" seems to be used as a bad thing, as in "he applies the *same* method to every student." But there's a whole large swath of space between the method being very general like "good contact, hit the ball reasonably far, know where the ball is going" and "the shaft needs to twist about its axis 17.5 degrees while the left arm moves 35 degrees across the chest" (to be clear, I don't think anybody's teaching the latter). Where's the line in the middle that separates those two? Or are both of those "methods"?

Everyone is a method teacher to some degree or another, because nobody who says "no method" really means that - they're simply trying to sell themselves as "I teach the golfer" or "I just teach good impact." Their method is the "'No Method' Method!" To truly have no method is to truly have no plan for a student, and again, nobody teaches that way.

"Method" is misused. Every good instructor teaches the student they have in front of them. Every good instructor teaches "impact." Every good instructor has a "method" because to claim otherwise is to claim that you don't have a plan.

And finally, IMHO, the only way a "method" limits growth is if the "method" becomes so precisely defined that acceptable ranges shrink and cease to become wide ranges of acceptable values or components. Personally, I like generous ranges with constant prioritization so the student can improve.

To put it another way: if you ask any "no method" teacher enough questions, you'll be able to suss out their "method."

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I think there is a difference between having a method of teaching and teaching a (specific) method of swinging.  You seem to be defending against criticism of the latter by invoking the former, if I am understanding you correctly.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

Originally Posted by turtleback

I think there is a difference between having a method of teaching and teaching a (specific) method of swinging.  You seem to be defending against criticism of the latter by invoking the former, if I am understanding you correctly.


That's the thing. I think that every instructor teaches a specific "method of swinging" to any particular student. So, they have a method for that student. They have to.

There are undoubtedly some teachers who try to shoehorn every student out there into a single, specific, very tight standard of measurement, but those instructors are nowhere near as prevalent as the "'No Method' Method" instructors would have you believe. The "shoehorners" don't last very long.

So again it almost comes down to how specific you want to be with the word "specific." :-) How tight are the allowable variances? I feel that the "method" I teach has some really wide variances, and I will resist any attempts to narrow that focus down except in a few key areas that virtually all instructors would agree to (ideal amount of shaft lean at impact has a low variance from, say, +3 to +7 degrees, perhaps).

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

My first instructor appeared to me to be a "No Method" instructor.  He had me swing at a few balls on the range and started to make adjustments.  He didn't suggest any specific method or golfer to emulate, basically stating we all have a natural swing motion and he works with that as the basis.  I did make some progress while with him, but it was very inconsistent.  What would work during one range session didn't the next, then I'd go for a lesson, he'd make more adjustments that would work for a while again then stop.  He was a great guy, but he wasn't the right instructor for me.

My current instructor definitely has a method, he believes Ben Hogan is a golf genius and had one of the best swings in the history of golf.  Everyone that he works with learns the basis of Ben Hogans approach to the golf swing with some minor variances that he's incorporated.  I've found this approach much more successful for me because there's a method I've learned and understand.  I hit my irons further and more consistently than I ever have, and if I do miss, I can tell what I did wrong and fix it myself(something I never could with my first instructor).  Having Hogans Five Lessons as the blue print to my swing makes it easy to review and pick up nuances that I missed or couldn't appreciate the first few times I read it.

As for shoe horning, my current instructor said he'd like to work with Dustin Johnson but would never consider working with Bubba Watson because his swing is so unconventional he wouldn't know how to even begin.  I guess which approach is best if between the student and instructor.  I prefer the instructor having a method assuming it's a proven one.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

newtogolf, that's a good point. Students often like a method because it lets them understand where they are now and what they need to do - over time - to get where they want to be.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Whatever method makes the ball go straight and far and i'm in!

:whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Eric, this is a very important topic. At least for me, since it is the reason why I am still playing golf. If it weren't for a "method" and your posting here, I would have buried my golf bag in the basement 18 months ago.

