Is technical instruction a hinderence?

[GreiginFife]

I'm lucky. My coach is very good at helping your mind, and making it simple. No going into stats anything more than in passing, and no repeating the bad things or moves.
I always feel so bouyed after a lesson with him.

I’m sure the pro does simplify it for my mate, but his brain is wired to get too involved in nonsense.

As I say, I keep it even simpler.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I’m sure the pro does simplify it for my mate, but his brain is wired to get too involved in nonsense.

As I say, I keep it even simpler.

As my dad would say..."You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.."

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Agree 100%. My coach is strong on the underlying intuitive nature of the golf swing - that too much store and emphasis is placed upon technical aspects and metrics...when all we are doing is hitting a ball. The only time my coach has used technology and stats when we set about sorting my game was at the very outset when he used our studio and tech to show me what I was doing and what we needed to change...and that was the end of it - no more studio, no videos, no stats...and only the very occasional photo of my stance...as that is where it all starts.

But I guess it's down to the individual's preferences...though these preferences might not be what he or she needs.

 

[Golf is fun]

Agree 100%. My coach is strong on the underlying intuitive nature of the golf swing - that too much store and emphasis is placed upon technical aspects and metrics...when all we are doing is hitting a ball. The only time my coach has used technology and stats when we set about sorting my game was at the very outset when he used our studio and tech to show me what I was doing and what we needed to change...and that was the end of it - no more4 studio, no videos, no stats...and only the very occasional photo of my stance...as that is where it all starts.

But I guess it's down to the individual's preferences...though these preferences might not be what he or she needs.

The last sentence sums it up very well, as human nature we like to feel in control and so want to know everything. In various sports a lot of the best athletes I've met know far less than outsiders expect, they just do what they're told without question, or at most light questioning to understand rather than particularly challenge. A lot of times this comes from starting as a kid so just doing what the adult tells them is all they've known, and so sticks into adulthood. Sure it helps that genetically they can do this at a higher level than most, but I do believe most people don't get anywhere near their limits in most endeavours because they don't commit in the same way.

 

[sunshine]

Good question, I believe the answer is yes and no!

Beginners and children don’t need much technical coaching, it’s all about developing a feel for swinging the club, but as you improve everyone reaches a barrier where technical input is required to make the next step up.

Something like throwing a ball may seem a natural action, but I did actually have to give my daughters some technical instruction, to stand side on, to stop them throwing “like a girl”.

The physics of angle of attack and degree of elbow bend etc is beyond most people. The recent thread about the plane on a treadmill demonstrated how many people don’t understand physics. But some people need data to validate their findings. The golf swing is quite fast so video and technology helps. I had a lesson last week using GC quad and my coach was trying to get me to release the club more through impact. The data showed my club face was 3 degrees open to swing path, I’m not able to measure the angle of my wrists and accurately adjust by 3 degrees, but it was useful feedback to see how making changes impacts my swing dynamics. The data wasn’t essential to the lesson but it helped.

 

[sunshine]

Lots of long posts on this thread so I’m breaking up my thoughts.

The OP asked for comparison with other sports. I used to play cricket and I had plenty of technical instruction there.

Examples included adjusting my batting grip (weakening it in golf parlance), and we would work on elements using a bowling machine. I was a bowler so most technical coaching focused on delivery action e.g. wrist position, follow through rotation. Not dissimilar to golf swing coaching. This was in the 90s so before the days of video analysis on smartphones and tracking technology.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

A thread right up my street

I have had a good few lessons with several teachers. I liked to know the technical side despite being a feel player. I improved most when we discussed the correct swing (plane, rotation etc) and then trying to feel the correct movements to replicate the changes being made. I have always felt data such as ball tracking (path, swing speed, carry etc) have been a great help and reinforced what I was looking for and gave definite feedback as to whether I was getting better both in a lesson and after.

