Why Isn't Golf Taught Like Skiing?

[DeadMan]

17 hours ago, Lihu said:

Other than that one part of it, the point is that you are completely off base with the "skiing is less athletic" post you made. . .

Well, I didn't actually say that. I said that you use less of your body while skiing. Which is true; skiing is primarily a lower body sport. Ideally, your upper body stays pretty still. Watch any truly technical skier out there and you'll notice that their upper body doesn't move that much. When you have a tough day of skiing, it's not your chest or arms that hurt.

Maybe the right way to say it is that skiing is less complex for your body, because the goal is to keep your upper body quiet while skiing. It's a lot easier to learn how to do that than it is to move nearly every part of your body in synch. In golf, you're moving basically any part of your body that you can twist. Your shoulders, wrists, hips, knees are all moving during the swing. Skiing is a much simpler motion.

[Buckeyebowman]

OK, I skipped from the first post to right here. I think the primary reason that golf is not taught like skiing is because golfers aren't afraid of falling down a frozen mountain and killing themselves!

Don't get me wrong, I think the ski model is absolutely right! What we need is a "bunny hill" for golfers! That's the practice green and a putter and chipping club!

That can work with kids, and even women, but it won't work with full grown men if they're starting the game in their adulthood. The word is "recruitment" isn't it?

I learned the game haphazardly, but started by chipping and putting to a hole I dug in the back yard!

[Blackjack Don]

Okay, I'm back. I'll reopen the bidding.

I am constantly seeing contradictory advice from pros. Yesterday on a podcast I heard a pro say he is against taking a divot. He said it's about the bounce. I'm also seeing many people say that the bottom of the swing occurs in front of the ball, which means taking a divot.

Not to get into which one is right, in this thread it doesn't matter. My point, and the one I still believe in--and I'm not alone, this isn't just MY criticism--as long as there is no system of teaching the game of golf, there is going to be students of golf who are spinning in circles. Do this, and then you have to undo it, learn one thing only to be told that's the wrong thing to do. Fill in your own example; everyone has one. Don't even get me started on hands, arms, and shoulders. Holy schmokes.

It's not about skiing. It's coming up with a system. The US Ski Association and the Professional Ski Instructors of America agree on the system of learning for their sport. It works.Somehow they got all the old school ski instructors to buy in. One step leads to another and to another. Any pro can teach it. They found a way to teach the skill.

I submit golf can and should be taught in a similar fashion. Or is there more money in Butch Harmon having a different way from everybody else? Seems like it might be more profitable the way it is, but is it good for golf?

[Lihu]

42 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Okay, I'm back. I'll reopen the bidding.

I am constantly seeing contradictory advice from pros. Yesterday on a podcast I heard a pro say he is against taking a divot. He said it's about the bounce. I'm also seeing many people say that the bottom of the swing occurs in front of the ball, which means taking a divot.

So, one instructor I know at my home town's course says "Taking divots is so 1980s". I'm guessing that's why all his students hit thin.

 

Quote

Not to get into which one is right, in this thread it doesn't matter. My point, and the one I still believe in--and I'm not alone, this isn't just MY criticism--as long as there is no system of teaching the game of golf, there is going to be students of golf who are spinning in circles. Do this, and then you have to undo it, learn one thing only to be told that's the wrong thing to do. Fill in your own example; everyone has one. Don't even get me started on hands, arms, and shoulders. Holy schmokes.

Yeah, you're not the only frustrated golfer possibly paying $50-$100 a week for lessons and not improving that much over years of playing. . .

 

Quote

It's not about skiing. It's coming up with a system. The US Ski Association and the Professional Ski Instructors of America agree on the system of learning for their sport. It works.Somehow they got all the old school ski instructors to buy in. One step leads to another and to another. Any pro can teach it. They found a way to teach the skill.

Beyond carving with hyperbolic skis on groomed flat-ish terrain, there is no real instruction for tackling double blacks and back country skiing.

The golf swing is deceptively complex and you need it to even get off the tee reasonably, it's not like there is an equivalent to wedging your way down a slope in golf. I suppose you could hit your PW 100 times a round?

 

Quote

I submit golf can and should be taught in a similar fashion. Or is there more money in Butch Harmon having a different way from everybody else? Seems like it might be more profitable the way it is, but is it good for golf?

It is pretty much taught in a similar manner as beginning ski instruction. The difference is that there are many more complex things that need to happen in a golf swing than in a hip turn or carve. Skis are pretty forgiving these days. I suppose you could make really "forgiving" clubs that are really short and controllable for golf. You'd hit shorter just like a sub-170cm ski would have you skiing pretty slowly to maintain control?

