or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Tiger on the Range with ProTracer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tiger on the Range with ProTracer

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 

I saw this video on YouTube of Tiger on the driving range with ProTracer. Normally, we see ProTracer on tee shots and occassionaly on approaches while on the course but I thought it was nice to see it repeatedly while on the range. He's working on hitting low stingers with his 3 (or 2) iron, 3 wood, and driver. 

 

 

post #2 of 22

Really cool! The ProTracer clearly shows you the 9 shot routine he has.

post #3 of 22

Faxon: "I think he can hit the ball up in the air if he has to, don't you?"

Brandel: (silence)

post #4 of 22
I remember watching this live, and Brandel kept mentioning that every ball had some curve to it. I just assumed Tiger was trying to do that. They weren't big banana balls for the most part, just playable draws and fades.
post #5 of 22

Funny, how many times I have heard "Pro's don't just stand and reload and pound balls..."  "Pro's go through their routine on every shot..." "Pro's always have some sort of alignment aid out...".   Obviously they don't.  The best pro of them all is standing there reloading ball after ball doing none of the "Pro's only...".

 

Now, he's 1 or 2 best all time, so yes he can do that and be fine.  But that's not the point.

post #6 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gridiron View Post
 

Funny, how many times I have heard "Pro's don't just stand and reload and pound balls..."  "Pro's go through their routine on every shot..." "Pro's always have some sort of alignment aid out...".   Obviously they don't.  The best pro of them all is standing there reloading ball after ball doing none of the "Pro's only...".

 

Now, he's 1 or 2 best all time, so yes he can do that and be fine.  But that's not the point.

The difference is that he is simply warming up immediately before a round.  Most of the talk you are referring to is when people are practicing.

 

Warming up and practicing are two totally different animals.

post #7 of 22

The shot at 3:00 is really cool.

They are starting to use the tracer more often on tee shots and regular shots this season (at least I notice it more than in years past), which I think is a good development.

post #8 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 

Faxon: "I think he can hit the ball up in the air if he has to, don't you?"

Brandel: (silence)

 

LOL.

 

 

@RPMPIRE Thanks for the video link. Really fun to watch. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gridiron View Post
 

Funny, how many times I have heard "Pro's don't just stand and reload and pound balls..."  "Pro's go through their routine on every shot..." "Pro's always have some sort of alignment aid out...".   Obviously they don't.  The best pro of them all is standing there reloading ball after ball doing none of the "Pro's only...".

 

Now, he's 1 or 2 best all time, so yes he can do that and be fine.  But that's not the point.

The difference is that he is simply warming up immediately before a round.  Most of the talk you are referring to is when people are practicing.

 

Warming up and practicing are two totally different animals.

 

Yea, but I gotta admit... a lot of them do hit balls just like Tiger does here in this video, even if it's a Tuesday. I'm not saying we ams should do it too (we aren't savants and golf isn't our job)... just that I have noticed what Gridiron is saying. 

 

Still, you're right. They're at the driving range of the course where they're about to play a PGA event. They're not at their home course range... where many of these pros are slowing down and hitting quarter shots to make improvements during an off-week. 

post #9 of 22

Did it ever occur to Brandel that he might, you know, be hitting those shots with curve on purpose

 

Plus, Tiger isn't hitting the ball ten feet off the ground, for Christ's sake. 

post #10 of 22

When Brandel starts talking about anything to do with a golf swing - I throw up a little in my mouth. He needs to stick to the politics and drama, and leave the instruction for people who know what they're talking about.

post #11 of 22

Brandel Chamblee and his 2 professional wins sure seems like the right guy to critique the swing of one of the 2 greatest golfers of all time.

