Don't Bump

[Ghost of Snead]

I wanted to trail back . . . A fellow WRXer pointed out that not all modern golf instruction is in the dark ages, pointing me in the direction of the below video. Kudos!!!

Edit: Technically, I guess I should have stated that not all modern golf INSTRUCTORS are in the dark ages.

 

Considering that many of Clement's videos deal with swing minutia, perhaps you shouldn't have trailed back.

[FatReed]

I wanted to trail back . . . A fellow WRXer pointed out that not all modern golf instruction is in the dark ages, pointing me in the direction of the below video. Kudos!!!

Edit: Technically, I guess I should have stated that not all modern golf INSTRUCTORS are in the dark ages.

 

Considering that many of Clement's videos deal with swing minutia, perhaps you shouldn't have trailed back.

 

Not familiar with his many other videos, nor were any others presented. The one presented is excellent.

 

Nonetheless, perhaps you are correct, as Clement might have just been having an off-day when he made that video, and abandoned his entire philosophy regarding golf instruction.

 

I love your posts Ghost; thanks for the contributions.

[Ghost of Snead]

I wanted to trail back . . . A fellow WRXer pointed out that not all modern golf instruction is in the dark ages, pointing me in the direction of the below video. Kudos!!! [media=]

[/media] Edit: Technically, I guess I should have stated that not all modern golf INSTRUCTORS are in the dark ages.

 

Considering that many of Clement's videos deal with swing minutia, perhaps you shouldn't have trailed back.

 

Not familiar with his many other videos, nor were any others presented. The one presented is excellent.

 

Nonetheless, perhaps you are correct, as Clement might have just been having an off-day when he made that video, and abandoned his entire philosophy regarding golf instruction.

 

I love your posts Ghost; thanks for the contributions.

 

Likewise Fat ... just curious as to why you abandoned the swing minutia approach you used to espouse on Wrx ?

[FatReed]

I wanted to trail back . . . A fellow WRXer pointed out that not all modern golf instruction is in the dark ages, pointing me in the direction of the below video. Kudos!!! [media=]

[/media] Edit: Technically, I guess I should have stated that not all modern golf INSTRUCTORS are in the dark ages.

 

Considering that many of Clement's videos deal with swing minutia, perhaps you shouldn't have trailed back.

 

Not familiar with his many other videos, nor were any others presented. The one presented is excellent.

 

Nonetheless, perhaps you are correct, as Clement might have just been having an off-day when he made that video, and abandoned his entire philosophy regarding golf instruction.

 

I love your posts Ghost; thanks for the contributions.

 

Likewise Fat ... just curious as to why you abandoned the swing minutia approach you used to espouse on Wrx ?

 

Ghost, as I have stated previously. . . because I got tired of giving chase down the rabbit hole.

 

In other words, I was naive and wrong in my belief that modern approaches to instruction would help me play better golf.

 

So, I chalk it up to a learning experience, with many mistakes made along the way. I blame myself for giving blind chase. . . and, quite simply, losing focus on the proper objective(s).

[Ghost of Snead]

I wanted to trail back . . . A fellow WRXer pointed out that not all modern golf instruction is in the dark ages, pointing me in the direction of the below video. Kudos!!! [media=]

[/media] Edit: Technically, I guess I should have stated that not all modern golf INSTRUCTORS are in the dark ages.

 

Considering that many of Clement's videos deal with swing minutia, perhaps you shouldn't have trailed back.

 

Not familiar with his many other videos, nor were any others presented. The one presented is excellent.

 

Nonetheless, perhaps you are correct, as Clement might have just been having an off-day when he made that video, and abandoned his entire philosophy regarding golf instruction.

 

I love your posts Ghost; thanks for the contributions.

 

Likewise Fat ... just curious as to why you abandoned the swing minutia approach you used to espouse on Wrx ?

 

Ghost, as I have stated previously. . . because I got tired of giving chase down the rabbit hole.

 

In other words, I was naive and wrong in my belief that modern approaches to instruction would help me play better golf.

 

So, I chalk it up to a learning experience, with many mistakes made along the way. I blame myself for giving blind chase. . . and, quite simply, losing focus on the proper objective(s).

 

Since you keep referencing "modern approaches to instruction", I have to ask you for a definition of such, when they came about, and what makes a "modern approach" any different than what was taught before the advent of video instruction.

[FatReed]

Ghost, please reference my prior posts regarding approaches to modern instruction, particularly #183. I believe I have covered that in some detail.

 

You reference video, but the ‘investigation’ into what is happening in the golf swing has extended well beyond simple photography and videos. Nonetheless, I know what you are getting at in reference to video.

 

Specifically, you are inquiring how more technology has negatively impacted modern golf instruction? Honestly, I might be best to alter my use of the term ‘modern,’ as it suggests older instructional eras, exclusive to modern technological advances, did not have similar shortcomings.

 

The truth is, I’m not clear to what extent ‘old’ instruction was position/mechanics based . . . or how much better, if at all, older instruction was than modern instruction? Obviously, due to a lack of access to modern minutia, they were less dependent upon it. I think a proper statement is that golf instruction has EVOLVED into a false paradigm.

 

What I can also say is that CURRENT golf instruction has become increasingly obsessed with minutia related to motion. I guess it’s in keeping with the era in which live of unprecedented information acquisition - data acquisition.

 

So, regardless of old’ or ‘modern’ instruction, the points I’ve made remain the same. Motion cannot be taught, only learned. In learning motion, the focus must be on the proper objective - or, as Clement stated, the task at hand. . . NOT the motion itself. In this regard, I’m particularly critical of ‘modern’ golf instruction because there has never been more minutia and, thus, golf instruction has never been so dependent upon presenting the minutia in a false attempt to teach motion to golfers.

