Flashy vs more anonymous instructors

[MelloYello]

15 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

I would say that complexity can be a good thing.  Use of 3D and force plate analysis can be very helpful when the person doing the analysis knows what they are doing.  A good teacher will make simple swing corrections based on 'complex' data.

 

However in my experience when lessons fail the instructor is often to blame and this is especially true of 'method' instructors.  Golf pros tend to teach the swing mechanics that work for them.  They know that what they teach is correct because it works for them and for some percentage of their students.  They also have stories of fixing the swings of students who got screwed up by other instructors which makes them even more right.  It's a common phenomenon and students who don't succeed are blamed for being lazy or stupid or whatever. 

 

The best teachers are humble and try to tailor the teaching to the student.    

 

Agreed. 

 

To your first point, there's no bad data, only what we choose to interpret, what we discard and subsequently whether we're right about all of that interpretation. My point was about complexity as an item for students to blame. A bogeyman someone's ego can point the finger at--a fitting pun perhaps!

 

To your second point, the student is 100% responsible for whether or not they pursue what's being given to them in lessons. If I go to the worst instructor in the world it's on me to avoid the bad advice. It's not the instructors fault. 

 

Too much of this conversation assumes the instructor is giving something more than counsel. If you see an instructor as a source of information, to me that's healthy. But if you see them as someone to blame, you're probably a bad student. 

 

A student should never pursue something they don't fully understand and believe in. 

 

I think a lot of students actually give up control because they don't want to assume responsibility (or think very hard about what they're being shown).

 

It's the student's golf game. They are the steward, not the instructor. The student being upfront in assuming that responsibility is critical to the whole process. 

[Zitlow]

Ask 10 different instructors how to start the downswing and you'll probably get 10 different answers. 

[The Pearl]

1 hour ago, Nels55 said:

I have spent a lot of time in the past trying to implement Manuel de la Torre's teaching.  I have the book and videos.  Even more time trying to apply Earnest Jones' teaching.  I have Ron Sisson's e-book and have watched and tried to apply his videos.  Those guys all teach very similar ideas of external focus moving the implement correctly and letting everything else take care of itself.  I really like the idea and it always works to some extent at first but over time I just get worse and worse until I cannot hit the ball at all and I go back to some internal swing thought in order to get some sort of swing working again.

 

I don't believe that I am alone in this cycle but I suppose that most folks are not dumb enough to keep trying something that does not work.   

 

I totally get that. As a MDLT zealot I will easily admit that it won't work with all golfers. Folks have different ways they take in and filter information. Ironically, in the spirit of this thread, most folks who struggle with MDLT, and I have been guilty of this, tend to struggle because they try to "add" to his principles. In other words try to complicate things. 

 

Good post.

Edited September 19, 2023 by The Pearl

[The Pearl]

1 hour ago, Nels55 said:

I would say that complexity can be a good thing.  Use of 3D and force plate analysis can be very helpful when the person doing the analysis knows what they are doing.  A good teacher will make simple swing corrections based on 'complex' data.

 

However in my experience when lessons fail the instructor is often to blame and this is especially true of 'method' instructors.  Golf pros tend to teach the swing mechanics that work for them.  They know that what they teach is correct because it works for them and for some percentage of their students.  They also have stories of fixing the swings of students who got screwed up by other instructors which makes them even more right.  It's a common phenomenon and students who don't succeed are blamed for being lazy or stupid or whatever. 

 

The best teachers are humble and try to tailor the teaching to the student.    

 

Good point.  There is data collection, data interpretation, and translating the data into actionable (simple) concepts for the students.  This is what great teachers do in all disciplines. 

 

Simple concepts can be taught in a complex matter.  Complex concepts can be taught in a simple matter. I am biased but this is where external focus instruction excels. 

[The Pearl]

47 minutes ago, MelloYello said:

 

Agreed. 

 

To your first point, there's no bad data, only what we choose to interpret, what we discard and subsequently whether we're right about all of that interpretation. My point was about complexity as an item for students to blame. A bogeyman someone's ego can point the finger at--a fitting pun perhaps!

 

To your second point, the student is 100% responsible for whether or not they pursue what's being given to them in lessons. If I go to the worst instructor in the world it's on me to avoid the bad advice. It's not the instructors fault. 

