Why Isn't Golf Taught Like Skiing?

[mvmac]

16 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

Can we try an experiment, Mulligans? Tell your neighbor to aim two inches in front of the ball and keep his left wrist straight. Nothing more. Send me an email about his results. At least he'll stop flipping.

:)

If only it were that easy, which is clearly isn't. Golf is much more complex and individualized than skiing or swimming or weight lifting. Just read what @iacas is posting, he knows what he's talking about.

[Lihu]

On 12/17/2016 at 2:05 PM, GolfLug said:

In skiing, what you feel is for most parts is exactly what you are doing. Much easier to learn intuitively. Half hour of basic instruction got me off the bunny hill the very next day for good.     

 

On 12/17/2016 at 4:38 PM, No Mulligans said:

Skiing is more of a natural movement (especially with modern equipment).  It is much easier to be a beginner at skiing than golf. 

I think comparing beginning skiing on intermediate/diamond slopes is kind of like comparing golfing while taking 4 to 7 shots to get to the greens. Any basic golf instruction (even from bad instructors) teaches you pretty much to do that.

 

On 12/17/2016 at 7:10 PM, allenc said:

Skiing is like riding a bike.  It's not intuitive right off the bat, but with some simple instruction and practice most people can learn to get from here to there pretty easily.  Of course there are tricks, racing, difficult slopes/bmw courses but if you can move around fluently you can be said to have mastered it.  And that take a couple weeks.

On the other hand hitting a golf ball is hard as hell and pretty much nobody can do it no matter how many years they practice (slight exaggeration).

More like a lifetime. . .

There is resort skiing and there is back country skiing. I've done both, where resort skiing is like getting on a few "double blacks" and saying you've "mastered" skiing. Back country skiing requires a lot more knowledge of terrain, snow conditions and control of your body much more than simple hip turns on moguls and whatnot. It's very technical, just like golf.

When you get to the point where you are pushing the limits of your equipment and ability, all sports are all really hard.

 

On 12/18/2016 at 6:52 AM, Blackjack Don said:

First, I am not comparing golf and skiing as the same. They obviously are not. From the comments so far, I have to believe that there are a bunch of folks out there that don't know a whole bunch about skiing. If you go to any ski area anywhere, you'll see the majority of skiers sitting back on the tails of their skis. If it's pointed out to you, because it takes a trained eye to see. The results however are obvious. Much like some golfers who have most of their weight on the right side and try to "lift" the ball. I've spent weeks trying to get someone to press their shins into the front of their boots, get the weight forward onto the front of their skis.

Yes, the technology of skiing has improved from my day. So has golf. It's been a century since I've been out skiing, but I'm willing to bet that skiers aren't that much better now, just like golf. My view is this is a failure of instruction in both skiing and golf.

But, again, I'm not comparing skiing and golf as activities. I spent twenty years playing pretty high-level tennis. I wouldn't even compare tennis and golf, but they share a lot of similarities in instruction. I would say tennis might be more agreement among tennis instructors than golf instructors. There is a way to hit a forehand that was first identified by Vic Braden. Lots of pros hit a forehand differently, and many of them suck at it, but they all have the racket face in the same position on impact. Same as golf.

But I maintain two thoughts:

1. Everybody is dissatisfied with golf instruction.

2. Golf professionals are obstinately clinging to the status quo.

Don thinks the two are related, and there is a better way. At least there should be discussion. 

 

I don't think ski instruction covers all aspects to master skiing just like current golf instruction doesn't cover all you need to become a scratch golfer.

 

On 12/18/2016 at 7:17 AM, No Mulligans said:

I grew up with my dad working at a ski resort and have had a season pass for the last 53 years.

You'd lose that bet.  Skiers are much better on average now.  Why speak of something you know nothing about, you admittied you haven't skied in a century.

There use to be a down up unweighting motions, shifting weight to the outside ski...  Long skinny skis, leather lace boots, cable bindings.  

 Now, just roll your knees to the inside of your turn and keep your weight forward will get you most of the way there.  Beginners can move past the snow plow stage (now called wedge) in a day or two.  The advanced runs that use to have just a few skiers a day are know crowded with skiers.

I learned to carve within 3 weeks of daily skiing (which I am told is kind of slow ), and it took me 3 years before I could tackle back country skiing even with a strong mountaineering background. It's incremental just like golf.

