Jump to content
  • entries
    50
  • comments
    767
  • views
    26,433

When Dinosaurs Die Off


iacas

4,872 views

 Share

01.jpg

02.jpg

This is the AFTER golf swing of a guy in my PGA classes. The player was hitting the ball a bit low (I wasn't able to record an initial video, but I didn't see a lot of axis tilt and someone told me he had reverse axis tilt at A4…).

The instruction he got? Go to the top by not rotating his hips, but by "loading" into his trail side, from the top "stay behind the ball" and throw the clubhead at the ball.

With the ball on a tee, this raised the ball flight. Absolutely. On the shots where he didn't hit several inches behind the ball.

The instructor mentioned Johnny Miller as a sort of role model for "keeping your weight behind the ball." Johnny Miller had one of the most powerful leg drives forward ever. His pressure and weight are both well forward.

Clue: if you have a pet theory, go on YouTube or load up your stored swings in Analyzr or V1 and see how many pros actually exhibit the thing you're thinking about. If it's none, as would be the case here (with irons, anyway), perhaps move on to something else instead of making it a core piece of your instruction.

Dinosaurs don't do that. Not every old instructor is a dinosaur, but dinosaurs eventually died off. I just wish it would happen much sooner in golf than it appears to be… I'll be dead and we'll still have dinosaurs out there roaming the lesson tee. Fewer than we have now, but they won't be extinct.

 Share

36 Comments


Recommended Comments



I find my lack of understanding in golf instruction.... disturbing.

This kind of information (from the previous instructor) makes it difficult to trust anything I hear or my ability to comprehend it... as in is his suggestion a feel or do I actually keep my weight back?

Link to comment

Amazing! One of my problems is when getting my weight into my left side I let my head go with it, sliding toward the target prior to impact. That's a real shot killer for me.

I would think the above advice would lead to skulls, tops, and the occasional quacker!

Link to comment

I won't be able to send a video for about 6 weeks or so, but now I'm wondering...I was taught to play almost every shot with the ball forward in my stance. I was told to look at Harmon, Nicklaus and others. I do "feel" as if my weight is "back" as I swing. I know my weight favors the left only slightly at set-up.  

I have seen my swing on video and it is not like the ones pictured. I believe I have more "drive" into the ball in the downswing, and I'm not so upright. But now I wonder: Is the instruction I received considered "wrong" as well? Thanks, -Marv

Link to comment

Not to threadjack (my favorite cheese) but is the difference between sweeping and picking the weight shift?  Nicklaus said he played every shot off his left instep and had a vertical swing.  This works well off mats and low grass, but when you hit off a good bit of grass especially with a fairway wood shouldn't you play the ball back and hit more level? I feel like hitting off of mats and crappy golf course semihardpan ruins the release.

Edited by TallSouthern
Link to comment
  • Administrator
1 hour ago, TallSouthern said:

Not to threadjack (my favorite cheese) but is the difference between sweeping and picking the weight shift?  Nicklaus said he played every shot off his left instep and had a vertical swing.  This works well off mats and low grass, but when you hit off a good bit of grass especially with a fairway wood shouldn't you play the ball back and hit more level? I feel like hitting off of mats and crappy golf course semihardpan ruins the release.

The longer the club, the more forward it's usually played in the stance.

You seem to have a good number of questions… Post some of them in this forum: https://thesandtrap.com/forums/forum/12-instruction-and-playing-tips/.

Link to comment

There may not be that big of change in golf instruction from the dinosaurs' perspective. The real dinosours did die off completely. Today's golf dinosours are being replaced with younger dinosours' teachings.

Link to comment
  • Administrator
17 minutes ago, Patch said:

There may not be that big of change in golf instruction from the dinosaurs' perspective. The real dinosours did die off completely. Today's golf dinosours are being replaced with younger dinosours' teachings.

I disagree.

There's a limit to how much we can know. To how finite information is while still being "helpful." We have the science to measure just about everything we could want to measure right now. We've reached a saturation point, basically.

The older dinosaurs didn't know a lot of what they were talking about. They thought weight transferred back in the backswing, or that the path primarily influenced the start direction, or other types of things we now know to be false to a rather detailed level.

Link to comment
  • Moderator
33 minutes ago, Patch said:

There may not be that big of change in golf instruction from the dinosaurs' perspective. The real dinosours did die off completely. Today's golf dinosours are being replaced with younger dinosours' teachings.