Actually, I never really understood the heated discussion on method teaching. From a European view - alas Germany - you'll be taught the traditional swing by the majority of golf pros which goes by-the-book. In my experiences they just tell every beginner what to do. Do this, hmm, better - and so on. The background has to be acquired by the student reading hopefully a good book. All my lessons went that way. No instructor actually explained what he is going to teach me. And lately no instructor ask me why I try to keep centered over the ball - all three pros I met tried to make me move my weight back when swinging back (all nice guys walking by and offered their help).

I felt that being left in the dark or dumb is not what I was looking for. Makes a nice cash cow for the pro, but does not really answer my questions on how to get it done.

Being taught Stack & Tilt, reading up in the book and finally watching the DVDs was excellent so far. As you abilities progress you can take over control, instead of just being controlled by a pro holding back on you. S&T; was very transparent. I would not want to do it without the help of a pro, but practice is way more rewarding that way. You have checkpoints and can work toward you goal. Since feel is not real, you need to reach certain positions in your swing to hit the ball right. Physics rule...

One thing I never got is that "everybody needs to swing his very own way", like the pro has to carve a new swing for every student. Since we all share the same physics, how many useful variations could there be or could your local pro "invent" for you? Marrrrrketing... :D

Bottom line, ask your current pro what "method"/approach/theory etc. he is teaching and read up on it. It'll make learning way easier and hopefully faster. If he is not telling you straight away, well, it is trust or leave.

Well, thanks Eric for endorsing my current "method swing"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'm new to golf but I like what you said.  I understand that there are certain fundamentals that are inherent to making consistent contact with the ball and the need for instructors to be organized and have an approach to teaching golf.  I disagree when the approach evolves more into a swing mechanic that is so rigid that the focus is on obtaining specific body positions at various points through the "one and only PGA-approved" swing.  It's probably related, but I disagree with teaching older golfers with limited flexibility, fitness, and other issues the same swing mechanics that are "proven" on the PGA tour.

Driver:  Callaway Diablo Octane iMix 11.5*
Fairway: Cobra Baffler Rail F 3W & 7W
Irons:  Wilson Ci
Wedges:  Acer XB (52* & 56*)
Putter:  Cleveland Classic #10 with Winn Jumbo Pistol Grip

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hmmm.... here's my (long, sorry) answer on a Volleyball trainer's point of view:

As short background: I'm 37, I have been playing sportsgames for as long as I can remember, played professional Volleyball for 20 years, studied sports and spent the last 2 years training and coaching a women's pro team.

Actual hcp is 18.6, never had a pro lesson (except the 2 required courses you need here in Austria).

To me, every technique in sports, where the result gives the definition of "good vs. bad", has some basic fundamentals which have to be done, to give the required result. But these fundamentals are only a small part, the rest is individual, where people are able to compensate some flaws in their technique with physical abilities.

In Volleyball, playing a pass requires the arms to point at the desired target. It's better to use straight arms, but you can  get away with bend arms, as long as the level of the "competition" is the same as your level of technique.

You can have fun playing some beach volley with your friends (where nobody ever got a lesson) with your "wrong" technique, but you won't have much fun if you have to receive an 80mph jump serve with it.

I think, every golf pro should at first have a talk with the pupils about their goals. Depending on the required results, the "method of swinging" should be chosen and because of this the resulting "method of teaching" should be decided. I.e. for a casual golfer who plays 2 times a month with no time to practice, don't try to fit them into a complete swing method, but make sure, he's more or less "right" through the impact zone with his "individual" swing.

IMO, the way (method) to teach _ALWAYS_ has to fit the pupil.

When I watch some golf pros at the ranges I visit, the level of didactic knowledge is horrible -> that's where I would say, a "Method Pro" is a bad thing, because the pupil cannot reach his/her full potential because of the pro's limitations in teaching, depending only on his one method.

greetings

michi

"I have my own golf course and Par is whatever I say it is. There's a hole which is a Par13 and yesterday I damn nearly birdied that sucker." - Willie Nelson

Link to comment
Share on other sites


For me, having a model that I am trying to copy has been very helpful. I guess you'd call this "method" teaching. I try to swing like Moe Norman in his competitive days before he became a paid endorser of Natural Golf. Moe was one of the greatest ball strikers ever. Moe's swing can be copied without 20-year-old flexibility. It is easy on the back and the joints. Having Moe as a model allows me to check my swing against his and work toward copying him. My teachers teach Moe's swing. The pupil should fit the method. Unless you have physical limitations that stop you from being able to hit the three or four positions needed to swing like Moe, they teach you to swing like Moe. I don't know how guys do it with a little of this and a little of that and create their own swing. Give me a model/method.