 

On 12/18/2016 at 7:28 AM, Blackjack Don said:

Next time you go out, pay attention to how many skiers have their weight forward over the tips, and how many are sitting back on the tails. Simple physics. Ski boots are stiff. Rear-closing boots helped, but ski racers still use front buckles. Some things don't change. 

Most people use the front buckles when making aggressive turns, float on powder, carve on packed powder (otherwise known as ice) and rear boot on twin tips when spinning and stuff.

There are situations where you need to be able to do any of the above. . .

 

Quote

Look, I'm only advocating for a system. We have a way to teach a difficult--and it IS difficult--sport. Just because it's easier doesn't make it easy. As long as everyone insists there is no one way to hit a golf ball, then most golfers will be

Lousy golfers

Who take too long to play.

Get frustrated.

And quit.

My goal would be a USGA/PGA commercial which says "Golf has never been easier. See a pro today to find out how." Not so much the smugness of "Thank a pro." Does anyone really think self-congratulations are in order?

Not sure I agree that ski instruction is that much more advanced than golf instruction. Seems like even the 90% bad instruction teaches you to hack your way from tee to hole just like beginning ski instruction gets you on beginner to intermediate slopes. More advanced carving techniques are likely still learned through experience and not really from better instruction.

Most instruction is on groomed terrain which is really easy to ski on.

 

14 hours 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.

Not really. Only up to a point. Just like golf instruction generally helps golfers get into the low 100s or even high 90s. Even bad instruction.

No ski instruction helps you get into a Warren Miller film. That's either talent and/or a lot of experience.

[Blackjack Don]

7 hours ago, Lihu said:

Most instruction is on groomed terrain which is really easy to ski on.

I'm done with this thread, but I thought this was a good place to end. This may be why people have been saying skiing is easy. It's not. It really is not. It's a skill, and mastering any skill is hard. Just because someone can get down a hill without falling under perfect conditions with the latest equipment doesn't mean they are skiing anymore than I'm playing golf if I move my ball into the fairway from the deep rough. I'm sorry this got in the way of the discussion.

Best wishes to you all, and hopefully I made a few friends and fewer enemies.

[Lihu]

11 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I'm done with this thread, but I thought this was a good place to end. This may be why people have been saying skiing is easy. It's not. It really is not. It's a skill, and mastering any skill is hard.

Yes, totally agreed.

 

Quote

Just because someone can get down a hill without falling under perfect conditions with the latest equipment doesn't mean they are skiing anymore than I'm playing golf if I move my ball into the fairway from the deep rough.

I don't equate using the latest equipment skiing with cheating in golf.

From what I understand, we can probably just equate skiing on short hyperbolic skis with using the latest most forgiving golf equipment. Supposedly makes it easier, but doesn't get you to "expert" level by any means.

 

Quote

I'm sorry this got in the way of the discussion.

Best wishes to you all, and hopefully I made a few friends and fewer enemies.

Stick around for other discussions. This was a good thought and crossed my mind as well, until I actually recalled how many face plants I took to learn to ski ice covered powder.

 

 

BTW, my son got into OSU with a scholarship. Not sure he is going there, but we all like the campus.

[iacas]

41 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I'm done with this thread, but I thought this was a good place to end.

Nobody's talking about mastering the skills required to ski the back country versus breaking 90. Not that I know of, anyway.

People are suggesting that in their opinions it's far easier to become "competent" in skiing than in golf. The instruction can thus be far simpler. The flow chart is far simpler. That more people new to skiing actually take instruction, and it lends itself to group instruction, unlike golf. There's also really only "one way" to ski, as opposed to golf, and the sport itself has way more margin for error over longer time frames.

41 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

It's a skill, and mastering any skill is hard,

I don't think anyone is talking about mastering the skill of golf. Just competency. Average people with day jobs don't have the time to master anything.

41 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I'm sorry this got in the way of the discussion.

The discussion is still valid, but you've never really responded to the points raised. You've said everyone needs a square clubface, I've pointed out that virtually no good players have square club faces. You've said everyone should swing like Rory, I've pointed out that his swing has flaws and that people CAN'T all swing like Rory. Not even on the PGA Tour. And on down the list.

It's fine that you're done - I gave up on asking you to respond to my points a few posts back.