I agree with @iacas. If you follow anything going on in the golf instruction world, you'd understand where this is coming from. The old instructors didn't have technology that we have today. They didn't know the answers so they guessed. They went by what they saw, felt, or what others' described they were doing. They used what tools they had available to them at the time. I don't blame them for that.

The problem is with instructors who refuse to accept new information. Even though we know how ballflight works, they still teach it the old (wrong) way. Those are the dinosaurs. As the world changes around them, they refuse to change with it. I absolutely blame them for that.

Link to comment
  • Administrator
2 minutes ago, billchao said:

The problem is with instructors who refuse to accept new information. Even though we know how ballflight works, they still teach it the old (wrong) way. Those are the dinosaurs. As the world changes around them, they refuse to change with it. I absolutely blame them for that.

Right.

I know plenty of older instructors who continue to adapt and grow.

Those guys are not the dinosaurs.

Link to comment
On 12/25/2017 at 9:34 PM, iacas said:

Marv, huh?

The above is not what you want, these images.

LOL! I returned to this string and saw this. I don't think I was thinking I should emulate your pictures...But not sure. I was just out of hospital and full of good cheer the doc gave me! Best, -Marv

Link to comment

Instructors should use launch monitors, pressure plates, cameras, and all the tech we have to learn more themselves.  Too many coaches use old-worn out feelings and phrases that may/may not work for their students.  Using tech that can measure what the student is doing builds validity and trust between the coach and their students.  I guess many of these dinosaurs don't want to invest in the tech or think they won't know how to use it, but it is to their benefit as a business and it better serves their students with quantifiable data that can be trusted.

Link to comment
  • Moderator
1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

I guess many of these dinosaurs don't want to invest in the tech or think they won't know how to use it, but it is to their benefit as a business and it better serves their students with quantifiable data that can be trusted.

I think it's even more simple than not wanting to invest in tech. They don't understand it, they fear it and they don't want to admit they were wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
46 minutes ago, mvmac said:

I think it's even more simple than not wanting to invest in tech. They don't understand it, they fear it and they don't want to admit they were wrong.

Some of them, yeah I'd agree.  I do think some of them, like Joe Pro, are looking at the cost of such things.  For Joe Pro, dropping tens of thousands of dollars just might not (in their head) be a profitable investment.  Golf is pretty expensive for most anyway, so putting the price of the tech into your lessons' price tag for the student might not bring in more students or return.  I think it is a complicated issue and not simple at all.  I'm sure there are some pros that fit into your format, but for many it may be much more than that.

Link to comment
  • Moderator
3 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Some of them, yeah I'd agree.  I do think some of them, like Joe Pro, are looking at the cost of such things.  For Joe Pro, dropping tens of thousands of dollars just might not (in their head) be a profitable investment.  Golf is pretty expensive for most anyway, so putting the price of the tech into your lessons' price tag for the student might not bring in more students or return.  I think it is a complicated issue and not simple at all.  I'm sure there are some pros that fit into your format, but for many it may be much more than that.

You don't need to own a Trackman to learn from those who do. That's not why those instructors are dinosaurs.

It's about being closed to new ideas and refusing to accept that what they teach is wrong.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, billchao said:

You don't need to own a Trackman to learn from those who do. That's not why those instructors are dinosaurs.

It's about being closed to new ideas and refusing to accept that what they teach is wrong.

I know, but if the topic is about good, sound teaching then the only way to do so is to measure.  I don't think you're getting a "real" lesson if tech isn't used.  Just watching 2D video and looking at positions isn't ideal for golf.  The golf swing is a motion.  The old guys who just look at video aren't getting the whole picture.  I think a real lesson is one where it utilizes all the technologies we have available.  Only then can you accurately measure what's going on in the motion and have reliable data to show your student.

Link to comment
  • Moderator
6 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Some of them, yeah I'd agree.  I do think some of them, like Joe Pro, are looking at the cost of such things.  For Joe Pro, dropping tens of thousands of dollars just might not (in their head) be a profitable investment.  Golf is pretty expensive for most anyway, so putting the price of the tech into your lessons' price tag for the student might not bring in more students or return. 

