Proficient Versus Insufficient: A Common Variable?

[FatReed]

I agree that proficient golf swings (motions) share certain characteristics, which many continue to study and define. That being stated, attention to defining motion characteristics does not equate to how one learned - or should attempt to learn - motion. The commonalities of proficient motion are the product of proper objective(s). Similarly, insufficiencies are the product of improper objective(s). In other words, proficient and insufficient golf swing (motions) differ BECAUSE of differing objectives - proper and improper, respectively.

 

The fact that most golfers are not proficient ball strikers isn’t nearly as astonishing as the fact that most golfers suffer the exact same insufficiencies in their golf swings (motions). I mean, it’s truly amazing that golfers can be so consistent in their insufficiencies. Typically established and identified are over-the-top; steep; early extension; ‘flip’ . . . all the relatively same insufficiencies that (consistently) consume thread after thread on WRX.

 

The typical responses and exchanges that extend the threads are to the effect: insufficiency ‘x’ is a symptom, not the problem. Golfers then get a plethora of anecdotes in the form of positions, reference to data of what ‘proficient’ players are doing, etc. . . that all preceded the stated insufficiency(ies), and are suggested to be the root problem. The chase down the rabbit hole commences.

 

I suggest that there IS a common ‘variable,’ differentiating proficient from insufficient. There must be, as it would be otherwise somewhat impossible for the human machine to produce both remarkably consistent proficiencies versus similarly consistent insufficiencies in motion.

 

What I do not agree with is the approach golfers and golf instructors take toward improving upon the insufficiencies, or the typically referenced ‘symptoms’ themselves. The common practice is to try and get the insufficient to ‘emulate’ the motion of the proficient. This motion-centric approach is a false paradigm, and does not identify the common variable, nor positive versus negative aspects of the variable. In brief digression, nor does such approach taken into account that FORCE DEFORMS (Frozen Divots).

 

Humans are amazing feats of evolution, including their ability to learn and execute complex motor patterns. The golf swing (motion) is no exception in either it’s complexity or ability to be learned to executed.

 

For the moment, instead of being enamored by the proficient, let’s focus on the insufficient that comprise the majority. If the golf swing required a thorough understanding of positions, forces . . . of MOTION to execute, then wouldn’t the majority of golfers demonstrate random and varied insufficiencies? It is more than intuitive to equate insufficiency with inconsistency (in motion). Rather, with regard to the golf swing, the insufficiencies are remarkably consistent. I believe I am safe to suggest, not by mere coincidence.

 

With the above stated, one should logically consider there is a common variable (error) that culminates in common insufficiencies among common machines. Conversely, that proficient golfers have the same common variable as part of their process, but execute it differently (correctly).

 

Over the past few weeks I have expressed my views on why golfers continue to give chase down the rabbit hole, and how modern golf instruction has propagated the chase. As introduced above, I’d like to extend my views to consider what common variable could explain consistent insufficiency versus proficiency.

 

I believe proper focus and objective must be in place to learn a proficient motion. . . and the motion itself is not the proper focus or objective for the new golfer, nor the insufficient golfer. Toward that end, neither should it become the focus or objective of the proficient golfer looking for ‘better.’

 

To be so consistently insufficient across the majority of golfers, there must be a common variable (error). If the focus cannot be the motion - as a primary objective or in correction of insufficiency - then what is the common variable (error) that results in such consistent insufficiency? My suggestion is that the common variable (error) is that the majority of golfers make the ball the target.

 

Why? Probably because it is completely intuitive and nearly universally common among the insufficient. . . but completely wrong. The target is the target, and striking the ball incidental. As many have stated previously, there are multitudes of external cues that golfers can utilize to achieve a proper objective, with proficient motion and associated awareness a desired by-product of the process. This is well established scientifically, not anecdotally.

 

Moreover, at the outset of their learning process, proficient golfers may vary in their defined objective, but I suggest none have the ball as their target, nor the golf swing (motion) as their objective. Once insufficiency is established, and focus takes another improper turn toward the motion itself - if not from the outset - another can of worms is unleashed . . . the chase begins.

