Jump to content
IGNORED

Coaches' philosophy?


Note: This thread is 2585 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
43 minutes ago, Hacker James said:

Also there are many differences between full swings, pitches, chips whereby certain methods are abandoned in favor of different methods for specialty shots.

Exactly. @Blackjack Don, you do realize we're talking about a pitch shot, right? A ton of stuff is different when you're hitting a pitch shot… including the fact that the low point can be on the OPPOSITE side of the golf ball (or under the golf ball).

You once said in another thread that hitting a putt is exactly like hitting a 5-iron. It is not. A putt, for example, is best hit with a slightly ascending stroke. The setup is very different. The kinematics and biomechanics are very different.

So is a pitch. It's a different shot.

43 minutes ago, Hacker James said:

Utley and others talk about the "Paint Brush" method which is mostly a feel based swing that incorporates a certain amount of wristy release at contact.

FWIW I don't teach (and most named above) don't teach any sort of active "wristy" anything at contact. That implies something you're actively doing, making the wrists do something.

43 minutes ago, Hacker James said:

So, it is not really a divergence, or alternate schools of thought, its only using the "right tool for the job".

I can only think that @Blackjack Don is one of (or a combination of) three things:

  • Too new to golf to realize the wide variety of shots required to play the game well.
  • Too enamored with Bobby Clampett, "move your low point forward," etc. to see that it doesn't apply to everything.
  • Simply brain farted or something and doesn't realize that Ridyard was talking about pitches. But… he said pitches, and I linked to videos on pitching, and I said pitching several times…
1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

When did this change occur?

It's not a change. It's a completely different kind of shot. Nobody's saying to hit your 6-iron this way.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

So I'm not going to say you're wrong, not by any means. I'm glad it give a "tremendous margin for error," because it's needed, I think. Anytime the hands get flippy, there is automatically a lot of inconsistency, I would think. Simply a matter of physics.

It's actually more consistent than trying to hit the ball with the low point forward, the shaft leaning forward, etc.

And as I said above, there's nothing "flippy" about it. It's actually the physics that guarantee the consistency and the action of the club and body, particularly around the impact area, in this type of shot: gravity, namely, and some double pendulum type stuff (where the wrists are one of the hinge points, loosely swiveling, not actively doing so).

Shaft leaning forward, using the leading edge = no margin of error. Stubbed chips. Bladed shots. Pitching eliminates those.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

I have a lot of problems with my golf swing that I'm working diligently to correct. One of the biggest is the collapse of my left wrist, esp with the driver. Is this two swings, not one? Or three--driver, middle irons and wedges/pitch/chipping? Would that not increase inconsistency? (Just asking, not debating, I promise.)

This is a pitch shot, not a full swing method. You wouldn't hit a driver with this setup, let alone this action.

Did you read through the thread or watch the videos I linked to?

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

Is there a school of thought that starts with the tee and ends with the putt, and one that starts with putting and ends with driver? (I kinda think there is, whether it is carved into stone or not.)

No. There are different ways to hit different shots.

@Blackjack Don this is getting frustrating for me, because I said a lot of this stuff in the other topics you've started. A putt is not like a 5-iron. A driver is not even like a 5-iron (it's more like it than a putt, though). A pitch is not like a putt, a 5-iron, or a driver. They all have different setups, different goals, different challenges, and different things.

You asked why golf isn't taught like skiing, and one of the reasons I gave is that skiing is much simpler. Golf is closer to learning how to waterski, snowboard, snow ski, ice skate, and skateboard than it is to learning how to do just one of those things.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

Eric, I can't figure out where you stand. In some ways, you are adamant that there is no one way to hit a golf ball, and yet you also are quite sure that there is.

If we're talking about the full swing, there is no one way to do it. Look at the game's best - their swings have, again, about five things in common, with everything else being varying degrees of "unique to them."

