"Be the Star of Your Own Lesson"

[iacas]

[Zitlow]

1 hour ago, bluedot said:

Doctors are in business to cure illness.  Caveat emptor.

Teachers are in business to educate. Caveat emptor.

Cops are in business to keep the peace. Caveat emptor.

Firemen are in business to put out fires. Caveat emptor.

C’mon, man….

 

Every purchase we ever make in any part of our life is caveat emptor; golf instruction is no different.  That said, not only has no golf instructor EVER tried to sell me a lesson, but the real caveat emptor in golf instruction is the question of whether or not the student is going to put in the reps after the lesson.  THAT is what the student should beware of, and many, if not most, just don’t understand the concept of what’s necessary.

 

Definitely and there are lot of bad doctors out there too, 250, 000 people die every year due to medical errors. Teachers are doing such a great job kids are graduating high school with the reading comprehension of 3rd graders. 

 

I'm not lesson adverse for people just bad lesson adverse for people where the "instructors" give out bad advice and the students get worse. Then are told  it takes weeks, months and years of lessons to improve. Ouch. 

 

PS: If the some of the "instructors" on here are really secure about their teaching ability they wouldn't be constantly seeking validation and they wouldn't be so defensive about criticism. 

 

 

Edited January 2 by Zitlow

[Zitlow]

1 hour ago, bluedot said:

There is so much wrong here that it’s hard to know where to start.  So I won’t.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to hit a nerve. 

[iacas]

I'd been replying to @Zitlow's drivel a bit lately (the holiday break afforded more time to do so), but this last round and the end of the holidays has once again made it obvious what a waste of time it is.

 

I have one final comment, though, since he's now being intentionally offensive.

Spoiler

1 minute ago, Zitlow said:

Teachers are doing such a great job kids are graduating high school with the reading comprehension of 3rd graders.

 

As the son to one and husband to another incredibly great teacher, just stop. You don't know what you're talking about. That's the nicest thing and the best advice I can give you at this point. FFS man.

 

 

1 minute ago, Zitlow said:

I'm not lesson adverse for people just bad lesson adverse for people where the "instructors" give out bad advice and the students get worse.

 

Many are averse to the horrible posts, advice, and commentary you unceasingly offer up here.

 

1 minute ago, Zitlow said:

They are told it takes weeks, months and years of lessons to improve.

 

It takes less time if they get better information. But, yeah, it takes some time. Not many "instant upgrades" out there. If you disagree… show us your move and share your GHIN, Mr. Keyboard Warrior. (I won't see it, but it should be amusing to the few people who don't have you on ignore.)

 

SZDD. Happy New Year everyone.

[GolfTurkey]

6 hours ago, Shilgy said:

1) most don’t take lessons

1b) most that do get a lesson think they’re “fixed” instantly 

 

2) most don’t get fit

 

3) Covid brought in a lot of beginners

 

4-100? 

Mike Austin isn't giving lessons anymore

[Soloman1]

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot.

 

The elephant in the room is most people aren’t very good at golf.

 

And will never be, regardless of how much world-class instruction they get.

 

People who are, figure it out within a couple of years after they start.

 

Sorry if that’s mean and insensitive.

[ThinkingPlus]

3 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot.

 

The elephant in the room is most people aren’t very good at golf.

 

And will never be, regardless of how much world-class instruction they get.

 

People who are, figure it out within a couple of years after they start.

 

Sorry if that’s mean and insensitive.

Channeling your avatar I see...

[mshills]

7 hours ago, Zitlow said:

According to the USGA, In the last 25 years, the average USGA handicap for a man has improved nearly two full strokes, from 16.3 to 14.4.

 

With all the equipment and teaching tool advances the handicaps have gone down less than 2 strokes in the last 25 years. Wow!

The point of this crashing non sequitur is what, exactly?

[Scottbox]

I'm ALWAYS the star!

