Poor Instruction Is Very Common. Why?

[iacas]

I'd like to respond to a lot of recent posts, but in order not to write a novel, I will try to keep my replies short. Please don't read my directness and/or brevity as anything but me wanting to be efficient and not write a ton.

15 hours ago, Piz said:

The language barrier, as it turns out, is no barrier at all.  The only important thing is communication.  

I disagree, because if someone completely communicates the wrong information to you… that's not good at all.

7 hours ago, Zeph said:

It's easy to become an instructor and the golf swing is very technical and difficult. There's a gap between the knowledge of the average pro and what's required to become a decent instructor. Even if you do have a great understanding of the golf swing and how it works, you need people skills to be able to properly teach a vast variety of individuals.

Yep. That's it in a nutshell.

6 hours ago, Hategolf said:

I took some lessons from this one guy, who told me I had to drop everything I knew about the swing cause it was wrong, he said it would take me 3yrs to become a lot better. I agreed to work with him. 

I had a really hard time executing the moves because I didn't fully understand the mechanics. He moved away. Looking back now I know he was 100% correct. I wished I would have know more about the swing then, I would have progressed a lot faster.

Unless I'm misunderstanding it, no… that makes no sense at all, and I disagree. You identify and then work on the priority piece, then lather, rinse, repeat. There's no "stop, forget everything, let's completely rebuild your golf swing from the ground up."

6 hours ago, Jack Watson said:

The other thing is physical limitations.

Theres a lot I cannot do.  Not even in slow motion.  It's not that I don't know what I think would be ideal or what a pro tells me to try,  it's just that I can't do it even in slow motion without literally quivering with tension.

I can't do yoga and feel where the clubhead is in my swing at the same time.

You're more capable of doing things than you think.

And any competent instructor can quickly see what you can and can't do. I deal with people that have physical limitations all the time. If you can turn your shoulders 80° but currently turn them 40°, turning them 80° will still be beneficial. I'm not gonna make the person keep trying and "quiver with tension" trying to get 90°+.

Your body controls where the clubhead goes. And unlike the clubhead, which has NO sensory perception in it at all, you can feel what you're body's doing. Your feel may not be real, but your hands, fingertips, arms, etc. can all "feel" things. The clubhead cannot.

5 hours ago, Hacker James said:

I have never had a formal lesson, but I believe that I do have the ability to recognize and choose the techniques that apply to me.

I doubt it. Hell, you'd be the first guy out of thousands if it were true, so I'm just playing the odds there.

4 hours ago, mfm22 said:

A few in between were not very good and just spewed the same basic info to every student - It's a good idea to try to watch your instructor / pro work with a few different types of students and listen - see what they say - work on - if it's the same things  be a little concerned  as every body has a bit of their own DNA .  I know most beginners  have similar issues - OTT  being a very common one 

You'd be surprised how few things are actually "different." There are days four people will get a variation of almost the same lesson. I'll have clinics with three people who are all working on the same thing. They feel it slightly differently, or go about it a little differently, but for example, "slide your hips forward a bit instead of backing them up on the downswing" is a common lesson type.

We're probably agreeing a lot more than disagreeing, btw.

4 hours ago, alfriday said:

To me, the biggest problem with most golf instruction is not the instructor, but the method that is generally and commonly used by instructors to teach a player.  Few instructors teach a swing, they teach swing parts.

Maybe we agree and this is just the way we're calling these words, but… you cannot teach a "swing" to people. You just can't. There are too many pieces. You have to break it down into what you seem to have called a "part."

To borrow the "fix" above, if someone's hips are backing up throughout the downswing and they're not achieving Key #2, then they need to work on that "part" of the swing - moving their hips forward to get their weight forward at impact and to improve at Key #2.

If someone's got the instinct to roll their hands over because their pivot stalls through impact and their hands/arms overtake their torso, they need to work on that "part" of the swing - keeping their chest and/or hip speed up, letting their neck/head rotate through a bit more perhaps, and thus slowing down the overtaking rate.

