How good can online lessons be?

[Circaflex]

Hello fellow golf nuts; I am in the market for lessons and given the pandemic; in-person availability has been limited. I subscribe to quite a few different golf instructors YouTube channels and almost everyone offers online lessons. I am very much someone who needs to feel the proper motion, because my brain will tell me I am doing everything correctly but when you look on tape it is a mess. I'm working from home for a minimum of the next 4 months; at this point I figured I might be able to work in some online lessons. I am mainly looking to the community for their opinions or experiences with online lessons in general. Also, I'd like to know about your lessons, were the live via Zoom/Skype/WhatsApp/Facetime? Or did you record your range sessions and send them to your instructor? Thanks.

[Mono]

so i've done a mix - recently used skillest app - would highly recommend, i do a mix of online and in person  - with different instructors - i'll probably get a lot of flak for that - no biggie 

 

for skillest you take your videos- upload them to the app and then select who you want as an instructor - there's something like 300 choices - you get a video and drills in return - i've re watched my video lessons 1/2 a dozen times and have worked on what was prescribed, it was in my opinion very reasonably priced

[Garush34]

+1 for skillest, I've been using it for about 2 years now and it's great for just getting a lesson when you want. No need to fit in time with a pro just record your swing and upload them to your chosen coach. 

 

I was a bit weary like you about online lessons, so I choose my coach based on price. Went with one of the cheaper guys to see how it worked at first. And I was surprised to find him really good and knowledge able. My swing and game has come on great since starting lessons with him. I have tried a couple other coaches one was poor and the other good which I used for putting. So it can be a mixed bag but I thinks worth it if you can find the right person. And as said above you can watch the video back as much as you want, which is great when you on the range or in the garden working on your changes. 

[naj959]

I just posted last night that I've had lessons online that were 10x better than the ones I was doing in person. A lot of it really depends on the coach and how they communicate. I did five or six lessons with Dan C. when he was on athlete nation and it was some of the best money I spent on golf. I believe he has since moved to the skillest platform. I really like how he tells you which mechanics you need to implement into your swing to make it work and what possible feels might be utilized to achieve those mechanics. The explanation of cause and affect gave me a deeper understanding of the golf swing and I now feel like I know enough to maintain my swing on my own for the most part. I never get too far off these days and now have the ability to self correct. But I'm sure a tune up every six months wouldn't be the worst idea.

I was also fortunate enough to win an online lesson from Monte and he is top notch as well. I learned a lot about using the ground properly and have purchased a few videos to supplement my learning. You can't go wrong with either person.

 

As far as format goes, I just recorded a few swings down the line and from face on. Submitted the video and received a 10-20 minute video with analysis, comparisons, and drills top help ingrain movements. Never done a Skype or Zoom session but I feel like it would be a hassle setting up the cameras at a range.

[juststeve]

I don't think lessons make anyone better.  What they do is give one the information to make themselves better.  Unless you have a teacher who is willing to supervise your practice you can get the information you need to improve from any teacher you can send a  video yo.

 

Steve

[Krt22]

They can be extremely good if you work with a good instructor AND are willing to put in the time. The only downfall is the instructor can't see how you respond to certain feels/thoughts, so it may need to be more iterative, especially if you are new to that instructor and they don't quite yet know your swing and tendencies. With that being said, facetime lessons are a great middle ground option (or main option if you don't have good local instructors)

[milesgiles]

I started listening to the guys on this forum this year and made some real improvement. I don’t think there’s anything particularly beneficial to meeting a pro in person. I also think there’s value in a common factor consensus opinion, rather than subscribing to the latest and greatest ‘method’ ie if several people give me the same advice, it’s a lot more likely to be correct and useful 

[Barfolomew]

Never had lessons but I could see online lessons being OK for good players that can self manage and understand what the coach is talking about... 