Check out the other topics on the site. Start a Member Swing thread, as many have encouraged you to do.

Cheers.

[Blackjack Don]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

People are suggesting that in their opinions it's far easier to become "competent" in skiing than in golf.

We probably can't find agreement on the definition of competent in golf. Competent may not be possible, in fact, regardless of instruction. Very few golfers will ever have the burning desire necessary to put the time and effort--and a larger amount of money than most of us can afford--into becoming a competent golfer. Instruction in golf is expensive. Knowledge has never been easier to get. Yet, incompetence seems to be as good as most golfers will ever get. I would be proud to break ninety every time. That wouldn't even be competent, would it?

I said I was done with this thread because I think we have beaten this horse unrecognizable. I don't have anything left to say.

1 hour ago, iacas said:

The discussion is still valid, but you've never really responded to the points raised.

Im sorry you feel this is true. I have done the best I can to respond. I have been unable to present a case. The failure is mine. I tried to answer you, as best I could. I don't think I have anything left to contribute. I'm convinced by all of your arguments that I lack sufficient knowledge and experience to argue the other side from you. I doubt I ever will.

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Check out the other topics on the site. Start a Member Swing thread, as many have encouraged you to do.

I plan on doing this. I may have put myself into a position where objectivity might be hard to come by. I might ask questions that would appear to be argumentative, or someone may think of me as golf's satan and wish me ill. (It's possible. Some of the responses in this thread have been close to line of personal, honestly. I'm not upset by it, but tone matters. While I'm argumentative, I try to remain jovial.) 

Putting oneself out there with a strongly unpopular position requires pretty thick armor. An asbestos suit, should flame wars break out. I've been in many of them, no surprise there. I feel and see the frustration and occasional anger. I am trying very hard to come at my golfing experience from my experience with my meditation practice. A smile never hurts.

You are a good teacher, Erik, of that I have no doubt. You also really care. You've got a great site here. I've been on the World Wide Web since the beginning. That we can disagree as strongly as we have is a testament to the site and how the Web has evolved into a more decent place. This discussion does have merit. We've shown we can discuss it without turning into a flame war, but I don't see how we can go any further with it. We seem to have no areas on which we agree.

Best wishes, and happy holidays.

Don

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

We probably can't find agreement on the definition of competent in golf. Competent may not be possible, in fact, regardless of instruction. Very few golfers will ever have the burning desire necessary to put the time and effort--and a larger amount of money than most of us can afford--into becoming a competent golfer.

I'd define competent as a single digit golfer. What's the equivalent in skiing - being able to go down some of the advanced runs? (Preferably someone who has skied in the last century can answer.)

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Instruction in golf is expensive. Knowledge has never been easier to get. Yet, incompetence seems to be as good as most golfers will ever get. I would be proud to break ninety every time. That wouldn't even be competent, would it?

I wouldn't say so.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I said I was done with this thread because I think we have beaten this horse unrecognizable. I don't have anything left to say.

I'm disappointed that you never seemed to acknowledge or reply to the points I raised. You made several statements that don't jive with what I know to be true.

And trust me - everything I look at I try to pick apart. I try to pull something apart because, if that's easily done, then I can quickly move onto something else. My natural reaction to anything is to be skeptical. I was this way about golf instruction when I came to it, and my background in the sciences (and multiple degrees) helped with that.

I like to shake up the established or accepted things. Before I knew anything about your argument, I'd be inclined to agree just out of nature - I am a skeptic and anti-establishment. But even with that bias I can't support your take on things at all. There are far too many holes which are far too easily poked.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Im sorry you feel this is true. I have done the best I can to respond.

Here's how I perceive several things have gone:

1. You make a statement. Maybe it's how "Rory has a perfect swing, everyone should copy that." or "the clubface has to be square at impact. It's just physics."
2. I counter that with examples and evidence and reasons.
3. You respond later, ignoring the specifics, but often adding something in about how "nobody's presented any evidence" or something.

Maybe I'm wrong, or weighting the few times that happened too heavily, but that's my perception of things.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I have been unable to present a case. The failure is mine. I tried to answer you, as best I could. I don't think I have anything left to contribute. I'm convinced by all of your arguments that I lack sufficient knowledge and experience to argue the other side from you. I doubt I ever will.