4 hours ago, alfriday said:

They correct swing parts instead of teaching a full swing that eliminates the mistake before they happen.

Someone who hits the ball fat (except for the times they bend their elbows to avoid hitting the ground behind the ball) because they're not getting their weight forward properly… how do you propose you teach them a "swing" without teaching them the "part" that they're not doing properly?

Their "mistake" is hitting the ball fat, or bending the elbows to avoid hitting it fat… but the "fix" is to get their hips forward with good secondary axis tilt.

4 hours ago, alfriday said:

The current method treats symptoms instead of the underlying illness.

I disagree.

If someone has an ear infection, you treat the ear infection, you don't talk to them about whether they're getting enough fiber or whether they're stretching and getting enough light exercise every day.

You treat the disease. The symptoms ("my ear hurts") point to the disease (ear infection). You don't talk about "the swing" (a person's entire health).

4 hours ago, alfriday said:

When I was young, I did a lot of fishing with my father.  I learned to cast very effectively.  I could place the lure over a log, or next to a stump or...you get the idea.  I learned to cast overhand, side arm and underhand   Casting a fishing lure to a spot is not much different from hitting a golf shot.  The movements are just as complex.  But, we don't break the motion down into minutia like we do in golf.

Casting is nowhere near - nowhere near - as complex as the golf swing.

Nowhere near.

A baseball swing is also simpler than a golf swing (there's only a downswing to make, so a person's "setup" position is the top of the backswing, AND they can hit the ball anywhere on the bat within several square inches, AND the bat is shorter and the ball is bigger, and it travels shorter distances so errors in alignment aren't nearly as magnified, AND anywhere within 90° is a "fair ball"), yet each team in the MLB employs a hitting coach that will use high-speed video, sensors, etc. to analyze the batting motion of their players.

4 hours ago, alfriday said:

In the days before high speed cameras and stop motion video, trackman, doppler radar, etc.,  Harvey Penik used a grass whip to teach a swing.  Ernest Jones and Manuel de la Torre used a ball on a string.

Maybe… they weren't very good instructors. Is Butch Harmon? Hank Haney? David Leadbetter?

4 hours ago, alfriday said:

Focus was on the target and swinging to the target, not on the ball and getting the club into the "correct" place at the top of the back swing.

Ask @Jack Watson how well he "swings the clubhead" right now.

4 hours ago, alfriday said:

I'm sure I'll catch a lot of flack for my views.  Thinking differently requires one to break out of the current paradigm and look at what has worked for generations of golfers.  It also corresponds to the latest research on results oriented learning.  Hopefully the cycle of body part focus and positions in a swing is coming to an end.  But, I'm not holding my breath.

I don't think it should. I think we're actually getting BETTER instruction now than EVER before. It's still not good, but it's better than it was 30 years ago, in large part BECAUSE of the tools we have available to us.

3 hours ago, Zeph said:

I wouldn't be surprised if it's easier to teach a fairly new player a good golf swing than to correct the swing of a player that's been playing for 10+ years and has a handicap of 15-20. One reason it's difficult to make changes in a golf swing is that you've been doing things "wrong" for a very long time and it's what the body and muscles remember. It's not impossible, but it takes more effort while practicing and playing.

Yep. It is easier. I'd almost rather teach a guy who is a 20 handicap and who has been playing a year than a 20 who has been playing for 30 years, all else equal. The first guy has a much better chance to improve more quickly.

2 hours ago, Dave2512 said:

IMO it's more a student problem than a instructor problem. Most golfers are so bad any improvement is low hanging fruit and that coupled with people wanting instant fixes and not being willing to put in the time they get half-assed instruction.

I would hope that doesn't happen - that an instructor gives "half-assed instruction" if he thinks the player won't practice much - but it probably does.

2 hours ago, Dave2512 said:

Expectation is the issue. They want drive-thru fixes that produce instant results and don't realize that at their skill level they are going to hit a bunch of bad shots no matter what. I've been a 5-8 handicap golfer for 4 years. On a good day I hit maybe a couple real good shots. Everything else is a half decent mishit. Bows my mind when I see a 20 handicap guy expecting to hit a bunch of great shots. It takes a lot of work to get there.