I do prefer this method of pitching, and think it's not only best but easiest to learn, but others have had success pitching with a more active trail wrist, forcibly sliding it under the ball (the left wrist still often breaks down around impact).

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

It's okay, whatever you believe, but you should know where you stand.

I know exactly where I stand… You seem to have confused a pitch with a driver swing.

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

I'm just not sure you articulate where you stand so well.

Don, dude, this one ain't on me. You've made the error of failing to understand that Ridyard was talking about a pitch shot.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

 

- Short Game is more important school: 70% of shots are inside 100 yards so spend 90% of your time working on the most basic, easiest and least separating aspect of your golf game.

This is definitely the self taught school that i am enrolled in right now. Has been one of the best ideas that i have come across, ad really improved my game and created a consistent swing. I think the idea is to spend more like 50% on this though and then 25% on full shots and 25% on putting (essentially 75% short game(100 yds to the flag)

"Swing with a Purpose" 

What's In The Bag:
Woods: Driver: RBZ stage 2 10* 3 wood: RBZ 15* 5 wood: NIke vapor speed 19*
Irons/ wedges: Rbladez tour 4-PW; Mizuno MP-T4 52*, 56*, CG11 60*
Putter: Odyssey White ice #9
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
21 minutes ago, Bryan Kasper said:

This is definitely the self taught school that i am enrolled in right now. Has been one of the best ideas that i have come across, ad really improved my game and created a consistent swing. I think the idea is to spend more like 50% on this though and then 25% on full shots and 25% on putting (essentially 75% short game(100 yds to the flag)

Unless you have a glaring weakness… that's a really bad way to spend your time if you're looking to get better.

You shouldn't spend much more than about 20% of the time on the short game. 15% on putting. More in that thread. @mvmac was kind of poking fun at the "70% short game" people…

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 hours ago, iacas said:

You once said in another thread that hitting a putt is exactly like hitting a 5-iron. It is not. A putt, for example, is best hit with a slightly ascending stroke. The setup is very different. The kinematics and biomechanics are very different.

I have changed my mind on this.

7 hours ago, iacas said:

@Blackjack Don this is getting frustrating for me, because I said a lot of this stuff in the other topics you've started.

I must be really good at starting conversations, huh? If you only knew the amount of information you are putting out there, quickly and concisely. Trust me, you may be frustrated, but you shouldn't be. One, you're helping a lot of people, not just me. Second, it clarifies your mind on what you're talking about, thinking, teaching. If you see this as a burden, I'll hope you will rethink it now. You're doing a good job here. You're coaching, and that's what you have dedicated yourself to doing. What's the problem?

7 hours ago, iacas said:

If we're talking about the full swing, there is no one way to do it. Look at the game's best - their swings have, again, about five things in common, with everything else being varying degrees of "unique to them."

To my (unquestionably too inexperienced) eye, they are all beginning to look the same. If they have a beard, I can't tell one from the other at a glance. I still think there is a guy out there who is Dustin Johnson's double. Thank god Beef is fat! :-D

Seriously, they are all the same in many eyes. I may be trusting my lying eyes too much.

7 hours ago, iacas said:

Don, dude, this one ain't on me. You've made the error of failing to understand that Ridyard was talking about a pitch shot.

No, I was just wrong. You have mostly convinced me that I have to learn swings from putting, to chipping, to pitching, to wedges, 9 down to 4i, fairway woods and driver. Jeezus, dude, no wonder people quit! If you think it is frustrating to teach, then imagine what it is like for students man! They might not tell you what they are really thinking. ("Can I find out how to tie a hangman's knot on the Internet?") ("My wife is right, this is a waste of time I'll never get better.") I may be wrong about this, too, but if I am, golf is too hard. 

But you've got me leaning in your direction, now. I'm going to stick with it, because I think the 10,000 swing rule applies here. Experience uber alles.

Eric, pass along to you something that has been said to me many times when a player blows smoke in my face: "You signed up for this when you took the job." I'm not crazy about it when they say it, but I have to accept it. Just part of the job. Welcome to the hard part.