 

On 12/24/2016 at 6:27 PM, Buckeyebowman said:

OK, I skipped from the first post to right here. I think the primary reason that golf is not taught like skiing is because golfers aren't afraid of falling down a frozen mountain and killing themselves!

Don't get me wrong, I think the ski model is absolutely right! What we need is a "bunny hill" for golfers! That's the practice green and a putter and chipping club!

That can work with kids, and even women, but it won't work with full grown men if they're starting the game in their adulthood. The word is "recruitment" isn't it?

I learned the game haphazardly, but started by chipping and putting to a hole I dug in the back yard!

Par 3 courses?

 

On 12/23/2016 at 6:18 AM, DeadMan said:

Well, I didn't actually say that. I said that you use less of your body while skiing. Which is true; skiing is primarily a lower body sport. Ideally, your upper body stays pretty still. Watch any truly technical skier out there and you'll notice that their upper body doesn't move that much. When you have a tough day of skiing, it's not your chest or arms that hurt.

Maybe the right way to say it is that skiing is less complex for your body, because the goal is to keep your upper body quiet while skiing. It's a lot easier to learn how to do that than it is to move nearly every part of your body in synch. In golf, you're moving basically any part of your body that you can twist. Your shoulders, wrists, hips, knees are all moving during the swing. Skiing is a much simpler motion.

Actually, thinking about this more and having done both activities in the last week or so, I agree that you do use more muscles in a golf swing. Not as intensely, but more muscles are probably used.

I stand corrected. . .

[Blackjack Don]

58 minutes ago, Lihu said:

it's not like there is an equivalent to wedging your way down a slope in golf.

Why not? Golfers won't accept it? Has anyone tried it? 

59 minutes ago, Lihu said:

The difference is that there are many more complex things that need to happen in a golf swing than in a hip turn or carve.

Really? Are you sure? Could it be it's not thought of as impossible? That it's taught well? Or that few skiers compare themselves to the US Ski Team? The ski industry would die if every skier thought they could do NASTAR the way a pro can. Silly to think that any physical thing is easy to do. That golf is so much more difficult than every other activity.

One of the great all-time tennis teachers, Vic Braden, said he could teach anyone who could walk to the water fountain without falling over to hit a forehand. He could. If you think that's easy, you haven't hit a good forehand and haven't tried to teach it. I've done both. I've taught skiers. I'm not a golf instructor, but I'll bet you there are voices out there who agree with me.

Joe Hallet, PGA professional and second-degree black belt instructor or some such, agrees with me. In fact, he uses the PSIA as an example of what his committee of the PGA is trying to do, so it is something that others recognize.

Sure, I'm frustrated by the conservative nature of the golf world, from the CCs down to the guy who hits a buck-fifty from the blacks, because that's the way the game is played.

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

Par 3 courses?

Top Golf? Who knows? I'm not involved. Merely a bystander who can't understand why thinking outside the box is heresy. See the ball, be the ball is not a system, but it's working as well as the stuff I've seen about hands, arms and shoulders.

 

PS--Golf may seem to use more muscles, but that's an opinion. If there is a muscle that golf uses that skiing doesn't, it's the one between the ears, because the speed of skiing makes it seem to be less. It takes coordination to do both, just different, and certainly at different speeds. Even those in a wedge don't have as much time to think as a golfer does.

PSS--They aren't keeping score in skiing. Golf can't get away from it.

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

I am constantly seeing contradictory advice from pros. Yesterday on a podcast I heard a pro say he is against taking a divot. He said it's about the bounce. I'm also seeing many people say that the bottom of the swing occurs in front of the ball, which means taking a divot.

I don't know what you were listening to. I know that the father of that one fringe-ish Tour player advocates no divot.

This just speaks to the fact that there is no one way to swing a golf club or get things done. Lexi Thompson takes huge divots. Tom Watson picked the ball. Neither was more right or wrong than the other. There can be multiple "right" ways to do things.

There are multiple schools of thought in lots of areas of athletics. Baseball hitting. Pitching has a bunch. Etc. Skiing, I'll say again, is relatively simple at that level. It doesn't have variations… because it's relatively simple at that level.

2 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

Not to get into which one is right, in this thread it doesn't matter. My point, and the one I still believe in--and I'm not alone, this isn't just MY criticism--as long as there is no system of teaching the game of golf, there is going to be students of golf who are spinning in circles.

Golf is more complex than skiing.

If a golfer finds a good instructor who understands what the commonalities of the best players are and what are personal differences, and who can communicate effectively, they won't be spinning in circles.

They might still suck, but at some point, that's on them, either for not practicing, or not having enough skill, or whatever.