Having said that, I have switched to the Eureka swing and gone from 11.4 in July last year to 8.2 today. I've done that solely through youtube videos and a couple of quick emails to Steve Johnston so there is clearly an argument that I just needed a different methodolgy. It is a bizarre swing (think Bubba Watson) but working for me. I just need a short game to get a lot lower

 

[Dunesman]

I would go for no, I think. The golf swing is just a very technical thing. The smallest, even imperceptible to the eye, factors make dramatic differences to the end result. We can all swing the club. On a certain scale we are all doing the same thing, yet the outcomes are vastly different. So it does require a focus and some understanding of the technical issues if the swing is to be changed from bad to good. Non technical instruction, if there is such a thing, is never going to bring the precision needed for an effective and repeating swing. Although, see Dr Kwon. While he can go deep into the forces and dynamics of the swing, for most pupils he takes a high level approach of a handful of key motions and rythm. It could almost be distulled to just swing with a rope. Unclear how effective this is though.

 

[VVega]

Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead. only try to realize the truth... There is no spoon.

Somehow feels fitting to post here

 

[Skytot]

Interesting thread this .

I agree with your opening statement. My personal opinion and story is this . I was a steady 10.0 hcp for a full season in 2023 , I started season 2024 0n 10.2 and serious visions of single figures. I went for regular lessons with my coach working on Cupped wrists , flatting the swing , compression , anything he told me ect .. I had a terrible season, I somehow developed a devastating bad hook , and finished the season on 13.2 a full extra 3 shots . I was so disillusioned.. Im 60yr old in a few weeks and must have googled senior golf in YouTube . I came across Easiest Swing , it basically is all about tempo , Rhythm and No tension and NO technical stuff. It breaks a few golfing laws - lift your left foot ( right H golfers), let your head move& bend your left arm . I started to adopt this new philosophy in my game since November. I’m hitting the ball so well without extra effort or swing thoughts . I can’t wait to properly put this new Easy swing into my summer golf comps .Ive got a new coach now and im only going to have short game lessons . At 60 im not going to start getting another 20/30yrds on my drives without the possibility of pulling my back out

 

[Golf is fun]

Curious as to what people think of 1 of the points I made in my opening post - does golf coaching remove athleticism? Obviously this is a generalisation, I get some coaches encourage it.

There seems to be a concept some people and teachers have that the ideal golf swing should be almost robotic. Remove as many moving parts as possible, and basically almost try and make it that so that all you have to do is reverse this or return to a predetermined position. Examples being concepts like trying to limit clubface rotation through the swing and removing reliance on timing.

There seems to be very little of letting people make powerful movements with more moving parts and accepting the human body is an amazing machine that can handle this, and additionally that relying on hand eye coordination isn't a bad thing and is in fact fundamental to nearly every other sport out there. Think someone like Bubba Watson who is self taught and has a very free moving and powerful swing.

I do think as golf progresses it will become more athletic we will see more of this at least at the elite level. However this takes time, as there is a very strong concept of doing things how they have always been done in the sport.

 

[Voyager EMH]

No tension. Going to have short game lessons.

 

[Orikoru]

Curious as to what people think of 1 of the points I made in my opening post - does golf coaching remove athleticism? Obviously this is a generalisation, I get some coaches encourage it.

There seems to be a concept some people and teachers have that the ideal golf swing should be almost robotic. Remove as many moving parts as possible, and basically almost try and make it that so that all you have to do is reverse this or return to a predetermined position. Examples being concepts like trying to limit clubface rotation through the swing and removing reliance on timing.

There seems to be very little of letting people make powerful movements with more moving parts and accepting the human body is an amazing machine that can handle this, and additionally that relying on hand eye coordination isn't a bad thing and is in fact fundamental to nearly every other sport out there. Think someone like Bubba Watson who is self taught and has a very free moving and powerful swing.

I do think as golf progresses it will become more athletic we will see more of this at least at the elite level. However this takes time, as there is a very strong concept of doing things how they have always been done in the sport.

I think a large number of people don't have natural athleticism to lose. And for plenty of those people, their 'natural' swing might contain a destructive fault that would need to be coached out of them. Plenty of people take up the game in their mid-40s or later, possibly too late for any natural athleticism to show itself, so they may need to be taught the optimum swing for their capabilities. I follow a couple of golf swing sub-Reddits, and you would be amazed at some of the ways people are swinging a club out there. It is not a natural instinct for everyone, I can assure you.