Best wishes.

 

Wayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I think the answer to my question is "Every golf instructor has their own method of teaching. It changes with each student. There is only individual lessons, individual structure."

If this is so, so be it. It doesn't give me a great deal of confidence I'll get much better at this golf thing. Yes, skiing may be easier. (I honestly question it, but concede the point.) I went from my first time skiing to teaching in three years. I skied 60 days a year. I am athletic. I am obsessive. Yet, this task may be too daunting, because I'm getting older by the year, my body is declining, perhaps faster than I can improve my game. I may be stuck trying to break 90 for the rest of my golfing life. I cannot even be sure that a professional who makes more than I do is telling me the right thing. Perhaps Bobby Clampett is wrong about everything he teaches. I now have to undo six months of work. This does not give me a lot of happiness. I'll do it, in a heartbeat, if that's what it takes to break 80. Just once.

I'm very good at giving voice to the voice in my head. If you think I'm alone and there aren't a million others out there who are frustrated with the game, I promise you I don't find that to be the case, because, hell, I talk to everybody! I do random surveys all the time. I ask people if they play golf and why they stopped. Basically, it's just too hard. Yes, it's expensive. Yes, it's time consuming. For the joy of the game, those are nothing! Small change. But it's hard. That's the thing that drives people from the game.

If it's true, that there is no way to teach the game to groups of people, then the game is self-limiting, to people who can overcome the difficulty and frustration. Remember "Rat farts!"? I can't remember his name, but I remember his hate for the game when he couldn't hit it five yards. He might have been obnoxious, but he wasn't that unusual when it comes to bad shots.

This is the reason I didn't want to agree with Eric. I will now. I can change my mind. I'll adapt. But I am terribly disappointed. I hope you all will feel I had our best interests in mind.

Where to start?

 

Wayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
32 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I must be really good at starting conversations, huh?

Maybe. At this point you don't seem to be awesome at actually having the ongoing conversation, though.

32 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

If you only knew the amount of information you are putting out there, quickly and concisely. Trust me, you may be frustrated, but you shouldn't be. One, you're helping a lot of people, not just me. Second, it clarifies your mind on what you're talking about, thinking, teaching. If you see this as a burden, I'll hope you will rethink it now. You're doing a good job here. You're coaching, and that's what you have dedicated yourself to doing. What's the problem?

What's the problem?

Among other things, you told me that I don't articulate where I stand very well. Because you didn't understand that Ridyard was demonstrating a pitch shot? C'mon…

35 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

To my (unquestionably too inexperienced) eye, they are all beginning to look the same. If they have a beard, I can't tell one from the other at a glance. I still think there is a guy out there who is Dustin Johnson's double. Thank god Beef is fat! :-D

Seriously, they are all the same in many eyes. I may be trusting my lying eyes too much.

They don't all look - or work - the same.

01.jpg02.jpg

All PGA Tour winners. Three of them are major championship winners.

35 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

No, I was just wrong. You have mostly convinced me that I have to learn swings from putting, to chipping, to pitching, to wedges, 9 down to 4i, fairway woods and driver. Jeezus, dude, no wonder people quit! If you think it is frustrating to teach, then imagine what it is like for students man! They might not tell you what they are really thinking. ("Can I find out how to tie a hangman's knot on the Internet?") ("My wife is right, this is a waste of time I'll never get better.") I may be wrong about this, too, but if I am, golf is too hard.

There aren't 14 golf swings as it seems that you're implying now, though some clubs can be used with different types of swings (a sand wedge can be used to blade the ball, chip, pitch, hit a full swing, a 3/4 shot, a knock-down… etc.).

A 6I is pretty similar to an 8I swing, but less like a driver swing.

7 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I think the answer to my question is "Every golf instructor has their own method of teaching. It changes with each student. There is only individual lessons, individual structure."