 

I accept that I could be incorrect regarding my suggestion that making the ball the target is the common variable (error) that results in consistent insufficiency in the golf swing (motion). I am open to other ‘variable’ considerations in terms of furthering discussion.

 

However, I’m quite confident that focusing on the motion itself is not the correct approach to addressing the insufficiencies and, in fact, only propagates the difficulties that the majority of golfers consistently face.

[dg_1983]

Nice.

 

Focus on moving the ball to the target.

[NotForeLong]

What is your evidence that focusing on the motion is the problem? Saying you are “quite confident” in something is not an argument and nothing else you said even attempts to rigorously prove your thesis.

 

In all of your posts, IMO you build up a strawman of what you think “modern golf instruction” is and then proceed to tear it down. But your mistake is assuming that all instructors are making the mistakes you claim they are. Anecdotally, I can tell you for a fact that there are instructors out there that can easily get quick and lasting results, period. Whether or not the ball being the target is the issue is irrelevant to the fact that they can consistency help people improve. I concede that these instructors are in a small minority and that most in fact do not get results. Teaching the golf swing is very hard, most cannot do it, and possibly for the reasons that you enumerate. But lumping every one in there with the good ones is just an overly simplistic view that does not bear out in reality.

 

The reason that most threads here involve chasing down the rabbit hole is that most people on here are not working with good instructors. In my opinion, they wrongfully think that understanding what to do intuitively is what it takes to improve and they want the easy and cheap way out. This golfers don’t improve because they aren’t doing what they need to do to improve, not because of some overall issues with “modern golf instruction”. The fact that most don’t want to put the time and money in to actually improve the right way is their issue, not an issue with the many legitimately good instructors out there.

[Sean2]

Golf has been around since the 15th century. Despite it's longevity, most of us still struggle to play this game with any consistency/proficiency.

 

Over a 500 year span no one has been able to figure out a way to make the golf swing easy. Given that, I would opine that it's not the instruction that is lacking, but the simple fact that hitting a golf ball well, developing a good swing, is a very difficult thing to do.

[FatReed]

What is your evidence that focusing on the motion is the problem? Saying you are “quite confident” in something is not an argument and nothing else you said even attempts to rigorously prove your thesis.

 

In all of your posts, IMO you build up a strawman of what you think “modern golf instruction” is and then proceed to tear it down. But your mistake is assuming that all instructors are making the mistakes you claim they are. Anecdotally, I can tell you for a fact that there are instructors out there that can easily get quick and lasting results, period. Whether or not the ball being the target is the issue is irrelevant to the fact that they can consistency help people improve. I concede that these instructors are in a small minority and that most in fact do not get results. Teaching the golf swing is very hard, most cannot do it, and possibly for the reasons that you enumerate. But lumping every one in there with the good ones is just an overly simplistic view that does not bear out in reality.

 

The reason that most threads here involve chasing down the rabbit hole is that most people on here are not working with good instructors. In my opinion, they wrongfully think that understanding what to do intuitively is what it takes to improve and they want the easy and cheap way out. This golfers don’t improve because they aren’t doing what they need to do to improve, not because of some overall issues with “modern golf instruction”. The fact that most don’t want to put the time and money in to actually improve the right way is their issue, not an issue with the many legitimately good instructors out there.

 

Your response received and pondered.

 

Thank you

[FatReed]

Golf has been around since the 15th century. Despite it's longevity, most of us still struggle to play this game with any consistency/proficiency.

 

Over a 500 year span no one has been able to figure out a way to make the golf swing easy. Given that, I would opine that it's not the instruction that is lacking, but the simple fact that hitting a golf ball well, developing a good swing, is a very difficult thing to do.

 

I agree that learning to PLAY GOLF proficiently is no simple task for most. . . I believe, however, the process is made to be much more difficult than it needs to be by BOTH golfers and golf instructors.

 

Thank you Sean

[Sean2]

Golf has been around since the 15th century. Despite it's longevity, most of us still struggle to play this game with any consistency/proficiency.

 

Over a 500 year span no one has been able to figure out a way to make the golf swing easy. Given that, I would opine that it's not the instruction that is lacking, but the simple fact that hitting a golf ball well, developing a good swing, is a very difficult thing to do.

