Overhearing a lesson never ceases to amaze me

[JCoop]

Originally Posted by Ben

Teaching the golf swing can be just as trying as learning the golf swing. It is so intricate. So many moving parts, so many angles, so much to manage.

Ah, but there is the crux. It's many moving parts but it's also very few moving parts, all aligned, and they stay that way throughout the swing. There are a couple of hinges that move, but the other stuff should stay in place. Easy to say, of course.

[Dr. Strangeclub]

My point was to assure that the teacher can hit the ball, not for the shots to teach you anything.  Okay, make it 5 irons or something, and if he chunks one or thins it, he's gonzo -- a little push or pull is acceptable, but a rope hook is not.  Anything to demonstrate competency. The playing requirements for a PGA club pro job are pretty easy (something like a 76?) so there is no guarantee whatsoever that the club pro knows much of anything.  Like the old saying goes, never take a tip from anybody with a handicap over 4, which could easily be the case with a club pro (despite his official handicap being zero).

As for the straight right arm thing, this was actually a straight right arm. The guy giving the lesson was a hacker.  Truly bizarre swing positions.

I see what the thread is talking about and agree.  I'm a big believer in arc width not arc length for generating accurate power and this seems to be a swing thought that would help that.

Originally Posted by iacas

Nah. While true to some extent, there's often a lot of tomfoolery in such demonstrations. Pros are people too, so they can think they're doing something but not do it. The golf swing is too fast to see a lot of what you want and just ripping five perfect drivers after teaching all day and not warming up is silly.

I can demonstrate every drill, which is oriented in such a way as to isolate the thing demonstrated, and do so without much warmup at all. So while I agree in part, there are too many exceptions and five perfect tee shots is too silly.

Feel ain't real.

Uhhh.... http://thesandtrap.com/forum/thread/35195/shorter-probably-better-swing-keep-the-right-arm-straight Yup.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangeclub

My point was to assure that the teacher can hit the ball, not for the shots to teach you anything.  Okay, make it 5 irons or something, and if he chunks one or thins it, he's gonzo -- a little push or pull is acceptable, but a rope hook is not.  Anything to demonstrate competency.  The playing requirements for a PGA club pro job are pretty easy (something like a 76?) so there is no guarantee whatsoever that the club pro knows much of anything.

I still think it's a silly requirement. I can demonstrate "competency" just fine, but the ability to teach and the ability to hit a golf ball on command without warmup are two very different skills.

Listen to a PGA Tour player talk. They can demonstrate things all day long but most don't know squat about "the golf swing." Heck, most know very little about their golf swing.

Judging an instructor by his playing ability isn't a great way to go.

[bunkerputt]

Originally Posted by iacas

I still think it's a silly requirement. I can demonstrate "competency" just fine, but the ability to teach and the ability to hit a golf ball on command without warmup are two very different skills.

Listen to a PGA Tour player talk. They can demonstrate things all day long but most don't know squat about "the golf swing." Heck, most know very little about their golf swing.

Judging an instructor by his playing ability isn't a great way to go.

I totally agree.  I was playing with my friend this weekend who I can out drive by 75 yards, but my irons fly WAY shorter than his.  He hits PW where I'm hitting an 8 or a 7-iron most of the time.  He was telling me how to hit it farther, talking about this and that, how he was a power lifter when he was younger and has a special build, etc. and on and on.  I had him hit a shot with my 8-iron and it flew about 110.  Point is, he was playing ultra-light graphite shafts with light heads and strong lofts on his irons.  When he got into a forged head, normal lofts and X100 shafts, it was way too heavy and stiff for him to actually hit the ball with an acceptable distance and trajectory.  He could have "demonstrated" how to hit it far with his clubs all day long and it would have given me zero info about how to generate power.

The sad thing is there are great teachers out there.  I don't think Hogan was one of them.  I also think it's way less than 20% of people who teach.  Maybe a few percent at most.

[deronsizemore]

85% (maybe more, probably not less) of instructors flat out suck. They charge what they charge, you hit 75 golf balls with a 7-iron, you eventually get into a rhythm and have some timing from hitting the same club repeatedly, and you hit the ball a little better at the end than at the beginning. You haven't learned much, they've thrown out 5-20 different things for you to work on, and you have to go back in a week because you're not actually any better.