That's all true, but I'm not sure what it has to do with the instruction. Any instructor who gives out these quick fix band-aid things isn't a good instructor, even if that's what the golfer thinks they want. Good instructors will educate the golfer on what improvement will be like, what it takes, how to practice, etc.

[boogielicious]

21 hours ago, Jack Watson said:

The other thing is physical limitations.

Theres a lot I cannot do.  Not even in slow motion.  It's not that I don't know what I think would be ideal or what a pro tells me to try,  it's just that I can't do it even in slow motion without literally quivering with tension.

I can't do yoga and feel where the clubhead is in my swing at the same time.

 

Sometimes the real slow work with a club can be difficult. If you have a shaft without a head, you can use that to work on the slow stuff and mapping work. I did this when my wrist and elbow were bad this spring. It takes the stress off the body, but allows you to work on things. 

[Hategolf]

20 hours ago, iacas said:

Unless I'm misunderstanding it, no… that makes no sense at all, and I disagree. You identify and then work on the priority piece, then lather, rinse, repeat. There's no "stop, forget everything, let's completely rebuild your golf swing from the ground up."

 Why not? Starting fresh from scratch seems to be a great idea for folks like me who had so many misconceptions of the golf mechanics. My problem was, I did not understand the cause and effect.  

 If i was to be asked to start all over again today, I still would consider it.

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Hategolf said:

If i was to be asked to start all over again today, I still would consider it.

Because it's a tremendous waste of time, and one cannot literally start over anyway.

Even if you switched sides and went righty (your profile says you're a lefty now), you wouldn't be able to "forget everything."

[Apoc81]

On 7/22/2017 at 1:43 AM, gregsandiego said:

I couldn't disagree more.

It's simple physics, and someone with the equipment and time could easily look at their own swing, work on what's wrong, and tinker until it's right. The body does what we make it do, and many people learn without coaching. (As much as I can't stand him, bubba is a self taught 2x major winner). Sure there's athletic ability and coordination involved, but I think anyone who puts in enough practice can learn to play decent golf. 

[saevel25]

4 minutes ago, Apoc81 said:

It's simple physics, and someone with the equipment and time could easily look at their own swing, work on what's wrong, and tinker until it's right.

This statement has nothing to do with physics.

The person has to be knowledgeable to know what to find. Then they have to know how to fix it. Then they need to know how to practice effectively. Not everyone, I would say not many people, can look at vide of their swing and tinker till it is correct.

6 minutes ago, Apoc81 said:

The body does what we make it do, and many people learn without coaching. (As much as I can't stand him, bubba is a self taught 2x major winner).

Actually the golf swing is a complex and unnatural motion. Feel does not produce expected results.

Define many? I would say you are using outliers to support your case instead of a majority.

8 minutes ago, Apoc81 said:

Sure there's athletic ability and coordination involved, but I think anyone who puts in enough practice can learn to play decent golf. 

I disagree on this. There are people who will probably never be able to create the correct wrist angles at impact. They probably will never play decent golf.

 

[DaveP043]

5 minutes ago, Apoc81 said:

It's simple physics, and someone with the equipment and time could easily look at their own swing, work on what's wrong, and tinker until it's right. The body does what we make it do, and many people learn without coaching. (As much as I can't stand him, bubba is a self taught 2x major winner). Sure there's athletic ability and coordination involved, but I think anyone who puts in enough practice can learn to play decent golf. 

I don't agree.  On one hand, yes, its physics. the club moves in the way we tell it to.  The big difficulty lies in diagnosis, in determining the thing (or things) that needs changing, and most of us simply don't have the knowledge to be able to do that.  Even if we could identify the changes needed, finding a way to make those changes happen isn't simply a matter of "tinkering".  Lee Trevino, Bubba, the rest of the truly self-taught players are the rarity.  The other guys (and women, of course), the remaining 99% of fine players, required coaching to get to the top of the game.  And you could certainly argue that for at least a few of them, instruction from well-respected and famous teachers resulted in a worsening of scoring, not improvement.  