 

A little off topic but I never understood how the The Golf Channel couldn't get analysts that had accomplished a little bit more in the game of golf and had a little more respected voice. Chamblee, Nobilo, Isenhour, Oberholser, Browne... I mean its a pretty sad group of analysts. John Cook and Brad Faxon are probably the most accomplished and we all know Cookie and Notah both have jobs cause of their connection to Tiger. They've got Lanny Wadkins stuck in the booth at Champions Tour events, get this guy in a more prominent role. I guess its funny to me that the only network that covers golf exclusively has such a poor group of analysts to go to. 

post #12 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad View Post
 

Brandel Chamblee and his 2 professional wins sure seems like the right guy to critique the swing of one of the 2 greatest golfers of all time.

 

A little off topic but I never understood how the The Golf Channel couldn't get analysts that had accomplished a little bit more in the game of golf and had a little more respected voice. Chamblee, Nobilo, Isenhour, Oberholser, Browne... I mean its a pretty sad group of analysts. John Cook and Brad Faxon are probably the most accomplished and we all know Cookie and Notah both have jobs cause of their connection to Tiger. They've got Lanny Wadkins stuck in the booth at Champions Tour events, get this guy in a more prominent role. I guess its funny to me that the only network that covers golf exclusively has such a poor group of analysts to go to. 

Chamblee having won twice on Tour is actually pretty impressive. Besides that, I don't think its necessary to have Tour winners in the booth because many of them don't have a clue what they're talking about anyways. Being a good player doesn't mean you know a lot about the golf swing, or the like. 

post #13 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad View Post
 

Brandel Chamblee and his 2 professional wins sure seems like the right guy to critique the swing of one of the 2 greatest golfers of all time.

 

A little off topic but I never understood how the The Golf Channel couldn't get analysts that had accomplished a little bit more in the game of golf and had a little more respected voice. Chamblee, Nobilo, Isenhour, Oberholser, Browne... I mean its a pretty sad group of analysts. John Cook and Brad Faxon are probably the most accomplished and we all know Cookie and Notah both have jobs cause of their connection to Tiger. They've got Lanny Wadkins stuck in the booth at Champions Tour events, get this guy in a more prominent role. I guess its funny to me that the only network that covers golf exclusively has such a poor group of analysts to go to.

You don't have to be a good golfer to be a good analyst.  That logic would also mean that you'd have to be a good golfer to be a good golf coach.  I don't think Haney, Harmon(s), or Foley were good golfers.  Do any of them have any professional wins?

 

Now, is Brandel a good swing analyst?  Probably not ... but he is very good at his job, and I do think that some of those other guys are as well.  Especially Nobilo.  :)

post #14 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad View Post
 

Brandel Chamblee and his 2 professional wins sure seems like the right guy to critique the swing of one of the 2 greatest golfers of all time.

 

A little off topic but I never understood how the The Golf Channel couldn't get analysts that had accomplished a little bit more in the game of golf and had a little more respected voice. Chamblee, Nobilo, Isenhour, Oberholser, Browne... I mean its a pretty sad group of analysts. John Cook and Brad Faxon are probably the most accomplished and we all know Cookie and Notah both have jobs cause of their connection to Tiger. They've got Lanny Wadkins stuck in the booth at Champions Tour events, get this guy in a more prominent role. I guess its funny to me that the only network that covers golf exclusively has such a poor group of analysts to go to. 


I'll take Nobilo's instruction over Chamblee's any day

post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zwick View Post
 

The shot at 3:00 is really cool.

 

I noticed that too.  Did you see how his setup totally changed!  I was watching and seeing him subtly alter his setup or swing for the draws vs fades, then he walks up to that one and I'm thinking, "What the heck is that for?"  I though maybe he was going to try to hit a harder fade.  Nope, totally wrong.  Super low baby draw.

post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad View Post
 

Brandel Chamblee and his 2 professional wins sure seems like the right guy to critique the swing of one of the 2 greatest golfers of all time.

 

A little off topic but I never understood how the The Golf Channel couldn't get analysts that had accomplished a little bit more in the game of golf and had a little more respected voice. Chamblee, Nobilo, Isenhour, Oberholser, Browne... I mean its a pretty sad group of analysts. John Cook and Brad Faxon are probably the most accomplished and we all know Cookie and Notah both have jobs cause of their connection to Tiger. They've got Lanny Wadkins stuck in the booth at Champions Tour events, get this guy in a more prominent role. I guess its funny to me that the only network that covers golf exclusively has such a poor group of analysts to go to.