 

Too much of this conversation assumes the instructor is giving something more than counsel. If you see an instructor as a source of information, to me that's healthy. But if you see them as someone to blame, you're probably a bad student. 

 

A student should never pursue something they don't fully understand and believe in. 

 

I think a lot of students actually give up control because they don't want to assume responsibility (or think very hard about what they're being shown).

 

It's the student's golf game. They are the steward, not the instructor. The student being upfront in assuming that responsibility is critical to the whole process. 

 

 

Good post. Some folks are just horrible students like some clients are horrible clients. They simply refuse to "learn" or in the case of golf, practice and stick with a swing change. Heck, most people can't even make a simple grip change without screaming bloody murder.  To a certain extent, the golf industry, like most industries will feed the customer what it wants and that is short-term fixes, gadgets, and various other types of short-cuts.

 

Human nature is undefeated.

[MPStrat]

5 minutes ago, The Pearl said:

 

Good point.  There is data collection, data interpretation, and translating the data into actionable (simple) concepts for the students.  This is what great teachers do in all disciplines. 

Could add adaptation to the list as well. 
 

In theory something might work to fix a particular student’s issue, but the teacher notices fairly quickly that it’s the wrong approach for that student and moves to something else to attack the same issue. It’s common for this to happen several times over the course of a lesson or handful of lessons. 
 

This is one of the many reasons why online lessons are far inferior to in person. 

[Nels55]

2 hours ago, MelloYello said:

To your second point, the student is 100% responsible for whether or not they pursue what's being given to them in lessons. If I go to the worst instructor in the world it's on me to avoid the bad advice. It's not the instructors fault. 

I would say that this where we disagree to some extent.  The teacher is an expert so why should the student doubt what the teacher is saying?  My point is meant to be about method teachers who teach a method that simply does not work for certain golfers maybe does not match well for most golfers.  The poor student is thinking; "The teacher is a really good player and other students hit the ball very well so the fault must be with me and I just have to work harder".  I have been there and it is not a good place to be.  Learning how to avoid the "bad advice" can be a bit expensive.  Makes sense?  

 

This is why I am a big fan of Mike Adams and also Dr. Wright's approach which is to test and measure and figure the correct swing for the individual golfer which may be a completely different set of mechanics from one student to the next.

 

Match the swing to the student as opposed to matching the student to the swing.

[virtuoso]

2 hours ago, Nels55 said:

Match the swing to the student as opposed to matching the student to the swing.

I agree to this partially and in theory but it can sometimes let the teacher and the student off too easily. 

[MelloYello]

2 hours ago, Nels55 said:

The teacher is an expert so why should the student doubt what the teacher is saying? 

 

That's really the question, isn't it?

 

If we're honest here, the student doesn't know whether the instructor will provide helpful advice. The student goes in blind. And the vast majority of those offering instruction are providing their personal opinions backed only by (1) their anecdotal experience as high-level golfers with good knowledge of the swing and (2) their personal interest and sincerity in seeing you do well.

 

This is not akin to going to college. This is a risk. You sign up for a Mechanical Engineering degree and you get what you pay for. You know what the actual job entails and you can see it covered in the curriculum. You know what's going to be taught. Who the professors are really doesn't influence the undergraduate experience because whether it's MIT or LSU they're both teaching the same thing in Thermodynamics class. 

 

Golf instruction OTOH is a product that's far less codified into a "do this, do that" form. Golf instruction is much more akin to a mechanic working on a car. Am I qualified to evaluate a mechanic? Only after seeing his/her work. Do all mechanics get to call themselves "experts?" Eh....

 

This is the biggest reason the student must be critical of the information being presented. At the end of the day, it's all advice no matter what the price is. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Nels55 said:

...The poor student is [left] thinking, "The teacher is a really good player and other students hit the ball very well so the fault must be with me and I just have to work harder." 

 

The (reasonable) student should be at least somewhat critical of the advice being given. It's not too much to ask that people at least understand what and why something is being prescribed. 

 

This is not like a doctor prescribing medication and a patient blindly taking it without understanding the science behind exactly how it works. This is simply a level of understanding that recognizes the big picture. 