[Ghost of Snead]

9 hours ago, Zitlow said:

According to the USGA, In the last 25 years, the average USGA handicap for a man has improved nearly two full strokes, from 16.3 to 14.4.

 

With all the equipment and teaching tool advances the handicaps have gone down less than 2 strokes in the last 25 years. Wow! 

 

 

The average is obviously skewed by the simple fact that 90% of golfers are weekend warriors, don't give a sh*t about improving, and are only looking for a few good shots, laughs and beers with their buds. They either have handicaps as their clubs require them or just keep them for the occasional A/B/C/D scramble. 

 

What's the average USGA handicap increase for the 10% who actively take lessons and play more than once a week ? 

 

Edited January 3 by Ghost of Snead

[dwboston]

36 minutes ago, Ghost of Snead said:

 

The average is obviously skewed by the simple fact that 90% of golfers are weekend warriors, don't give a sh*t about improving, and are only looking for a few good shots, laughs and beers with their buds. They either have handicaps as their clubs require them or just keep them for the occasional A/B/C/D scramble. 

 

What's the average USGA handicap increase for the 10% who actively take lessons and play more than once a week ? 

 

 

Average is skewed by outliers (both high and low).  Median is a better measure of central tendency.

 

Don't make me get into the Central Limit Theorem.  😀 

[dwboston]

And I'm always the star of my own lessons.  Unfortunately my performance in my lessons tends to be more like "Gigli" than "Citizen Kane".

[MPStrat]

47 minutes ago, Ghost of Snead said:

 

The average is obviously skewed by the simple fact that 90% of golfers are weekend warriors, don't give a sh*t about improving, and are only looking for a few good shots, laughs and beers with their buds. 

 

What's the average USGA handicap increase for the 10% who actively take lessons and play more than once a week ? 

 

 

Remember, these statistics are based on those who keep a USGA index, not all golfers. I would be interested to know how many golfers with a USGA index have taken more than 1 golf lesson. I would guess maybe half? But that’s purely a guess, I have no idea. 

[Chunkitgood]

95 % plus of golfers try to scoop the ball up.  They badly need a complete overhaul of their swing, or rather to start from scratch, beginning with being told how the club works as a tool.  I suspect that if teachers would simply give students that knowledge and observe and comment on their progress, more people would be better golfers.  But I wonder if many teachers actually have that knowledge to give.

 

I never took a lesson but watched many, not to “steal” knowledge of how to play but rather out of curiously as to why so much golf teaching fails.  I have friends who constantly take lessons and go to clinics and have the same swing they had literally decades ago.

 

Are golf teachers charlatans?  They may be if their only qualification is that they can play golf well.  It seems to be an accepted principle of neuroscience that people who are expert at something do not have conscious access to how they do it.  There is also reason to believe that a great many people making a living at golf in fact just do not do it properly themselves.

 

You can say what you want about Dunning Kruger but some people have a documented capability in cognition that exceeds that of most others.  These people frequently do something other than play golf for a living, but they sometimes take an interest in it and may even have an understanding of it that exceeds that of the expert player.

[CasualLie]

15 hours ago, iacas said:

 

I think the last time I was on the On the Mark podcast, we talked about one of my Twitter threads where I talked about "how to be a good student." You might find those tweets interesting (or not).

 

 

 

Wait...what???!!!  That's awesome; love that podcast.  I'm going to have to track down that episode.

[MonteScheinblum]

17 minutes ago, CasualLie said:

 

Wait...what???!!!  That's awesome; love that podcast.  I'm going to have to track down that episode.

I was on his Mark’s cast during Covid.  He’s great.  Asks questions and lets you answer and never talks over you.

Edited January 3 by MonteScheinblum

[notsohard]

Secret is in the Dirt....ask Elk.