 

I agree that learning to PLAY GOLF proficiently is no simple task for most. . . I believe, however, the process is made to be much more difficult than it needs to be by BOTH golfers and golf instructors.

 

Thank you Sean

 

I agree, and have often wondered that very thing...are we making this more difficult than it needs to be? I just don't know how to make it less difficult.

[Golfbeat]

I asked an older gentleman (early 70's) at our club, who played to a 2 hcp, what his swing thought was and he said: "I am just trying to throw the club head at the target". I do not know how often I tried this but it simply never worked for me.

[FatReed]

I asked an older gentleman (early 70's) at our club, who played to a 2 hcp, what his swing thought was and he said: "I am just trying to throw the club head at the target". I do not know how often I tried this but it simply never worked for me.

 

Golfbeat,

 

If you have interest, please refer to post #12 in thread below.

 

In that post, I described what works for ME, and apparently your friend, and in regard to throwing the club. I believe it’s simply an intent associated with an objective.

 

Regardless, everyone ‘learns’ differently, and develops their own feels, intents, external cues, etc. . . you have been around for a while, and I’m certain this is known to you.

 

Best,

 

FR

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/1627712-ee-downswing-trigger-right-or-left-knee/

 

 

[FatReed]

Golfbeat,

 

I am certainly familiar with Shawn Clement, but never made it a point follow his work.

 

As posted in a thread recently, a fellow WRXer pointed out the below Clement video that I feel is exceptional, and echoes my recent posts in various threads, and related to the topic at hand. . . including perspective on the intent to throw the club toward the target; NOT at the ball, which is not the target.

 

[FatReed]

Golf has been around since the 15th century. Despite it's longevity, most of us still struggle to play this game with any consistency/proficiency.

 

Over a 500 year span no one has been able to figure out a way to make the golf swing easy. Given that, I would opine that it's not the instruction that is lacking, but the simple fact that hitting a golf ball well, developing a good swing, is a very difficult thing to do.

 

I agree that learning to PLAY GOLF proficiently is no simple task for most. . . I believe, however, the process is made to be much more difficult than it needs to be by BOTH golfers and golf instructors.

 

Thank you Sean

 

I agree, and have often wondered that very thing...are we making this more difficult than it needs to be? I just don't know how to make it less difficult.

 

Sean,

 

I have previously offered suggestion toward your quandary, both as pursuits and avoidances.

 

Rather than rehash, I would like to ask, what is your focus as you prepare for your next shot, whether on the range or course?

 

As it pertains, please observe the photo below of Jason Day as he prepares for his next shot. Do you think one ounce of thought or energy is being given toward his motion? Jason is giving complete focus to his objective; he is visualizing his target (point B), and the ball flight he desires to execute in moving the ball from point A to point B.

 

Seems so simple, but can you do that? Of course you can, but DO you have similar focus? Or, as is quite easy and common, do thoughts and focus related to swing positions, mechanics . . . of MOTION cloud or even predominate?

 

Seems so simple, and it can become the case, IF you are committed to proper focus and objective. Takes some effort for most, especially those who have given chase down the rabbit hole of insufficiency.

 

I think you would be amazed at the results if you could assume a similar pre-shot routine as Jason; perhaps less obvious, but as with all elite golfers. . . given your quandary, my presumption is that you currently do not.

 

 

[AFcelica]

Just visualize the shot you want to hit and presto! You're one of the best players on the planet, Genius!! You've really got something here Reed... you better bottle and sell it before someone steals your idea. I can't believe you're giving it all away for free!

[georgey]

Golf has been around since the 15th century. Despite it's longevity, most of us still struggle to play this game with any consistency/proficiency.

 

Over a 500 year span no one has been able to figure out a way to make the golf swing easy. Given that, I would opine that it's not the instruction that is lacking, but the simple fact that hitting a golf ball well, developing a good swing, is a very difficult thing to do.

 

I agree that learning to PLAY GOLF proficiently is no simple task for most. . . I believe, however, the process is made to be much more difficult than it needs to be by BOTH golfers and golf instructors.

