Why Isn't Golf Taught Like Skiing?

[CarlSpackler]

Most people learn to hit a golf ball the way a toddler learns to walk. They keep trying until they don't fall down. Not exactly the best way, but this is how I learned. It’s effective because they work on it constantly until they “get it”. Learning to walk is a necessary survival instinct though. I got pretty decent at scoring when I got a membership to a course 6 years ago or so and played 4-5 times per week. I had grooved my imperfections, BUT, they are still imperfections that I am still trying to correct. Harvey Penick said to beware of a player with an ugly swing who is competing at the same level as you are. Don’t assume that they cannot score just because they have an ugly swing.

I played with a lady over the weekend that I have played with before. She mentioned that she had taken a lesson and had been practicing but wasn't any better. I asked what she was working on, and it was basically a steady head. I don’t think this is her priority. I wouldn’t say that it is perfect (as much as I can tell from the cart that is) but it isn’t that bad. Her chicken wing is probably her biggest issue. She is VERY consistent with her driver, but is lucky to hit it 150. I’m guessing that this teacher does this with every student on their first visit. That is the problem with having a system.

[phillyk]

42 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Somehow two things got conflated, one of which I never said. I never said golf was easier than skiing or skiing is easier than golf. I said the PSIA has a program of how they teach skiing. The PGA doesn't. It should. I believe this is a cause of much of the frustration, anger, and misery in golf. Most people who are trying to improve get a hundred different opinions, many of them totally contradictory. They try one thing and then another. And then another. They never get it.

The PGA does in fact have a basic program to teach.  It looks like a 400 page text book and includes 30yr old pictures and ideas for instruction.  Here's where it's tricky.  The PGA hopes/expects us, the pros, to build our own program that evolves off their old fundamental book.  Some don't and thus give out band-aid fixes and bad instruction. Those who take it to the next level to develop their own programs and learn more about the swing, gain a better understanding and have the tools to give better instruction.

Iacas and other pros have their academies where they want to teach pros a program that works.  Those who attend these don't get a special 3 letter title behind their name, so you would never know whether your pro has more than that PGA fundamental instruction base.

The PGA does have an instructional Master Professional program though. It means a certain person has over 1000hrs (I think) of instruction.  Most of the guys who have that title, I'd assume, have a solid understanding and can give you good instruction, iacas correct me if I'm wrong about that.

[Blackjack Don]

23 minutes ago, nevets88 said:

Imho, going back to an older point in this thread, with skiing, there is this fear instinct, but after a couple of trips or maybe a couple of hours for others, most people conquer the fear - falling down, the steepness, the ice, the trees. Once that fear is conquered, it's a lot easier to learn.

With golf, there is the hit instinct. Imho, that hit instinct is way harder to remove than the fear instinct.

Skiing imho is easier than golf. I bet if you follow a thousand beginning skiers and golfers, people become competent skiers much faster than golf. They'll get down a blue (not barreling down and crashing, but turning and a proper stop) much faster than breaking 100.

I agree. SKiing is easier than golf. Maybe. I have no data to back up either way. But I can see why everybody has been saying golf is harder. 

Now, take a hundred skiers who have never had a lesson but get down the hill and have fun, and give them a group lesson. Take a hundred golfers who struggle to break a hundred. I have no idea what the exact data would be, but I am pretty sure the percentages of skiers improving would be better than the golfers--by quite a bit. Only because skiing is so easy and golf is so hard, or is there some percentage in that data that would be because ski instruction is better than golf instruction? It's laughable to think that skiing is that much easier, because it's not. It's really hard to be a good skier. People who don't take lessons show that. Ski instruction does make better skiers.

19 minutes ago, CarlSpackler said:

I’m guessing that this teacher does this with every student on their first visit. That is the problem with having a system.

Does he have a system? Is this the first thing one should teach?

 

 

[CarlSpackler]

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Does he have a system? Is this the first thing one should teach?

I don't know for sure. I am guessing, but my point is that he/she has her working on keeping a steady head when it doesn't seem that is her priority. I would want to see it on video to be sure. I do think that grip/stance/posture should certainly be evaluated and addressed on lesson #1, but good golf instruction is not a one size fits all. People are different height, weight, musculature, etc. 

I sometimes think that I could teach better than many of the golf teachers in the world...

[phillyk]

4 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I agree. SKiing is easier than golf. Maybe. I have no data to back up either way. But I can see why everybody has been saying golf is harder. 