I might buy the last line a little.  Anyone who gets a moderately decent start, learns a few basics, can groove an imperfect swing and become moderately competent.  But if someone wants to get anywhere close to his or her true potential, good instruction is a necessity.

[Apoc81]

50 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I don't agree.  On one hand, yes, its physics. the club moves in the way we tell it to.  The big difficulty lies in diagnosis, in determining the thing (or things) that needs changing, and most of us simply don't have the knowledge to be able to do that.  Even if we could identify the changes needed, finding a way to make those changes happen isn't simply a matter of "tinkering".  Lee Trevino, Bubba, the rest of the truly self-taught players are the rarity.  The other guys (and women, of course), the remaining 99% of fine players, required coaching to get to the top of the game.  And you could certainly argue that for at least a few of them, instruction from well-respected and famous teachers resulted in a worsening of scoring, not improvement.  

I might buy the last line a little.  Anyone who gets a moderately decent start, learns a few basics, can groove an imperfect swing and become moderately competent.  But if someone wants to get anywhere close to his or her true potential, good instruction is a necessity.

I'm going on the assumption that if you are interested enough in teaching yourself, you have most certainly took the time to learn the physics and basics of the swing. Again, i'm talking fit, athletically inclined people who are willing to hit hundreds of balls a day and film and critique what they see have a pretty damn good chance of playing golf. If we're talking your average obese american who hits a bucket of balls twice a week, then no, they won't ever play good golf. I'm working under the assumption that the person doing this is reasonably fit and ambitious enough to practice daily, on all parts of the game, and getting in the course time to practice scrambling and course management as well. 

 

While I have a coach, I think that the fact that im willing to put in the time and effort to become better has had just as much impact. I mean, I come from a golfing family, and I played pretty good golf before I ever got a coach (which was when I made my high school golf team). I was scratch by 18-19, and better than scratch when I got burnt a few years back and had to take almost 3 years off. Im now a 5, after playing about 100 rounds this year, but I don't know i'll ever get back to where I was. And I admit, coaching got me to scratch, and it made me more competitive, and kept my golf consistent throughout my adulthood, but I was still a 6-7 by the time I was 14 and joined our high school team (ages 14-17 here). I had never had a single lesson to that point. 

[DaveP043]

9 minutes ago, Apoc81 said:

I'm going on the assumption that if you are interested enough in teaching yourself, you have most certainly took the time to learn the physics and basics of the swing. Again, i'm talking fit, athletically inclined people who are willing to hit hundreds of balls a day and film and critique what they see have a pretty damn good chance of playing golf. 

That's where I disagree.  Lots of practice, without proper guidance, will ingrain poor habits.  Yes, he can groove those poor habits, but the mythical "anyone" won't get near his true potential based on athleticism and instinct and practice alone. 

Edited August 8, 2017 by DaveP043

[Piz]

Is anyone, truly, self-taught?  How does one learn anything without observation, experiment, and reflection?  To say that an individual has never had a "lesson" does not mean they have never gleaned information from an external source.  Are we not all students in some respect?

[BallMarker]

On 7/16/2017 at 11:33 AM, Jack Watson said:

Why is it that there's so much ineffective instruction out there?

Or, it's more likely that most students expect instant results without much practice at all. Then after a few practices, they give up.

56 minutes ago, Piz said:

Is anyone, truly, self-taught?  How does one learn anything without observation, experiment, and reflection?  To say that an individual has never had a "lesson" does not mean they have never gleaned information from an external source.  Are we not all students in some respect?

I'd would think you have to at least understand the basics before you can even start to figure it out on your own.

Otherwise, there are too many variables in a golf swing to figure it out.

Edited August 8, 2017 by BallMarker

[Kalnoky]

People practice but they just slip back into old habits. I had a good lesson last time out but I find myself on the practice tee just trying to remember what the man said. The knowledge is real slippery and easy to lose.

