I'm Having A Lesson!

[Foxholer]

Complete opposite. I'm more scared of trying to make changes that don't work out and my game goes to total rat turd and I can't break 100 anymore. You hear stories like that. Ultimately I don't want to ruin my enjoyment of the game, that's all. But I'm sure that's only in rare cases.

You could do much better if you 'lose that attitude'! But handicap golf can be comfortable for those who don't want to challenge themselves! And attitudes to golf and your (and others) handicap(s) is often a reflection to your entire personality! Donald Trump is a classic example!

 

[pendodave]

If it is just one lesson, I think it would be nice if he looked at your wedges, irons and drivers and told you what you were doing that could be improved with each. Then at least you'd have some food for thought, and be able to visit the 'tube if you wanted to try a little self improvement along the suggested lines.
It's probably better than just fiddling around blind.
Or fiddling around and becoming blind...

 

[HomecountiesJohn]

For those newer members who aren't familiar with my stance on lessons, I've never had one as an adult because a) I don't really practise as such, I just enjoy playing, b) I've always been a bit apprehensive about becoming one of those 'death by a hundred swing thoughts' guys. But, my brother-in-law bought me a Virgin Experience voucher for one free lesson at Christmas, and I've finally got round to booking it - next Tuesday, at Stanmore Golf Club.

Judging from the booking confirmation I think it might be an indoor studio one, which is a bit of a shame as I thought I'd get more out of a short game and putting lesson if anything, but we'll see what happens when I get there. I'm still a bit nervous about it, and I don't want to change anything too drastically because I'm never going to be someone who books another 6 lessons and is down the driving range every week - just not my bag. Any serious change would probably take me way too long to bed in and ruin my enjoyment. But, this year I have seen my game definitely improve but the scores haven't so much, so maybe a couple of pointers might be the thing I need to get to the next level, who knows.

So I guess I'm apprehensive but open-minded and hopeful at the same time. It is only one lesson, with a £5 off if I book another one, but I think lessons there are like 57 quid so not exactly a massive saving. I don't know how much can really be accomplished in only one lesson.

Good luck with your lesson, it seems to me it'll be wasted on you unfortunately.

 

[Orikoru]

So, I had the lesson. Have to say I rather enjoyed it. There was no mind-blowing game-changer I don't think, but as I said, I wasn't really looking for that. I was surprised that he didn't even mention my grip or swing really - in fact he said I don't really need to change anything on that front (probably partly because I made it clear at the start I don't get a lot of practise in so a big change might be beyond me).

He started off asking me what I want to work on, and said we could either go in his studio or out on the course. Given that it had been raining heavily, and I thought I might as well make use of the numbers you get from the studio, I elected to go in there, and told him how my strike is pretty inconsistent. So I hit 8 iron a bunch of times, we looked at the numbers, and he reckoned that angle of attack was the big one that if we could improve it would have a knock-on effect and make everything better, pretty much. This is actually something I knew I had an issue with, but I haven't really bothered working on it, and it was nice to have the numbers and a pro confirm that to me. Essentially I was averaging 1 degree up and we wanted it 1 degree down, more or less.

So again, no huge changes, we just checked ball position first, I told him I tend to have the ball middle of stance, but when we actually looked at it, it had probably crept a ball forward of middle without me realising, so that was one thing for me to watch out for. Other than that he just said try and get the feeling of my body turning through the shot more and not hanging back, really. Then he set it up so I was playing the front nine at Wentworth, so it was more target-based, more enjoyable and obviously I'd get to hit a variety of clubs keeping in mind what we said.

So yeah, overall I had a positive experience. The only small caveat for me is that I still don't think I would pay upwards of 50 quid for that, I think it would only be worth me paying for lessons if I was in a position to make more changes with more practise. But that aside, I really enjoyed the hour, got on great with Alex at Stanmore, and I think he understood really well what I wanted to get out of it and kept things simple for me.

 

[Biggleswade Blue]

Yeah I definitely do that.

I do too. I have to bed in techncial changes from a lesson, then forget about it and just hit the ball. Despite having achived huge improvements over each lesson (so by the end of the lesson I am executing beautifully what we have been working on), I find the bedding in takes a few weeks focussing on the techncial changes, then I have a few weeks where each time I warm up/practice I work a bit on the technical stuiff, then try to forget about it and just play. I then have a few weeks where I try not think too techncially at all. Generally I go 6-8 weeks between lessons. Improvement is not rapid, but it is there.

Just showing how much I overthink it!

 

[garyinderry]

Theres swing changes which can be awkward to implement and then there is set up changes which really aren't that difficult to change while still seeing really postive results.

 

[Orikoru]

Theres swing changes which can be awkward to implement and then there is set up changes which really aren't that difficult to change while still seeing really postive results.

Yeah, it was quite funny actually. He asked me "where do you normally have the ball in your stance?" And I was like 'I just have it in the middle for irons, keeps it simple.' Then we looked down at how I had set up and it was maybe three quarters of a ball left of middle, and I was like 'oh.' Even just sorting that out should help the angle of attack, but I hadn't even noticed it creeping forward, so it's just something to remember to consciously check.

 

[Canfordhacker]

When it's a setup thing I will sometimes put a coloured sharpie marker on my glove - then when I look down at set up it is a visual reminder to ensure I have incorporated that particular aspect (ie ball position in this instance). Not all the time, just at the outset.

 

[stefanovic]

Golf lessons are a complete con.
That's because the game is nearly all inspiration.
True, a pro might be able to fix a fault but that will unearth at least one more and you'll be back to where you began (if you are lucky).
There are plenty of teaching pro's who have destroyed a player's natural game.