I guess I was referring more to learning from tech and evolving out of dinosaur thinking. You don't need to spend thousands of dollars to convey the correct ball flight laws, correct pressure shifts, correct macro body movements, etc. You can still utilize a great deal of the knowledge without having the tools.

Link to comment
  • Moderator

There are some pretty respected instructors who are putting their knowledge online for 1/100th the cost of a radar and there is tons of info. If I were aspiring to be a pro and limited funds, that would be one of my first options.

Link to comment

Well I’ve also seen the mix of actually having TrackMan yet still not teach the modern (correct) mechanics. All that data available, a very nice TrackMan hitting station indoor and outdoor yet the guy still preaches short game being the most important component of golf and there is no ‘hip slide’ toward the target...only rotation.

Link to comment
  • Moderator
1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

I know, but if the topic is about good, sound teaching then the only way to do so is to measure.  I don't think you're getting a "real" lesson if tech isn't used.  Just watching 2D video and looking at positions isn't ideal for golf.  The golf swing is a motion.  The old guys who just look at video aren't getting the whole picture.  I think a real lesson is one where it utilizes all the technologies we have available.  Only then can you accurately measure what's going on in the motion and have reliable data to show your student.

I disagree, and I know a number of good instructors who would, too. You don't need to measure exactly how much pressure a student is exerting during x part of their swing if you've seen enough measured swings to know what a person should look like when they're doing it correctly.

I've taken lessons from @iacas. I've never been on Swing Catalyst or Gears. Hell I don't even think we've even been on Flightscope during lessons.

Good instructors use videos. Dinosaurs don't. But it's absurd to say a lesson isn't good unless the instructor uses high tech equipment. Even the good instructors who own those tools aren't using them every lesson.

1 hour ago, mvmac said:

I guess I was referring more to learning from tech and evolving out of dinosaur thinking. You don't need to spend thousands of dollars to convey the correct ball flight laws, correct pressure shifts, correct macro body movements, etc. You can still utilize a great deal of the knowledge without having the tools.

I agree and that's what I think this thread is about, too.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, mvmac said:

You don't need to spend thousands of dollars to convey the correct ball flight laws, correct pressure shifts, correct macro body movements, etc. You can still utilize a great deal of the knowledge without having the tools.

To convey it, sure.  But to measure it- no.  Feel and real are different most of the time.  You're guessing in my opinion.  Maybe you have video evidence for some of it, but it's hard to quantify that to a student without evidence.  Maybe your Joe Hacker, but to the discerning golfer, no.  If I'm paying you for lessons, I want every penny worth of it and I want measurable proof of what I'm working on and why.

14 minutes ago, billchao said:

how much pressure a student is exerting during x part of their swing

That's one part of the swing and sure you might can take an educated guess to produce a good looking motion.  Good luck giving a student accurate face to path, angle of attack, low point, strike location, etc. without a bit of tech.  Most pros these days are too concerned with positions and pretty pictures.  STRIKE IS KING.  Pretty pictures can help with that, but it's not one size fits all.

14 minutes ago, billchao said:

Good instructors use videos. Dinosaurs don't. But it's absurd to say a lesson isn't good unless the instructor uses high tech equipment. Even the good instructors who own those tools aren't using them every lesson.

I disagree.  In today's world and tech, you should have it.  If nothing else it's a receipt for your student- that is, your rationale for why the student should use their hard earned money on your expertise.  That's why good doctors, mechanics, teachers, etc use cutting edge technology and give appropriate mapping out of their plan/rationale/evidence.  You're almost advocating for the dinosaurs imo.

Edited by ncates00
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

Well I’ve also seen the mix of actually having TrackMan yet still not teach the modern (correct) mechanics.

That can happen, but I haven't seen that with instructors.  I've seen that with ME- owning tech myself with gc2, but I'm learning.  I may know a lot and learning more, but knowing how to apply that is where I see a coach who can also verify what I'm working on.  I don't have time to play around.

Link to comment
  • Moderator
43 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

To convey it, sure.  But to measure it- no.  Feel and real are different most of the time.  You're guessing in my opinion.  Maybe you have video evidence for some of it, but it's hard to quantify that to a student without evidence.  Maybe your Joe Hacker, but to the discerning golfer, no.  If I'm paying you for lessons, I want every penny worth of it and I want measurable proof of what I'm working on and why.