I think the hard part is learning enough about the golf swing and why the ball does what it does (whether you can actually do these things yourself or not) is key to knowing if the pro you're seeing for lessons is full of it.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangeclub

I think the most interesting tip I ever heard at the range, complete with demonstrating it, was, "Keep your right arm straight."  And he was talking to a right hander.  Very odd.

Come on people, I mean really!

Perhaps the student was really bending his right arm on the back swing to the point he looked like Eamonn Darcy and the teacher said that to him to get him to reduce the bend as much as possible. Very few people over exaggerate a piece of instruction and have great difficulty reducing the error even a little bit. You have to over exaggerate the order sometimes just to see a tiny improvement.

For e.g. I have students that lift up prior to impact and so I tell them to dip down towards the ball as their club head approaches impact. Do you really think I want them to dip down towards the ball? Of course not, it is just an over exaggeration so they retain their inclination to the ground. The student feels as if they are bobbing up and down, but in reality they are remaining still. I explain this to them and show it to them on video.

I love the threads on here re: instruction. They are full of low handicappers criticizing golf instructors without having a clue how to teach themselves.

[x129]

More to the point if we are all such experts with complete mastery of the swing and ball flight laws, how come we are not teaching? If you look at golf digests rates for the top guys, if your making under about 250k a year you should switch professions.

It would be amusing to compare the advice of the top 10 or so methods/teachers (S&T;, Leadbetter, Ballard, Haney, Hogan,...) and list how many times each one says that something the other one does is fundamentally wrong.

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I love the threads on here re: instruction. They are full of low handicappers criticizing golf instructors without having a clue how to teach themselves.

[Dr. Strangeclub]

How would you judge a teacher, then, if not by how they hit the ball?  If you have no recommendations (obviously the best course of action, but reliable recommendations are not easy to locate for a new golfer), you have to start somewhere.  I would no more suggest taking a golf lesson from an unknown pro who could not hit the ball at least fairly impressively than I would say to take guitar lessons from somebody who couldn't rip off a fairly complicated piece on demand.  Admittedly, some pros have "lost their edge" from having to deal with the course business day to day, but who were once pretty good players and know their stuff.  Others never knew anything to begin with.  I must say, I'm a bit surprised that all you low handicappers suggest taking lessons from somebody who can't hit the ball themselves;  true, they might be splendid teachers, but I think it's highly unlikely.  Why would you want somebody to teach you with methods and ideas that don't even work for them?  Baffling.  I'll compromise, 3 out of 5, with one real spank, no worm burners.

The "straight right arm" story, an attempt to return to the threadline, involved one hacker teaching another hacker.  The right arm was straight.

[Dr. Strangeclub]

Originally Posted by x129

More to the point if we are all such experts with complete mastery of the swing and ball flight laws, how come we are not teaching? If you look at golf digests rates for the top guys, if your making under about 250k a year you should switch professions.

It would be amusing to compare the advice of the top 10 or so methods/teachers (S&T;, Leadbetter, Ballard, Haney, Hogan,...) and list how many times each one says that something the other one does is fundamentally wrong.

That would make a pretty decent golf article!

I think everybody has to stop including Hogan as a "teacher".  He was a swing theorist, but didn't really give golf lessons at all, per se.  Maybe to Kite and the Byrum brothers or something, but teaching was definitely not his thing that I'm aware of.  He gave Faldo a talk in his office shortly before he died, after which Faldo went out and won his next tournament, absolutely crushing the ball (a bit more appropriately to his size).  He had always been something of a dinker, the sort of the thing big, strong people can get away with, but something Hogan said had him launching it that week.

From what I've seen, Haney and Leadbetter are complete frauds.  I sort of like Ballard and tried it for a while after Strange won the US Open doing it, but coming off the ball that much on the backswing eventually went to hell for me and I had to go back to "basics" -- keeping the head still remains a good idea for me.  S&T; seems pretty sensible, but I'd list The Golfing Machine cult as some sort of bizarre religion.  (Yes, I read the book.  Horrifying. And I, too, am an engineer, so I'm not so easily bowled over by Homer's quasi-scientific approach.)  I'd rate Jack Nicklaus' book, Golf My Way, talking about people who can hit the ball but can't teach, as the most destructive golf instruction book of all time.

