The pro doesn't always know best

[patricks148]

like most things in life there are good and bad. and whats good for one person may not be for someone else.

a guy i used to play with when i first started who was a good ball striker and off 8 or 9 went to the most highly rated pro up here, is an SGU coach and coaches all the young guns with great results. even coached Russel Knox when he was growing up. the guy is now off 13 and raising, had at least 6 years of lessons and paid thousands on lessons i would say.

go go to a guy at the local range i would call a mate, he would see me when ever i needed he charges half what the " best pro " does but has got me down to cat1 and below. but i also here people slqg him off for his teaching methods .

 

[Maninblack4612]

I wouldnt think the Pro ever knows best. They have a certain common template of what they put out as the 'correct' or good swing, but have no more credibility for it being correct other than that they all stick to the same story.
In reality they have little or no understanding of what makes a good swing - they are pros because they happened, by chance, to have grown up swinging it better than the rest of us. Thinking they know something about teaching a golf swing because of that, is a big mistake.

That's a bit of a sweeping statement, although I agree that many, many good players are lousy coaches. It takes a special talent to be able to spot the errors & give an amateur a reliable swing that fits his physical limitations. Lots of pros simply coach the way they were coached in a "one size fits all" approach. I hate to be taught by anyone who doesn't explain why I should change something or what causes the fault I've got.

 

[bobmac]

There is no template, there is no "one size fits all" approach.

There are however the 5 laws in golf and that is what the PGA training degree is based on.

And if I happen to swing it better than some, I can assure you its not down to chance.

And finally I think after 25 years as a Cat I golfer, a 3 year degree in golf plus 14 years teaching, I think I have some understanding of what makes a good golf swing.
Happy Sunday

 

[Imurg]

As an Instructor, albeit in a different field, I know that there are good instructors, bad instructors, good pupils and bad pupils.
And personalities need to match.
A friend of mine, a really good instructor, just couldn't get this particular pupil to make any real progress, they just weren't hitting it off.
He called me, I took this pupil on and within a few weeks we were bombing around town, getting better every lesson.
I've palmed a pupil over to him too - same result.
Not every pupil will help with the instructor and vice versa
If you don't believe, move on.
Same in any walk of life.

 

[moogie]

As an Instructor, albeit in a different field, I know that there are good instructors, bad instructors, good pupils and bad pupils.
And personalities need to match.
A friend of mine, a really good instructor, just couldn't get this particular pupil to make any real progress, they just weren't hitting it off.
He called me, I took this pupil on and within a few weeks we were bombing around town, getting better every lesson.
I've palmed a pupil over to him too - same result.
Not every pupil will help with the instructor and vice versa
If you don't believe, move on.
Same in any walk of life.

So I take it your mate managed to get Fragger through his test then......

 

[Imurg]

So I take it your mate managed to get Fragger through his test then......

Busted👍👍😂😂

 

[PhilTheFragger]

So I take it your mate managed to get Fragger through his test then......

Busted👍👍😂😂

Nay Fragger passed his test in 1980, aged 18 way before Imurg could drive . however he did get 2 of my daughters through so he must be doing something right

 

[Doon frae Troon]

There is no template, there is no "one size fits all" approach.

There are however the 5 laws in golf and that is what the PGA training degree is based on.

And if I happen to swing it better than some, I can assure you its not down to chance.

And finally I think after 25 years as a Cat I golfer, a 3 year degree in golf plus 14 years teaching, I think I have some understanding of what makes a good golf swing.
Happy Sunday

I am old enough to recall when the PGA decided to introduce a national training manual. [late 1960's]
They gathered half dozen or so coaches together [surprisingly they were all based near London !] Jacobs, Cox, Adwick etc.

They never got passed the first meeting as they all had differing opinions of the basics. Nearly came to fisticuffs I was told.

 

[MikeB]

As an Instructor, albeit in a different field, I know that there are good instructors, bad instructors, good pupils and bad pupils.
And personalities need to match.
A friend of mine, a really good instructor, just couldn't get this particular pupil to make any real progress, they just weren't hitting it off.
He called me, I took this pupil on and within a few weeks we were bombing around town, getting better every lesson.
I've palmed a pupil over to him too - same result.
Not every pupil will help with the instructor and vice versa
If you don't believe, move on.
Same in any walk of life.