 

Thank you Sean

 

I agree, and have often wondered that very thing...are we making this more difficult than it needs to be? I just don't know how to make it less difficult.

 

For starters, listening to those that have walked many tour miles goes a long way to shortening the distance to Grandma's house. Not too involved to become involved.

[media=]

[/media]

[FatReed]

Golf has been around since the 15th century. Despite it's longevity, most of us still struggle to play this game with any consistency/proficiency.

 

Over a 500 year span no one has been able to figure out a way to make the golf swing easy. Given that, I would opine that it's not the instruction that is lacking, but the simple fact that hitting a golf ball well, developing a good swing, is a very difficult thing to do.

 

I agree that learning to PLAY GOLF proficiently is no simple task for most. . . I believe, however, the process is made to be much more difficult than it needs to be by BOTH golfers and golf instructors.

 

Thank you Sean

 

I agree, and have often wondered that very thing...are we making this more difficult than it needs to be? I just don't know how to make it less difficult.

 

For starters, listening to those that have walked many tour miles goes a long way to shortening the distance to Grandma's house. Not too involved to become involved.

[media=]

[/media]

 

It’s too late Jackie, the ‘cat’ has already been dissected to death. . .

 

Thank you for sharing geargey

[copperjeff]

FatReed,

 

If the golf ball is not a target, then I challenge you to play golf without hitting the ball.

 

While you could certainly rack up a high number of strokes on the first hole without ever contacting the ball, you will never proceed to the next hole (unless match play lol)

 

The object of golf is to strike a ball with a club in such a way that the ball ends up in a specific hole in the ground.

 

 

Next, I can visualize a draw all I want, but if I don't know how to produce the motion to do so, it simply won't happen.

 

The vast majority of people are terrible at most sports, especially if they have never had any instruction/coaching and golf is a lot harder than the majority of sports.

 

 

If you are coaching T-ball, do you ask the kid to visualize the baseball flying through the air over the fence, or do you teach him how to swing a bat properly?

 

[FatReed]

FatReed,

 

If the golf ball is not a target, then I challenge you to play golf without hitting the ball.

 

While you could certainly rack up a high number of strokes on the first hole without ever contacting the ball, you will never proceed to the next hole (unless match play lol)

 

The object of golf is to strike a ball with a club in such a way that the ball ends up in a specific hole in the ground.

 

 

Next, I can visualize a draw all I want, but if I don't know how to produce the motion to do so, it simply won't happen.

 

The vast majority of people are terrible at most sports, especially if they have never had any instruction/coaching and golf is a lot harder than the majority of sports.

 

 

If you are coaching T-ball, do you ask the kid to visualize the baseball flying through the air over the fence, or do you teach him how to swing a bat properly?

 

Copper

 

Advancing the ball from point A to point B is the objective, so it’s beyond me as to why in the world you would pose a challenge to anyone to play golf without hitting the ball?

 

What I have stated is that the ball is not the target; the target is the target . . . and the strike is incidental. If you are challenging that approach, then challenge accepted and fulfilled routinely. In fact, at some point in my life since starting to play the game at age 6, or so, I might have missed the ball . . . but I do not remember such an occasion.

 

Regarding shot shaping, well, that is all part of the learning experience.

 

There seems to be an underlying presumption by you, and others, that I said learning to play golf is easy. . . what I’ve stated is that the game is often made harder than it needs to be, but I never suggested it was easy.

 

I do not agree that golf is harder than most other sports, but that’s another topic and debate.

 

I also do not agree with your global statement that the vast majority of people are terrible at most sports. I would agree that individuals who do not play a particular sport will never develop some degree of proficiency at the sport. Your statement infers some level of capacity for humans to play a sport proficiently is inherently lacking.

 

FR

[copperjeff]

FatReed,

 

If the golf ball is not a target, then I challenge you to play golf without hitting the ball.

 

While you could certainly rack up a high number of strokes on the first hole without ever contacting the ball, you will never proceed to the next hole (unless match play lol)

 

The object of golf is to strike a ball with a club in such a way that the ball ends up in a specific hole in the ground.

