Natural Golf or Technical???

[thecraw]

I have a reason for this post, but was just wondering what everyones opinion was in relation to natural or technical golfing technique.

Obviously the wonderful natural talents of Sandy Lyle and the magestical Seve are clear for all too see, however is it also coincidence that these great natural players games went south when they sought technical assistance.

Granted players records like Faldo speak volumes about his dedication and methodical approach in his search for technical perfection of the golf swing.

As I have already stated I have a reason for this post and I will reveal all later. I can guarentee that some people will say you need a mixture of both but try and think how you play your best golf.

Players like Els, Furyk and Couples spring to mind as playing what works where as most young guns like Kramer, Kim, McIlroy all seem to swing in the same way.

I see that natural golf teaching is growing bigger and bigger which is quite a shift from even 2 or 3 years ago where you were more than likely being told to "set the club" or given instruction on how to get the club on the "correct" swing path.

 

[medwayjon]

Great post.

Im not on the same level obviously but......

My swing is naturally a little Furyk-esque, loopy with a steep drop into the ball.

I was absolutely creaming my irons when warming up for my last lesson, hitting them long & straight.

My lesson started, my pro started trying to get me to change to a text-book grip and swing and it all fell apart in the most spectacular fashion. I was hitting shots like a man who had picked up a club for the 1st time.

So, I am a believer in Natural golf, I have never been into talking about swings being off-plane and boring stuff like that so I will carry on natural and have lessons as and when on specifics such as short-game and alignment, but as for the swing, leave alone!

 

[Macster]

Natural for me these days, but then again, Ive played a long time so have a reasonably compact grooved swing.

I almost never think about my 'swing' when playing, and apart from maybe a 1/2 swing whilst behind the ball looking at the shot, thats it, step up, address the ball, and think rhythm.

I dont take lessons, as the last one I did tried to completely remodel my swing, which did my head in, and I decided that at mid 40's, that just wasnt gonna happen.

To me, once you're on the course particularly, you gotta trust what you have, or it all goes to pot.

 

[CrapHacker]

I think everyone needs to get some basic things right.

IE Impact. If you are getting your body and hands together in the right position in the right way, then what comes before and after is up to you. Obviously it's easier to get into the right position some ways rather than others, but if someone has made the most of their imperfect swing over the years, then you'll need the skills and dedication of a Faldo to sort it all out at once.

So for most I say keep it natural, but work on improving one small thing at a time. After all, we all hope to be still playing for many years, so what's the rush.

Having said that, I'm coming back after a huge layoff, so I'm in danger of permanetising some faults that, if I get a few lessons soonest, I should be able to avoid.

Also I'm one of the less naturally talented players you'll ever see, so the nearer I can get to a 'textbook' swing, the easier it is for me to repeat it.

Again, though, if a pro starts wiping the slate clean and starting from scratch, it'll end up with tears before bedtime. I need to improve one or two things at a time.

So I'll start with setup. Work through the takeaway to the position at the top of the backswing. Then try to sort out my movement through the ball to the followthrough, hoping that I haven't fallen flat on my butt in the process.

So hopefully I'll end up with something that looks fairly textbook, but feels natural to me.

With that in mind, and going off at a slight tangent : video lessons. I'd never had one before last year, and had always grooved my swing tempo thinking I looked like Faldo at his peak. That weird choppy unbalanced swing definately wasn't me. So a side issue, can video lessons be more trouble than they're worth ? If a good pro is getting images into your head that you can work with without bursting your plastic bubble, maybe it's better to live in ignorance and bliss ?

 

[TWM]

So a side issue, can video lessons be more trouble than they're worth ? If a good pro is getting images into your head that you can work with without bursting your plastic bubble, maybe it's better to live in ignorance and bliss ?

I had only one video lesson and it was an eye opener for me. I immediately saw the faulty swing plane and got it corrected in the one lesson.

 

[RGDave]

I'm 95% FOR technical golf and structured tuition that believes the fastest and most efficient way to get better is to aspire to the text-book technique or best current thinking.

Consider for a moment that I know zero about Golf but coach something similar (which I do). Players can and frequently DO achieve colossal heights through natural and unorthodox technique. It is rarely the fastest way to get from a-b but often the "student" is so far down one road that attempting a re-build of technique basics is impossible (or nigh on).