Russ - Student of the Moe Norman swing as taught by the pros at - http://moenormangolf.com

Titleist 910 D3 8.5* w/ Project X shaft/ Titleist 910F 15* w/ Project X shaft

Cobra Baffler 20* & 23* hybrids with Accra hybrid shafts

Mizuno MP-53 irons 5Iron-PW AeroTech i95 shafts stiff and soft stepped once/Mizuno MP T-11 50.6/56.10/MP T10 60*

Seemore PCB putter with SuperStroke 3.0

Srixon 2012 Z-Star yellow balls/ Iomic Sticky 2.3, X-Evolution grips/Titleist Lightweight Cart Bag---

extra/alternate clubs: Mizunos JPX-800 Pro 5-GW with Project X 5.0 soft-stepped shafts

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hmmm.... here's my (long, sorry) answer on a Volleyball trainer's point of view:

As short background: I'm 37, I have been playing sportsgames for as long as I can remember, played professional Volleyball for 20 years, studied sports and spent the last 2 years training and coaching a women's pro team.

Actual hcp is 18.6, never had a pro lesson (except the 2 required courses you need here in Austria).

To me, every technique in sports, where the result gives the definition of "good vs. bad", has some basic fundamentals which have to be done, to give the required result. But these fundamentals are only a small part, the rest is individual, where people are able to compensate some flaws in their technique with physical abilities.

In Volleyball, playing a pass requires the arms to point at the desired target. It's better to use straight arms, but you can  get away with bend arms, as long as the level of the "competition" is the same as your level of technique.

You can have fun playing some beach volley with your friends (where nobody ever got a lesson) with your "wrong" technique, but you won't have much fun if you have to receive an 80mph jump serve with it.

I think, every golf pro should at first have a talk with the pupils about their goals. Depending on the required results, the "method of swinging" should be chosen and because of this the resulting "method of teaching" should be decided. I.e. for a casual golfer who plays 2 times a month with no time to practice, don't try to fit them into a complete swing method, but make sure, he's more or less "right" through the impact zone with his "individual" swing.

IMO, the way (method) to teach _ALWAYS_ has to fit the pupil.

When I watch some golf pros at the ranges I visit, the level of didactic knowledge is horrible -> that's where I would say, a "Method Pro" is a bad thing, because the pupil cannot reach his/her full potential because of the pro's limitations in teaching, depending only on his one method.

greetings

michi

You are not really referring to method but advancing skill levels. Basic levels of fundamentals are intrinsic to all sports. There are always individuals who are exeptions, but they are few. For example throwing a ball. The real fundamentals are moving your body in balance, shifting your weight effeciently, developing a consistent release point. Arm angles, range of motion, how much leg drive, grip can vary. In my view method teachers cross the line when they insist that the technical elements, arm angle, grip, how far back you take your arm are absolute. Good teachers have a range of technical tools that they can present to different students. In golf there are several elements involved in power and accuracy. Different people posses these gifts in various proportions. So the techniques vary as well. A person who is tall, flexible but not very strong will focus on arc for power and rythym for accuracy. A short person with powerful upper body may focus on rotation for power and grip to limit hand action for accuracy. The fundamentals are the same, but the area of technique emphasized varies.

1W Cleveland LauncherComp 10.5, 3W Touredge Exotics 15 deg.,FY Wilson 19.5 degree
4 and 5H, 6I-GW Callaway Razr, SW, LW Cleveland Cg-14, Putter Taylor Made Suzuka, Ball, Srixon XV Yellow

Link to comment
Share on other sites




Originally Posted by mihi4    for a casual golfer who plays 2 times a month with no time to practice, don't try to fit them into a complete swing method, but make sure, he's more or less "right" through the impact zone with HIS "individual" swing.