Now, take a hundred skiers who have never had a lesson but get down the hill and have fun, and give them a group lesson. Take a hundred golfers who struggle to break a hundred. I have no idea what the exact data would be, but I am pretty sure the percentages of skiers improving would be better than the golfers--by quite a bit. Only because skiing is so easy and golf is so hard, or is there some percentage in that data that would be because ski instruction is better than golf instruction? It's laughable to think that skiing is that much easier, because it's not. It's really hard to be a good skier. People who don't take lessons show that. Ski instruction does make better skiers.

When I moved to Washington State, I went skiing (at Mount Baker) about 12 times one winter and was good enough to hit the diamond runs, the next year I took a series of 3 lessons and I got to going down double diamond and some back country.  Golf wise, it definitely took a lot longer than a year and a half to hit scratch handicap.  I'm just one story but it's a difference of years not a few months.

[Blackjack Don]

11 minutes ago, phillyk said:

The PGA does in fact have a basic program to teach.  

The rest of your text kinda says they don't. The results say they don't, either. How about a thousand hours teaching the wrong thing? 

Everybody agrees to hit down on the ball, but nobody knows how to teach that? Everybody agrees that a good shot requires a square club face, and everybody does it differently? The laws of physics would disagree.

Golf's biggest problem--and one can probably stick this one on all mankind--is it's stuck in tradition. "We've always done it that way!" is not a reason, nor a good excuse. The wise man doesn't look for ways it won't work, but looks for reasons why it can. 

Tradition and ego get in the way of good results, and esp now, with all the technology available to test theories, there's no excuse other than it's the way it's always been done. And the earth is flat.

[Blackjack Don]

1 minute ago, CarlSpackler said:

I don't know for sure. I am guessing, but my point is that he/she has her working on keeping a steady head when it doesn't seem that is her priority. I would want to see it on video to be sure. I do think that grip/stance/posture should certainly be evaluated and addressed on lesson #1, but good golf instruction is not a one size fits all. People are different height, weight, musculature, etc. 

I sometimes think that I could teach better than many of the golf teachers in the world...

At least as good as most.

There is no one way? If there were a hundred club face angles that produce a straight shot, then I might agree. But since there is one way, a straight club path, I'm looking for ways to get there. If her elbow is flying but the club comes into the ball square, and she's enjoying the game, then I'm going to suspect she doesn't need anything because at most she's going to get another ten or fifteen yards? Or lose it.

How about this? There is one way to swing a golf club, and nobody agrees on how to do it? Shouldn't a professional KNOW how to do it and all agree?

Could this be why "golf is so hard?"

I don't know, but you can't say I'm not looking for the holy grail that I believe most of us are seeking. Just let me hit the ball straight(er). Then let me find out how I did it where other people can do it. So far, when I've told people to aim in front of the ball they get instant results. Not my job to figure out why, but there must be something there. Or what? Next time you guys are at the range, listen for the sound of fat hits. Start there and work backward. That's what I'm trying to do.

Thanks for playing everybody. I am learning a lot about why it can't be done.

[CarlSpackler]

10 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

The rest of your text kinda says they don't. The results say they don't, either. How about a thousand hours teaching the wrong thing? 

Everybody agrees to hit down on the ball, but nobody knows how to teach that? Everybody agrees that a good shot requires a square club face, and everybody does it differently? The laws of physics would disagree.

Golf's biggest problem--and one can probably stick this one on all mankind--is it's stuck in tradition. "We've always done it that way!" is not a reason, nor a good excuse. The wise man doesn't look for ways it won't work, but looks for reasons why it can. 

Tradition and ego get in the way of good results, and esp now, with all the technology available to test theories, there's no excuse other than it's the way it's always been done. And the earth is flat.

That is one of the strengths of this site and what I find here. Just because it's always been/done that way doesn't mean it's right.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

At least as good as most.

There is no one way? If there were a hundred club face angles that produce a straight shot, then I might agree. But since there is one way, a straight club path, I'm looking for ways to get there. If her elbow is flying but the club comes into the ball square, and she's enjoying the game, then I'm going to suspect she doesn't need anything because at most she's going to get another ten or fifteen yards? Or lose it.

How about this? There is one way to swing a golf club, and nobody agrees on how to do it? Shouldn't a professional KNOW how to do it and all agree?

Could this be why "golf is so hard?"

I don't know, but you can't say I'm not looking for the holy grail that I believe most of us are seeking. Just let me hit the ball straight(er). Then let me find out how I did it where other people can do it. So far, when I've told people to aim in front of the ball they get instant results. Not my job to figure out why, but there must be something there. Or what? Next time you guys are at the range, listen for the sound of fat hits. Start there and work backward. That's what I'm trying to do.

Thanks for playing everybody. I am learning a lot about why it can't be done.

