Line on the ball for putting?

[iteachgolf]

> @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > > So top players at a younger age can get distracted or lose interest (burn out?) as they get older - that makes sense.

> > >

> > > But are there many top players in high school who weren’t at least decent players in middle school? I would expect any examples of such would be the exception and definitely not the norm.

> >

> > My top high school players currently didn’t play golf in middle school.

>

> Ok now I am intrigued. Were they strong in other sports before starting in golf? Were their parents athletes or play golf competitively? What is it about them that makes them your top students?

>

 

No their parents don’t play golf. They played other sports but weren’t elite at them. They are the best because they shoot the lowest scores. They work hard, one just won US Jr qualifier by 4.

 

They knew they started late, worked hard on the right things, and want to be the best

[iteachgolf]

> @wlm said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > > So top players at a younger age can get distracted or lose interest (burn out?) as they get older - that makes sense.

> > >

> > > But are there many top players in high school who weren’t at least decent players in middle school? I would expect any examples of such would be the exception and definitely not the norm.

> >

> > My top high school players currently didn’t play golf in middle school.

> That is the exception rather than the rule.

>

 

 

You’d be surprised. I’ve had 10 in the last 3 years alone play on scholarship in college that didn’t start until they were 13.

 

I’ve also had a lot of great players who have played since they were a toddler. But plenty of kids who are athletic can start at 13 and get VERY good. Heavy_hitter’s daughter did it as well

[heavy_hitter]

> @wlm said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > > So top players at a younger age can get distracted or lose interest (burn out?) as they get older - that makes sense.

> > >

> > > But are there many top players in high school who weren’t at least decent players in middle school? I would expect any examples of such would be the exception and definitely not the norm.

> >

> > My top high school players currently didn’t play golf in middle school.

> That is the exception rather than the rule.

>

 

Disagree. That is a complete misconception.

 

My daughter is living proof. She never picked up a club until the end of her 7th grade year. Never had a lesson until 8th grade. Decided in 8th grade she wanted to try to play in high school the following year. Never played in a tournament until January of her 8th grade year. She was terrible. She worked hard, learned, and got better. Ended up having a fabulous Junior Career highlighted by qualifying for the girl's USGA Junior. Is now playing for a D1 college.

 

I have seen just as many that have started early and were good that never made it to college to play golf. Burn out, cars, girl's, puberty changes everything.

[wildcatden]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @wlm said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > > > So top players at a younger age can get distracted or lose interest (burn out?) as they get older - that makes sense.

> > > >

> > > > But are there many top players in high school who weren’t at least decent players in middle school? I would expect any examples of such would be the exception and definitely not the norm.

> > >

> > > My top high school players currently didn’t play golf in middle school.

> > That is the exception rather than the rule.

> >

>

>

> You’d be surprised. I’ve had 10 in the last 3 years alone play on scholarship in college that didn’t start until they were 13.

>

> I’ve also had a lot of great players who have played since they were a toddler. But plenty of kids who are athletic can start at 13 and get VERY good. Heavy_hitter’s daughter did it as well

 

 

That's an interesting stat. In the past 3 (or 5 years), do you have a comparison of how many of your students that played since they were toddlers that went on to scholarship? I know the sample size is likely small, but just interested in your observation.

[iteachgolf]

> @wildcatden said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @wlm said:

> > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > > > > So top players at a younger age can get distracted or lose interest (burn out?) as they get older - that makes sense.

> > > > >

> > > > > But are there many top players in high school who weren’t at least decent players in middle school? I would expect any examples of such would be the exception and definitely not the norm.

> > > >

> > > > My top high school players currently didn’t play golf in middle school.

> > > That is the exception rather than the rule.

> > >

> >

> >

> > You’d be surprised. I’ve had 10 in the last 3 years alone play on scholarship in college that didn’t start until they were 13.

> >

> > I’ve also had a lot of great players who have played since they were a toddler. But plenty of kids who are athletic can start at 13 and get VERY good. Heavy_hitter’s daughter did it as well

>

>

> That's an interesting stat. In the past 3 (or 5 years), do you have a comparison of how many of your students that played since they were toddlers that went on to scholarship? I know the sample size is likely small, but just interested in your observation.

 

I mean almost all my junior who spend all 4 years of high school with me play on scholarship. I’d say it’s about even for kids who started really young. I’d say majority of my kids start 10-12 years old and for every one that was playing US Kids at 6 years old, I have a kid who started 8th or 9th grade who is shooting 66 by the time he’s 18.

