Scooping vs Divots - Pros & Cons?

[iacas]

2 hours ago, ShawnSum said:

I'm going out tomorrow morning and plan to do some experimenting with ball position. Seems like a better idea vs tweaking the swing at this point.

I disagree that's likely a better idea.

[PerfectStriking]

8 hours ago, ShawnSum said:

I'm going out tomorrow morning and plan to do some experimenting with ball position. Seems like a better idea vs tweaking the swing at this point.

Ball position is another whole issue right? Interestingly in Golf My Way Jack said one position, but hard to say right? I think one position obviously doesn't work with the modern driver but if all balls are hit off the ground / very low tee probably one position works, I hit it out of about centre + / - 1 ball so nearly centre for everything off the ground which is all clubs and all shots except the driver and the driver is different right! That driver head is just so big! Jack hit it out of more of a forward position for everything, but maybe that is because the equipment was generally harder to swing through and get the face closed, I don't even carry a 6 iron, hybrid and fairways from 6 up. No matter what any teaching pro says I believe you can get a much more consistent swing from getting a consistent feel and club swing across all your clubs and distances, for instance a 90 gram iron shaft equates to a 50 gram driver shaft feel and 110 to a 60, but try explaining that to a teaching pro who will say you just need to correct your swing fault, yeah right the club is making my swing fault and different swing reacting to the different club feel but that is all in my head right? Ball position could be a whole year of trial and error IMHO it will mess with your head but maybe that is just what we all have to go through, I've settled now and won't change so good luck!

Edited July 13, 2019 by PerfectStriking

[iacas]

1 hour ago, PerfectStriking said:

Ball position is another whole issue right? Interestingly in Golf My Way Jack said one position, but hard to say right? I think one position obviously doesn't work with the modern driver but if all balls are hit off the ground / very low tee probably one position works, I hit it out of about centre + / - 1 ball so nearly centre for everything off the ground which is all clubs and all shots except the driver and the driver is different right! That driver head is just so big! Jack hit it out of more of a forward position for everything, but maybe that is because the equipment was generally harder to swing through and get the face closed, I don't even carry a 6 iron, hybrid and fairways from 6 up. No matter what any teaching pro says I believe you can get a much more consistent swing from getting a consistent feel and club swing across all your clubs and distances, for instance a 90 gram iron shaft equates to a 50 gram driver shaft feel and 110 to a 60, but try explaining that to a teaching pro who will say you just need to correct your swing fault, yeah right the club is making my swing fault and different swing reacting to the different club feel but that is all in my head right? Ball position could be a whole year of trial and error IMHO it will mess with your head but maybe that is just what we all have to go through, I've settled now and won't change so good luck!

No, man.

To several of those things, no.

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, PerfectStriking said:

No matter what any teaching pro says I believe you can get a much more consistent swing from getting a consistent feel and club swing across all your clubs and distances, 

A swIng can be consistent and be bad. So can a feel. ‘ No matter what any teaching pro says’ isn’t a great attitude for learning. I get this in my field all too often, ‘ No matter what the doctor says, I need a Z-Pak.’ Not really logical thinking is it ?

[PerfectStriking]

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

A swIng can be consistent and be bad. So can a feel. ‘ No matter what any teaching pro says’ isn’t a great attitude for learning. I get this in my field all too often, ‘ No matter what the doctor says, I need a Z-Pak.’ Not really logical thinking is it ?

Well maybe some people are better just eating a little less or exercising rather than taking a pill right? But we digress 🙂 

[Vinsk]

2 hours ago, PerfectStriking said:

Well maybe some people are better just eating a little less or exercising rather than taking a pill right? But we digress 🙂 

I agree but I think you missed the point. I appreciate what you believe but to disregard what a professional instructor recommends isn’t always the best decision. There are great instructors who may give you excellent advice and to choose not to take it just because you ‘believe’ something else will only hinder your improvement. 

[PerfectStriking]

9 hours ago, Vinsk said:

I agree but I think you missed the point. I appreciate what you believe but to disregard what a professional instructor recommends isn’t always the best decision. There are great instructors who may give you excellent advice and to choose not to take it just because you ‘believe’ something else will only hinder your improvement. 

Hi Vinsk, I think the point is that golf teaching hasn't become a science it has become a religion or some kind of order and the top guys are like the renaissance heretics and the rest of us are living in the dark ages, even Jack seems to need to hide his real beliefs about modern teaching...

"Every other sport is played from the ground up ...This used to be true with golf, but today I see it being taught with the upper body dominating, partly because modern equipment is so much lighter." Jack Nicklaus

It wouldn't be the first time society ended up this way right?