 

 

Next, I can visualize a draw all I want, but if I don't know how to produce the motion to do so, it simply won't happen.

 

The vast majority of people are terrible at most sports, especially if they have never had any instruction/coaching and golf is a lot harder than the majority of sports.

 

 

If you are coaching T-ball, do you ask the kid to visualize the baseball flying through the air over the fence, or do you teach him how to swing a bat properly?

 

Copper

 

Advancing the ball from point A to point B is the objective, so it’s beyond me as to why in the world you would pose a challenge to anyone to play golf without hitting the ball?

 

What I have stated is that the ball is not the target; the target is the target . . . and the strike is incidental. If you are challenging that approach, then challenge accepted and fulfilled routinely. In fact, at some point in my life since starting to play the game at age 6, or so, I might have missed the ball . . . but I do not remember such an occasion.

 

Regarding shot shaping, well, that is all part of the learning experience.

 

There seems to be an underlying presumption by you, and others, that I said learning to play golf is easy. . . what I’ve stated is that the game is often made harder than it needs to be, but I never suggested it was easy.

 

I do not agree that golf is harder than most other sports, but that’s another topic and debate.

 

I also do not agree with your global statement that the vast majority of people are terrible at most sports. I would agree that individuals who do not play a particular sport will never develop some degree of proficiency at the sport. Your statement infers some level of capacity for humans to play a sport proficiently is inherently lacking.

 

FR

 

After rereading my post it appears I didn't make one of my points as clear as I had thought.

 

The ball is one of 2 targets in the game of golf. The ball is the target of the clubhead, with the intention of sending the ball to the goal/2nd target/cup.

 

I am arguing your stance as to not have the ball as the target. The ball must be a target by default, because if I swing without hitting the ball, I am not playing golf, I am simply swinging a club.

 

 

In terms of my generalization on people being terrible at sports, my view is that compared to what you are ultimately capable of, most people, without receiving some sort of instruction/coaching are not at all good.

 

Additionally, I am not making an assumption you said golf was easy, and did not intentionally word my post in such a manner. However, you do posit that learning golf should be much easier than it currently is, without providing any solutions on how to make it so, other than removing the ball as a target and saying someone should not concentrate on the motion of the swing to correct inefficiencies.

 

In every other sport I have personally played, coached, or watched others being coached, correcting inefficiencies in motion is deemed to be working on the fundamentals. Why should golf be any different than all of these other sports?

[Quick Bucket]

The object of golf is to strike a ball with a club in such a way that the ball ends up in a specific hole in the ground.

 

The object better be to have a ball struck BY a club, not WITH a club.

[copperjeff]

The object of golf is to strike a ball with a club in such a way that the ball ends up in a specific hole in the ground.

 

The object better be to have a ball struck BY a club, not WITH a club.

 

Can you explain your thinking behind this?

[FatReed]

Copper wrote:

 

“I am arguing your stance as to not have the ball as the target. The ball must be a target by default, because if I swing without hitting the ball, I am not playing golf, I am simply swinging a club.”

 

***

 

Copper,

 

If focusing on the ball as your target allows you to play golf and enjoy the game, that’s really all that matters.

 

That being stated, I personally like the idea of “simply swinging the club” much more. . . as an approach to advancing the ball from point A to point B.

 

That the ball must be your target in order to hit the ball, well, such is simply not true.

 

FR

[copperjeff]

Copper wrote:

 

“I am arguing your stance as to not have the ball as the target. The ball must be a target by default, because if I swing without hitting the ball, I am not playing golf, I am simply swinging a club.”

 

***

 

Copper,

 

If focusing on the ball as your target allows you to play golf and enjoy the game, that’s really all that matters.

 

That being stated, I personally like the idea of “simply swinging the club” much more. . . as an approach to advancing the ball from point A to point B.

 

That the ball must be your target in order to hit the ball, well, such is simply not true.

 

FR

 

Then stand with your back to the ball and swing away.......

 

At some point there must be an intention to use the club to make contact with the ball, wether or not it is part of your consciousness in your current golf game.

[copperjeff]

Copper wrote:

 

“I am arguing your stance as to not have the ball as the target. The ball must be a target by default, because if I swing without hitting the ball, I am not playing golf, I am simply swinging a club.”