Humans are not robots. Take 2 people that are the same height and you will find that one has longer arms or shorter legs. One leg might be longer than the other. One person might be stronger. People are highly varied. 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

Somehow two things got conflated, one of which I never said. I never said golf was easier than skiing or skiing is easier than golf. I said the PSIA has a program of how they teach skiing. The PGA doesn't. It should.

They have a teaching program. They have a whole book. It's not very good.

You're ignoring the fact that any teaching program is still largely going to fail because:

1. Most golfers don't take lessons, and they certainly don't do it before they get out on the golf course and learn some things on their own (right or wrong, most often wrong).
2. Golf is complex and difficult. It's easier (heck, it's possible!) to put together a standard program to teach skiing. I don't think it's possible in golf. If it was, it would be something like 5SK, but even 5SK is just a few landmarks. You still have to know how to get your student to achieve those keys, and which one to start with.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

I believe this is a cause of much of the frustration, anger, and misery in golf.

I believe those causes are more about how difficult and complex golf is.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

Most people who are trying to improve get a hundred different opinions, many of them totally contradictory. They try one thing and then another. And then another. They never get it.

Most people don't get instruction.

A golfer who takes a lesson from me would very often get the same lesson from Dave Wedzik. Or Mike if he was still teaching. Or Brian. Or Stephan. Or Preston, or Paul.

A student came to us once and we worked with him on some things. He went from a 10 to a 4, and had already planned to go visit a "big name" instructor out west, pre-paid and everything. He's a decent instructor too. The guy went and… got the same piece he'd been working on in Erie with us.

Good instructors occasionally disagree on the priority piece, but it's less often than you think, and sometimes there are two very close priorities.

There are "hundreds" of ideas out there because there are "hundreds" of ways that you can go wrong in the golf swing. There aren't "hundreds" of errors you can make in skiing, are there?

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

If changing a grip is hard--and it is!--try getting someone who put their weight on the tails of their skis to get out over the front.

And yet all the anecdotal evidence people have shared in this thread or that I've heard from people is that the skiing thing is easier, and getting your weight onto the front of your skis constitutes a good chunk of what makes you a successful skier. The grip - of which there can be many, many functional grips - is only a very, very small part of the golf swing. I could take fourteen different grips and still beat you handily. There's no one right grip for everyone.

Ask @GolfLug about his grip, and how we helped him deal with his forearm injury.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

Forget about how hard one is over another. Is that getting us anywhere?

It matters. It's important, arguably central, to the discussion.

There's no standardized way to teach people to ride a bike (though if there was I'd support this method - we used it and my kid was literally pedaling along as far as she wanted within 15 minutes of starting), but people learn how to that relatively quickly all on their own sometimes, or with non-experts (their parents) guiding them to do it.

It's far simpler - to the point of even being reasonably possible - to put together a program for a simpler activity. Can I teach someone CPR in a pretty standardized program? Yeah. Can I teach someone to be a general practitioner in the same four hours?

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

What the f**k does that mean?

It means the shaft should be pointing at the lead shoulder at impact. I'm not sure what you mean by "now you tell me" and "what does that mean?" It's answered in several places, including here:

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

Yeah, like I'm ever going to be Freddie or Phil. In fact, it's not only a ridiculous comparison, but counter-productive. If I were your student and you told me to do something and I kept saying "that's not how Tiger did it," how long before you give up on me? How long would you stay with a teacher who kept doing this? (No disrespect, and I mean that.) I'll stick with this conversation as long as you can stand it.

You seem to have completely misunderstood the point.

Fred Couples has an incredibly strong left hand grip, so his left wrist is not anatomically flat at impact - it's quite cupped. Those with weak grips (like Hogan) tend to be arched slightly.

And Phil Mickelson plays golf lefty. So his left wrist isn't flat either.  (We renamed it years and years ago because "Inline Impact" is both more correct AND not righty-biased.)

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

Which do you want? Someone who forces you to examine your profession or someone who blindly accepts whatever you or anyone else suggests?

That's not an appropriate question. And what I mean by that is that you're not forcing me to examine my profession - I've spent thousands of hours doing that and you're not making me re-think any of the conclusions I've drawn, or their premises, etc.

And you're not only not blindly accepting things, you don't even seem to be listening to what I'm saying.

And no, I don't want students to blindly accept things, ever. But there comes a point in some lessons where some students are asking too many questions and I, having experience that they do not, know it's in their best interests to just focus on the core piece or whatever rather than to get distracted by tangential questions, thoughts, etc.