[yellowlover519]

I think we can all agree to disagree on this topic as it has been raised many times. Yes, there are plenty of statistics where juniors that did not play until 12 have played for good D1 schools. But it is a fact that if you google the majority of top juniors on AJGA rankings or JGS, they all have resumes of winning when they were young. Maybe not all US Kids or IMG World Champions, but having qualified to those events, they were winning local events. In fact, I would argue that there are many more top ranked juniors that played and won since the age of 6 than those that started playing at age 11 or 12. Same thing on the professional level. If you dive into the stories of any of the top players, they all played from a young age (10U), albeit maybe not as competitively as others. This stat will continue to skew in the favor of younger players playing and winning US Kids events from the age of 7-8 as time goes on since many of the pros today didn't even have that option, and, even for those that did, US Kids was not as popular as it has become over the last 10 years.

 

Burnout percentage is minimal in the scheme of things. Physical disadvantages (e.g., not growing or being as strong as peers post puberty) is a much bigger factor to explain why kids that won or were good at 11U aren't as good in high school. Has nothing to do with burnout in most cases, IMO.

[wlm]

> @heavy_hitter said:

> > @wlm said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > > > So top players at a younger age can get distracted or lose interest (burn out?) as they get older - that makes sense.

> > > >

> > > > But are there many top players in high school who weren’t at least decent players in middle school? I would expect any examples of such would be the exception and definitely not the norm.

> > >

> > > My top high school players currently didn’t play golf in middle school.

> > That is the exception rather than the rule.

> >

>

> Disagree. That is a complete misconception.

>

> My daughter is living proof. She never picked up a club until the end of her 7th grade year. Never had a lesson until 8th grade. Decided in 8th grade she wanted to try to play in high school the following year. Never played in a tournament until January of her 8th grade year. She was terrible. She worked hard, learned, and got better. Ended up having a fabulous Junior Career highlighted by qualifying for the girl's USGA Junior. Is now playing for a D1 college.

>

> I have seen just as many that have started early and were good that never made it to college to play golf. Burn out, cars, girl's, puberty changes everything.

 

That is awesome! I was just saying I think it is an exception, in that most kids played in middle school who advance to the higher levels. I'm sure iteachgolf sees a broader group than me though.

[tiger1873]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @JuniorGolfParent said:

> > So top players at a younger age can get distracted or lose interest (burn out?) as they get older - that makes sense.

> >

> > But are there many top players in high school who weren’t at least decent players in middle school? I would expect any examples of such would be the exception and definitely not the norm.

>

> My top high school players currently didn’t play golf in middle school.

 

I can see top high school players but not high> @yellowlover519 said:

> I think we can all agree to disagree on this topic as it has been raised many times. Yes, there are plenty of statistics where juniors that did not play until 12 have played for good D1 schools. But it is a fact that if you google the majority of top juniors on AJGA rankings or JGS, they all have resumes of winning when they were young. Maybe not all US Kids or IMG World Champions, but having qualified to those events, they were winning local events. In fact, I would argue that there are many more top ranked juniors that played and won since the age of 6 than those that started playing at age 11 or 12. Same thing on the professional level. If you dive into the stories of any of the top players, they all played from a young age (10U), albeit maybe not as competitively as others. This stat will continue to skew in the favor of younger players playing and winning US Kids events from the age of 7-8 as time goes on since many of the pros today didn't even have that option, and, even for those that did, US Kids was not as popular as it has become over the last 10 years.

>

> Burnout percentage is minimal in the scheme of things. Physical disadvantages (e.g., not growing or being as strong as peers post puberty) is a much bigger factor to explain why kids that won or were good at 11U aren't as good in high school. Has nothing to do with burnout in most cases, IMO.

 

Not being exposed to golf at young age is very bad but you do not need to be winning events either. I believe Brooks Koepka did not win until he was 14 or 15 and even then only won regional events. He did play golf when he was under 10 though.

 

The vast majority of kids who win US Kids events at young age especially at a high level do things that do not help long term development. I've seen kids win who have croquet swings, or even worse use drivers that are way too long the parents are too much into them winning and think the other kids will never catch up. The thing is around 12 it begins to catch up but the time they're 15 or 16 a lot kids get left behind because they never learned to control the spin on the ball or really get out trouble or even plan there way around the course.

 

At young age your looking for tournament experience so they learn how to play in tournaments and it doesn't matter where they place. When a kid is 14 or 15 they need to win qualifiers or they will never get the chance to play bigger tournaments. It's a very different environment above 12 in junior golf.

[iteachgolf]

I’m not talking top high school player, I’m talking elite junior golfers who are high ranked both in state and nationally who will play for top college programs.

 

A kid diving into golf seriously at 12-13 vs playing casually 9-10 isn’t going to make much of a difference. The kids who play at an elite level got good fast, whenever they started. Do you honestly think the kids who start at 9 and are qualifying for worlds at 11 wouldn’t be able to start at 13 and be near top of the class rankings in their state by 15? There aren’t kids who were bad for 10 years who all of a sudden got really good just because they played for a long time. The kids who go on to play at top programs often were shooting around par within 1-3 years of playing golf regardless of the age they started, provided they are playing appropriate yardage.