Many years ago, techniques and playing styles were all a bit muddled, mostly by the lack international coherency. These days, players and coaches travel the world, share ideas and the "technical" ideal is narrowing year by year.

As the boundaries of correct technique move in on all sides, the only outcome is that highly coached players will look more similar year on year. Nothing wrong with having an identical swing to hundreds of other players, it's what you do with it after that....and your ability/inspiration/work ethic.

The idea that "you can do what you want" from a technical perspective has almost been completely thrown out the window. My cousin (Mark Petchy) would undoubtedly say that players NOT prepared to put in the work and aspire to the ideal and most consistent technique are doomed to failure. Look at Andy Murray, as his technique gets closer to perfection and his inspiration grows he is knocking on the door of no.3 spot.....

As much of my income is from coaching, I personally find it sad that folk keep banging on about making the best of what they have and NOT challenging their basic(s) technique. There are things that one can overcome by hard work, but there are also things where the only efficient progress can be made by improving technique.

If I didn't approve of technical teaching, my students would be miles behind where they are.

 

[JustOne]

I would say technical on the long game and more natural on the short. Touch and creativity are hard to teach (and learn) and there aren't that many Furyks on the tour.

regards...

 

[User 105]

I'm certainly no expert but I think it has to be a bit of both.

I think having a good technical game will only take you so far if you don't have any natural talent.

Same as a natural game, unless it's combined with some basic technical knowledge, again will only take you so far.

I also think it depends what you want out of golf. If you are just playing for the fun and enjoyment of it and you're not interested in improving, then do what you enjoy just go with what works for you.

If you want to improve I do strongly believe some coaching is required. But finding a coach that can tailor their teaching to you and your goals and talent is key. Rather than the ABC, do this, now do that type of teaching.

 

[RGDave]

I would say technical on the long game and more natural on the short. Touch and creativity are hard to teach (and learn) and there aren't that many Furyks on the tour.

Spot on. No matter how good the technique for chips and pitches, without touch and talent, it means so little.

 

[CrapHacker]

I'm 95% FOR technical golf and structured tuition that believes the fastest and most efficient way to get better is to aspire to the text-book technique or best current thinking.

Consider for a moment that I know zero about Golf but coach something similar (which I do). Players can and frequently DO achieve colossal heights through natural and unorthodox technique. It is rarely the fastest way to get from a-b but often the "student" is so far down one road that attempting a re-build of technique basics is impossible (or nigh on).

Many years ago, techniques and playing styles were all a bit muddled, mostly by the lack international coherency. These days, players and coaches travel the world, share ideas and the "technical" ideal is narrowing year by year.

As the boundaries of correct technique move in on all sides, the only outcome is that highly coached players will look more similar year on year. Nothing wrong with having an identical swing to hundreds of other players, it's what you do with it after that....and your ability/inspiration/work ethic.

The idea that "you can do what you want" from a technical perspective has almost been completely thrown out the window. My cousin (Mark Petchy) would undoubtedly say that players NOT prepared to put in the work and aspire to the ideal and most consistent technique are doomed to failure. Look at Andy Murray, as his technique gets closer to perfection and his inspiration grows he is knocking on the door of no.3 spot.....

As much of my income is from coaching, I personally find it sad that folk keep banging on about making the best of what they have and NOT challenging their basic(s) technique. There are things that one can overcome by hard work, but there are also things where the only efficient progress can be made by improving technique.

If I didn't approve of technical teaching, my students would be miles behind where they are.

I'm getting mixed messages here. For a beginner / restarter then I agree that aiming for the best possible swing is the way to go, but you say yourself that for many who have a 'unique' swing ingrained, then a technical rebuild is almost impossible.

Now if someone knows they have an imperfect technique, but wants to improve ( and isn't Faldo ) then to rebuild from scratch would demoralise most so much that they'd probably give up the game.

So surely a good coach works with what is already fixed, and tweaks it a couple of inches at a time.

If the pupil is willing to put enough time and effort in, then eventually a good swing will be reached, but most people get to an acceptable level for them, and then put up with a slightly improved version of poor, rather than having the time/money/mental strength to get to be the very best they can.

 

[CrapHacker]

So a side issue, can video lessons be more trouble than they're worth ? If a good pro is getting images into your head that you can work with without bursting your plastic bubble, maybe it's better to live in ignorance and bliss ?