If you want to pay me to talk about golf swing theory for 45 minutes, sure. But it may very well be the worst "lesson" ever.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

However, if someone is telling me something… without any elaboration, then I am assuming they are saying "because I said so." For me, this is where I smile and leave the car.

No, and honestly, that comes off as kinda jerky. The topic of this thread is not instructional, nor is it to list the many ways in which a putt is different than a 5-iron. As you can see, it's not like I'm "shy" about typing a fair amount or giving out a bunch of free information or sharing what I know or think with people.

Bluntly… you're not paying me, you're not taking a lesson right now, and most importantly: that's not the topic here.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

I am sorry that the Golfing Machine is outdated--another time you made a statement without further explanation--and I hate to keep quoting one source, it just so happens to be one I agree with: Bobby Clampett teaches from putting backwards and I think this is how teaching golf can be standardized. He says a drive is a long putt. I understand what he means. Everybody else disagrees because that's what they do.

I don't think that will work, and I don't agree with Bobby on that. And you don't get to be dismissive and say "because that's what they do." I have very real reasons why I disagree.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

I know you didn't mean it rudely, and I didn't take it that way. Because I've trained my mind to not be defensive. I know you are trying to help me, but resist that I'm trying to help you (and others). Ha, easy now to say I've only been at this for six months, but have you ever heard of "fresh eyes"?

Having fresh eyes doesn't mean what you see is worth anything.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

You guys have been doing this the same way since Hogan.

Please stop lumping everyone together. No, we haven't. I haven't.

Also, there weren't many instructors back in Hogan's day.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

The technology has improved, but not the results. I'm not saying standardized teaching is the cure, but doing the same thing over and over isn't working. Show me, if I'm wrong.

People ARE better at golf now than they used to be. Handicap indexes are lower than they've ever been.

Again… Few golfers take lessons. Those who do are quite likely to either get a bad instructor or even if they do get a good one, are not likely to put in the time and effort required to truly improve at what is ultimately a very difficult task. And new golfers are some of the least likely to take lessons - they don't even know if they like golf, so expecting them to spend a few hundred bucks on lessons is a non-starter. They just want to whack a ball and see it go in the air occasionally.

I've "shown you" several things. You're just not willing, it seems, to accept that your "fresh eyes" may not have found some holy grail secret that will revolutionize golf instruction.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

The club has to come through the ball consistently, over and over, to have good results.

Virtually every golfer has a repeatable swing. Consistency isn't really their problem. It's the super tiny margin for error that is the problem, and the fact that their consistent swing is a bad swing.

45 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Pretty much, yeah. I can't get around the same either. But the driver from  back to parallell and forward to parallel, sure, you and I can do that. I'm older and not nearly as flexible, but who is to begin with. There is a way to hit a golf ball that is the same no matter who hits it: It's a matter of physics. The problem is everyone in golf thinks it is an art, but it's simply science. 

No, there isn't.

Everyone's body is not built the same.

And there's no one way to swing a club. There's no one way to hit a forehand in tennis, it seems, either, though perhaps that's closer than the variety we see in successful golf swings.

And stop with the generalizations. I bring one of the more scientific backgrounds to golf, and apply a more scientific mindset to golf, than the vast, vast majority of instructors. The art is in the communication, the rest is just physics, biomechanics, and geometry. I get that.

And I still disagree with you.

45 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I've seen people who contort themselves into knots and still hit the ball straight. There is nothing about their swing that a pro would say is right, yet, they get results.

Bullshit. I could tell you the things they do right. Jim Furyk does five things right, for example…

And this is why generalizing is bad for you, Don.

45 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

If you, Swede, go to four pros to make your swing better, I'll bet you a cheeseburger it's not going to get better.

:sigh: I'd take that bet with EVERY student I've got.

I'd quickly get sick of cheeseburgers. And I loooooove cheeseburgers, so that's saying something!

Good instructors help their students get better. Bad ones do not. Generally speaking.

The problem is not that there's not a template to teaching golf, or that golf instructors are too stupid to realize a putt is exactly like hitting a driver (?!). The problem is that there are bad instructors out there. And even the golfers who go to good instructors sometimes don't put in the work. And the vast majority of golfers don't ever go see any instructors. Add in the fact that a small portion of golfers simply lack the coordination, or speed, or some other thing to get much better than a certain level.

45 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I have no confidence in any pro, because there is so much different opinion among them. I guess we gotta stick with one and hope for the best. 

Well that's a fun attitude. Maybe you should find another sport with a standardized training program?