This makes the most sense to me.   Every student is an individual with different flaws and needs.  I have serious physical handicaps, so a "you must do it this way" instructor is worthless to me. I want an instructor who can work within MY abilities to achieve the goal of simple, basic good ball striking.

Burner 2.0 Graphite 4-AW
09 Burner 10.5*
08 #3 Burner 15*
09 Burner 3H
09 Burner 4H
TM-110 putter

Vokey 56.11
Titleist NXT 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't think method instruction means one swing concept fits all, I see it as meaning there's a foundation and structure to the swing that you and your instructor build for you based on your individual needs.  If an instructor watches you swing and then just suggests band-aids or "fixes" to your swing how do you identify problems or corrections on your own?

Originally Posted by Texas solo

This makes the most sense to me.   Every student is an individual with different flaws and needs.  I have serious physical handicaps, so a "you must do it this way" instructor is worthless to me. I want an instructor who can work within MY abilities to achieve the goal of simple, basic good ball striking.



Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 4671 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • On my car I got the extended power train warranty. I do read the fine print most of the time. Though at now 37, my eyes aren’t what they were 10 years ago.    The problem with most of these extended warranties on electronics and appliances is you don’t register the warranty with the place you buy the warranty from, which I’ve always found strange. Unless it’s GameStop then you know Alina drops her Switch in the next two years and the screen cracks they’ll replace it. No questions asked.    You buy a slow cooker at Walmart for $50 and the extended warranty is say $6, you have to go through a third party to register your product for the warranty, and it’s pretty damn annoying. Target is the same way. Anything you buy the extended protection on you have to go through a third party.    Why do retailers go through a “broker” for warranties? Because they don’t wanna deal with it? They make me talk to someone from another country, that I can barely understand, when I need my warranty fulfilled.   Sorry for the rant.
    • You may be able to find a regular flex Blueboard on the second hand market. I’m little more than half your age so I swing a shaft that launches pretty low so I don’t have a lot of experience with Regular flex (other than when I try to hit it I miss way to the left).    There are other shafts, such as the newer Ping Alta that I’ve heard good things about. And one that no one talks about. The Jupiter shaft. You can get this shaft for a $100 with a grip and your Ping adapter installed. I was talking to the golf manager at Dick’s Sporting Goods here and he has one in his driver and has nothing but good things to say about it. I thought about getting one for my Paradym Triple Diamond to play it a little shorter, but haven’t pulled the trigger yet.
    • Wordle 1,013 3/6* ⬛🟨⬛🟨🟨 🟩⬛🟩🟩⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Meanwhile, another old Tour Edge guy switches to Callaway for this season. I have a different problem, course dependent set-ups. What I’m wondering is if @dragonsmhas the 8 iron set 5-PW, AW, GW or just 5-PW, GW. Because the PW is 42°, AW 47°, and GW 52°. Because that could potentially be a gap there. The 5-iron to 6-iron length jump is 5/8” instead of 1/2” so you should be careful of that.    @WUTiger the problem most people have with 3-woods is they don’t play them far enough back into their stance. And they usually don’t have enough loft and the shaft is too long. So 3HL, 4 or 5-wood is probably better for most golfers. I do the “Frankenwood” approach. I have both the 3+ and 5 woods. I typically will either add two degrees to the 3+ on 6600 yards or longer courses, or take a degree off the 5-wood on shorter courses than 6300 or so, and use the 5-wood shaft for both. I don’t usually find a situation where I need both the 3 and 5 wood on a course. I don’t play from 7000 yards it’s no fun. Edit: I mostly agree with @WUTiger on the gapping, although a lot of the newer even fixed hosel fairway woods are made better than what we had when we were playing the old Exotics XRails.
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6* ⬛🟦🟦⬛⬛ ⬛🟦⬛🟦🟦 🟧⬛🟧🟧🟧 🟧🟧🟧🟧🟧 par is good after a double bogey yesterday.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...