 

I could see a rook getting confused

[MK7Golf21]

In person is better, online is good for occasional maintenance. Online lessons an instructor might point something out and give you a feel or drill to try and the student gives it a try. Many times it just doesn’t click and the student gives up on it, wasted time/money whereas in person the instructor immediately sees it’s not working and gives a different feel or approach to fix the issue. Just the way it goes 

[pinhigh27]

online lessons with a good instructor are way better than in person lessons with someone who is incompetent (the vast majority of teaching pros)

 

in person lessons with someone who is good is the ideal 

[RichieHunt]

I generally think you need a mix of in-person and online lessons in order for online lessons to be effective.

 

However, the players I find that can do online lessons are usually junior golfers.  They just pick it up more easily and don't have as many ingrained movements.

 

 

 

RH

[cardoustie]

I have had great on line lessons from Monte and iteach

[Fairway14]

On 11/3/2020 at 8:36 AM, Circaflex said:

Hello fellow golf nuts; I am in the market for lessons and given the pandemic; in-person availability has been limited. 

 

Buy a copy of Jack Nicklaus instruction book "Golf My Way". I promise you he knows what matters to good golf swings more than 99.99% of the instructors out there charging money for lessons.

[sethdavidsdad]

Online lessons can be good. Most instructors will give you one or two things to work on. It's really up to you to work on and make the changes. I would recommend doing 4-6 lessons with the same instructor over a 2-3 month period.  

[me05501]

1 hour ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Buy a copy of Jack Nicklaus instruction book "Golf My Way". I promise you he knows what matters to good golf swings more than 99.99% of the instructors out there charging money for lessons.

 

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on a lot of factors such as your learning style, your overall honesty with yourself, and your fitness and body type. 

I watch a lot of instructional videos but I also take live lessons with a pro I like a lot. The pro is great for helping me match feels and reals and understand where my personal tendencies are liable to take me. We've worked together to identify where I'm most likely to get off-track and what kinds of drills will help with my issues. He helps me set realistic goals. 

Knowing that kind of stuff about yourself can really help you sort through the online content and intelligently disregard stuff that doesn't apply or is unlikely to help YOU. But it can be a goldmine for finding new drills to solidify what I'm working on during live lessons. 

 

If you can engage the same process with online lessons I think it could be just as useful, but I'm not sure the technology is quite there yet. I think we're maybe one tech iteration away from being able to have a virtual lesson that is more or less identical to a live lesson.

[Fairway14]

15 minutes ago, me05501 said:

 

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on a lot of factors such as your learning style, your overall honesty with yourself, and your fitness and body type. 

I watch a lot of instructional videos but I also take live lessons with a pro I like a lot. The pro is great for helping me match feels and reals and understand where my personal tendencies are liable to take me. We've worked together to identify where I'm most likely to get off-track and what kinds of drills will help with my issues. He helps me set realistic goals. 

Knowing that kind of stuff about yourself can really help you sort through the online content and intelligently disregard stuff that doesn't apply or is unlikely to help YOU. But it can be a goldmine for finding new drills to solidify what I'm working on during live lessons. 

 

If you can engage the same process with online lessons I think it could be just as useful, but I'm not sure the technology is quite there yet. I think we're maybe one tech iteration away from being able to have a virtual lesson that is more or less identical to a live lesson.

 

My experience is that most instructors are incompetent. Specifically, they tend to teach quick fixes rather than fundamentally sound address technique (grip-posture-alignment).

A truly competent instructor knows the influence that grip-posture-alignment have on the entire golf swing, so those address fundamentals are really the only techniques that need be "taught". The late great teacher Tommy Armour said he wanted 6 months to teach a student the grip. His point was to communicate just how much grip technique affects the entire swing. Nicklaus instructor Jack Grout refused to take a student who would not use the grip technique he taught. Grout new it was a waste of his and his student (s) time if the student would not use fundamentally sound grip technique.

Sadly, most instructors today will say "hey, Tour player XYZ has a bad grip and he was won millions of dollars". While that's true, there is an easy way (fundamentally sound grip) and a hard way (unorthodox grip). Address posture and alignment are the other fundamentals which create the swing and as such , like the grip, should be the primary focus of any competent instructor.