[PedronNiall]

The mysticism that surrounds golf certainly has follow-on effects helpful in stoking the finger pointing and ire that are just under the surface and always ready to come out regarding golf instruction. It's what makes many students go into lessons blind with no sense of agency for themselves because they don't want to ask stupid questions or they feel like they're in the wrong for being uncertain about what they're "taught" as a perceived expert showed it to them. It's what allows bad instructors to keep holding lessons, as many who fail can be convinced by said person or themselves that they and not the instructor must be at fault. It's why some good instructors may languish in obscurity when they don't latch onto enough of the right buzzwords and hot methods or don't kowtow to the right people to end up on top instructors lists; how can an instructor be any good if they aren't touted by other "good" instructors? If the good doesn't bubble to the top, then that increases the encounters learning golfers will have with the bad. 

 

There's a very relevant discussion to be had about the things wrong with much of the available sources of instruction,  be they in person, online, or written, but I will agree the blurb that inspired this post does a poor job of setting the stage for anything resembling that talk. 

[johnrobison]

13 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot.

 

The elephant in the room is most people aren’t very good at golf.

 

And will never be, regardless of how much world-class instruction they get.

 

People who are, figure it out within a couple of years after they start.

 

Sorry if that’s mean and insensitive.

That's the truth and the crux of it. And it's way beyond most people - it's probably more than 90%. 

[bluedot]

7 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

95 % plus of golfers try to scoop the ball up.  They badly need a complete overhaul of their swing, or rather to start from scratch, beginning with being told how the club works as a tool.  I suspect that if teachers would simply give students that knowledge and observe and comment on their progress, more people would be better golfers.  But I wonder if many teachers actually have that knowledge to give.

 

I never took a lesson but watched many, not to “steal” knowledge of how to play but rather out of curiously as to why so much golf teaching fails.  I have friends who constantly take lessons and go to clinics and have the same swing they had literally decades ago.

 

Are golf teachers charlatans?  They may be if their only qualification is that they can play golf well.  It seems to be an accepted principle of neuroscience that people who are expert at something do not have conscious access to how they do it.  There is also reason to believe that a great many people making a living at golf in fact just do not do it properly themselves.

 

You can say what you want about Dunning Kruger but some people have a documented capability in cognition that exceeds that of most others.  These people frequently do something other than play golf for a living, but they sometimes take an interest in it and may even have an understanding of it that exceeds that of the expert player.

For a guy who seems proud of the fact that he’s never taken a lesson, you believe that you know a LOT about teaching and coaching.  And I suspect that your last paragraph refers to you.  So a couple of questions:

 

1. How good are you?  Do you play competitively, and if so how successful have you been?  Ranked? Club Champion?  Scratch?  It might serve to validate your opinions, and your pretty constant drumbeat against instruction, if we knew how successful you’ve been without it.

 

2. If your last paragraph DOES refer to you as an example of someone with a “capability In cognition that exceeds that of most others”, have you put that to work and actually GIVEN golf instruction?  And if so, how successful have your students been?
 

Just wondering.

[Zitlow]

15 hours ago, mshills said:

The point of this crashing non sequitur is what, exactly?

 

[virtuoso]

9 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

95 % plus of golfers try to scoop the ball up.  They badly need a complete overhaul of their swing, or rather to start from scratch, beginning with being told how the club works as a tool. 

So, if a guy has a shallow angle of attack, and no shaft lean at impact, he needs to start from scratch?

[DShepley]

12 hours ago, MPStrat said:

 

Remember, these statistics are based on those who keep a USGA index, not all golfers. I would be interested to know how many golfers with a USGA index have taken more than 1 golf lesson. I would guess maybe half? But that’s purely a guess, I have no idea. 

Looking at my golf friends, I would say it's way less than half

[MPStrat]

31 minutes ago, DShepley said:

Looking at my golf friends, I would say it's way less than half

Could be. Really have no idea. 
 

Of my golfing friends who keep an index I couldn’t think of many who haven’t taken more than 1 lesson. One friend in particular brags that he hasn’t taken a lesson but his dad has taken many lessons and taught him as a young kid. Vast majority have. Of my friends who don’t keep an index, it’s maybe 1 in 5 who have even taken 1 lesson in their life.