Depends on how you define "method." But to a point, sure. Everyone's coming with something different. Golf is not like skiing.

7 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

It doesn't give me a great deal of confidence I'll get much better at this golf thing.

Find a good instructor, be a stupid monkey, and practice by employing the 5S's of Effective Practice.

7 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Perhaps Bobby Clampett is wrong about everything he teaches. I now have to undo six months of work. This does not give me a lot of happiness. I'll do it, in a heartbeat, if that's what it takes to break 80. Just once.

He's not wrong about everything he teaches (you're also not working with Bobby Clampett directly). You also don't have to "undo" anything. You're the golfer you are right now.

You've never posted your swing here. Several people, including me, have invited you to do so.

You might never break 80. I don't know.

7 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

If you think I'm alone and there aren't a million others out there who are frustrated with the game, I promise you I don't find that to be the case, because, hell, I talk to everybody!

It's a difficult game. People are frustrated by it. To some, that's part of the allure.

7 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Yes, it's expensive. Yes, it's time consuming. For the joy of the game, those are nothing! Small change. But it's hard. That's the thing that drives people from the game.

You're talking to the guy who trademarked "Golf is Hard"®.

7 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Where to start?

Find a good instructor, and do what they say, and practice properly.

Post a Member Swing thread.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

To my (unquestionably too inexperienced) eye, they are all beginning to look the same. If they have a beard, I can't tell one from the other at a glance. I still think there is a guy out there who is Dustin Johnson's double. Thank god Beef is fat! :-D

Seriously, they are all the same in many eyes. I may be trusting my lying eyes too much.

Wandering a little . .but . . . one of the things I found surprising is how different pro golf swings look to me than they did a year ago . and a year before that . .and a year before that, etc.  When I first started really practicing and looking at pro golf swings - they all looked basically the same to me.  Gradually . .and I could hardly believe it . . but as I improved I started to notice more and different things in their swings.  

I still can't track to whatever Peter Kostis is talking about during the Konica Minolta Bizhub swing vision segments . .I tend to think hes just making stuff up . . but maybe I just haven't developed enough of an eye yet.  But swings of different pro golfers look very different to me.  I could tell Ricky Fowler from Sergio Garcia from Dustin Johnson even if they had no heads.  

 

edit . .oh, and there is a guy who swings and looks a LOT like DJ . I can't think of who it is right now but I know I've seen him and thought the same thing.  

Edited by Rainmaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
3 minutes ago, Sandhills Golfe said:

So,  Ridyard  preaches throwing the clubhead to the ball?

No.

Not at all how I'd describe it.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

20 hours ago, iacas said:

Unless you have a glaring weakness… that's a really bad way to spend your time if you're looking to get better.

That was a great read, and i see what happened there, a little bit of miscommunication of terms on my part. what i meant in terms of short game was shorter swings, working on my half swings almost entirely, whether that be with wedges or with longer irons. 

I have been working on half to 3/4 swings more so than the full swing. When i look at what is actually meant by short game, meaning just chips/ pitches and bunker play, then i am closer to the post you referenced. so i guess thats more of a short swing school as opposed to short game. 

like @Blackjack Don was saying its great having people to spell out some of the issues with communication in golf because it seems there is so much meaning that gets lost in the terminology of the sport. 

  • Upvote 1

"Swing with a Purpose" 

What's In The Bag:
Woods: Driver: RBZ stage 2 10* 3 wood: RBZ 15* 5 wood: NIke vapor speed 19*
Irons/ wedges: Rbladez tour 4-PW; Mizuno MP-T4 52*, 56*, CG11 60*
Putter: Odyssey White ice #9
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 1/31/2017 at 9:14 AM, iacas said:

Do your research. There are good ones out there. Not a lot. But enough.