20 minutes ago, phillyk said:

The PGA does have an instructional Master Professional program though. It means a certain person has over 1000hrs (I think) of instruction.  Most of the guys who have that title, I'd assume, have a solid understanding and can give you good instruction, iacas correct me if I'm wrong about that.

As you know, you don't have to be good at golf instruction to get to 1000 hours of instruction. I mean, you can get there in a year teaching just 20 hours a week.

I think there's more to the "Master" thing than just 1000 hours, too, but it's OT, so…

13 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Now, take a hundred skiers who have never had a lesson but get down the hill and have fun, and give them a group lesson. Take a hundred golfers who struggle to break a hundred. I have no idea what the exact data would be, but I am pretty sure the percentages of skiers improving would be better than the golfers--by quite a bit. Only because skiing is so easy and golf is so hard, or is there some percentage in that data that would be because ski instruction is better than golf instruction? It's laughable to think that skiing is that much easier, because it's not. It's really hard to be a good skier. People who don't take lessons show that. Ski instruction does make better skiers.

You're convinced of your point and not listening to others.

Define a "good skier"?

Skiing is simpler, and easier. The two things don't mean the same thing.

@Blackjack Don, is riding a bike both simpler and easier than skiing? Maybe that's why even dumb parents can teach their kids to ride a bike in an hour or two, while it takes a few more hours to learn to ski?

The simplicity and ease of doing something has a huge effect on how quickly someone can advance in it.

4 minutes ago, phillyk said:

When I moved to Washington State, I went skiing (at Mount Baker) about 12 times one winter and was good enough to hit the diamond runs, the next year I took a series of 3 lessons and I got to going down double diamond and some back country.  Golf wise, it definitely took a lot longer than a year and a half to hit scratch handicap.  I'm just one story but it's a difference of years not a few months.

None of the anecdotal evidence - while remembering it's just anecdotal evidence - that people have shared in this thread supports you, Don.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Everybody agrees to hit down on the ball, but nobody knows how to teach that?

With every club? No. Some clubs perform best when hit level. Some perform best when hit on the upswing.

And even if you're just talking about a 5-iron, as I said above, majors have been won by players hitting 8 to 10° down and majors have been won by players hitting 0 to 1° down.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Everybody agrees that a good shot requires a square club face, and everybody does it differently? The laws of physics would disagree.

I disagree that a good shot requires a square clubface. Very, very few good players have a clubface that's "square" to the target or their club path at impact.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Golf's biggest problem--and one can probably stick this one on all mankind--is it's stuck in tradition.

I give up.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

"We've always done it that way!" is not a reason, nor a good excuse. The wise man doesn't look for ways it won't work, but looks for reasons why it can. 

Has anyone said that in this entire thread (excluding yourself)?

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Tradition and ego get in the way of good results, and esp now, with all the technology available to test theories, there's no excuse other than it's the way it's always been done. And the earth is flat.

I give up.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

How about this? There is one way to swing a golf club, and nobody agrees on how to do it? Shouldn't a professional KNOW how to do it and all agree?

There is no one way to swing a golf club. People are not all identical robots.

There are fairly big differences between the major winners last year. Tiger's won majors with three or four different swings.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Could this be why "golf is so hard?"

No. Golf is hard because it combines incredible speeds with incredible precision, and combines those with a very small target placed really far away, a varied playing field and countless variations on shots required to navigate that playing field, and a lack of opponents whose own mistakes can directly benefit you.

That's why golf is hard.

With skiing, hell, gravity will get you to the bottom of the hill one way or another.

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I don't know, but you can't say I'm not looking for the holy grail that I believe most of us are seeking. Just let me hit the ball straight(er).

Find a good instructor.

[Blackjack Don]

11 minutes ago, phillyk said:

When I moved to Washington State, I went skiing (at Mount Baker) about 12 times one winter and was good enough to hit the diamond runs, the next year I took a series of 3 lessons and I got to going down double diamond and some back country.  Golf wise, it definitely took a lot longer than a year and a half to hit scratch handicap.  I'm just one story but it's a difference of years not a few months.

You must be a very good athlete, no doubt. Did you know that the diamond system is unique to each ski area? I got real good at skiing the black diamonds in Wisconsin, then went to Vail and found out their blacks weren't the same as Wilmot Mtn.  Just an aside, not disagreeing with you. Yes, you can progress faster, but let me pose a question to you, based on your experience.

Could you have skied a double-black run without the lessons?

I tried skiing the bumps and crashed. I thought I was good until I went through the program to be an instructor. I could then ski the bumps without becoming a yard sale, but still couldn't get the hang of finishing my turns above the gates as much as the instructor wanted me to. Not all lessons work, even in skiing, but the ski lessons are better than golf lessons because there is a program. If this isn't true, so far, nobody's showed much evidence.