 

Personally, I think your perspective is giving the "expert" instructor too much credit while simultaneously pretending the student is a sheep. That's not really how it is. 

 

2 hours ago, Nels55 said:

This is why I am a big fan of Mike Adams and also Dr. Wright's approach which is to test and measure and figure the correct swing for the individual golfer which may be a completely different set of mechanics from one student to the next.

 

Match the swing to the student as opposed to matching the student to the swing.

 

IDK. I haven't seen any "method" instructors that aren't scam-artists. Pretty sure that was a 90s thing which died a long time ago or now hides out in a few places on the internet. 

 

These days, most (reasonably decent) instructors have a good understanding of cause-and-effect in the golf swing and are just trying to get students away from egregious irregularities and towards a swing that's built with a chain of things that all deliver a reasonably consistent result. 

 

It ain't rocket science.

 

.

Edited September 19, 2023 by MelloYello

[Santiago Golf]

9 hours ago, DataGolfer said:

 

You can argue it... George himself in a recent NLU episode says he makes most of his money through his website and training aids.

 

I know George and I listen to that podcast haha (guess that part was the least important to me)

[Santiago Golf]

8 hours ago, Zitlow said:

Ask 10 different instructors how to start the downswing and you'll probably get 10 different answers. 

 

I'll give you great answer, it doesn't really matter. The golf swing last less than 1 second for most golfers. 

 

Most golfers aren't doing slow motion training for it to really matter.

They are just thinking about it and not even close to preforming what they are thinking.

 

 

[Nels55]

4 hours ago, MelloYello said:

IDK. I haven't seen any "method" instructors that aren't scam-artists. Pretty sure that was a 90s thing which died a long time ago or now hides out in a few places on the internet. 

 

These days, most (reasonably decent) instructors have a good understanding of cause-and-effect in the golf swing and are just trying to get students away from egregious irregularities and towards a swing that's built with a chain of things that all deliver a reasonably consistent result. 

 

It ain't rocket science.

90s thing?  Pros have been teaching their one right way to swing since the first golf pro.

[Zitlow]

14 hours ago, Santiago Golf said:

 

I'll give you great answer, it doesn't really matter. The golf swing last less than 1 second for most golfers. 

 

Most golfers aren't doing slow motion training for it to really matter.

They are just thinking about it and not even close to preforming what they are thinking.

 

 

 

Thinking about the components slows down the reflexes. 

 

Jack Nicklaus's teacher Jack Grout learned from Henry Picard who learned from Alex Morrison.

 

"In order to improve his game the player must first learn to picture the swing as a whole, not as a series of separate actions." Alex Morrison

 

 

[Nels55]

15 minutes ago, Zitlow said:

 

Thinking about the components slows down the reflexes. 

 

Jack Nicklaus's teacher Jack Grout learned from Henry Picard who learned from Alex Morrison.

 

"In order to improve his game the player must first learn to picture the swing as a whole, not as a series of separate actions." Alex Morrison

 

 

Speaking of Jack Grout in "Golf My Way" at 1:54:03 he mentions that some players are impossible and simply cannot play the game:

 

Is that true?  Or possibly Jack Grout did not know how to help the "impossible golfers"?

[Santiago Golf]

56 minutes ago, Zitlow said:

 

Thinking about the components slows down the reflexes. 

 

Jack Nicklaus's teacher Jack Grout learned from Henry Picard who learned from Alex Morrison.

 

"In order to improve his game the player must first learn to picture the swing as a whole, not as a series of separate actions." Alex Morrison

 

 

 

I have read Chamblees book that has this quote in it

 

There are simply two types of thinkers

Those who think in words and those who think in pictures

 

I personally think in pictures. So swing thoughts have never worked for me. I struggle to work out problems silently. The best training aid for me is to watch old videos of my swing when I'm hitting it the best to get that mental image of my swing. 

 

Anyways

 

Research has shown that golfers get better by practicing smaller swings and slowing down the swing to ingrain the changes. 

 

 

[bluedot]

3 hours ago, Nels55 said:

Speaking of Jack Grout in "Golf My Way" at 1:54:03 he mentions that some players are impossible and simply cannot play the game:

 

Is that true?  Or possibly Jack Grout did not know how to help the "impossible golfers"?