This reminds me of the old golf joke about a sign in a pro shop. "Series of 10 lessons - $500.00   Single lesson - $1500.00    If you want a miracle, it's going to cost you!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 3 weeks later...
On 2/1/2017 at 9:22 PM, Rainmaker said:

Wandering a little . .but . . . one of the things I found surprising is how different pro golf swings look to me than they did a year ago . and a year before that . .and a year before that, etc.  When I first started really practicing and looking at pro golf swings - they all looked basically the same to me.  Gradually . .and I could hardly believe it . . but as I improved I started to notice more and different things in their swings.  

I still can't track to whatever Peter Kostis is talking about during the Konica Minolta Bizhub swing vision segments . .I tend to think hes just making stuff up . . but maybe I just haven't developed enough of an eye yet.  But swings of different pro golfers look very different to me.  I could tell Ricky Fowler from Sergio Garcia from Dustin Johnson even if they had no heads.  

 

edit . .oh, and there is a guy who swings and looks a LOT like DJ . I can't think of who it is right now but I know I've seen him and thought the same thing.  

It's Kevin Chappell,

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 2/3/2017 at 10:44 PM, Buckeyebowman said:

This reminds me of the old golf joke about a sign in a pro shop. "Series of 10 lessons - $500.00   Single lesson - $1500.00    If you want a miracle, it's going to cost you!"

Not really

On 2/2/2017 at 10:20 AM, Bryan Kasper said:

I have been working on half to 3/4 swings more so than the full swing. When i look at what is actually meant by short game, meaning just chips/ pitches and bunker play, then i am closer to the post you referenced. so i guess thats more of a short swing school as opposed to short game. 

I don't know if I would agree with this. If a golfer spends a good amount of their time starting out learning half and 3/4 swings then they are just training themselves not to take a good full turn. Teach a golfer to make a good turn, maintaining a steady head, will give a foundation for everything else. 

  • Upvote 2

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I hope this makes sense. I would like to find a teacher who, first, really focuses on what the student is actually physically capable of doing, and, two, respects the physical changes and limitations of the old golfer.

Last year, at 70, and after two years of taking golf seriously, again, I knew that I had fallen into bad ways of doing things. I paid an instructor (he has all the credentials) $600 for two series of lessons over the summer. He helped me a lot, BUT we hit a wall. He insisted  that the only way was to hit with big muscles, never with arms, and with substantial side bend, like a baseball swing. Plus his ability o communicate to me was limited. I am in fair shape for an old guy and was able to incorporate some of this, of course. However, I will be finding another person. -Marv

DRIVER: Cleveland 588 Altitude ( Matrix Radix Sv Graphite, A) IRONS: Mizuno JPX-800 HD Irons & 3,4,5 JPX Fli-Hi (Grafalloy Prolaunch Blue Graphite, R); WEDGES: (Carried as needed) Artisan Golf 46, 50, 53, 56 low bounce, 56 high bounce; PUTTER: Mizuno TP Mills 9

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, MarvChamp said:

I hope this makes sense. I would like to find a teacher who, first, really focuses on what the student is actually physically capable of doing, and, two, respects the physical changes and limitations of the old golfer.

Last year, at 70, and after two years of taking golf seriously, again, I knew that I had fallen into bad ways of doing things. I paid an instructor (he has all the credentials) $600 for two series of lessons over the summer. He helped me a lot, BUT we hit a wall. He insisted  that the only way was to hit with big muscles, never with arms, and with substantial side bend, like a baseball swing. Plus his ability o communicate to me was limited. I am in fair shape for an old guy and was able to incorporate some of this, of course. However, I will be finding another person. -Marv

Sounds like you found an instructor with a "my way or the highway" method of teaching. There are lots of guys like this. They only know how to teach one swing. They can't look at you, nor anyone else, assess their limitations and capabilities, and design an instruction program that will maximize their abilities.

It seems they want to turn us all into pros, and we all don't have that ability!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 2/25/2017 at 2:27 PM, saevel25 said:

I don't know if I would agree with this. If a golfer spends a good amount of their time starting out learning half and 3/4 swings then they are just training themselves not to take a good full turn. Teach a golfer to make a good turn, maintaining a steady head, will give a foundation for everything else. 

