Jab at Modern Teaching

[saevel25]

http://www.golf.com/golf/tours_news/article/0,28136,2079371,00.html

Just curious what the opinions are on this article. I find it interesting that they crash the modern teaching method of position teaching. But to me that just speaks the genius of the players who come around. Bobby Jones, Sam Sneed, Hogan, Jack, Watson, Tiger... I am not saying Rory will be them, but i am saying that the common thread between them all is that they developed there swing with out the help of what we might call modern teaching of golf. As i might even say, Tiger lost his swing after going to a modern teacher of golf. It might be good for alot of players, and us as amateurs, but these players were there best when they had there natural swing they learned themselves. Though Tiger went to Butch Harmon, Butch only tweaked his swing a bit and tried to get him to slow down and hit more fairways, really it wasn't until Hank and now Folley that Tiger's swing really changed.

Is it these no-name teachers of golf that know whats right, or is it some ingrained ability to know whats works in the golf swing. I know S&T; have alot of it right after looking at the best swings, and Rory has alot of it right. I am just wondering what makes them able to pick it up as it was second nature, that defies what others have to do, get a swing nearly on there own and have it work at the highest level.

[Harmonious]

Well, I'll be the first to comment that I agree with a lot that Chamblee has to say.  The fundamentals of grip, posture, stance, rhythm, etc. ARE important.   I don't ignore good instruction, but I approach it from a "feel" standpoint, rather than a "technical" standpoint. Whenever I have tried to hit certain "positions" I fail completely.  I do my best when I get out of my own way, and let my natural ability (for better or worse) take over.

I like Chamblee's phrase "technique-addicted golfers". No doubt he will catch some flak here for saying that.

[nevets88]

I kind of agree with BC that "modern" teaching can get pretty technical, but on at a lower/simpler level, for me, it works and outlined what's essential in a golf swing.

Did Fred Couples really say if you need a glove, you're swinging too hard?

[senorchipotle]

making a proper golf swing is not that hard. if you are able to swing a hammer and hit a nail, swing an axe and split a log, then you are capable of making a rhythmical, on plane swing. our bodies are programmed to sense momentum and use it to our advantage. i think the golf swing is definitely being overthought and overtaught. i took lessons last spring and went from a 6 to not being able to break 90 within a matter of days. i tried to go back to my old swing and that only made things worse. i was ready to quit until a fellow sand trapper who shall remain anonymous straightened me out with a few e-mails and critiques of my swing.

moral of story, there are many ways to swing, but only one proper way to make contact with the ball. once you feel it, you know what that feeling is, and with practice you can repeat it. if more teachers helped people get that feel with proper alignment, grip, and stance, there would be more good golfers.

sadly, i don't think many pro's are looking to produce good golfers, only good clients.

[iacas]

I think Brandel (hiya buddy!) is one of the most qualified people to talk about instruction at Golf Channel. But in the world of golf, he's one of the least qualified. I've talked to PGA Tour instructors. How often is Brandel on the range to see what people are doing? Let's just say that the next time he's on the range it will almost be the first time in 2011. He's talking out of his posterior.

I think there are some teachers out there who think about positions too much (and really, almost doing it at all is too much). The point of the golf swing is not to hit positions - it's to make a motion that connects positions that are geometrically compatible. Nobody can hit a "good" golf shot with the clubhead a foot outside the hands at what I'd call "P6." Simply can't be done.

A good instructor will figure out the feel the student needs to correct that position, not just say "at P6 your clubhead is here and should be here. Make it be here instead."

If Ben Hogan had a high-speed video camera available to him, he'd have used it. Rory's swing isn't perfect. He's a little inside at P6 and will tend to hit the occasional pro-level quacker... like #10 at Augusta this year. He's had surgeries already. It's a really good swing, though.

Yes, some students and too many instructors can get too fascinated with "positions." That's why I wrote this thread .

I'm not going to get into the definition of "fundamentals." I now prefer the terms "commonalities" and "variables." Everyone needs a "grip," but the grips used by the game's best (and worst) players are variables, not commonalities. The commonalities of the game's best are: hit the ground after the ball and in the same spot, hit the ball far, control the curve on the ball.

[The Tin Man]

I find it interesting that no mention is ever made of golf being a dance.

(Golfers who started out very young learned their swings the same way they learned "Itsy Bitsy Spider" - not a chopped up series of analytical movement that's supposed to flow.)

I wonder how a Hula dancer would go about it? The legs, arms. hips, and hands tell the story of the ball.

Imagine Homer Kelley teaching Kindergarden.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by The Tin Man

Imagine Homer Kelley teaching Kindergarden.