I had only one video lesson and it was an eye opener for me. I immediately saw the faulty swing plane and got it corrected in the one lesson.

But wouldn't you have believed the pro if he had just told you about it, and showed you the position you should be aiming for ?

 

[mono217]

Natural golf. Its how you want to hold the club grip it rip it swing it hit it.

 

[Cernunnos]

When I started I did have a natural feel for the game, even though clearly I needed direction. However, the more & more I got involved in the technical side of the game, the less I have had feel for the game, hence parhaps why my putting & short game rather than improving has gone south of the water somewhat.

This is also why I recently took the decision to not take any more lessons for a while, in the hope that some natural feel would start to return to my game & it would less & less resemble painting by numbers. Unfortunatly it seems to resemble a at the moment a poor copy of a Van Gough, painted by someone with myopia, if you carry on with the artist analogy. When the aim is for perhaps something like The Haywain by Constable... Instead I ought to be arested by a Constable for the way I've been playing this week, as its still golf by numbers.

 

[RGDave]

I'm getting mixed messages here. For a beginner / restarter then I agree that aiming for the best possible swing is the way to go, but you say yourself that for many who have a 'unique' swing ingrained, then a technical rebuild is almost impossible.

Now if someone knows they have an imperfect technique, but wants to improve ( and isn't Faldo ) then to rebuild from scratch would demoralise most so much that they'd probably give up the game.

So surely a good coach works with what is already fixed, and tweaks it a couple of inches at a time.

If the pupil is willing to put enough time and effort in, then eventually a good swing will be reached, but most people get to an acceptable level for them, and then put up with a slightly improved version of poor, rather than having the time/money/mental strength to get to be the very best they can.

True, but the question is "how easy and/or practical is it to fix certain elements?"

Some things are easy to modify and some things are not....(again, I'm not directly talking about golf)....what depresses me is that folk use the "ingrained" element as a cop out. There are things I know I can and might fix in my swing but as well there are things that I may never attend to and have to be prepared to accept as they are. I stopped playing for a very long time, because I was SO utterley depressed with my distance.

I think *some* golf pros are too ready to leave rubbish as rubbish. I've had the odd lesson with some of these and never gone back. I want a pro who says, "look, this is not really good enough, and this is how we can improve it", not leaving a "wrong" swing and tweaking peripheral stuff.....

 

[Cernunnos]

Dave Good point, you do have to fix the fundimentals, but we musn't get too cought up in technicals at the expense of feel, but agreed, to leave faults & paint around the edges is in most cases also asking for trouble.

 

[Yerman]

its a bit of both the more natural tallent the less technical support you need. But one correction: Anthony Kim has a very different swing to Rory McIlroy.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I've a foot in both camps here. I know the technical aspect pretty well but years of playing a certain way have now ingrained the well documented idiosynchrasies of my swing. My coach and I are now working on a more natural feeling to the swing although making sure we remain rooted in the the correct fundamentals.

I would love to have a text book swing. Cut the overswing which leads to lifting and overswing/reverse pivot ont he way bac and maintain the spine angle on the way down. It probably could be done by going right back and starting over but unless I'm going to give up playing for a whole winter period its not likely to happen and its a case of working within the parameters I currently have.

 

[RGDave]

its a bit of both the more natural tallent the less technical support you need. But one correction: Anthony Kim has a very different swing to Rory McIlroy.

Yes. Sadly, Kim's is better. Rory has the rest though!!!

TonyN ought to copy Anthony Kim......I've been meaning to find a swing for him to copy for ages.....

 

[Farneyman]

I have played golf for only a few years now and have a 16 handicap. Thats was got without any lessons. Im now at a stage where I want to push my game on and know that my natural swing wont get me there( single figures) as I slice a lot off the tee.

Its now got to the stage where I have to get a bit technical as before when I hit a good shot or a bad shot I never knew the difference in regadrd to what I done.

I want to know what Im doing right so I can repaet it again and again. There is so much to love about this game and trying to get better is one of my favourite bits.

Do I want to stay with my natural swing and continue at 16 all my playing days or so I want to get some technical help to get lower.... hell yeah

Thats how I see it.

 

[madandra]

I try to be technical but always perform better when using the natural. I recently played and was 5 over after 4 holes and went back to simply swinging the club up and down the line and finished the other 14 holes in 3 over.