The bottom line is that most current instructors teach trendy in swing position nonsense which at best is a quick fix band aid. It's much more sensible to learn and practice fundamentally sound address technique, as this creates a foundation that lasts for the lifetime of the player.

[me05501]

Holy generalizations, Batman! 

 

I've met teaching pros like that, but I've also had excellent ones. 

[pinhigh27]

44 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

My experience is that most instructors are incompetent. Specifically, they tend to teach quick fixes rather than fundamentally sound address technique (grip-posture-alignment).

A truly competent instructor knows the influence that grip-posture-alignment have on the entire golf swing, so those address fundamentals are really the only techniques that need be "taught". The late great teacher Tommy Armour said he wanted 6 months to teach a student the grip. His point was to communicate just how much grip technique affects the entire swing. Nicklaus instructor Jack Grout refused to take a student who would not use the grip technique he taught. Grout new it was a waste of his and his student (s) time if the student would not use fundamentally sound grip technique.

Sadly, most instructors today will say "hey, Tour player XYZ has a bad grip and he was won millions of dollars". While that's true, there is an easy way (fundamentally sound grip) and a hard way (unorthodox grip). Address posture and alignment are the other fundamentals which create the swing and as such , like the grip, should be the primary focus of any competent instructor.

The bottom line is that most current instructors teach trendy in swing position nonsense which at best is a quick fix band aid. It's much more sensible to learn and practice fundamentally sound address technique, as this creates a foundation that lasts for the lifetime of the player.

It’s not one or the other. You can trend a person towards correct fundamentals without telling them they can’t hit a full shot till they can do a perfect 9 to 3 and they need to hit 100,000 of them .

 

why is Michael Jordan not the best owner or basketball coach ? I don’t think Nicklaus would be much better than avg joe pro and certainly way worse than a good coach. 
 

if anything Nicklaus coach sounds like a bad coach. People that are so insistent on people doing something their way are generally bad coaches who are unable to adapt to their students. What if the player was physically incapable of gripping the club that way and swinging well, would he turn them away ?

[Fairway14]

23 minutes ago, pinhigh27 said:

I

if anything Nicklaus coach sounds like a bad coach.

 

Young Nicklaus listened to his instructor Jack Grout and he learned. For his entire career Nicklaus practiced what Jack Grout taught him and became the greatest player of all time. 

A competent teacher knows what to teach and how to teach it. A competent student listens, watches, and learns.

[RichieHunt]

4 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Young Nicklaus listened to his instructor Jack Grout and he learned. For his entire career Nicklaus practiced what Jack Grout taught him and became the greatest player of all time. 

A competent teacher knows what to teach and how to teach it. A competent student listens, watches, and learns.

 

I do feel that is more of what you would see from teachers pre-2015 as I do believe that instruction has improved tremendously.

 

There's no 'right' or 'wrong' way to grip the club.  Matt Wolff has a very weak grip, Dustin Johnson has a very strong grip.  Some guys are more hunched over the ball (i.e. Keegan Bradley) some guys are more upright with their posture (i.e Bryson).  Some guys align open, others align closed.  Bubba Watson aims open and cuts his driver and hooks his irons.  

 

What I feel that golf instruction is starting to better understand is that there is no 'right' way to do most things in the golf swing, but there is a 'right' way for individual golfers.  Matt Wolff's weak grip is 'right' for his swing.  But Jordan Spieth, who went from a strong grip to a more neutral grip and thus far it has been 'wrong' for him.

 

More instructors are starting to understand this and understand that there is matchups/compatibility that works with a swing as well as how the golfer individually moves and all of that impacts their ballstriking performance.

 

As you study golfers, good and bad, you find that there is no 'fundamentally sound' grip or posture or alignment.  There are numerous successful golfers that are in a spectrum of grips/postures/alignments.  