Basically I am saying there can be and everybody else is telling me I'm wrong. Hmm, this doesn't seem quite right, does it? We agree golf instruction needs improvement, but are we now agreeing it isn't going to happen on a broad scale because it hasn't?

[RussUK]

4 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

 

How about this? There is one way to swing a golf club, and nobody agrees on how to do it? Shouldn't a professional KNOW how to do it and all agree?

Could this be why "golf is so hard?"

 

Not sure i agree with the "one way to swing a club". If that was the case every golfer would be swinging identically or, even worse, swinging like Jim Furyk .

I believe golf is only as hard as we as individuals make it. The problem is as its human nature to always strive for the best possible (in some cases "perfection") we make it harder than it could/should be. 

Not saying golf isnt hard, becuase it is, just that we make it worse by always looking for that swing "secret". Just my humble opinion.

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Could you have skied a double-black run without the lessons?

That's not the same thing as breaking 90 or 100 in golf.

4 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Not all lessons work, even in skiing, but the ski lessons are better than golf lessons because there is a program. If this isn't true, so far, nobody's showed much evidence.

No, you're just not listening.

You can train a high schooler to be a ski instructor in relatively short order because skiing is simpler and easier.

Parents teaching their kids to ride a bike aren't "better instructors" and most don't have a program at all. Yet their kid is often pedaling around the neighborhood a few hours later. Riding a bike is simpler and easier.

4 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Basically I am saying there can be and everybody else is telling me I'm wrong. Hmm, this doesn't seem quite right, does it? We agree golf instruction needs improvement, but are we now agreeing it isn't going to happen on a broad scale because it hasn't?

The bold statement is so untrue I don't know where to start, except to say that you don't seem to be reading anything people are typing to you.

[Blackjack Don]

"It means the shaft should be pointing at the lead shoulder at impact."

This is the first time I've heard this. Seriously. Please don't give up. We're not that far apart. You are already doing what I'm advocating for. This is also what is making us crazy. We're talking past each other.

When I read this, I immediately got it. Yes! that sounds right to me. (You can say Duh, I can take it.) I'll buy into this, for sure. Shaft pointing to my left shoulder.

Now, if the arm is straight, the wrist leading at impact, then the shaft must be pointing toward the left shoulder, right? Unless you're double-jointed or have a broken arm. So you can teach this, and Clampett teaches the straight wrist--you called it something that sounded really technical and cool but didn't tell me anything, honestly, and I can't remember it without going back and looking it up--and I remember one of the slo-mo replays and comments by the color guy saying about how the hitter kept his left arm straight through impact, and it all seems to be exactly the same thing! So this is a fundamental.

Yes, so what if skiing is easier, and every other activity is. But if everyone is teaching the same thing, a straight left wrist at impact, aiming in front of the ball, and hitting down and through, the weight shift should naturally occur, I think. Probably doesn't with most people, but their hip turns and everything should occur if they are doing everything right.

Now, they might hit the ball left or right because there are a jillion different things that can be a hair out of place and get a bad result, but the fundamentals never change.

Golfers are bad at fundamentals. It doesn't take a great deal of time to teach someone the fundamentals of catching a ground ball, but most people do it poorly. The fundamentals are the same.

What are the fundamentals in golf? And you tell me there can't be a program to teach these?

See? And you and others are already doing it! It can't be KISS?

I give up. Like everybody else, I'll find my own way. 

17 minutes ago, iacas said:

Find a good instructor.

Hasn't it been established that unicorns don't exist? If there is no standardization in teaching the fundamentals, then there will be flaws in every instructor. How can there not be? Some are gooder than others, but who can I trust?

What is the one single question one should ask an instructor to show that he's good?

[Blackjack Don]

13 minutes ago, iacas said:

That's not the same thing as breaking 90 or 100 in golf.

No, you're just not listening.

You can train a high schooler to be a ski instructor in relatively short order because skiing is simpler and easier.

Parents teaching their kids to ride a bike aren't "better instructors" and most don't have a program at all. Yet their kid is often pedaling around the neighborhood a few hours later. Riding a bike is simpler and easier.

The bold statement is so untrue I don't know where to start, except to say that you don't seem to be reading anything people are typing to you.

Yes, I'm listening and reading every word--well, I still have to go back and finish your long one--sorry, But everybody else's I'm reading. Didn't I say and haven't I said skiing is not as hard as golf, but getting someone on skis and down a hill without them face-planting isn't easy, man. Try it. It takes a ton of skill to learn to ski, and it took me a couple of tries to make it through ski instructor school. It isn't easy. 