Edited January 3 by MPStrat

[DShepley]

Most of the people I have played with over the past 20 years did not take formal lessons.  Not to say someone didn't help them along the way but I would say the majority of golfers I am around have not paid for a formal lesson or actively take lessons.

[CasualLie]

8 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

I was on his Mark’s cast during Covid.  He’s great.  Asks questions and lets you answer and never talks over you.

 

Wait...What???!!!  How did I miss that?  😉

 

I see that was before I started listening to Mark; I'll go back.  And yes, some of the "others" (ahem...Claude...cough) tend to talk wayyyy too much.

 

@iacas turns out I did listen to your episode, I remember the joke about Erie being the bastion of golf instruction!  Like many On the Mark episodes, great stuff.  

 

Why on earth there needs to be a golf instruction story so piss poorly written on the website is way beyond me.  It's so bad it can't even be called clickbait.  Not even AI would write such garbage.

 

Luckily, we do have great podcasts talking to real instructors who have built a lifetime of experience and share it at a pretty reasonable price.  

 

Further, we are quite fortunate to have a handful of instructors on this forum putting in a ton of hours.  Even if they were $500/hour instructors, and we know they are not, factor in the non paid hours studying, podcasting, posting herep, that rate drops fast.  And for those calling it part of "marketing", there's a little bit of that, keyword little.  What's really going on here is a love of golf and a love of sharing knowledge.

 

Again, we are so fortunate.  We (instructor and student) really don't need to be insulted by the garbage writing in that article.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

Holy generalization and disdain for golf instruction. The instructor I have worked with for many years has constantly evolved his teaching, so maybe I just got lucky. I do agree with the taking ownership aspect, to quote Ted Lasso, 'be curious'.  

 

Improvement in golf is always a journey, I don't know why anyone would expect to turn things around overnight or for 5-10 minutes of drills to do anything lasting. I've played at a pretty high level and have been working on the same small change for nearly 2 years.  Most people are so bad on a fundamental level an overhaul is probably needed if they are genuinely wanting/willing to improve. The author seems to be arguing for band-aids that achieve short term results. 

[iacas]

15 minutes ago, CasualLie said:

@iacas turns out I did listen to your episode, I remember the joke about Erie being the bastion of golf instruction!  Like many On the Mark episodes, great stuff.

 

Thanks.

 

15 minutes ago, CasualLie said:

Why on earth there needs to be a golf instruction story so piss poorly written on the website is way beyond me.  It's so bad it can't even be called clickbait. Not even AI would write such garbage.

 

It's pretty bad.

 

15 minutes ago, CasualLie said:

Further, we are quite fortunate to have a handful of instructors on this forum putting in a ton of hours.  Even if they were $500/hour instructors, and we know they are not, factor in the non paid hours studying, podcasting, posting herep, that rate drops fast. And for those calling it part of "marketing", there's a little bit of that, keyword little.  What's really going on here is a love of golf and a love of sharing knowledge.

 

Nah, I thought we were only in this to sell lessons?

 

10 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

95 % plus of golfers try to scoop the ball up. They badly need a complete overhaul of their swing, or rather to start from scratch, beginning with being told how the club works as a tool. I suspect that if teachers would simply give students that knowledge and observe and comment on their progress, more people would be better golfers.

 

No.

 

10 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

I never took a lesson but watched many, not to “steal” knowledge of how to play but rather out of curiously as to why so much golf teaching fails. I have friends who constantly take lessons and go to clinics and have the same swing they had literally decades ago.

 

So how much of the blame do they deserve? Because, as I see it, you can get the best golf lesson of all time, but if you "try" to do it for a week at full speed, decide at some point that it "stopped working" (because it was working when the pro made you focus on it and work on it at slower speeds with him watching you), and give up on it… whose fault is that really?

 

There are a lot of bad instructors out there. They're bad at communicating, prioritizing, etc. But that percentage is shrinking, and the good ones are getting better and better.