I don’t think it’s a failing of Jack Grout.  I taught tennis for many years, and every now and then I had a student who just couldn’t do it.  It may have been kinesthic sense, or hand-eye coordination, or something else, or combinations of things, but even the simplest parts of footwork and the swing just didn’t happen.  That wasn’t frequent, but pretty clear when it happened.

Edited September 20, 2023 by bluedot

[MPStrat]

4 minutes ago, bluedot said:

I don’t think it’s a failing of Jack Grout.  I taught tennis for many years, and every now and then I had a student who just couldn’t do it.  It may have been kinesthic sense, or hand-eye coordination, or something else, or combinations of things, but even the simplest parts of footwork and the swing just didn’t happen.  That wasn’t frequent, but preen clear when it happened.

There are a percentage of people who aren’t naturally gifted enough to play golf at a respectable level. I don’t know what that number is but it’s a tiny fraction compared to those who think they can’t play but really just have poor technique. 

[MelloYello]

16 hours ago, Nels55 said:

90s thing?  Pros have been teaching their one right way to swing since the first golf pro.

 

There was a period in the 80s when you could title a book "The Golfing Machine," LOL. These days, you couldn't get away with that. 

 

Golf instruction evolves over time with the generations and I think what you're talking about peaked in the 80s/90s with instructors like McLean and Leadbetter who devised names for various swing methods. There were a ton. 

 

In 1994, McLean published "The Eight-Step Swing" and followed that up in 1997 with "The X-Factor Swing." In 1995, David Lee wrote a book called, "Gravity Golf: The Evolution & Revolution of Golf Instruction."

 

Stuff like that was the norm back then. To me, present day instruction is wildly different. In some ways the transition to platforms like YouTube have been a boon as Instructors just can't get more than 5 minutes of attention and thus need for focus more on basic concepts. In some ways, that's actually helping to eliminate a lot of the "method problem" that once plagued golf instruction.  

 

And truth is, McLean, Leadbetter and Harmon are mummies compared with today's generation who base most of their teaching on fundamentals and small concepts along with video- and launch monitor-based guidance. 

 

Of course we can find examples of everything but what you're describing peaked and has been relegated to--if we're being honest--forums constructed exactly like this with insulated little communities. 

 

 

.

Edited September 20, 2023 by MelloYello

[me05501]

Anyone who has ever priced a product or service learns that price drives the perception of value.

 

The more people charge for something the more their customers think it must be worth.

 

The more people pay for something the more likely they are to value it over less expensive stuff.

 

The person who flies across the country to take lessons with a specific person at a premium price is much more likely to value and apply that instructor's advice.

 

They might get the exact same advice from their local assistant pro for a fraction of the cost but they wouldn't value it as much. Subconsciously they're likely to downgrade that advice because they only paid $45 to hear it. 

 

It's the same concept that makes one rare jewel more valuable than another that might be just as rare. Don't try giving any woman a ruby engagement ring, no matter how big the stone!  

Edited September 20, 2023 by me05501

[MK7Golf21]

6 minutes ago, me05501 said:

Anyone who has ever priced a product or service learns that price drives the perception of value.

 

The more people charge for something the more their customers think it must be worth.

 

The more people pay for something the more likely they are to value it over less expensive stuff.

 

The person who flies across the country to take lessons with a specific person at a premium price is much more likely to value and apply that instructor's advice.

 

They might get the exact same advice from their local assistant pro for a fraction of the cost but they wouldn't value it as much. Subconsciously they're likely to downgrade that advice because they only paid $45 to hear it. 

 

It's the same concept that makes one rare jewel more valuable than another that might be just as rare. Don't try giving any woman a ruby engagement ring, no matter how big the stone!  

 

exactly, seen this a lot. 

[Nels55]

5 hours ago, bluedot said:

I don’t think it’s a failing of Jack Grout.  I taught tennis for many years, and every now and then I had a student who just couldn’t do it.  It may have been kinesthic sense, or hand-eye coordination, or something else, or combinations of things, but even the simplest parts of footwork and the swing just didn’t happen.  That wasn’t frequent, but pretty clear when it happened.