 

***

 

Copper,

 

If focusing on the ball as your target allows you to play golf and enjoy the game, that’s really all that matters.

 

That being stated, I personally like the idea of “simply swinging the club” much more. . . as an approach to advancing the ball from point A to point B.

 

That the ball must be your target in order to hit the ball, well, such is simply not true.

 

FR

 

Then stand with your back to the ball and swing away.......

 

At some point there must be an intention to use the club to make contact with the ball, wether or not it is part of your consciousness in your current golf game.

 

At this point, we are probably starting to delve into semantics.

 

I'm not saying that a person can play golf without consciously trying to hit the ball.

 

But, when learning how to play the game of golf, at some point, the swing, and club must be directed to the ball.

 

[copperjeff]

I will further add, that the intention of ONLY hitting the ball, and not having a secondary target that you are intent on sending the ball to can lead to mechanical issues.

 

With the only intent of trying to hit the ball as hard as possible a lot of people certainly will pull down directly from the top to apply as much downward force into the ball as possible.

 

Instead of saying the ball is the target, OR the landing spot is the target, I believe they both are.

 

If you don't want to call the ball a target, and feel as though too many people are too ball bound, we have no argument.

[FatReed]

Copper wrote:

 

“I'm not saying that a person can play golf without consciously trying to hit the ball.”

 

***

 

Copper

 

Is that really what you intended to write?

 

At any rate, what I AM saying is that making the ball the target is not only an ineffective approach, but a detrimental approach in most golfers . . . perhaps not you?

 

I further believe that once insufficiency is established, via those who make the ball their target, then things get even worse when that objective is not corrected, and attention turns to the golf swing motion itself.

 

If you read my original post again, making the ball target is the variable I suggest differentiates consistently insufficient versus the proficient. Even if that is not THE variable, I will not digress to consider making the ball the target as a sound objective.

 

Again, if you play and enjoy golf having the ball as your target, there is nothing whatsoever I could, or should say to change that. Ultimately, unless feeding your family is dependent upon how well you play golf, then THE only objective is simply to have fun.

 

FR

[FatReed]

Copper wrote:

 

“If you don't want to call the ball a target, and feel as though too many people are too ball bound, we have no argument.”

 

***

 

Copper,

 

Not sure how one can be ball bound unless their target is the ball?

 

Anyway, you’ve stated your views, and me mine. I think it’s safe to say we are not in agreement on the topic.

 

Golf season is upon us, and I hope yours is an enjoyable one.

 

Best,

 

FR

[copperjeff]

FatReed,

 

That line was a mess lol.

 

To state it clearly, you and I agree that the conscious intent to hit the ball is not necessary to play golf.

 

I also have not said one way or the other what my conscious intent is.

 

What I am saying is that at some point there must be an intent to hit the ball wether it is conscious or not.

 

I don't really care if you call the ball a target, an aiming point, or just a point through with the swing passes. The position of the ball must be taken into consideration by the mind in order for the ball to be hit.

 

Again, if you want to say the CONSCIOUS INTENT to hit the ball CAN lead to swing issues, I won't argue.

 

However, you cannot simply discount the fact that the ball exists and must be struck in order to play golf. Where the ball exists in space MUST be taken into consideration, otherwise, I'm just swinging the club randomly through the air.

 

I'm also well aware that I could take a swing blindfolded and someone could place a ball down before my next swing from the exact same spot, and I could successfully hit it. But, thats not golf, setup and alignment are parts of the game.

[copperjeff]

FatReed,

 

To further clarify, I'm not saying the sole intention of someone should be to purely just hit the ball. The ball needs to be hit to the final target.

 

I don't think we are quite as far apart as what you may think :-)

 

Being ball bound by having the ball as the only target CAN be destructive, but not necessarily so.

 

Just pulling on a thread to see where it leads. Its fun to talk through things.

[Sean2]

Golf has been around since the 15th century. Despite it's longevity, most of us still struggle to play this game with any consistency/proficiency.