 

But a lot of it is on the golfer.

 

I'm proud of how little credit I take for my students when they succeed on the golf course, including my own daughter, because I realize that my contribution is like 1% or less. They're the ones doing the work, shooting the scores, etc. They get almost ALL the credit. But they also then get almost all the blame, except if I happen to give them bad advice or info. I see my role as a guide, and since I also see the blame/credit as I described above, it helps keep me on top of things.

 

10 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

You can say what you want about Dunning Kruger but some people have a documented capability in cognition that exceeds that of most others.  These people frequently do something other than play golf for a living, but they sometimes take an interest in it and may even have an understanding of it that exceeds that of the expert player.

 

We're not talking about "expert players" here. We're talking about golf instructors, many (most) of whom can't play better than their best students.

[baudi]

 

 

 

Probably many here studied this poem in English class long time ago. *)

Ryan uttered his analysis and opinion in a bold statement with one final message: command your lesson. I like that.

 

The ability to understand the needs of the persona should result in predictable responses and thus a match and lead. In choosing the next learning path the consideration of investment should be done once and righteous so. 

Otherwise, the involved persons run the risk of a failed opportunity.

 

There is this interesting story of Mahan Khalsa about a sales pitch at a listed company.

At the time, his company was very small and being impressed by his prospect, he covered his small identity with a bit of bravado and show off.

In the end Khalsa did not win the contract because the big company preferred to work with small companies.

Lesson learned the hard way. He took the wrong path and could not reverse it.

 

To me, it starts with values of a sincere attitude and a consistent Gestalt-cycle.

My decision process is a fragile black box, often filled with irrational and vague elements.

 

E.g. a couple of months ago I posted a vid on learning behavior.

This clip was not new and ± 2 years old at the time.

About a week later, an established pro who frequently posts on this forum used the same clip on his twitter account. However, two years earlier that same pro uttered the opposite in a message on a podcast.

 'That's just a coincidence', you say. Isn't it great that he changed his mind?! Why bother at all?

To me this guy lost a lot of his credibility. 

 

 

* Essentially, it also relates to Zitlow's point about reading. Personally, I am quite concerned about the lack of the attention span by many youngsters today. I will not touch the causes but the effects not only manifest in comprehensive reading. The proof is anywhere.

Edited January 3 by baudi

[GolfTurkey]

28 minutes ago, baudi said:

 

 

 

Probably many here studied this poem in English class long time ago. *)

Ryan uttered his analysis and opinion in a bold statement with one final message: command your lesson. I like that.

 

The ability to understand the needs of the persona should result in predictable responses and thus a match and lead. In choosing the next learning path the consideration of investment should be done once and righteous so. 

Otherwise, the involved persons run the risk of a failed opportunity.

 

There is this interesting story of Mahan Khalsa about a sales pitch at a listed company.

At the time, his company was very small and being impressed by his prospect, he covered his small identity with a bit of bravado and show off.

In the end Khalsa did not win the contract because the big company preferred to work with small companies.

Lesson learned the hard way. He took the wrong path and could not reverse it.

 

To me, it starts with values of a sincere attitude and a consistent Gestalt-cycle.

My decision process is a fragile black box, often filled with irrational and vague elements.

 

E.g. a couple of months ago I posted a vid on learning behavior.

This clip was not new and ± 2 years old at the time.

About a week later, an established pro who frequently posts on this forum used the same clip on his twitter account. However, two years earlier that same pro uttered the opposite in a message on a podcast.

 'That's just a coincidence', you say. Isn't it great that he changed his mind?! Why bother at all?

To me this guy lost a lot of his credibility. 

 

 

* Essentially, it also relates to Zitlow's point about reading. Personally, I am quite concerned about the lack of the attention span by many youngsters today. I will not touch the causes but the effects not only manifest in comprehensive reading. The proof is anywhere.

 

If I understood that correctly:

 

1. You liked the article

 

2. You're probably going to wake up with Mike Tyson's tiger in your bathroom