Has Golf Instruction Gotten Too Technical?

[iacas]

My Twitter thread on this:

 

[Big Lex]

It would help to know more about the respondents before making any conclusions about the significance of the 50% number. I would think it's more of a problem if 50% of actual, active students think teaching is too technical, versus golfers in general just voicing their opinion based on things they see on TV or youtube.

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

It would help to know more about the respondents before making any conclusions about the significance of the 50% number. I would think it's more of a problem if 50% of actual, active students think teaching is too technical, versus golfers in general just voicing their opinion based on things they see on TV or youtube.

Of course, but the segment is "golfers on Twitter" and 50% is still a sizable number.

[billchao]

I think tweet #4 is relevant, here. How many of the people who voted are actually taking lessons from an instructor? Or are they watching AMG on YouTube thinking that’s how people teach?

Golf information is obviously technical and people have more ways than ever before to communicate the information to the public, but an informative video about a certain facet of the swing is not the same thing as a lesson.

[iacas]

26 minutes ago, billchao said:

I think tweet #4 is relevant, here. How many of the people who voted are actually taking lessons from an instructor? Or are they watching AMG on YouTube thinking that’s how people teach?

Right. I think that's a big part of it.

26 minutes ago, billchao said:

Golf information is obviously technical and people have more ways than ever before to communicate the information to the public, but an informative video about a certain facet of the swing is not the same thing as a lesson.

Instructors have to communicate somewhat "technically" when they're making an AMG-like video… because how else could you really do it?

[suhhhduddd]

this is solely from my experience.

I've worked with some pretty notable coaches, most of them didn't do it for me. Too "feel" oriented and not systematic and technical enough. always left feeling like i learnt nothing because a feel is dependent on the day. 

From my pov, it seems like european/scandinavian coaching is way more systematic and model based producing way technically sounder swings, whilst american coaching is more feel based producing more unique swings.

I might be completely off but thats what i see.

 

also im very against this shallowing, butt twist, gankasy swing style. it seems like theyre trying to complicate it more than it should be/use fancier terms ways to seem like theyre more knowledgable but idk. again my thoughts.

 

 

Edited December 31, 2022 by suhhhduddd
extra info

[Coach Whitty]

I was on the fence as it depends on the level of student and the instructor's understanding of what will better help said student.  More often than not (in my experience) golf enthusiasts who have read a lot, perhaps got their PhD in Golf Instruction from the University of YouTube, have a terrible tendency to overload the beginner/average weekend warrior.  This can do more damage as too many swing thoughts often lead to tension/frustration and can in turn lead to a breakdown in one's game.

I also believe that analyzing data is great, but a lot of stuff out there is a sales gimmick just like being told a magic move or hidden secret will suddenly get you gaming like a young Jack Nicklaus.  If you are having to send your data to NASA to check the equations of a golf swing, you are working way too hard and the average golfer isn't going to be able to use that information.

[Coach Whitty]

After posting last night and reading quite a few posts on different topics since then, I have changed my opinion.  I do believe golf instruction has become far too complicated for the average golfer, who should not get hung up on overly complicated jargon and scientific data as most of it will be of little value to the weekend warrior.  

It appears that many enthusiasts desire to be viewed as an authority or "the" authority on principles they believe themselves to be the sole discoverer of and get very huffy/standoff-ish when others are addressing the same said principle from a slightly different viewpoint.  They then have a tendency to pad and patent their thoughts with scientific jargon in the hopes of selling the idea of "listen to me only because I have all this complicated information that will turn you into a professional ...or... here is the real fix to your game that the pros don't want you to know".  

As an old duffer who was raised in the Sam Snead/Patty Berg classical methods of golf, I have been instantly attacked on other forums like Golfwrx after posting a simple key I was taught and like to use in my game.  Messages of "that way of thinking has been proven 'wrong' or 'incorrect' are constantly thrown around.  Then comes the torrent of explanation why the things that have been proven to work...don't work.

I do believe many (not the majority) need that information to justify their questionable monetary investment and time management that border on obsession.

[billchao]

@Coach Whitty do you actually take golf lessons?

[saevel25]

8 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

I do believe golf instruction has become far too complicated for the average golfer, who should not get hung up on overly complicated jargon and scientific data as most of it will be of little value to the weekend warrior.  

That is a bad generalization. 

First, every driving range I go to, or golf course that I've been next to a few instructors. It isn't the technical part that is the issue. It's dated, just BAD, instruction. None of them were using up to date jargon or scientific data. 

Second, some people do better with the technical data than others. Some it might just go in one ear and out the other. Some it might be something they can remember but have no actual understanding of it. Like, you know that gravity exists, but do not know exactly why gravity works. You have some who can both remember and understand. It varies, a good instructor will need to figure out who needs what. Sometimes, knowing and understanding people may not benefit from knowing and understanding. Sometimes, people might not be able to know or remember, but it may give them confidence their golf instructor knows and understands it.

13 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

It appears that many enthusiasts desire to be viewed as an authority or "the" authority on principles they believe themselves to be the sole discoverer of and get very huffy/standoff-ish when others are addressing the same said principle from a slightly different viewpoint. 

Nah, I doubt this is valid generalization. There might be a few, but it is a small fraction of golf instructors. 