 

 

 

 

HoC

[Fairway14]

2 minutes ago, RichieHunt said:

 

I do feel that is more of what you would see from teachers pre-2015 as I do believe that instruction has improved tremendously.

 

There's no 'right' or 'wrong' way to grip the club.  Matt Wolff has a very weak grip, Dustin Johnson has a very strong grip.  Some guys are more hunched over the ball (i.e. Keegan Bradley) some guys are more upright with their posture (i.e Bryson).  Some guys align open, others align

 

Actually, "pre-1985" is more accurate than pre-2015.  Golf instruction took a drastic turn for the worse once video became readily available. 

The easy way to learn golf is by using fundamentally sound address technique (grip-posture-alignment), and absolutely yes there is a "right way"

to do these things. But (as written earlier in this thread) the faker instructors  point to outlier players with an unorthodox grip , poor posture, or non square alignment and say "see , Tour pro XYZ is getting it done with a bad  grip, so grip doesn't matter". The reality is that 99% of Tour players play with fundamentally sound address technique, which is the easiest way to play consistently great golf.. Sure charlatan instructors hang their hats on the 1% who can make it without sound fundamentals, but that's doing it the hard way and certainly nothing which should be "taught".

[RichieHunt]

9 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Actually, "pre-1985" is more accurate than pre-2015.  Golf instruction took a drastic turn for the worse once video became readily available. 

The easy way to learn golf is by using fundamentally sound address technique (grip-posture-alignment), and absolutely yes there is a "right way"

to do these things. But (as written earlier in this thread) the faker instructors  point to outlier players with an unorthodox grip , poor posture, or non square alignment and say "see , Tour pro XYZ is getting it done with a bad  grip, so grip doesn't matter". The reality is that 99% of Tour players play with fundamentally sound address technique, which is the easiest way to play consistently great golf.. Sure charlatan instructors hang their hats on the 1% who can make it without sound fundamentals, but that's doing it the hard way and certainly nothing which should be "taught".

 

An outlier differs significantly from the rest of the observations.  

 

There are very, very few outliers on Tour because we have so many observations and those observations are wide ranging.  For instance Paul Azinger was consider by people like yourself to be an outlier with his very strong grip.  But before, during and after Azinger's career we've seen numerous players (observations) with very similar strong grips.  Therefore, Azinger was never an outlier.  He just didn't fit into the subjective aesthetic of a 'fundamentally sound grip.'

 

Jim Furyk's grip would be an outlier, but I don't know of any instructor teaching that grip.

 

The same goes for the open stance alignment of Bubba Watson.  We've seen numerous Tour players with similar open stance alignments.  He wouldn't be considered to have 'fundamentally sound alignment', but he is not an outlier.

 

'Fundamentally sound' is a subjective focus on aesthetics.  The instructors that get the most out of their students are the ones that have an objective focus on functionality. 

 

 

 

 

 

RH

[argoodman]

Any golf lesson is complicated.  I have had good lessons in person, bad lessons in person and great lessons online.  Not all golf instructors know what they are doing and have the ability to communicate.

 

Recently, I have had success (with a lot of work still needed) with an online golf instructor that I will not name.  I try to follow what they say and sometimes I go to the dreaded YouTube machine for help only to slow down my progress.  My instructor allows me to speak my "language" and to help put the changes in place.  (Everyone's perception is a different.)  I prefer being told the hard truth why I am not getting any better at golf, that approach works with me.  Additionally, I am not a natural athlete, so I need to over think how to move.  (None of this is a simple kinetic chain of events.)

 

No one instructor is right, but their are bad instructors.  Real changes that we all want are hard and take time.  After a year, I am able to stop myself from early extending in my backswing without thinking about it as well as keep my head still.  It is tough to eliminate 15 years of bad habits and not let them back in.

 

Don't over think it, try the instructor online or in person that seems to match your style. 

[golfarb1]

Assuming the instructor is competent, the real weakness of online lessons is the student himself; more specifically his misinterpretation of the instructors suggestions. Now this can obviously happen with in person instruction , but at least the instructor can correct the students mistakes immediately with hands on instruction.  