 

[The Squirrel]

It breaks a few golfing laws - lift your left foot ( right H golfers), let your head move& bend your left arm

Laws from where? These all seem like terrible "laws" that you've been taught? In terms of doing anything dynamic and athletic, keeping lots of different bits of you still or rigid is never going to work...

I agree with Golf is Fun that removing dynamism is terrible. I’m in my mid 40s, have little natural athleticism but would say that this makes it even more important to not shackle whatever little I do have!

Check out Paddy Harrington as he makes exactly this point in several videos - he HATES the ‘laws’ quoted above..

 

[Backache]

I would suggest there is a considerable difference between defining and insisting on a certain angle of a joint at a particular point of the swing and trying to establish good movement patterns, though both could be described as technical instruction.

 

[Skytot]

Laws from where? These all seem like terrible "laws" that you've been taught? In terms of doing anything dynamic and athletic, keeping lots of different bits of you still or rigid is never going to work...

I agree with Golf is Fun that removing dynamism is terrible. I’m in my mid 40s, have little natural athleticism but would say that this makes it even more important to not shackle whatever little I do have!

Check out Paddy Harrington as he makes exactly this point in several videos - he HATES the ‘laws’ quoted above..

I think I agree with everything you say .

 

[Hobbit]

There’s a place for simple coaching, and there’s a place for technical coaching. And there’s different levels to it that might or might not be applicable in any given scenario and with any given level of ability

I coach in a different sport, qualified with badges and working on the next level. If it’s a newbie, it’s basic. If it’s a newbie with specific issues I’ll probably use a camera with video coaching overlay. If it’s one of our better players it will be with the camera. I can make an educated guess without the camera but the pupil really benefits from seeing exactly what’s happening, inc slo-mo & freeze frame.

Would a newbie benefit from it? Yes, if applicable to the issue they’ve got. But it’s a no if I’m teaching fundamentals.

 

[howbow88]

I'm curious what other people think, is golf teaching overly technical? Did you come from another sport that was more or less technical (as a beginner and as you got better)?

I think several sports are becoming way too technical now. At a higher level I understand it, but at an amateur level it is often laughable. I had a 20 handicapper I was playing with the other day, saying all sorts of nonsense about weight and flex. I zone out as I don't want this stuff seeping into my brain.

I genuinely think that when you're out on the course, 'grip it and rip it' is the only way to play.

 

[howbow88]

I've never been one for get into this position at P1, P4 etc as I find that totally useless because as soon as you put any speed into it everything goes out the window.

Yep. As Mike Tyson said: 'Everyone's got a plan until they get punched in the mouth.'

 

[Golf is fun]

There’s a place for simple coaching, and there’s a place for technical coaching. And there’s different levels to it that might or might not be applicable in any given scenario and with any given level of ability

I coach in a different sport, qualified with badges and working on the next level. If it’s a newbie, it’s basic. If it’s a newbie with specific issues I’ll probably use a camera with video coaching overlay. If it’s one of our better players it will be with the camera. I can make an educated guess without the camera but the pupil really benefits from seeing exactly what’s happening, inc slo-mo & freeze frame.

Would a newbie benefit from it? Yes, if applicable to the issue they’ve got. But it’s a no if I’m teaching fundamentals.

For context I also went and got the coaching certs in my old sport, and coached some complete beginners and an elite who won a commonwealth gold medal. However, my take on it is that it's my job as a coach to understand the technical nuances, and then design a task for the athlete so that they will apply these concepts without having to consciously think about them or know them.

There is a reason children learn motor skills the way they do, it's how nature designed us to learn and there is no reason this should change as an adult. There's a lot of really good research coming out in this space, my favourite is that it appears adults actually pick up motor skills faster than children, which "common knowledge" always told us didn't happen. The catch is that children retain these patterns better after sleep, whereas adults degrade.

Sometimes I think this has come about because the teaching has evolved to fit the technology, and we we all love technology, when it should be the other way round. If golf was taught on a course, rather than with a range and with a lot more focus on strategy and how to play (this technical aspect makes sense to teach) rather than on swing I reckon we'd have more ugly swings and lower handicaps.