Jump to content

Coach Whitty

Member
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Coach Whitty

Recent Profile Visitors

153 profile views

Coach Whitty's Achievements

Member

Member (2/9)

  • 1st Reaction Received
  • 1st Topic
  • 1st Post

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. What is your current most common shot shape?
  2. I have already stated that if that is what "clicks" with a student, they should go for it. If it doesn't, that's okay to. There's good news for those who don't. You don't need it to learn to play good golf.
  3. That's fine if that is how you want to approach your golf instruction. I think too many students get hung up on too many things to think about as it is. I can see how the ability to break down the data and use science is very valuable to pros whose livelihood depends on it. It is a huge investment for someone who never will go to that level. I am glad you give only one thing for your students to think about. While I am not speaking on YouTube "instruction", I am addressing the coaches I have witnessed on the course over the years all the way up to today, especially ones that put on summer clinics in my area. There are a lot of wonderful coaches here that are able to balance the two, but I have noticed an obsession with numbers beginning to creep in, to the point where some of the students who come to me have been tied up into a mental not (frustrated that the data they got from hours and hours of lessons on our local simulators isn't equating to good golf, or at least improvement, on the course).
  4. If you would like a serious discussion here goes. In order, my father played college golf at the University of Minnesota and was a coach. If that doesn't fit the definition of having lessons...so be it. What is your definition of technical data? Is it going to simulators and standing on pressure plates and looking at numbers? Is it investing heavily in trainer equipment? I'll go with you on range sessions, as that is where a swing will be developed. If you require more data to improve your game and instruction, more power to you. I teach in a classical way with the philosophy of the more complicated you try to make something, the more things that can go wrong, and the more bad golf you will experience. My views may sound too simple at times, but I've never been a great believer in complicating an issue unnecessarily. "If you have the task of giving first aid, it is a mistake studying up on open heart surgery." However if something works, great. Go with it. A lot of instructional talk today comes out of a couple hundred unusually gifted and highly trained pros and rarely contributes to the game of the weekend golfer. To a beginning golfer, I try to get them to follow techniques that Sam Snead taught. For reference, Sam Snead taught my father's college coach, who instructed my father, who in turn instructed me. Call me biased, it's what I know and has proven fruitful for my instruction and students' success. I believe in focusing on technique more than data analysis. A cause based instructional method of analysis does an awesome job of explaining the golf swing, but it doesn't make a good game happen. Sound individualized, results based technique instruction does teach a good game and keeps explanations down to a minimum. So I understand your "feel ain't real" thought, but if a technique works (even if what is "felt" isn't what is actually happening), does it really matter why to the average golfer who is successful, probably not. I do teach my students timing and rhythm as I want them to build a swing that is free and easy, focusing on smooth movements not torqued mechanical motions. I want them to physically be able to use their swing into their old age without having to constantly tweak and mess with it. That does not mean avoiding data, it simply means not getting hung up on it. This topic is on instruction and in my experience over the years many of the instructors I listen to on the course teach in a way where they flood a student with so many swing thoughts of angles etc..., you can see the smoke coming out of the poor player's ears. I see this as too much technical instruction.
  5. My goodness, I didn't realize I would have such an impact on my very first time posting. Like throwing one French Fry to a flock of seaguls. Thank you so much for the warm welcome. To answer the first question, I was taught by my father who is my hero not that it is of any importance to all of you kind and inviting individuals. I was fortunate to have him, because I came from a very poor family who on paper, should not have been able to make it, but somehow my parents managed. Now back to topic. The usage of technical data is not a bad thing and I support this in my original post, but I do believe that in instruction, it all depends on the need of the student and the level they are at. For example, could I take a beginning student and tell them all about the intricacies of hip turn, shoulder turn, spine angle, inside/outside path, etc...? Yes, and if that is what they needed...I would. However, if I could give them simple swing thoughts that could get them to develop a beautiful swing that they could use for a lifetime and have fun/success with, while naturally adhering to said scientific principles you seem to be so beholden to, would I do it? If that is what the student needed, you bet. However, I was simply responding to this topic with an opinion that as I said before "many (but not the majority)" become too engrossed with trying to sell their beliefs of what goes into the swing, that they are willing to attack anyone who has had successful instruction techniques sometimes different and even contrary from their chosen pedagogy. For future reference, perhaps you should frame the question as "Why do you feel there should be more technical data in golf instruction?" That way only people of the same persuasion will be there to support your opinions. Thank you to the several individuals (including the administrator and moderator?) who have demonstrated the coaching styles they must employ. While I am very aware of the difference between "correction" vs "attacks", I must assume you are all younger based on the sarcastic and childish .gifs you used. I can see this is not a place for professional discussion. Best of luck.
  6. After posting last night and reading quite a few posts on different topics since then, I have changed my opinion. I do believe golf instruction has become far too complicated for the average golfer, who should not get hung up on overly complicated jargon and scientific data as most of it will be of little value to the weekend warrior. It appears that many enthusiasts desire to be viewed as an authority or "the" authority on principles they believe themselves to be the sole discoverer of and get very huffy/standoff-ish when others are addressing the same said principle from a slightly different viewpoint. They then have a tendency to pad and patent their thoughts with scientific jargon in the hopes of selling the idea of "listen to me only because I have all this complicated information that will turn you into a professional ...or... here is the real fix to your game that the pros don't want you to know". As an old duffer who was raised in the Sam Snead/Patty Berg classical methods of golf, I have been instantly attacked on other forums like Golfwrx after posting a simple key I was taught and like to use in my game. Messages of "that way of thinking has been proven 'wrong' or 'incorrect' are constantly thrown around. Then comes the torrent of explanation why the things that have been proven to work...don't work. I do believe many (not the majority) need that information to justify their questionable monetary investment and time management that border on obsession.
  7. I find any shoe I buy in wide has a tendency to last longer.
  8. I was on the fence as it depends on the level of student and the instructor's understanding of what will better help said student. More often than not (in my experience) golf enthusiasts who have read a lot, perhaps got their PhD in Golf Instruction from the University of YouTube, have a terrible tendency to overload the beginner/average weekend warrior. This can do more damage as too many swing thoughts often lead to tension/frustration and can in turn lead to a breakdown in one's game. I also believe that analyzing data is great, but a lot of stuff out there is a sales gimmick just like being told a magic move or hidden secret will suddenly get you gaming like a young Jack Nicklaus. If you are having to send your data to NASA to check the equations of a golf swing, you are working way too hard and the average golfer isn't going to be able to use that information.
×
×
  • 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...