 

Over a 500 year span no one has been able to figure out a way to make the golf swing easy. Given that, I would opine that it's not the instruction that is lacking, but the simple fact that hitting a golf ball well, developing a good swing, is a very difficult thing to do.

 

I agree that learning to PLAY GOLF proficiently is no simple task for most. . . I believe, however, the process is made to be much more difficult than it needs to be by BOTH golfers and golf instructors.

 

Thank you Sean

 

I agree, and have often wondered that very thing...are we making this more difficult than it needs to be? I just don't know how to make it less difficult.

 

Sean,

 

I have previously offered suggestion toward your quandary, both as pursuits and avoidances.

 

Rather than rehash, I would like to ask, what is your focus as you prepare for your next shot, whether on the range or course?

 

As it pertains, please observe the photo below of Jason Day as he prepares for his next shot. Do you think one ounce of thought or energy is being given toward his motion? Jason is giving complete focus to his objective; he is visualizing his target (point B), and the ball flight he desires to execute in moving the ball from point A to point B.

 

Seems so simple, but can you do that? Of course you can, but DO you have similar focus? Or, as is quite easy and common, do thoughts and focus related to swing positions, mechanics . . . of MOTION cloud or even predominate?

 

Seems so simple, and it can become the case, IF you are committed to proper focus and objective. Takes some effort for most, especially those who have given chase down the rabbit hole of insufficiency.

 

I think you would be amazed at the results if you could assume a similar pre-shot routine as Jason; perhaps less obvious, but as with all elite golfers. . . given your quandary, my presumption is that you currently do not.

 

 

 

I think when you play golf at that level your swing is almost automatic...you have done it so many times, it's second nature. IMHO where the problem comes with amateurs is we are constantly changing/tweaking our swings. We are in effect playing golf swing, and not golf. It's difficult to focus on the target when you don't have a swing that you "own", because you are constantly thinking about what has to be where as you take a swipe at the ball.

[FatReed]

Sean

 

Nice post. Your thoughts are well taken.

 

Absolutely, as you suggest, some golfers are more proficient than others, and thoroughbreds are few and far between.

 

Nonetheless, I believe the swing becomes automatic through proper focus, and the focus should never be on the swing (motion) itself. If a golfer finds him/herself out on course ‘playing golf swing,’ then the focus is obviously wrong. I doubt anyone would argue that statement.

 

In the above regard, I think a major problem with ‘practice’ ranges is that amateur golfers almost universally never approach having proper focus. Very few identify a target, or maintain focus on the target. Conversely, the primary focus is on the golf swing (motion). Worse yet, as you say, a shot-to-shot change in focus on the swing. No way in hell anyone will become proficient with such approaches.

 

I think developing a swing you ‘own’ - making it ‘automatic’ - comes with proper practice - proper focus. Better yet, from simply playing golf with proper focus. Ranges are overrated, if not largely detrimental for learning to play golf proficiently.

 

FR

 

[Ghost of Snead]

Sean

 

Nice post. Your thoughts are well taken.

 

Absolutely, as you suggest, some golfers are more proficient than others, and thoroughbreds are few and far between.

 

Nonetheless, I believe the swing becomes automatic through proper focus, and the focus should never be on the swing (motion) itself. If a golfer finds him/herself out on course ‘playing golf swing,’ then the focus is obviously wrong. I doubt anyone would argue that statement.

 

In the above regard, I think a major problem with ‘practice’ ranges is that amateur golfers almost universally never approach having proper focus. Very few identify a target, or maintain focus on the target. Conversely, the primary focus is on the golf swing (motion). Worse yet, as you say, a shot-to-shot change in focus on the swing. No way in hell anyone will become proficient with such approaches.

 

I think developing a swing you ‘own’ - making it ‘automatic’ - comes with proper practice - proper focus. Better yet, from simply playing golf with proper focus. Ranges are overrated, if not largely detrimental for learning to play golf proficiently.

 

FR

 

So Fat ... contrary to what you believe, lots of amateur golfers do attempt to hit the ball at a target but are unable to do so consistently due to bad swing mechanics. What would you suggest they do ? Carry on, focus on the target, and magically their swing will fix itself ? Let's assume these range golfers actually want to get better.