Has Golf Instruction Gotten Too Technical?

[iacas]

Share your thoughts. I'll add mine later.

[Jeremie Boop]

So, I'm going with no on this, but there's a slight caveat to it. I believe it depends on the instructor/student how much of that technical knowledge needs to be shared. A good instructor will know who will benefit from that more specific information. Being able to get more in depth in the analysis in and of itself isn't a bad thing.

Then again, I've been known to be wrong before and I didn't sleep in an Holiday Inn Express last night.

[JetFan1983]

Can it get too technical? Yes, and that's bad. But golf instruction or golf tips in general tend to be too reductive than too technical, and I'm not sure why that isn't discussed more. 

[nevets88]

I think it's gotten to the point where someone with a lot of athletic and technical IQ who needs to understand why things happen, understanding of the golf swing and movement and all that has accommodated more and more of said golfers and that's good. But instructors can still use all the reams of knowledge acquired especially recently, to keep it just simple enough but not reductive to help those who don't need to know every single detail.

What are you trying to get accomplished in an hour though - it's just changing movement patterns, not teaching someone organic chemistry.

[Elmer]

I think you can tweak a habit in an hour. I don't know how much a person can absorb in an hour and how deep into technical you can get.

 that being said some of the best advise I have received has been the simplest. As someone who breaks down every movement of my swing and over thinks all of it, it is nice to get some tin cup advise on hitting a ball - "put change in left pocket, put hat on backwards, hit ball".

[saevel25]

I voted no, just because I don’t think most golf instructors get to technical and are just still teaching by old adages. 

[iacas]

I put the poll on Twitter, too, and currently (very few votes so far), "yes" is winning:

[Vinsk]

Well…universally, no. We can choose our instruction to be technical or not. Can it be? Sure. But I don’t partake in those types of lessons because they don’t really ring well with me. I read some of the discussions Erik has with over zealous posters and it’s pure entertainment. I’ll stick with getting feelings and just telling me where I’m wrong. 

[Zippo]

Don’t they call it “5 Simple Keys”?

[dennyjones]

I voted "no".   My lesson with Erik was thorough, succinct and personal.    I'm sure some teachers can overwhelm students with numbers and phrases but that's why it's important to find a good instructor.   

[Darkfrog]

In my limited experience, no. I think good golf teachers should be able to recognize the amount of technical information their student needs or wants.  Also the student should know when to let the teacher know that they want more or less technical information.

For me, I like to know the technical details because I like to know the why and how of things, but I prefer to have my golf instruction boiled down to something that I can register as a simple feel or thought.

[mohearn]

If anything, the golf instructors I have listened to, while they are giving others lessons, are far too non-technical.  It's my impression, could be wrong, that many are just phoning it in.  I know there are good teachers out there, have to be, right?  But shouldn't they be expert level on trackman, force plates, Gears or what have you?  But then with that expertise, they don't have to dump all the data on a students head, that's certainly not the way. Really curious Erik's take on this.

[billchao]

I voted no. I like learning swing changes with the mechanical movements in mind over just a feel because feels can change. Knowing what I’m trying to do allows me to monitor my progress when the feel I used during the lesson stops working or I’ve taken it too far

[Cheese]

From what I have read, watched etc over many years it does appear to be especially with technology gizmos.

With this question out there I wonder  are golfers actually better players with all of this technical lessons and so on?

Does the equipment make the golfer?  Hmmmm

Just wondering

[iacas]

12 minutes ago, Cheese said:

From what I have read, watched etc over many years it does appear to be especially with technology gizmos.

I have a GEARS system. It spits out hundreds of bits of info at every point in the golf swing.

Do I share even 1% of that with golfers? No.

I'll have more to say on this after another day or so. I'm enjoying reading the conversation for now.

[Darkfrog]

40 minutes ago, billchao said:

I voted no. I like learning swing changes with the mechanical movements in mind over just a feel because feels can change. Knowing what I’m trying to do allows me to monitor my progress when the feel I used during the lesson stops working or I’ve taken it too far

This is a good way of putting it. understanding the mechanical change is important, because it tells the player how to identify when the feel that gets them there initially isn’t working. I’m really bad at this, and when a feel stops working, my tendency is to exaggerate more and more of the feel.

[Big Lex]

I don't see how it can be too technical, when what we are actually trying to learn is, well, technique. 

As long as what is being taught or what technology is used to teach is valid, and not pseudo-science, I don't see how a teacher can be too technical.

If a teacher is ineffective because he or she is confusing the student with terminology or numbers, or if the teacher is focusing too much on numbers and not observing the student, that's bad "pedagogy," that's not being too technical.

But if it's the opposite, and you have the best pure teacher in the world (observant, great communicator, etc.), but they rely on outdated and disproven theories about the golf swing or ball flight, or avoid technical tools because they don't understand them or like them, then that's not going to help a student either. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Big Lex

[Denny Bang Bang]

I’m on the fence.  All the information available today is great.  But the instructor needs to understand it and use it effectively (I imagine some do, and some don’t).  It also depends on the student’s ability to understand it.