 

[Maninblack4612]

Golf lessons are a complete con.
That's because the game is nearly all inspiration.
True, a pro might be able to fix a fault but that will unearth at least one more and you'll be back to where you began (if you are lucky).
There are plenty of teaching pro's who have destroyed a player's natural game.

This daft statement might be true of a tiny number of naturally gifted players & a few incompetent pros. The majority of us require more than inspiration. I have personally improved my game by consulting a pro, who worked around what I've got, & reading a couple of really good instruction books.

I would never have arrived at the decent swing I have now, working on my own. I'm just not a natural swinger of the club, in common with 90% + of the golfing population.

 

[Crow]

Golf lessons are a complete con.
That's because the game is nearly all inspiration.
True, a pro might be able to fix a fault but that will unearth at least one more and you'll be back to where you began (if you are lucky).
There are plenty of teaching pro's who have destroyed a player's natural game.

And there are far more who have corrected a player's fault that they weren't even aware that they had, giving them far more enjoyment out of the game.

 

[Maninblack4612]

Yeah, it was quite funny actually. He asked me "where do you normally have the ball in your stance?" And I was like 'I just have it in the middle for irons, keeps it simple.' Then we looked down at how I had set up and it was maybe three quarters of a ball left of middle, and I was like 'oh.' Even just sorting that out should help the angle of attack, but I hadn't even noticed it creeping forward, so it's just something to remember to consciously check.

The pro from whom I have lessons has me playing everything forward of the centre of the stance. You say you like to understand why you should make a change. Surely playing the ball further back in your stance will increase the angle of attack, the very thing you're trying to avoid.

 

[fundy]

The pro from whom I have lessons has me playing everything forward of the centre of the stance. You say you like to understand why you should make a change. Surely playing the ball further back in your stance will increase the angle of attack, the very thing you're trying to avoid.

sounds like hes trying to go from a +ve aoa to a -ve one, ie get steeper so putting the ball back a bit should be fine

 

[Orikoru]

The pro from whom I have lessons has me playing everything forward of the centre of the stance. You say you like to understand why you should make a change. Surely playing the ball further back in your stance will increase the angle of attack, the very thing you're trying to avoid.

Of course it wouldn't? My club is bottoming out before the ball, so if you bring the ball back I'm more likely to strike down on it. That's common sense. I think you've got it backwards?

 

[ger147]

Of course it wouldn't? My club is bottoming out before the ball, so if you bring the ball back I'm more likely to strike down on it. That's common sense. I think you've got it backwards?

Not commenting on your swing in particular as I haven't seen it so have no idea, but it's you who has things backwards i.e. generally speaking having the ball further back in your stance encourages a steeper angle of attack, having the ball further forward encourages a shallower angle of attack.

And don't confuse where your swing bottoms out with angle of attack as they are 2 different things, albeit connected as a change to one often affects the other.

 

[fundy]

Not commenting on your swing in particular as I haven't seen it so have no idea, but it's you who has things backwards i.e. generally speaking having the ball further back in your stance encourages a steeper angle of attack, having the ball further forward encourages a shallower angle of attack.

And don't confuse where your swing bottoms out with angle of attack as they are 2 different things, albeit connected as a change to one often affects the other.

and if hes hitting up on an 8 iron and the pro wants him to hit down on it more surely he needs a steeper angle of attack?

 

[Maninblack4612]

Of course it wouldn't? My club is bottoming out before the ball, so if you bring the ball back I'm more likely to strike down on it. That's common sense. I think you've got it backwards?

sounds like hes trying to go from a +ve aoa to a -ve one, ie get steeper so putting the ball back a bit should be fine

I don't think that "striking down" on the ball is a good idea for amateurs like us, we don't have the power or consistency to do this properly & if you catch it heavy while hitting down the ball goes nowhere. The divot is caused, not so much by "hitting down", but it is a result of the club going down in an opposite reaction to the ball going up. Slo mo video confirms this, even shots with a 5 or 6 iron are more of a sweeping motion than anything else.

And I still think playing the ball father back increases the angle of attack.?

 

[Orikoru]

Not commenting on your swing in particular as I haven't seen it so have no idea, but it's you who has things backwards i.e. generally speaking having the ball further back in your stance encourages a steeper angle of attack, having the ball further forward encourages a shallower angle of attack.

And don't confuse where your swing bottoms out with angle of attack as they are 2 different things, albeit connected as a change to one often affects the other.

We might be on slightly crossed wires here, but I think @fundy has it right - generally my angle of attack was 1 or 2 degrees up, we wanted to make it a downward angle, so bringing the ball back slightly in stance should help that, assuming no other change to the swing.

 

[Orikoru]

And I still think playing the ball father back increases the angle of attack.?

This honestly makes no sense to me, and I think you're wrong. Think about it, if you move the ball forward (towards left foot) two inches and I don't change my swing whatsoever, then I will top the ball at best with an extremely upward contact since the low point of my swing was 2 inches before the ball. If I move it 2 inches back (towards right foot), I will strike it while the club is on the way down, so a negative angle of attack.

 

[ger147]

This honestly makes no sense to me, and I think you're wrong. Think about it, if you move the ball forward (towards left foot) two inches and I don't change my swing whatsoever, then I will top the ball at best with an extremely upward contact since the low point of my swing was 2 inches before the ball. If I move it 2 inches back (towards right foot), I will strike it while the club is on the way down, so a negative angle of attack.

Increasing the angle of attack when talking about irons is generally understood to mean making it steeper i.e. more negative.