[newtogolf]

Take a look at the hitting coaches on Major League baseball teams.  You'd be surprised at how many of them never even made it to the Majors and how many had less than stellar careers as hitters.

Tm     Coach             OPS+   PA
ATL    Terry Pendleton   91     7637
ARI    Jack Howell       103    2982
BAL    Terry Crowley     104    1768
BOS    Dave Magadan      112    4936
CHC    Rudy Jaramillo    N/A    0
CIN    Brook Jacoby      104    5027
CLE    Jim Nunnally      111    1048
COL    Don Baylor        118    9401
CWS    Greg Walker       108    3177
DET    Lloyd McClendon   94     1375
FLA    John Mallee       N/A    0
HOU Jeff Bagwell 149    9431
KCR    Kevin Seitzer     111    6062
LAA    Mickey Hatcher    89     3607
LAD    Don Mattingly     127    7721
MIL    Dale Sveum        82     2198
MIN    Joe Vavra         N/A    0
NYM    Howard Johnson    117    5715
NYY    Kevin Long        N/A    0
OAK    Jim Skaalen       N/A    0
PHI    Greg Gross        103    4355
PIT    Don Long          N/A    0
SDP    Randy Ready       108    2488
SEA    Alonzo Powell     71     171
SFG    Hensley Meulens   77     549
STL    Mark McGwire      162    7660
TBR    Derek Shelton     N/A    0
TEX    Clint Hurdle      105    1596
TOR    Dwayne Murphy     115    5242
WAS    Rick Eckstein*    N/A    0

Being a good teacher doesn't mean being a great athlete.  Some people can know the science behind hitting a golf ball or baseball but not be able to physically execute it.  When Hogan was in his car accident and recovering he couldn't hit a golf ball but his knowledge of the golf swing and proper technique wasn't lost.  There's a lot that goes into being a good teacher that goes beyond physically being able to do what you're teaching.  I'd rather go back and have Ben Hogan as my swing coach from a wheelchair than Bubba Watson today.

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangeclub

How would you judge a teacher, then, if not by how they hit the ball?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangeclub

How would you judge a teacher, then, if not by how they hit the ball?

A thousand ways (okay, maybe that's slightly exaggerated).

How about "do their students improve at a good rate and fairly consistently across the board?"

How about "do they exhibit a deep knowledge of the golf swing?"

How about "do they communicate well?"

How about "do they have fun, do they make you feel respected, and do people enjoy taking lessons with them?"

How about "do they make you feel at ease when you talk to them about signing up for lessons?"

How about "do they use video?"

How about "do they know what makes the ball fly the way it does?"

There are a bunch of ways.

Here's another list that can help people to choose a good instructor .

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangeclub

I must say, I'm a bit surprised that all you low handicappers suggest taking lessons from somebody who can't hit the ball themselves;  true, they might be splendid teachers, but I think it's highly unlikely.  Why would you want somebody to teach you with methods and ideas that don't even work for them?  Baffling.  I'll compromise, 3 out of 5, with one real spank, no worm burners.

Nobody's suggesting worm burners, but you said "rip five perfect drives" or something.

Ability to hit the ball well and ability to teach are two very, very different things. Again, PGA Tour pros can rip the ball - even left-handed - but most of them haven't got the first clue why or how...

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangeclub

S&T; seems pretty sensible, but I'd list The Golfing Machine cult as some sort of bizarre religion.

Some are. I've read it. I know it pretty darn well. To me, it's a dictionary, if nothing else. If I talk about rolling the third accumulator with another instructor he'll know what I mean.

I will say this, too. If two teachers appear similarly qualified, I'll almost always recommend a guy with true TGM knowledge over the other guy. At least TGM people know what causes the ball to fly the way it does, by and large. And they understand some other important things.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Take a look at the hitting coaches on Major League baseball teams.  You'd be surprised at how many of them never even made it to the Majors and how many had less than stellar careers as hitters.

Being a good teacher doesn't mean being a great athlete.