2 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

Do this, and then you have to undo it, learn one thing only to be told that's the wrong thing to do. Fill in your own example; everyone has one. Don't even get me started on hands, arms, and shoulders. Holy schmokes.

That's only really even true if they're constantly switching instructors.

Even if you find an instructor who preaches one way or a system, so long as it was a valid system, golfers would still largely get better.

2 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

It's not about skiing. It's coming up with a system.

Again… golf is complex.

5SK is a system. It suits your needs, but we still disagree occasionally on what the priority fix for a student is, and it's just a full-swing system: there's putting, chipping, pitching, and other skills necessary to be a good golfer.

2 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

The US Ski Association and the Professional Ski Instructors of America agree on the system of learning for their sport.

The US Ski Association and the Professional Ski Instructors of America can agree on the system of learning for their sport because their sport is relatively simple to teach, and can be boiled down to one system.

2 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

I submit golf can and should be taught in a similar fashion. Or is there more money in Butch Harmon having a different way from everybody else? Seems like it might be more profitable the way it is, but is it good for golf?

That's the only new thing you said in the whole post.

And yeah, it may be more profitable the way it is now, but I don't think that's the reason why it's still taught that way.

Skiing (at the novice/intermediate level) is easier and simpler.

19 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Why not? Golfers won't accept it? Has anyone tried it?

You're coming at this from a position of ignorance. I don't mean that in a bad way, just a factual one.

No, I don't think there's any real equivalent to wedging down a hill in skiing to be found in golf.

You can learn to be a competent skier in a weekend or two. You can't learn to be a competent golfer in that time. The equivalent? I should be able to teach most people to be a competent putter in that time. Putting is (relatively) easy and simple.

That's the best equivalency you're going to get: skiing is like putting.

19 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Really? Are you sure?

Here's how this thread keeps going…

1. Person: golf is more complex than skiing.

2. You: No way, I don't believe it!

3. [Go back to step 1.]

19 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

One of the great all-time tennis teachers, Vic Braden, said he could teach anyone who could walk to the water fountain without falling over to hit a forehand. He could. If you think that's easy, you haven't hit a good forehand and haven't tried to teach it. I've done both. I've taught skiers. I'm not a golf instructor, but I'll bet you there are voices out there who agree with me.

Like I said, I'd take that bet.

Hitting a forehand - not even necessarily hitting it well - is again far, far simpler than playing golf. Playing tennis as a whole is simpler than playing golf. I played a little golf with Ivan Lendl when I lived in southern Florida. That's what he says, anyway. And I've played a little tennis, too. And one of our golf students is a tennis instructor here in Erie.

[Go back to step 1.]

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Joe Hallet, PGA professional and second-degree black belt instructor or some such, agrees with me. In fact, he uses the PSIA as an example of what his committee of the PGA is trying to do, so it is something that others recognize.

I would bet he doesn't. Have you talked with Joe? I have. In person.

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

PS - Golf may seem to use more muscles, but that's an opinion.

No it's not. It's something you could measure and determine to be factually true or not. Once you defined the level. A top-end skier may use the same number of muscles (or more) as a golfer, but perhaps a beginner skier uses far fewer muscles and yet a beginning golfer still has to use almost all of the same muscles.

I don't know what the answer is - and the number of muscles has never been my argument - I'm just saying it's not really just an opinion - it's something we could measure and determine if we wanted to.

[Go back to Step 1.]

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

If there is a muscle that golf uses that skiing doesn't, it's the one between the ears, because the speed of skiing makes it seem to be less.

The speed of the golf swing is pretty fast, too, Don…

[Go back to Step 1.]

5 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Even those in a wedge don't have as much time to think as a golfer does.

Uhhhh…

That's like saying a guy sitting in the ski cabin sipping a hot chocolate has more time to think than a golfer about to begin his downswing.

The entire golf swing is a second or two.

[Lihu]

43 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

PS--Golf may seem to use more muscles, but that's an opinion. If there is a muscle that golf uses that skiing doesn't, it's the one between the ears, because the speed of skiing makes it seem to be less. It takes coordination to do both, just different, and certainly at different speeds. Even those in a wedge don't have as much time to think as a golfer does.

PSS--They aren't keeping score in skiing. Golf can't get away from it.

That's the argument I made earlier, and I think I was wrong.

Skiing can be way more intense than golf, but not necessarily at the peak few tens of milliseconds of the swing. Thinking about it a properly swung golf club uses a tad more muscle groups than skiing, but I agree that skiing is way more intense overall.

Wedge down a double black might be that intense, but down an intermediate slope I would say it's pretty calm.

Score is the end goal in golf, while getting to the bottom of the slope in some way or manner is the goal in skiing. Many people do compete skiing and snowboarding, and usually use time or some other form of scoring.