Hmmm, thats interesting, granted these discussions always go to some kind of black and white issue where it shouldnt. Both swing position/ path and full turn are important and neither should be neglected but i don't know which one is more important, I think i only make full swings on maybe 20% of my shots,actually probably the same for half to 3/4... I guess in my head the turn is simple compared to the position and path. i see the full swing as only a simple turn away from a 3/4 swing, meaning everyswing above a half swing includes the elements of the half/ 3/4 swings( including the full shots), whereas the turn is only for the full shots. so full swing mechanics are there for 20% where half swing mechanics account( non- mutually exclusively) to 40%...

that is mainly why i have the focus that i do. let me know what you think about that?

"Swing with a Purpose" 

What's In The Bag:
Woods: Driver: RBZ stage 2 10* 3 wood: RBZ 15* 5 wood: NIke vapor speed 19*
Irons/ wedges: Rbladez tour 4-PW; Mizuno MP-T4 52*, 56*, CG11 60*
Putter: Odyssey White ice #9
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator
2 hours ago, Bryan Kasper said:

Hmmm, thats interesting, granted these discussions always go to some kind of black and white issue where it shouldnt. Both swing position/ path and full turn are important and neither should be neglected but i don't know which one is more important, I think i only make full swings on maybe 20% of my shots,actually probably the same for half to 3/4... I guess in my head the turn is simple compared to the position and path. i see the full swing as only a simple turn away from a 3/4 swing, meaning everyswing above a half swing includes the elements of the half/ 3/4 swings( including the full shots), whereas the turn is only for the full shots. so full swing mechanics are there for 20% where half swing mechanics account( non- mutually exclusively) to 40%...

that is mainly why i have the focus that i do. let me know what you think about that?

In my opinion, turn and path are both required for almost every shot, even if its only a half-swing.  And in my view, turn and path are completely dependent on one-another.  Consequently, I think full-swing mechanics are the most important.  You can dial it back to 3/4 or 1/2 if you need to, but its hard to dial a chipping motion up and get to a reasonable full swing.  

The other aspect is what you gain or lose by improving a specif part of your game.  Full swings can get you in good position to make pars (or better), and can cost you strokes in multiples, when you start hitting it in hazards or OB.  Short game shots can save a stroke on occasion, but rarely cost you much.  Full swing improvement will make more of a difference to your score than shorter-game improvement .

  • Upvote 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 2585 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • I did not realize that, I was thinking a more traditional golf club.  
    • Thanks for the feedback. @StuM, we are a "club without real estate" so no facilities or pro. We have a membership of around 185 players and we only play together as a group at our tournaments, which are held at public access courses. A group of us setup the tournaments, collect the money and dole out the prizes.
    • In general, granting free relief anywhere on the course isn't recommended.  Similarly, when marking GUR, the VSGA and MAPGA generally don't mark areas that are well away from the intended playing lines, no matter how poor the conditions.  If you hit it far enough offline, you don't necessarily deserve free relief.  And you don't have to damage clubs, take unplayable relief, take the stroke, and drop the ball in a better spot.
    • If it's not broken don't fix it. If you want to add grooves to it just because of looks that's your choice of course. Grooves are cut into putter faces to reduce skid, the roll faced putter is designed to do the same thing. I'm no expert but it seems counter productive to add grooves to the roll face. Maybe you can have it sand-blasted or something to clean up the face. Take a look at Tigers putter, its beat to hell but he still uses it.     
    • I get trying to limit relief to the fairway, but how many roots do you typically find in the fairway? Our local rule allows for relief from roots & rocks anywhere on the course (that is in play). My home course has quite a few 100 year old oaks that separate the fairways. Lift and move the ball no closer to the hole. None of us want to damage clubs.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...