Yes, I have seen some folks like that.  It seems that there is no possibility of their every making any kind of a golf swing.  I do wonder though, is mental or physical?  A person can get the idea that they cannot do anything that requires coordination and at that point they will simply prove that they cannot do it every chance that they get.  I really don't believe that there is any fairly normal human being who cannot learn a sort of golf swing that will get them around the course.  I can think of one guy in particular who was very uncoordinated or whatever but loved the game and took lessons and practiced a bit and played as often as he could which was about once a week most of the time.  He got to where he could get around the course and he would be really happy if he got through a round with no quads.  

 

Do you think that if one of the tennis students who had two left feet worked at tennis for 8 hours a day that they could get the basics down?

[bluedot]

2 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

Yes, I have seen some folks like that.  It seems that there is no possibility of their every making any kind of a golf swing.  I do wonder though, is mental or physical?  A person can get the idea that they cannot do anything that requires coordination and at that point they will simply prove that they cannot do it every chance that they get.  I really don't believe that there is any fairly normal human being who cannot learn a sort of golf swing that will get them around the course.  I can think of one guy in particular who was very uncoordinated or whatever but loved the game and took lessons and practiced a bit and played as often as he could which was about once a week most of the time.  He got to where he could get around the course and he would be really happy if he got through a round with no quads.  

 

Do you think that if one of the tennis students who had two left feet worked at tennis for 8 hours a day that they could get the basics down?

Perhaps, but the issue in tennis becomes not only the speed of the ball and the size of the court, but finding someone to spend that much time with you.  Golf you can practice and even play alone; tennis not so much.

 

I don't know a way to measure the mental/physical parts of the problem, and I'm sure that both come into play.  But my impression of these folks was that it was a physical limitation more than a self-image problem.  But I truly don't know.

[Nels55]

1 hour ago, bluedot said:

Perhaps, but the issue in tennis becomes not only the speed of the ball and the size of the court, but finding someone to spend that much time with you.  Golf you can practice and even play alone; tennis not so much.

 

I don't know a way to measure the mental/physical parts of the problem, and I'm sure that both come into play.  But my impression of these folks was that it was a physical limitation more than a self-image problem.  But I truly don't know.

I think that a really large component is how a person grows up.  If playing ball games is a constant during the early years then well coordinated movements are a lot more likely. 

 

This conversation reminds me of a friend of mine who went to Rice university on a math scholarship.  He had to take P.E. and was really dreading it because sports were not his thing.  Anyway, at the first class they asked each student what kind of sports experience they had and then divided the students into groups based on their answers.  My friend was put in the group with all the other guys who always got picked last.  My friend said that they played basketball and they were all terrible at it but had a blast because everyone got handle the ball and shoot or whatever if they ever got that far down the court.  LOL I guess that story doesn't have much relationship to conversation but I always thought it was a rather good one.

[baudi]

16 hours ago, Santiago Golf said:

I have read Chamblees book that has this quote in it

 

There are simply two types of thinkers

Those who think in words and those who think in pictures

i am not too sure about the process of thinking (very complex) but when it concerns learning/education here is a clip that opened my mind.

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by baudi

[Santiago Golf]

5 hours ago, baudi said:

i am not too sure about the process of thinking (very complex) but when it concerns learning/education here is a clip that opened my mind.

 

 

I 100% agree that people are not visual learners for the most part (especially as you get wiser in age), but people do think in pictures vs words. 

 

I first hand know that people are not visual learners from the Golf Schools I taught. I demonstrate 25+ times a very simple drill, answer all questions, show the wrong way to do the drill, and then proceed to watch 3/4 people go to the drill and they are not doing correctly (not speaking in terms of mechanics).

 

I think there is value to watching YOUR OWN GOLF SWING in full speed and slow motion, just taking it in, not critique it. 

 

Simple test to figure out how you think is walk down a busy street and try to think about a conversation you had early in the day. If you find yourself struggling to think the words in your head and find the need to speak to self quietly, this shows that you don't think in words but more in pictures. If you remember the conversation words in your head, this shows you think more in words. Some people think in a combination of both

 

I know for myself, I absolutely struggle with thinking in words. It causes me to have constant typos unless I speak out loud when I am typing. Though I can remember a ton of golf courses (even ones I haven't played) and the WITB of almost everyone I have played with or caddied for.