 

I guess there is a very real possibility that ‘old’ instruction made similar mistakes, but just didn’t have as much minutia to present in the process

[Ghost of Snead]

Ghost, please reference my prior posts regarding approaches to modern instruction, particularly #183. I believe I have covered that in some detail.

 

You reference video, but the ‘investigation’ into what is happening in the golf swing has extended well beyond simple photography and videos. Nonetheless, I know what you are getting at in reference to video.

 

Specifically, you are inquiring how more technology has negatively impacted modern golf instruction? Honestly, I might be best to alter my use of the term ‘modern,’ as it suggests older instructional eras, exclusive to modern technological advances, did not have similar shortcomings.

 

The truth is, I’m not clear to what extent ‘old’ instruction was position/mechanics based . . . or how much better, if at all, older instruction was than modern instruction? Obviously, due to a lack of access to modern minutia, they were less dependent upon it. I think a proper statement is that golf instruction has EVOLVED into a false paradigm.

 

What I can also say is that CURRENT golf instruction has become increasingly obsessed with minutia related to motion. I guess it’s in keeping with the era in which live of unprecedented information acquisition - data acquisition.

 

So, regardless of old’ or ‘modern’ instruction, the points I’ve made remain the same. Motion cannot be taught, only learned. In learning motion, the focus must be on the proper objective - or, as Clement stated, the task at hand. . . NOT the motion itself. In this regard, I’m particularly critical of ‘modern’ golf instruction because there has never been more minutia and, thus, golf instruction has never been so dependent upon presenting the minutia in a false attempt to teach motion to golfers.

 

I guess there is a very real possibility that ‘old’ instruction made similar mistakes, but just didn’t have as much minutia to present in the process

 

What you fail to acknowledge is that the data collected by modern instructors is only passed along to their students in a language the student can understand. The good teacher uses Trackman/Flightscope, Gears, video, Boditrak, etc as reinforcement to the instruction being passed along. And I have not seen or heard from any instructor who does have the goal of getting their students to properly advance the ball from point A to point B.

 

As to the video you presented in another thread ... any 2-year-old can pick up a golf club and learn a motion to advance the golf ball. However in most cases, the learned motion will have flaws and the ball will not go in the direction it should. And what we have left is a majority of golfers who certainly have learned a motion, but the motion is not good enough to produce the desired result. The good instructor will teach the student how to modify the entire motion by effectively narrowing down the swing issue to a manageable part or two.

 

I'd much rather be a golf student today with all of the technology and "minutia" available than one in the 1950s where all you had was a guess from a "pro" standing behind you on the range.

[Golfbeat]

Why don't you guys PM eachother?

[Ghost of Snead]

Why don't you guys PM eachother?

 

Apologies Golfbeat, this thread was derailed about 4 pages back and no one said anything.

[FatReed]

Ghost, please reference my prior posts regarding approaches to modern instruction, particularly #183. I believe I have covered that in some detail.

 

You reference video, but the ‘investigation’ into what is happening in the golf swing has extended well beyond simple photography and videos. Nonetheless, I know what you are getting at in reference to video.

 

Specifically, you are inquiring how more technology has negatively impacted modern golf instruction? Honestly, I might be best to alter my use of the term ‘modern,’ as it suggests older instructional eras, exclusive to modern technological advances, did not have similar shortcomings.

 

The truth is, I’m not clear to what extent ‘old’ instruction was position/mechanics based . . . or how much better, if at all, older instruction was than modern instruction? Obviously, due to a lack of access to modern minutia, they were less dependent upon it. I think a proper statement is that golf instruction has EVOLVED into a false paradigm.

 

What I can also say is that CURRENT golf instruction has become increasingly obsessed with minutia related to motion. I guess it’s in keeping with the era in which live of unprecedented information acquisition - data acquisition.

 

So, regardless of old’ or ‘modern’ instruction, the points I’ve made remain the same. Motion cannot be taught, only learned. In learning motion, the focus must be on the proper objective - or, as Clement stated, the task at hand. . . NOT the motion itself. In this regard, I’m particularly critical of ‘modern’ golf instruction because there has never been more minutia and, thus, golf instruction has never been so dependent upon presenting the minutia in a false attempt to teach motion to golfers.

 

I guess there is a very real possibility that ‘old’ instruction made similar mistakes, but just didn’t have as much minutia to present in the process

 

What you fail to acknowledge is that the data collected by modern instructors is only passed along to their students in a language the student can understand. The good teacher uses Trackman/Flightscope, Gears, video, Boditrak, etc as reinforcement to the instruction being passed along. And I have not seen or heard from any instructor who does have the goal of getting their students to properly advance the ball from point A to point B.

 

As to the video you presented in another thread ... any 2-year-old can pick up a golf club and learn a motion to advance the golf ball. However in most cases, the learned motion will have flaws and the ball will not go in the direction it should. And what we have left is a majority of golfers who certainly have learned a motion, but the motion is not good enough to produce the desired result. The good instructor will teach the student how to modify the entire motion by effectively narrowing down the swing issue to a manageable part or two.

 

I'd much rather be a golf student today with all of the technology and "minutia" available than one in the 1950s where all you had was a guess from a "pro" standing behind you on the range.

 

Ghost, I think it’s safe to say that our views differ. . . perfectly acceptable on my end.

[pingnewbie]

Can someone call Koepka’s coach and let him know he’s not getting gucci at all?

[georgey]

... any 2-year-old can pick up a golf club and learn a motion to advance the golf ball. However in most cases, the learned motion will have flaws and the ball will not go in the direction it should. And what we have left is a majority of golfers who certainly have learned a motion,

 

A golf swing is a collection of corrected mistakes. Carol Mann.

[BottleCap]

Here's an answer

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kNA88T7efg