You don't have to be a good golfer to be a good analyst.  That logic would also mean that you'd have to be a good golfer to be a good golf coach.  I don't think Haney, Harmon(s), or Foley were good golfers.  Do any of them have any professional wins?

 

Now, is Brandel a good swing analyst?  Probably not ... but he is very good at his job, and I do think that some of those other guys are as well.  Especially Nobilo.  :)

 

Butch Harmon was on tour from 1970 to 1972 or something like that. He had one win: the 1971 BC Open. 

 

I agree though with what you said. You don't need to have been a great player to be an intelligent analyst or great instructor. 

post #17 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad View Post

Brandel Chamblee and his 2 professional wins sure seems like the right guy to critique the swing of one of the 2 greatest golfers of all time.

A little off topic but I never understood how the The Golf Channel couldn't get analysts that had accomplished a little bit more in the game of golf and had a little more respected voice. Chamblee, Nobilo, Isenhour, Oberholser, Browne... I mean its a pretty sad group of analysts. John Cook and Brad Faxon are probably the most accomplished and we all know Cookie and Notah both have jobs cause of their connection to Tiger. They've got Lanny Wadkins stuck in the booth at Champions Tour events, get this guy in a more prominent role. I guess its funny to me that the only network that covers golf exclusively has such a poor group of analysts to go to. 

Because the "good" guy are still out there and earning a paycheck from actually playing golf.
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbishop15 View Post
 

Chamblee having won twice on Tour is actually pretty impressive. Besides that, I don't think its necessary to have Tour winners in the booth because many of them don't have a clue what they're talking about anyways. Being a good player doesn't mean you know a lot about the golf swing, or the like. 

 

I didn't say that you had to be and I wasn't intending to slight any of those guys. I enjoy Nobilo quite a bit along with Cook and a few others but in general the GC has a weaker group of analysts and "color" guys compared to other networks. I'd much rather listen to Azinger, Strange or Andy North over most of the guys on the GC. I don't think analysts have to be the most knowledgable of what they are talking about all the time. Leave all that to the former teachers or guys who currently teach rather than former players. Anyone can analyze a swing, that doesn't mean the viewing audience is going understand it or believe it.

I'd rather listen to guys who have accomplished a lot in the game who have an interesting personality infused with their experiences. The GC definitely lacks pizzazz with their color crews. Chamblee creates that pizzazz but most of the time I think he does it to self indulge in his own percieved image. Its like the production crews tell him "Okay you have to go out and be the devils advocate and be controversial all the time."

Maybe just picking on the accomplishments on the GC crew isn't the best way to describe what I was trying to say. Frankly I just don't find most of them particularly interesting or care what most of them have to say. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 

You don't have to be a good golfer to be a good analyst.  That logic would also mean that you'd have to be a good golfer to be a good golf coach.  I don't think Haney, Harmon(s), or Foley were good golfers.  Do any of them have any professional wins?

 

Now, is Brandel a good swing analyst?  Probably not ... but he is very good at his job, and I do think that some of those other guys are as well.  Especially Nobilo.  :)

I believe that some of the best coaches in any sport were probably not very good at playing their respective sport. The cerebral part of any sport is much harder to master than the the physical side of the sport and its rare you find a player with both. The cerebral players always make the best coaches but are usually not the best at playing the sport. 

 

I also think being a golf coach or a swing coach is much different than being a coach in any other sport. Golf coaches teach mechanics, biomechanics and all that good stuff. A basketball coach or a baseball coach generally doesn't teach the finest nuances on the sport the way a golf coach would but rather a style of the game and the strategy behind it. Yeah sure basketball coaches will fine tune your shot or how to pass proerly but they can't tell you how to run or jump or any basic athletic ability. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tour Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Tiger on the Range with ProTracer