I gotcha, I'm all for verifying.

I'm just saying that not having thousands of dollars to spend on tech isn't an excuse for saying the start line of the ball is mostly determined by the direction of the path or that you have to roll your wrists to hit a draw or that you should have your butt out and chin up for good posture.

Link to comment

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Blog Entries

  • Posts

    • Yet another question about the technology for filming a swing. I read Erik's updated "Filming your Swing" blog post as part of researching my next phone purchase. My current phone, which is on its last legs, was able to record video up to 1080p at up to 120 fps (Pixel 3XL).  However, that camera isn't great at the moment (various reasons unrelated to its specifications) and I'm going to get a new device soon, too.  Its likely successor for me is only able to do 30fps at 1080p, so that won't work for filming a golf swing.  It can do 720p @ 480 fps though (device I'm likely to get is a Galaxy A42).  Will that work for this?  I realize the post says "at least 720p video," but I don't know if I should shoot for better than that (such as if it is expected to be outdated soon).  It also seems odd to me that a camera could do only 30fps at 1080p but 480 fps at 720p, but I know almost nothing about these things. I am also debating getting a separate camera for golf swings if this won't work;  my prior separate-camera is a Canon PowerShot ELPH 110.  I believe it tops out at 720p / 30 fps;  if there's a reasonably priced camera that works for my golf swing filming, I'd be happy to get that and not sweat the camera on the phone. Other than filming my golf swing, my phone is pretty much a communication device and podcast player, so I'm not going higher end except if doing so is the most effective way to get a good camera for my golf swing. (Apologies if this should have been a separate thread, but I figured it was on-topic here and I didn't think there was another forum than Member Swings where this would be an appropriate top-level post)
    • Day 127: Played 18 this morning. Tried to simplify the mechanics of my priority piece (which is two things) into a feel but didn’t work great, so just settled on on of them after a few holes. Played okay except for a dumb triple bogey on #12.
    • I got my first round in. I haven't used Game Golf in so long, I got out of the habit of tagging. Missed a few shots on the course, though it was pretty easy to edit in on my computer. Like @iacas, I also felt the editor was just okay. I didn't have an issue with the map size, but I found scrolling up and down a lot a bit tedious. I had to mess around with adding shots and penalties, though, so I had to spend more time editing off the map. The penalty functions weren't very intuitive. They seem to add an additional "dead shot" (does not appear to track the distance for your stats) for counting purposes as well as a penalty stroke. The lost ball one makes sense, as it gives you a marker with an X on it so you can mark off where you hit the ball that was lost, then your next shot is from where you played your last stroke to where you play your next one. But the drop ball function seems to work the exact same way, which doesn't make sense. If I hit into a penalty area I'm likely not taking S&D, so in order to make it work score-wise, I ended up just deleting the original tracked shot. I don't know if I'm doing that correctly. I didn't like tagging on my belt the way I used Game Golf. As Erik mentioned, the vibration is subtle and it doesn't beep. I often didn't know if it registered. Also the Game Golf unit was angled so you can tag the club hanging down at your side naturally. Tagging the Shot Scope requires bringing the club perpendicular to the ground. It's awkward and I almost hit a playing partner today while tagging a putt because he was walking past me and didn't expect me to bring the club up like that. Next time I'm going to try wearing the unit on my left like I do my Garmin and tagging by bringing the unit to the club. I might even stop using the Garmin if the GPS on the H4 is good enough. Didn't get a chance to compare today because I forgot my Garmin. I didn't know there was a pin marker function. I'm going to have to try that next time. So far I like the data it presents. It seems more detailed than Game Golf. I'll form a more complete opinion of it as I play more rounds.
    • I realize this got no traction initially. But for anyone interested, SwingLogic will be dropping this for pre-orders early in the week. No idea what the timeline is for delivery though. I plan to give it a shot. If it turns out to be comparable to the Mevo or R10, I'd imagine it'll do really well. 
    • Day 582: Worked a bit on another piece of having my upper center move toward the target in transition. I call it the Leaning Tower of Pisa feel. It is more for the irons. For driver, it doesn’t need to be as pronounced. Videos the practice.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. DocP
      DocP
      (61 years old)
    2. Isaac03
      Isaac03
      (38 years old)
    3. phillyk
      phillyk
      (32 years old)
×
×
  • 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...