This isn't really an "experience versus lack of experience" argument. My experience has shaped my opinions but I don't believe I've made the "I'm experienced so my points matter more" argument.

It boils down to this, though: you think there's "one way" to teach golf. I disagree, and cited reasons why. Again, I'm obviously seeing things through my eyes, and I'm sure you feel differently, but that's where I'm at.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I plan on doing this. I may have put myself into a position where objectivity might be hard to come by. I might ask questions that would appear to be argumentative, or someone may think of me as golf's satan and wish me ill. (It's possible. Some of the responses in this thread have been close to line of personal, honestly. I'm not upset by it, but tone matters. While I'm argumentative, I try to remain jovial.) 

I don't think anyone's gotten personal. I haven't.

And you get to decide what your "Member Swing" thread is about. If it's about actually improving, though, there are two threads for you:

Read over those. Also unlike skiing, there's no real "bunny slope." There's no bigger ball and bigger clubs with a shorter distance and a larger hole at the end in golf (though the latter two you can create or find, and the former two exist… but it's called SNAG and it's for little kids ).

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

You are a good teacher, Erik, of that I have no doubt. You also really care. You've got a great site here. I've been on the World Wide Web since the beginning. That we can disagree as strongly as we have is a testament to the site and how the Web has evolved into a more decent place. This discussion does have merit. We've shown we can discuss it without turning into a flame war, but I don't see how we can go any further with it. We seem to have no areas on which we agree.

Discussions are fine. I'll often take a devil's advocate position (I do it less online since there's no tone of voice and there's a record of everything, but still…) because I like to discuss things. And you'll get more of that here than virtually anywhere else, and in a more civil fashion, too, I believe.

People here are open minded. They kinda have to be, since many golfers still believe things that are factually untrue, and that doesn't fly here.

Welcome to the site.

[No Mulligans]

@iacasI think the equivalent of a singe digit in skiing is Corbet's Couloir in Jackson Hole.  Maybe not quite, there is a probable a higher percentage of skiers that can do this than golfers that play to single digits.  On the other hand, you could get really hurt doing this, in that sense there isn't an equivalent in golf.

The equivalent of a pga player would be skiing on the world cup.  I believe it's as hard to succeed on the world cup as it is on the pga.  In that sense skiing is as hard as golf.

But, to have fun as an intermediate... that is much easier in skiing than golf.

 

[phillyk]

17 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

I think the equivalent of a singe digit in skiing is Corbet's Couloir in Jackson Hole.  Maybe not quite, there is a much higher percentage of skiers that can do this than golfers that play to single digits.  On the other hand, you could get really hurt doing this, in that sense there isn't an equivalent in golf.

 

We have spots like that.  This video doesn't do it justice because it was a good pow day (this isn't me in the video).  But when it's icey that 5ft wide section sucks. haha!  But I see people go down it all the time.  It's hard to compare ability in skiing and snowboarding, sometimes, because you could go down those steep spots sideways and say you went on a double black versus actually going down normal.  Golf, there is a clear distinction in ability.

 

[iacas]

51 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

@iacasI think the equivalent of a singe digit in skiing is Corbet's Couloir in Jackson Hole.  Maybe not quite, there is a probable a higher percentage of skiers that can do this than golfers that play to single digits.

Really?

Nearly 1/3 of all male golfers with handicaps are single digit golfers.

And 6-9 handicappers aren't "good," but they're "competent" IMO.

[Lihu]

2 hours ago, No Mulligans said:

@iacasI think the equivalent of a singe digit in skiing is Corbet's Couloir in Jackson Hole.  Maybe not quite, there is a probable a higher percentage of skiers that can do this than golfers that play to single digits.  On the other hand, you could get really hurt doing this, in that sense there isn't an equivalent in golf.

The equivalent of a pga player would be skiing on the world cup.  I believe it's as hard to succeed on the world cup as it is on the pga.  In that sense skiing is as hard as golf.

But, to have fun as an intermediate... that is much easier in skiing than golf.

 

Yeah, that's the kind of drop you really don't want your skis to be pointing straight down for longer than it takes to plant the pole and do that hip check.

This is like scratch skiing at a resort. . .

 

 

Pro level:

 

 

 

[Lihu]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Really?

Nearly 1/3 of all male golfers with handicaps are single digit golfers.