Actually, I think Homer would do a fabulous job teaching kindergar t en.

[The Tin Man]

YOUR RIGHT!

....if I had Homer for a Kindergarden Teacher he would have to demonstrate and not explain.

[kurisu]

I'm currently following what you'd call "modern" instruction and I can't understand or relate to what Brandel is talking about. Again "positions" is certainly not what I am being taught.

For instance, my biggest hurdle right now (in my own view) is to stop posting up my front leg so fast on the downswing. I've tried a few "images" on my own, and my instructors have now suggested one that seems to "click" better for me. If I start to do this right, I'll be able to achieve better "positions", but never have I done stationary work trying to ingrain positions.

For me "modern" means "making full use of all the latest knowledge and technology" to communicate "feelings" and "images" better.

[nevets88]

making a proper golf swing is not that hard. if you are able to swing a hammer and hit a nail, swing an axe and split a log, then you are capable of making a rhythmical, on plane swing. our bodies are programmed to sense momentum and use it to our advantage. i think the golf swing is definitely being overthought and overtaught. i took lessons last spring and went from a 6 to not being able to break 90 within a matter of days. i tried to go back to my old swing and that only made things worse. i was ready to quit until a fellow sand trapper who shall remain anonymous straightened me out with a few e-mails and critiques of my swing.

moral of story, there are many ways to swing, but only one proper way to make contact with the ball. once you feel it, you know what that feeling is, and with practice you can repeat it. if more teachers helped people get that feel with proper alignment, grip, and stance, there would be more good golfers.

sadly, i don't think many pro's are looking to produce good golfers, only good clients.

The last line, I don't think all pros do it, but unfortunately many times I felt this way. Sugarcoat remarks or lesson to make it seem your swing is not as bad as it is. Superficial "fixes".

[mvmac]

Both of Hogan's books have illustrations of positions during the golf swing

[Topper]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Well, I'll be the first to comment that I agree with a lot that Chamblee has to say.  The fundamentals of grip, posture, stance, rhythm, etc. ARE important.   I don't ignore good instruction, but I approach it from a "feel" standpoint, rather than a "technical" standpoint. Whenever I have tried to hit certain "positions" I fail completely.  I do my best when I get out of my own way, and let my natural ability (for better or worse) take over.

I like Chamblee's phrase "technique-addicted golfers". No doubt he will catch some flak here for saying that.

I agree with the article and Harmonious.  I take lessons with some regularity.  My current instructor focuses on fundamentals like grip, alignment, tension, and swinging within my physical ability.  Previous instructors were very position oriented and taught a very specific swing which (to them) was THE correct swing.  I absolutely agree that on averagae instructors make teaching golf way too complicated.

I think it was Iaacas that posted on another thread about a teaching method or approach versus a rigid system of swing mechanics.  An organized approach to teach golf is a good thing but forcing people with varying flexibility, physique, balance, coordination, etc, into the same mechanical swing just doesn't make sense.

[nevets88]

I respectfully disagree. I think subscribing to the old fundamentals as grip, posture, etc... is important, but to me, the true fundamentals are hitting the ball first, divot after ball, the ball flight laws, and the three imperatives of TGM - flat wrist at impact, lag pressure pt and plane line. The old fundamentals gives you guidelines on how, the true fundamentals goes more towards the nature of the game and on why and for me are more essential. A crude analogy, I wish I could think of a better one, is playing the piano. The old fundamentals would be sit up straight, curved fingers, pennies on wrists. But look at Glenn Gould, he blows these away and plays brilliantly. The true fundamentals is this is a general idea of how the music should play and make people feel, work your way towards this ideal. It goes more to making music rather than hitting notes.

[saevel25]

Well i wil say this, i think its easier to build a solid swing around a solid grip. For me thats slighly on the stronger side, but mostly were the hands are overtop the club, not underneath it. I cringe when i see someone with a straight arm, right hand under the ball and he goes and snaps the living crap out of it. I just shake my head. But yes, grips are different for each person, so it can't be a fundamental, but it sure helps to at least start with something in the middle of what people have and find your swing and then tweek the grip later. I would put it as an iteration, with regards to math. You just pick a value you think is close to the right answer, do the math, than pick another answer, and keep going till you get the right one.

I agree Fundamentals are hitting the ball first..

[MiniBlueDragon]

Originally Posted by iacas

I'm not going to get into the definition of "fundamentals." I now prefer the terms "commonalities" and "variables." Everyone needs a "grip," but the grips used by the game's best (and worst) players are variables, not commonalities. The commonalities of the game's best are: hit the ground after the ball and in the same spot, hit the ball far, control the curve on the ball.

^^^^ This!