We should delineate between adults that are learning to play for the first time and adults who've been playing at a high level all their lives. The latter group might see an instructor for a tune up, go out and shoot an 81, and be angry about the lesson. The former group is barely hanging on to the game and doesn't have a golf swing yet. 

 

[b101]

On 22/07/2017 at 10:32 PM, iacas said:

You'd be surprised how few things are actually "different." There are days four people will get a variation of almost the same lesson. I'll have clinics with three people who are all working on the same thing. They feel it slightly differently, or go about it a little differently, but for example, "slide your hips forward a bit instead of backing them up on the downswing" is a common lesson type.

As a teacher by profession, this is exactly what separates good teachers from average/bad - the ability to deliver essentially the same information, but personalise it so that the individual student gets what they need. Additionally, you need the experience and desire to seek/look at alternative methods or solutions when the first one doesn't fit. I've lost count of how many different ways I've used to teach the past tense, for example, ranging from the student who needs to understand how and why it works, to those who just need set examples and phrases. It'll depend on the student's current level, motivation and ability, as well as what they want to do with the information. If it's just to pass an exam, fine, if it's with the longer term goal of becoming fluent, we'll do things slightly differently.

I would imagine the golf swing is little different as an example, except for the fact that we're all more interested and therefore read more about it, without having the understanding or ability to siphon out what is useful and what isn't. It's one of the few things I can think of where more knowledge probably does more harm than good...

[iacas]

4 hours ago, Apoc81 said:

It's simple physics, and someone with the equipment and time could easily look at their own swing, work on what's wrong, and tinker until it's right.

Nah.

4 hours ago, Apoc81 said:

(As much as I can't stand him, bubba is a self taught 2x major winner). Sure there's athletic ability and coordination involved, but I think anyone who puts in enough practice can learn to play decent golf. 

Bubba's gotten lessons. That whole thing is bull. I've stood ten feet from him when his caddie was helping him on the range, basically giving him a lesson and making him do drills. He's talked with Tiger and I've seen the two of them working on things. He had a coach in college.

He's never cold called an instructor and said "I'd like to take a lesson," but he's had "lessons."

And… what, one player on the modern PGA Tour? That's your example?

On 7/21/2017 at 10:30 AM, Apoc81 said:

Physics isn't just demonstrated on paper. It also isn't "hit he ball with a fast and straight club face in the sweet spot."  The body and it's movements follow the laws of physics as well.

So? The golf swing isn't a physics problem. It's way, way more difficult to fix than you're giving credit to.

And you're not even completely correct. Feels, emotions, proprioception… learning, patience, dedication… those aren't governed by physics. Biomechanics is a separate area of science. Physics "applies" but it's not really "applicable" per se.

Teaching and learning the golf swing involves far more than just the "physics" of it.

On 7/21/2017 at 10:30 AM, Apoc81 said:

The clubface, impact, follow through, you can test all of it and create a very repeating swing.  There's obviously geometry in there as well, but if you are in good physical shape, you should have no trouble creating a repeating swing through muscle memory (and video), as long as you understand each component of it.

Yeah… no.

On 7/21/2017 at 10:30 AM, Apoc81 said:

I'm no pro, I would never try to give lessons, but that doesn't change the fact that the swing is simple, and if you understand it, you could most certainly teach yourself. 

It's not simple in the way you are talking about. The "system" involves a lot more than a little geometry and physics. It involves people.

3 hours ago, Apoc81 said:

I'm going on the assumption that if you are interested enough in teaching yourself, you have most certainly took the time to learn the physics and basics of the swing.

Way more to it than that.

3 hours ago, Apoc81 said:

Again, i'm talking fit, athletically inclined people who are willing to hit hundreds of balls a day and film and critique what they see have a pretty damn good chance of playing golf.

You lost everyone right there at "hundreds of balls a day." And even then, with a few small missteps, they can set a really low ceiling on their potential.