I guess we're done here. I hear ya. There isn't anything other than going out there and finding my own way. I'm sad that's the way it is. My friend who gave me the book "Swing the Handle, Not the Club" is disappointed I am not sticking to his teacher's book. There are things in there that work for me, but I found the real things that made the biggest difference to me in a different source. On the fourth reading of Merrens' book, I see where he is saying the same things about a flat left wrist and hitting down on the ball, but nothing about aiming in front of the ball. These are fundamentals to me. Yet, a very successful teacher and my friend didn't tell me about them. You did, Erik. I thank you for pointing it out.

I'm sticking to practicing the fundamentals until I get them right. If I don't see improvement, then I'll ask you for help. I must be missing something fundamental. That's the hard part of self-teaching. But thanks to video, I saw how I swayed, how my left elbow flies around, how my head moves. All fundamentals I can't see when I swing, only when I see where the shot goes.

So it's back to the fundamentals. Good thread. Glad it got out there. Hoped it made someone think. That's my reward. When someone says Hmm, I'm happy.

Peace.

[nevets88]

58 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I agree. SKiing is easier than golf. Maybe. I have no data to back up either way. But I can see why everybody has been saying golf is harder. 

Now, take a hundred skiers who have never had a lesson but get down the hill and have fun, and give them a group lesson. Take a hundred golfers who struggle to break a hundred. I have no idea what the exact data would be, but I am pretty sure the percentages of skiers improving would be better than the golfers--by quite a bit. Only because skiing is so easy and golf is so hard, or is there some percentage in that data that would be because ski instruction is better than golf instruction? It's laughable to think that skiing is that much easier, because it's not. It's really hard to be a good skier. People who don't take lessons show that. Ski instruction does make better skiers.

 

My impression of a ski instructor is a good skier who's taking time off from school. Ski bum is something you hear more than golf bum. There's probably more of a chasm between your average ski instructor and one who teaches Olympic hopeful downhill skiers than the average pro and those who teach PGA Tour pros.

[CarlSpackler]

19 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Hasn't it been established that unicorns don't exist? If there is no standardization in teaching the fundamentals, then there will be flaws in every instructor. How can there not be? Some are gooder than others, but who can I trust?

What is the one single question one should ask an instructor to show that he's good?

I don't think there is a magic question that can be asked. When I interview a potential employee, I ask more than one question. I would want to know that an instructor is interested in defining a priority that I need to work on and that we are going to stick with it until it's fixed. I would also want to know what they use to identify that priority. If it doesn't involve video analysis, then RUN AWAY! I've said this before. The worst lesson I ever had was from a pro who told me there was nothing wrong with my swing after watching me hit a dozen shots.

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

"It means the shaft should be pointing at the lead shoulder at impact."

This is the first time I've heard this. Seriously. Please don't give up. We're not that far apart. You are already doing what I'm advocating for. This is also what is making us crazy. We're talking past each other.

No, you're not listening. You keep repeating things, claiming nobody's countered your statements, when people have done those very things.

And if you haven't ever read that before, you didn't really look into what 5SK is, because it's pretty much everywhere.

It's here:

It's said to give the same thing but using different words here:

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Now, if the arm is straight, the wrist leading at impact, then the shaft must be pointing toward the left shoulder, right?

Lee Westwood's left arm is bent, his wrist is cupped, and he achieves Key #3. Fred Couples left wrist isn't flat, but he achieves Key #3.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

So you can teach this, and Clampett teaches the straight wrist--you called it something that sounded really technical and cool but didn't tell me anything, honestly, and I can't remember it without going back and looking it up--and I remember one of the slo-mo replays and comments by the color guy saying about how the hitter kept his left arm straight through impact, and it all seems to be exactly the same thing! So this is a fundamental.

It's not really, though, no.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Yes, so what if skiing is easier, and every other activity is.

It's easier to create a program when the flow chart is simple.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

But if everyone is teaching the same thing, a straight left wrist at impact, aiming in front of the ball, and hitting down and through, the weight shift should naturally occur, I think.

That made me chuckle.

And again, there's no one way, nor can there ever really be.

Dude, you don't even know. The flow chart for just "Key #3" might have a hundred boxes on it… and they won't all arrive at having a straight lead arm or a flat lead wrist.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Now, they might hit the ball left or right because there are a jillion different things that can be a hair out of place and get a bad result, but the fundamentals never change.

Achieving the fundamentals - whatever you decide they are - in golf is an incredibly complex process that is different for every person.