In fact, a lot of the times, the poorer players are passionate about the game and make for better instructors. They remember how hard it was. When asked how to do something their answer is not "Well, uhhh, gee, I don't know, I just kinda see it in my mind and then the ball does it." The poorer players (poor being relative - these people are still really good golfers) will study the swing. They'll put a lot of energy into finding the answers.

A player relying on, for lack of a better phrase, "talent" alone never has to dig for those answers. Hogan knew a lot about HIS swing because he had to dig for the answers. He was a poorer player early on (again, relatively speaking). Tiger had a lot of talent, but what took him to the heights he attained was that he behaved a bit like a poorer player - seeking knowledge, working on things, and learning his swing (however flawed it may have been at any point past or present) like a poor player might.

Nicklaus too.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by iacas

In fact, a lot of the times, the poorer players are passionate about the game and make for better instructors. They remember how hard it was. When asked how to do something their answer is not "Well, uhhh, gee, I don't know, I just kinda see it in my mind and then the ball does it." The poorer players (poor being relative - these people are still really good golfers) will study the swing. They'll put a lot of energy into finding the answers.

Another great example is the world of soccer. Look at the best coaches, Sir Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger and José Mourinho to name three. All poor to very poor footballers themselves relatively speaking of course, but excel at coaching soccer teams to glory. The only top class footballer considered a great coach is Johan Cruyff.

(Un)fortunately, for a lot of golfers how good a player you are matters for some reason. Many of my students have told me they'd rather take a lesson from me because "you were a 0 handicapper before turning pro" or "I've seen you shoot 69", than some other instructor. I always tell them, I wish you'd take lessons from me because I know the ball flight laws etc. and ultimately can help you improve.

[Harmonious]

As a student (any student, not just golf) progresses from beginner to expert, and all along the progression, he will probably require different types of instructors.  A beginner  does not need a "name" instructor any more than you would ask a Nobel physicist to teach you the multiplication tables. Early on, the personality of the teacher is the most important, how well he can communicate the basic ideas and provide positive reinforcement.  As the student gains proficiency, a different instructor may be required, one who is more knowledgeable about the swing and its technicalities, yet can still relate the information.

At some point, though, I think that the proficiency of the instructor will come into play.  In other words, if I were a scratch or pro player, I think I would want to learn from someone who can actually do the things they teach.  Just like someone who wants to be a concert pianist would probably want to learn from someone who is also a great pianist.  There is a level of respect, for lack of a better term, that an instructor must be given.  And I would find it difficult to learn from someone who couldn't  perform the things he was asking me to perform.  Maybe that's just me, but I think it's also true of others, which is probably why the PGA requires a proficiency test. The PGA has an minimum expectation that its members can play a decent round of golf.

Now, at the highest levels, the instructor probably cannot play as well as the student.  When that occasion occurs, the instructor has to have something else to offer, such as a successful philosophy or method that clicks with the student. But, as we have seen on the pro tours, it is very common for players to move from coach to coach, trying to find the ideal instructor.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

As a student (any student, not just golf) progresses from beginner to expert, and all along the progression, he will probably require different types of instructors.

I disagree entirely. A good instructor can teach at any level, and many do.

I know of a few guys who teach at the highest level on the PGA Tour, and yet pretty much each week (often on Thursdays), they'll teach the 27 handicapper, the 14 handicapper, the +1 handicapper, and some people new to the game of golf.

It's rare that someone who teaches on the PGA Tour wants to teach beginners and high handicappers, but "want" and "ability" are not the same. A good instructor can teach both. We teach a tour professional or two, and we teach beginners, and everyone in between.

All that said, a beginner doesn't "need" a "name" instructor, but that's not what you said first. A player shouldn't "require" different instructors because that implies that a good instructor can't work with a player from "beginner to Tour" - that some instructors are good for beginners, some good for intermediate, and some good for the advanced and super advanced. But that's all.

Originally Posted by Harmonious

At some point, though, I think that the proficiency of the instructor will come into play. In other words, if I were a scratch or pro player, I think I would want to learn from someone who can actually do the things they teach. Just like someone who wants to be a concert pianist would probably want to learn from someone who is also a great pianist. There is a level of respect, for lack of a better term, that an instructor must be given. And I would find it difficult to learn from someone who couldn't  perform the things he was asking me to perform.