14 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

They then have a tendency to pad and patent their thoughts with scientific jargon in the hopes of selling the idea of "listen to me only because I have all this complicated information that will turn you into a professional ...or... here is the real fix to your game that the pros don't want you to know".  

If you are watching Youtube advertisements maybe? I doubt your typical golf course instructor is like this. I think again, the generalization is off. Are we really talking about a non-negligible set of golf instructors here? Even if I watch Youtube golf instruction, its usually just generalized tips. Maybe it is a golf swing specific tip if they are actually helping someone out. Still, I hardly see what you are talking about here. 

[iacas]

A reply in just GIFs…

23 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

I do believe golf instruction has become far too complicated for the average golfer, who should not get hung up on overly complicated jargon and scientific data as most of it will be of little value to the weekend warrior.

23 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

They then have a tendency to pad and patent their thoughts with scientific jargon in the hopes of selling the idea of "listen to me only because I have all this complicated information that will turn you into a professional ...or... here is the real fix to your game that the pros don't want you to know".

23 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

As an old duffer who was raised in the Sam Snead/Patty Berg classical methods of golf, I have been instantly attacked on other forums like Golfwrx after posting a simple key I was taught and like to use in my game.

23 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

Messages of "that way of thinking has been proven 'wrong' or 'incorrect' are constantly thrown around.  Then comes the torrent of explanation why the things that have been proven to work...don't work.

21 minutes ago, Coach Whitty said:

I do believe many (not the majority) need that information to justify their questionable monetary investment and time management that border on obsession.

3 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

First, every driving range I go to, or golf course that I've been next to a few instructors. It isn't the technical part that is the issue. It's dated, just BAD, instruction. None of them were using up to date jargon or scientific data.

3 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

If you are watching Youtube advertisements maybe? I doubt your typical golf course instructor is like this. I think again, the generalization is off. Are we really talking about a non-negligible set of golf instructors here? Even if I watch Youtube golf instruction, its usually just generalized tips. Maybe it is a golf swing specific tip if they are actually helping someone out. Still, I hardly see what you are talking about here. 

12 minutes ago, billchao said:

@Coach Whitty do you actually take golf lessons?

[klineka]

@iacas you forgot one

 

[iacas]

I'm interested in what @Coach Whitty can say to elaborate.

What Sam Snead thing? Is he taking lessons, or just looking at YouTube videos? Does he understand "#FeelAintReal"?

[billchao]

29 minutes ago, iacas said:

What Sam Snead thing?

You don’t know the Sam Snead method? It’s simple. All you need to do is be born with generational talent in golf 😉

[Vinsk]

A solid hundee @Coach Whitty is on team Nicklaus for GOAT. 😃

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

A solid hundee @Coach Whitty is on team Nicklaus for GOAT. 😃

Guys, c'mon… you're just giving weight to his feelings of being attacked for sharing. 😛 

All I will say to that, @Coach Whitty, is that:

• Feel ain't real.
• People often seem to perceive "correction" as "attacks".

[Vinsk]

6 hours ago, Coach Whitty said:

I have been instantly attacked on other forums like Golfwrx after posting a simple key I was taught and like to use in my game.

What is this key? Please remember it does the conversation very well to explain how it has helped your game and why you believe this ‘key’ has helped. You won’t be ‘attacked’ here for that. Science isn’t an enemy. If what you state doesn’t hold up to the science be it physics, anatomy, kinesiology, etc…that doesn’t mean you’re being attacked. We all enjoy learning here more than anything. 

[Ty_Webb]

This was an interesting read and one I hadn't seen before. There are two coaches near me, who happen to share a first name. One of them is my coach. He's pretty technical (probably leaning towards very technical). He has his own proprietary force plates and his own GEARS analysis software. The other is I think basically a polar opposite. I've never been to him for a lesson, but I did know a guy who was going to him. The guy used to be a hockey player and was VERY good for the most part. He'd only been playing for 3 years and could shoot 65 or 85 depending on which game came out on a particular day and I've never seen anyone hit it close as often as he did. He'd have 2-3 kick in birdies a round. And he hit it FAAAAAR, so pretty unusual to find a par 5 he couldn't reach with an iron. Anyway - I asked him one day what he's working on. He was going to his coach at least once a week and his answer was "rhythm". Like - what? 

I said I was on the fence for the original question. I don't think it's got too technical for me, but I am technically minded and I like to know and understand how and why things work. It seems that there is no way I could get that from the second coach I mentioned above, but my coach gives me all that and probably more than I really need. But at the same time, he and I can go to the lesson tee and he'll watch me swing for a bit and then he'll point out something that I need to improve, explain why and what I need to do and then help me develop the feels to actually do it. So he blends very well not only the technical stuff that is good for my curiosity, but also the actual thoughts and feels that I need to improve.

I think he gets it spot on between the technical and the not so technical. But I also don't doubt that my friend who went to the other coach would be floundering with mine if he approached things with him the same way he does with me (I have no clue if he would approach things like that). Bottom line is I think that some coaches can be too technical for some students and some coaches can be insufficiently technical for some students. I'm sure there are some coaches who are able to work with both types of students effectively. I think those coaches have to necessarily be pretty technical though.