Dude, there's a guy who had a PGA Tour card who swings cross-handed for crying out loud.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Golfers are bad at fundamentals. It doesn't take a great deal of time to teach someone the fundamentals of catching a ground ball, but most people do it poorly. The fundamentals are the same.

Catching a ground ball is much, much, much easier than hitting a 5-iron 190 yards to a green smaller than my living room.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

What are the fundamentals in golf? And you tell me there can't be a program to teach these?

You're not listening.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Yes, I'm listening

I disagree.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Didn't I say and haven't I said skiing is not as hard as golf, but getting someone on skis and down a hill without them face-planting isn't easy, man. Try it. It takes a ton of skill to learn to ski, and it took me a couple of tries to make it through ski instructor school. It isn't easy. 

It's significantly easier than learning to play golf. It doesn't take a "ton" of skill. Again, my daughter's school has a "ski club" and virtually all of the kids who go to that and get a little bit of instruction are off the bunny slopes and can be classified as "skiers" by the end of their seven or eight weeks.

You're not gonna get those results from a junior golf clinic regardless of how good your program is.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

There isn't anything other than going out there and finding my own way.

And you wonder why I feel you're not listening?

Find a good instructor.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

On the fourth reading of Merrens' book, I see where he is saying the same things about a flat left wrist and hitting down on the ball, but nothing about aiming in front of the ball. These are fundamentals to me.

Maybe.

You're probably not doing what you think you're doing.

Post a Member Swing thread. Even if you ignore anything anyone has to say, the benefits to you will be real: you'll get to document your swing, see it evolve, write down your notes and thoughts, and lessons, and have it all in one easy to search place

And occasionally if someone makes a comment that helps you, bonus.

27 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Hasn't it been established that unicorns don't exist?

Again, you wonder why I think you're not reading what I (and others) are writing…?

Good instructors exist.

27 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

What is the one single question one should ask an instructor to show that he's good?

There's no such thing.

And if there was, a shitty instructor could just memorize the answer.

[GolfLug]

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

"It means the shaft should be pointing at the lead shoulder at impact."

This is the first time I've heard this. Seriously. Please don't give up. We're not that far apart. You are already doing what I'm advocating for. This is also what is making us crazy. We're talking past each other.

When I read this, I immediately got it. Yes! that sounds right to me. (You can say Duh, I can take it.) I'll buy into this, for sure. Shaft pointing to my left shoulder.

Now, if the arm is straight, the wrist leading at impact, then the shaft must be pointing toward the left shoulder, right? Unless you're double-jointed or have a broken arm. So you can teach this, and Clampett teaches the straight wrist--you called it something that sounded really technical and cool but didn't tell me anything, honestly, and I can't remember it without going back and looking it up--and I remember one of the slo-mo replays and comments by the color guy saying about how the hitter kept his left arm straight through impact, and it all seems to be exactly the same thing! So this is a fundamental.

Yes, so what if skiing is easier, and every other activity is. But if everyone is teaching the same thing, a straight left wrist at impact, aiming in front of the ball, and hitting down and through, the weight shift should naturally occur, I think. Probably doesn't with most people, but their hip turns and everything should occur if they are doing everything right.

Now, they might hit the ball left or right because there are a jillion different things that can be a hair out of place and get a bad result, but the fundamentals never change.

Golfers are bad at fundamentals. It doesn't take a great deal of time to teach someone the fundamentals of catching a ground ball, but most people do it poorly. The fundamentals are the same.

What are the fundamentals in golf? And you tell me there can't be a program to teach these?

See? And you and others are already doing it! It can't be KISS?

I give up. Like everybody else, I'll find my own way. 

Hasn't it been established that unicorns don't exist? If there is no standardization in teaching the fundamentals, then there will be flaws in every instructor. How can there not be? Some are gooder than others, but who can I trust?

What is the one single question one should ask an instructor to show that he's good?

So what is your explanation of why golf instruction is not standardized?

If you haven't already noted the owners of this site have a 'fundamentals' program to cut through the very fog you speak of. Just ask or read. Hell, it won't cost you a dime if you chose not to. The info is laid out in pain staking detail. And learning them can be very 'KISS'. In fact it is imperative that it is simplified to stupidity. It's called prioritization - one thing at a time. Rinse and repeat till it is time for a new priority. News flash: It just won't be as quick as skiing. But that's how I learned - FINALLY.. and education and improvement continue. As to what that is and what the next priority should be and when.. etc., sorry man, you can take your chances but there is no substitute for a trained eye. Heck, I needed help on even staying on my priority. BTW, in golf 'going it alone' has the highest probability of least learning.

I have a feeling you know all of this already.