[wildcatden]

> @yellowlover519 said:

> I think we can all agree to disagree on this topic as it has been raised many times. Yes, there are plenty of statistics where juniors that did not play until 12 have played for good D1 schools. But it is a fact that if you google the majority of top juniors on AJGA rankings or JGS, they all have resumes of winning when they were young. Maybe not all US Kids or IMG World Champions, but having qualified to those events, they were winning local events. In fact, I would argue that there are many more top ranked juniors that played and won since the age of 6 than those that started playing at age 11 or 12. Same thing on the professional level. If you dive into the stories of any of the top players, they all played from a young age (10U), albeit maybe not as competitively as others. This stat will continue to skew in the favor of younger players playing and winning US Kids events from the age of 7-8 as time goes on since many of the pros today didn't even have that option, and, even for those that did, US Kids was not as popular as it has become over the last 10 years.

>

> Burnout percentage is minimal in the scheme of things. Physical disadvantages (e.g., not growing or being as strong as peers post puberty) is a much bigger factor to explain why kids that won or were good at 11U aren't as good in high school. Has nothing to do with burnout in most cases, IMO.

 

 

None of that stuff at 12U matters. "Qualifying" for USKG Worlds is a joke. It's a money making scheme not a prestigious qualifying tournament. Example: Looking back at 2017 USKG Worlds (because 2018 had some rain cancelled rounds), look at the worst overall scores for boys at each age group:

6&U- +54

7 - +58

8 - +72

9 - +94

10 - +74

11 - +75

12 (B Flight) - +95

12 (Championship Flight) - +28

 

Those are quite the stringent requirements they have to allow tournament access.

 

[CTgolf]

For those who say it doesn’t really matter when you start:

 

How do you know the kid who started at 13 and achieved success wouldn’t even be better if he had been playing and competing since 7?

 

If you took 100 random players and started them at 7, and another 100 random players and started them at 13, I’m almost 100% sure the ones who started earlier would be better on average by 18, and the best would be better and the worst would probably also be better.

 

iTeach: presumably the 13yo (or any age for that matter) beginner you are taking on as a student has a ton of potential, otherwise you wouldn’t make time for them in the first place? That skews the results dramatically.

 

The average parent reading this forum has no clue whether his child is exceptionally talented or not (outside of others telling him his kid is great); even if the kid is gifted, there are few, if any, advantages starting him later rather than sooner.

[iteachgolf]

> @CTgolf said:

> For those who say it doesn’t really matter when you start:

>

> How do you know the kid who started at 13 and achieved success wouldn’t even be better if he had been playing and competing since 7?

>

> If you took 100 random players and started them at 7, and another 100 random players and started them at 13, I’m almost 100% sure the ones who started earlier would be better on average by 18, and the best would be better and the worst would probably also be better.

>

> iTeach: presumably the 13yo (or any age for that matter) beginner you are taking on as a student has a ton of potential, otherwise you wouldn’t make time for them in the first place? That skews the results dramatically.

>

> The average parent reading this forum has no clue whether his child is exceptionally talented or not (outside of others telling him his kid is great); even if the kid is gifted, there are few, if any, advantages starting him later rather than sooner.

 

I think you are grossly mischaracterizing things. I teach juniors who can’t break 90. I don’t only teach kids who are already good. I don’t turn down lessons based on a players skill or potential ability. What exactly do you think an 8 year old is learning and retaining that isn’t learned by a 13 year old? Like I said the ones who are going to be elite, get good fast. And far more has to do with work ethic and working on the right things than it does athletic ability.

[leezer99]

So did we decide if a line on the ball was helpful or not?

[heavy_hitter]

> @CTgolf said:

> For those who say it doesn’t really matter when you start:

>

> How do you know the kid who started at 13 and achieved success wouldn’t even be better if he had been playing and competing since 7?

>

> If you took 100 random players and started them at 7, and another 100 random players and started them at 13, I’m almost 100% sure the ones who started earlier would be better on average by 18, and the best would be better and the worst would probably also be better.

>

> iTeach: presumably the 13yo (or any age for that matter) beginner you are taking on as a student has a ton of potential, otherwise you wouldn’t make time for them in the first place? That skews the results dramatically.

>

> The average parent reading this forum has no clue whether his child is exceptionally talented or not (outside of others telling him his kid is great); even if the kid is gifted, there are few, if any, advantages starting him later rather than sooner.

 

Puberty, Cars, and Girls change everything. There are two golf careers in a juniors life, Pre-Puberty and Post Puberty. What you have done pre-puberty honestly doesn't mean anything. It can develop just as many bad habits as it does good habits.

[wildcatden]

> @leezer99 said:

> So did we decide if a line on the ball was helpful or not?

 

 

Depends on the compression rating of the ball.

 

 

[luderiffic]

> @leezer99 said:

> So did we decide if a line on the ball was helpful or not?

 

It helped my pre-puberty kids. Can't comment on what will happen after they start eyeing chicks and cars.