[Fairway14]

6 hours ago, RichieHunt said:

 

.

 

'Fundamentally sound' is a subjective focus on aesthetics.  The instructors that get the most out of their students are the ones that have an objective focus on functionality. 

 

Address technique fundamentals serve the function of promoting-creating a fundamentally sound effective swing. 

Instructors who don't teach address technique fundamentals are incompetent and, or, faking their way thru the lessons they give.

[Pepperturbo]

I am not surprised some golf teachers now sell lessons online.  Just make sure you're aware of it's limitations and especially aware of the instructors teaching style, and limitation.  The rest depends on YOU and whether or not you're one that aligns with online instruction and the instructors style. 

 

Do YOU know which learning style you are? 

• Visual (spatial):You prefer using pictures, images, and spatial understanding.
• Aural (auditory-musical): You prefer using sound and music.
• Verbal (linguistic): You prefer using words, both in speech and writing.
• Physical (kinesthetic): You prefer using your body, hands and sense of touch.
• Logical (mathematical): You prefer using logic, reasoning and systems.
• Social (interpersonal): You prefer to learn in groups or with other people.
• Solitary (intrapersonal): You prefer to work alone and use self-study.

Edited November 6, 2020 by Pepperturbo

[Zitlow]

22 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Young Nicklaus listened to his instructor Jack Grout and he learned. For his entire career Nicklaus practiced what Jack Grout taught him and became the greatest player of all time. 

A competent teacher knows what to teach and how to teach it. A competent student listens, watches, and learns.

 

From Wikipedia. "Grout departed Fort Worth in early 1937 and spent the next three years at Hershey Country Club in Hershey, Pennsylvania, as an assistant to Henry Picard. At that time, Picard was one of the top players on the tour. Through Grout's association with Picard, he was exposed to new theories on golf technique that had been advanced in the 1920s and 1930s by Alex Morrison, a controversial West Coast professional. It was Morrison's coaching which primarily took Picard to stardom.[6]"

 

Probably a lot of Scottish influence on Jack's swing by Grout.

 

Edited November 6, 2020 by Zitlow

[LowAndLeft32]

NA

Edited November 6, 2020 by LowAndLeft32

[MonteScheinblum]

1 hour ago, Pepperturbo said:

I am not surprised some golf teachers now sell lessons online.  Just make sure you're aware of it's limitations and especially aware of the instructors teaching style, and limitation.  The rest depends on YOU and whether or not you're one that aligns with online instruction and the instructors style. 

 

Do YOU know which learning style you are? 

• Visual (spatial):You prefer using pictures, images, and spatial understanding.
• Aural (auditory-musical): You prefer using sound and music.
• Verbal (linguistic): You prefer using words, both in speech and writing.
• Physical (kinesthetic): You prefer using your body, hands and sense of touch.
• Logical (mathematical): You prefer using logic, reasoning and systems.
• Social (interpersonal): You prefer to learn in groups or with other people.
• Solitary (intrapersonal): You prefer to work alone and use self-study.

Well said.  Some people are able to learn at all of those levels, they are easy. Others I have to bounce ideas off them until I find out which works for them.

 

Engineers are very logical and if I don’t explain all the how’s and why’s, they don’t get it.

Visual learners MUST see what a better movement they lack looks like...others, couldn’t give a rodents butt...and so on.

[Pepperturbo]

1 minute ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Well said.  Some people are able to learn at all of those levels, they are easy. Others I have to bounce ideas off them until I find out which works for them.

 

Engineers are very logical and if I don’t explain all the how’s and why’s, they don’t get it.

Visual learners MUST see what a better movement they lack looks like...others, couldn’t give a rodents butt...and so on.

 

I am surprised you've encountered people that are capable of learning using all of those levels.  I suppose it depends on what is taught to whom.  Clinically, psychologically, and intellectually we haven't seen that in the corporate world, and we do a lot of training & management development.

 

You still in OCty?