Edited July 14, 2019 by PerfectStriking

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, PerfectStriking said:

Hi Vinsk, I think the point is that golf teaching hasn't become a science it has become a religion

I find this to be completely inaccurate. In fact I find it to be the complete opposite. Jack’s days were about feels and feels alone. For some reason, perhaps nostalgia mixed with a little stubbornness, people think declaring teachings that have scientifically been debunked by some of the great players and teachers is golf blasphemy. It isn’t. Science is based on data, statistics and research. Hardly any of those were included in Jack’s teachings. It doesn’t belittle him he just went with what he thought he was doing. 

Religion is a set of beliefs with no facts or science to back it. It’s faith and feelings. This is the opposite of science. @iacas is a golf instructor and a scientist. He’s interested in what great golfers actually did or do. Not what they think or say they did or do. Why people want to argue with that is beyond me. Facts don’t care about feelings. 

[PerfectStriking]

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

I find this to be completely inaccurate. In fact I find it to be the complete opposite. Jack’s days were about feels and feels alone...

As a doctor you can't possibly believe just because a doctor or medical scientist wasn't practicing or researching in the last 10 years they must have been a bad doctor or scientist? I thought only millennials thought that way. So people like Pasteur, Curie and Vesalius were obvious fakes that did nothing to help medical science and it was all just feelings they had not based in any science at all right? This site isn't just about talking about one guy, he runs the site for open discussion not to shut down discussion every time someone has a different thought and so no need to bring every discussion about modern teaching back to some personal attack on him.

[iacas]

Curie was still doing actual science. “Feels” aren’t science.

I’m not taking it as a personal attack at all. I never take things here that way unless it’s obvious it is. Including not taking it that way when it’s an attack on my ideas. Which I encourage.

[boogielicious]

7 hours ago, PerfectStriking said:

As a doctor you can't possibly believe just because a doctor or medical scientist wasn't practicing or researching in the last 10 years they must have been a bad doctor or scientist? I thought only millennials thought that way. So people like Pasteur, Curie and Vesalius were obvious fakes that did nothing to help medical science and it was all just feelings they had not based in any science at all right? This site isn't just about talking about one guy, he runs the site for open discussion not to shut down discussion every time someone has a different thought and so no need to bring every discussion about modern teaching back to some personal attack on him.

We are getting a bit off topic here, but I think golf instruction is moving the same way science always has. Each new generation is building on the valid ideas and knowledge of the previous generation. If Jack’s instructor had the tools we have today, they would have come to the conclusions we do today.

But the topic is divots. A good golf swing can take a small or large divot. I take a relatively small divot now because my path is shallow. I’m actually working on getting a bit steeper at impact. My hands are forward of the head at impact, which is Key 3, so I’m not scooping. 

I would recommend @ShawnSum post a video of his swing on grass so we can help out.

[Vinsk]

7 hours ago, PerfectStriking said:

As a doctor you can't possibly believe just because a doctor or medical scientist wasn't practicing or researching in the last 10 years they must have been a bad doctor or scientist?

OT So I’ll conclude: Of course I don’t think that nor did I say anything like that. What those scientist got right they got right. But just as the very nature of science theorems that have since been proven wrong are wrong be it from Curie, Einstein or Newton. For some reason people can’t believe that Nicklaus was ever wrong. He was. Period.

[ShawnSum]

On 7/12/2019 at 10:47 PM, iacas said:

I disagree that's likely a better idea.

It wasn't a good idea. It felt really awkward, lol. Didn't hit very many shots trying this out. While I didn't really make any significant progress with the whole "divot" thing I did find out that if I don't remember to release the club, well taking a divot is the least of my worries!! 

1 hour ago, boogielicious said:

We are getting a bit off topic here, but I think golf instruction is moving the same way science always has. Each new generation is building on the valid ideas and knowledge of the previous generation. If Jack’s instructor had the tools we have today, they would have come to the conclusions we do today.

But the topic is divots. A good golf swing can take a small or large divot. I take a relatively small divot now because my path is shallow. I’m actually working on getting a bit steeper at impact. My hands are forward of the head at impact, which is Key 3, so I’m not scooping. 

I would recommend @ShawnSum post a video of his swing on grass so we can help out.

I'm definitely going to post one as soon as I can hit the range with a friend who can record the proper angles for me!

[ShawnSum]

4 minutes ago, PerfectStriking said:

Hi Shawn, the mathematical complexity of swinging is way beyond science and angles and robotic control I'd really chill out on all this tech / maths talk if I were you. Good luck!

Chill out, play more golf and get my feel for the game again and get back down into the mid 70s, oh and have that rum and coke after each round...yep sounds good to me!!!!