1 hour ago, BallMarker said:

Or, it's more likely that most students expect instant results without much practice at all. Then after a few practices, they give up.

I don't think that's the more likely thing at all.

I think most instructors are bad, like the topic says.

1 hour ago, BallMarker said:

Otherwise, there are too many variables in a golf swing to figure it out.

Yeah, and one misstep leads to another.

[Jack Watson]

4 hours ago, BallMarker said:

Or, it's more likely that most students expect instant results without much practice at all. Then after a few practices, they give up.

Maybe.  I can only give examples from my experience.  I got some advice here.  I went out first time to try and implement that advice.  Overall yes I was not as good as normal however I hit some that were enough to show me that I was working on something that can be very effective.   Those few executed slightly better were plenty to motivate me to press onward.

The first time I went to a local guy which was the first time I ever saw my swing he advised me what to work on.  Honestly it never worked.  I went three more times and I was doing way worse with no light at the end of the tunnel.  I was working very hard on what he told me but for me in the end the instruction was useless.  

I dunno,  but it's my strong opinion that if the instruction is good,  a person should be able to tell within a hundred balls or so-probably less if supervised.  It doesn't mean that you own the concept only that its potential is very obvious.

Imo the majority of "golf instructors" just are not very good.

7 hours ago, Apoc81 said:

It's simple physics, and someone with the equipment and time could easily look at their own swing, work on what's wrong, and tinker until it's right. The body does what we make it do, and many people learn without coaching. (As much as I can't stand him, bubba is a self taught 2x major winner). Sure there's athletic ability and coordination involved, but I think anyone who puts in enough practice can learn to play decent golf. 

It's not and that's incorrect.  

Hogan wrote that it pained him to see people "practicing" who were only ingraining deeper and deeper fundamentally incorrect moves.

He said they will never improve.  I think that's one idea he was really correct about.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Jack Watson

[Jack Watson]

To me a person who refers to the swing as simple physics is really only advertising their personal lack of understanding of physics.

[JonMA1]

6 hours ago, Apoc81 said:

but I was still a 6-7 by the time I was 14 and joined our high school team (ages 14-17 here). I had never had a single lesson to that point. 

 In all fairness, getting good seemed to come easier to you than it does the average person. You stated that you came from a golfing family, is it possible you were taught good basics at an early age?

It amazes me that people can play this game at the level of low single digit or better. Maybe some of us hacks started out with such poor basics and the more we practiced, the more engrained those bad habits became. 

6 hours ago, Apoc81 said:

I'm working under the assumption that the person doing this is reasonably fit and ambitious enough to practice daily, on all parts of the game, and getting in the course time to practice scrambling and course management as well. 

I might be an exception or on the low side of the spectrum, but I've met these criteria for the last 5 1/2 years and golf has been anything but easy. Granted, I took the game up late in life, but I've worked my ass off, studied the mechanics, took video and can debate course management with the best of them.

My opinion is that however good some people are with learning the game on their own, they would be at least a bit better with good instruction.

I also believe that some of us are destined to play poor golf for various reasons, none of which include a lack of fitness, effort or desire. Lessons from a good instructor might help us, but the bar will always be set low.

[Jack Watson]

I am going to post something highly theoretical now,  but it's something I keep coming back to so I will throw it out there.

My theory is certain people,  and they are a minority,  tend to make a pretty fundamentally sound pivot as they start playing.

For these folks,  improvement comes very rapidly and they get really into golf.

The vast majority have to learn what these others do naturally by practice.  

People like me go a long time without anyone teaching them a fundamentally sound pivot.  We struggle a lot.

Evidence?  Some people are able to improve very rapidly with minimal instruction.  Others struggle for many years.

I personally know a guy who took no instruction and became single digit just by practice and he used no video or instruction.  TBH his swing is really good.  IMO this guy just for whatever reason made a sound pivot very early in his development and capitalized.  

For others the game is a matter of disciplined practice and they can become great also,  but only if they don't spend years shooting 95 and further ingraining a garbage pivot.