And 6-9 handicappers aren't "good," but they're "competent" IMO.

Competent? Not really how I feel. . .

 

[No Mulligans]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

Really?

Nearly 1/3 of all male golfers with handicaps are single digit golfers.

And 6-9 handicappers aren't "good," but they're "competent" IMO.

Since the population of skiers include those that go once every few years.  The population of golfers should include those that don't have handicaps.  The subset of golfers that have handicaps (less than 10% based on a quick google search) is not a fair representation.

[JonMA1]

6 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

I plan on doing this. I may have put myself into a position where objectivity might be hard to come by. I might ask questions that would appear to be argumentative, or someone may think of me as golf's satan and wish me ill. (It's possible. Some of the responses in this thread have been close to line of personal, honestly. I'm not upset by it, but tone matters. While I'm argumentative, I try to remain jovial.) 

I think you might be surprised @Blackjack Don. None of us gets to state our opinion on this site without it being questioned or argued. We've all had to defend our point of view. It's all part of what I enjoy about TST. You were passionate about your opinion but didn't seem disrespectful or rude, and I thought others acted that way as well.

You received a lot of responses from your initial post - that means your point was valid enough to argue. Trust me, that beats the alternative.

---

As far as "a standard lesson plan", I agree that there might be a best way to teach most students. But - and this goes for any type of instruction - I wouldn't want discourage creativity when it comes to finding new methods of reaching those of us who don't fall into the category of "most" students.

[CarlSpackler]

5 minutes ago, JonMA1 said:

I think you might be surprised @Blackjack Don. None of us gets to state our opinion on this site without it being questioned or argued. We've all had to defend our point of view. It's all part of what I enjoy about TST. You were passionate about your opinion but didn't seem disrespectful or rude, and I thought others acted that way as well.

You received a lot of responses from your initial post - that means your point was valid enough to argue. Trust me, that beats the alternative.

---

As far as "a standard lesson plan", I agree that there might be a best way to teach most students. But - and this goes for any type of instruction - I wouldn't want discourage creativity when it comes to finding new methods of reaching those of us who don't fall into the category of "most" students.

This. 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, No Mulligans said:

Since the population of skiers include those that go once every few years.  The population of golfers should include those that don't have handicaps.  The subset of golfers that have handicaps (less than 10% based on a quick google search) is not a fair representation.

Golfers who don't golf more than "once every few years" aren't golfers.

Someone else put it this way: I consider myself a decent skier but it's a safe bet that anything with the word "Couloir" in its name is not safe for me. Also crevasse.

So I reject the idea that that run is equivalent to a single digit golfer. Maybe a 1 or a 2, but not a 7, 8, 9.

I rarely snowboard but can still get down even some more advanced hills after starting on the intermediate to reacquaint myself. If I golfed as often as I snowboard I might not break 110 (well, if I also expunged my playing history, too).

---

Anyway, the point isn't really to compare the two. It is, and isn't.

The point was to discuss whether the way we teach skiing (one method or process, etc.) could apply to golf instruction.

[Patch]

I learned to ride a bike first, then came water skiing, then snow skiing, then snow boarding. Some where after the water skiing came golf. Of the 5, golf was the toughest. The only requirement for the other 4 was keeping my balance, while mastering other difficulties, as I went along. 

In golf, all the difficulties are there, and start when you take up the game. 

The only way I could associate golf and skiing instruction is to start with easy stuff first. 

 

[Hardspoon]

IMO, a big reason for the difference between teaching skiing and teaching golf is that skiing depends much more heavily on inherent athletic characteristics: balance, agility, and reflexes.

Therefore, if you give a skier the basics of technique, they will continue to improve with practice.  Period.  Maybe not as quickly as they would with continued coaching, but simply by skiing more, they'll continually get better.

Golf isn't like that.  The methods used to teach it have to be adaptive.  One "fix" may create another problem, which requires another necessary "fix", which maybe creates (or reveals) another priority problem in the swing.

Also, golf requires multiple skills (full swing, short game, putting, and some specialty shots) as a fundamental component of the game.  A skier can be a really good downhill skier without learning moguls, or without learning freestyle tricks.  A golfer has to learn all the skills, at least at some basic level, unless they're just going to enter long drive contests or play mini golf.