Really?

How many PGA Tour events have Jimmy Ballard, Hank Haney, David Leadbetter, MB/AP, Butch Harmon, etc. ever won? Majors? Lee Trevino has said he's never taken a lesson (not true) because he's never found a coach who could beat him. So Tiger Woods doesn't get to take lessons from anyone?

Good players are typically smart enough (the stupidity of using Butch Harmon aside...) to show their respect because the teacher has good information and conveys it well.

That should be the only real requirement at any level of instruction: good communication of good information.

[Shindig]

How many PGA Tour events have Jimmy Ballard, Hank Haney, David Leadbetter, MB/AP, Butch Harmon, etc. ever won? Majors?

Butch Harmon won a B.C. Open in 1971. Your point is still correct; in fact, I'm not sure what I said even contradicts what you said.

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by iacas

Really?

Yes, really. If you were asked by your student how to hit a certain shot, and in attempting to show him, you  couldn't do it, how much respect do you imagine your student would have for you and, by extension, your instruction?

Originally Posted by iacas

How many PGA Tour events have Jimmy Ballard, Hank Haney, David Leadbetter, MB/AP, Butch Harmon, etc. ever won? Majors? Lee Trevino has said he's never taken a lesson (not true) because he's never found a coach who could beat him. So Tiger Woods doesn't get to take lessons from anyone?

Good players are typically smart enough (the stupidity of using Butch Harmon aside...)   to show their respect because the teacher has good information and conveys it well.

Phil Mikelson seems like a bright guy to me You didn't read my final paragraph, which said:  "Now, at the highest levels, the instructor probably cannot play as well as the student.  When that occasion occurs, the instructor has to have something else to offer, such as a successful philosophy or method that clicks with the student. But, as we have seen on the pro tours, it is very common for players to move from coach to coach, trying to find the ideal instructor. "

Originally Posted by iacas

That should be the only real requirement at any level of instruction: good communication of good information.

Which is what I said:  "Early on, the personality of the teacher is the most important, how well he can communicate the basic ideas and provide positive reinforcement. As the student gains proficiency, a different instructor may be required, one who is more knowledgeable about the swing and its technicalities, yet can still relate the information."

One day I'll learn how to do multiple quotes.

[mirv]

ben hogan once said of sam snead "sam doesn't know a damn thing about hitting a golf ball.  he just does it better than anyone else."  everyone's read hogan's book, but not many people even know snead wrote a couple of books, let alone gleaned anything about the swing from them, which goes right along with what iacas said a few posts ago about how the "poorer" player who has really studied the swing will probably be able to tell you a lot more about the how and why of the swing than someone who just has an abundance of natural talent.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Yes, really. If you were asked by your student how to hit a certain shot, and in attempting to show him, you  couldn't do it, how much respect do you imagine your student would have for you and, by extension, your instruction?

I can "do it." Better yet, I can demonstrate the motions required and work with them on finding the appropriate means for them to hit the shot. But I'm young and a pretty good player. Playing and instructing aren't the same. Could Harvey Penick demonstrate the shot? Could a gifted instructor who has arthritis do it? What if I had a brace on my hand - would I be less of an instructor?

The simple truth is people want to know how to do things for themselves. They care a lot less about seeing it done. It's far more impressive - and they respect me plenty - when I get them hitting the shot they want to hit.

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Phil Mikelson seems like a bright guy to me You didn't read my final paragraph, which said:  "Now, at the highest levels, the instructor probably cannot play as well as the student.  When that occasion occurs, the instructor has to have something else to offer, such as a successful philosophy or method that clicks with the student. But, as we have seen on the pro tours, it is very common for players to move from coach to coach, trying to find the ideal instructor."

Yeah... the search for "the ideal instructor" is not why players switch instructors. They switch instructors like the 9 handicapper switches putters. "Well, this one's gone stale... I need a fresh voice." Or switch caddies.

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Which is what I said:  "... a different instructor may be required..."

You also said "will probably."

Originally Posted by Harmonious

One day I'll learn how to do multiple quotes.

There's no time like the present! It's copy and paste.