This hits the nail on the head. Coach & pupil have to understand each other in any walk of life. I have had lessons from 7 different coaches, all very good players & undoubtedly good coaches but I haven't "clicked" with any of them until the most recent (I think, it's early days) I asked him to keep it simple which he did & the results are coming, the wild pulls are fewer, the slices are now gentle fades and there are more going straight.

 

[Maninblack4612]

There is no template, there is no "one size fits all" approach.

There are however the 5 laws in golf and that is what the PGA training degree is based on.

And if I happen to swing it better than some, I can assure you its not down to chance.

And finally I think after 25 years as a Cat I golfer, a 3 year degree in golf plus 14 years teaching, I think I have some understanding of what makes a good golf swing.
Happy Sunday

And, getting back to my original point, I wonder if you, having looked at my swing, would have suggested the change which I discovered which is working so incredibly well.

 

[bobmac]

And, getting back to my original point, I wonder if you, having looked at my swing, would have suggested the change which I discovered which is working so incredibly well.

I'm not sure if I've seen your swing but if your feet weren't lined up square I would have spotted it while looking down the line

 

[Backsticks]

There is no template, there is no "one size fits all" approach.
There are however the 5 laws in golf and that is what the PGA training degree is based on.
And if I happen to swing it better than some, I can assure you its not down to chance.

No one size fits all approach because no one knows what it truly takes to hit a golfball well. No sure that those 5 'laws' would stand up to any true academic analysis, from a body that more trade union than educational establishment.

I am old enough to recall when the PGA decided to introduce a national training manual. [late 1960's] They gathered half dozen or so coaches together [surprisingly they were all based near London !] Jacobs, Cox, Adwick etc.
They never got passed the first meeting as they all had differing opinions of the basics. Nearly came to fisticuffs I was told.

Didnt know that won, but totally plausible. Because nobody knows what the key points are let alone how to teach them.

If DJ, Bubba, or Furyk rocked up to any pro, and, without hitting a ball, showed them their swing, not a pro in the world would recognise any of them as having swing fundamentals that are to a level that allows them to at the extreme 0.0000001% of best golfers in the world. If they asked him how can I improve, the pro would start straighten out wrists, changing alignments, altering turns etc to make them conform to what the body of pro espouse as the 'correct' method. Yet these guys hit is essentially as good as its possible to hit it already!
There are oodles of 'perfect', 'textbook', 'model' swing players out there who cant get within a mile of those players even in the aspect of long game alone (ie. leaving aside short game, competitive nerve, etc)- yet by the Pro's logic, they should be even better.

Pros are pros because - and they dont know why - they hit it better than the rest. They dont hit it better than the rest because the understand the swing and can implement it, and the hacker doesnt.

 

[Backsticks]

That's a bit of a sweeping statement

A little maybe - but not far from the manner of the stopped clock being correct twice a day. Of course people have improved their play following visits to a pro - but much of it is random. The percentage who have compared to the percentage who havent in minute. Add in those who improved by dint of a increased practice regimen, playing frequency, seriousness, focus and desire to improve, and whether pros have any clear impact on the process is very questionable.

 

[Backsticks]

the premise of this thread is that a middling golfer knows best, and that pros are a waste of money is laughable.

I wouldnt suggest that anyway. The middling golfer knows equally as little as the pro.

 

[garyinderry]

Pros are pros because - and they dont know why - they hit it better than the rest. They dont hit it better than the rest because the understand the swing and can implement it, and the hacker doesnt.

There is a difference between tour pro who plays for money and PGA Pro who you pay for swing advice.

 

[Maninblack4612]

I'm not sure if I've seen your swing but if your feet weren't lined up square I would have spotted it while looking down the line

Around half a dozen pros, including the one who got Prince Andrew from a novice to 4 handicap, failed to suggest it. In fact, I may be a little open at address now, but it works better than anything else I've tried.

 

[Backsticks]

There is a difference between tour pro who plays for money and PGA Pro who you pay for swing advice.

Sure, the PGA pro doesnt hit it well enough to be a tour pro.

 

[Jensen]

Around half a dozen pros, including the one who got Prince Andrew from a novice to 4 handicap, failed to suggest it. .

Would that be the wee small Scottish guy at a certain driving range?

 

[Maninblack4612]

Would that be the wee small Scottish guy at a certain driving range?

No, but the one you're talking about was from the "everybody has to do it this way" school.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

No one size fits all approach because no one knows what it truly takes to hit a golfball well. No sure that those 5 'laws' would stand up to any true academic analysis, from a body that more trade union than educational establishment.





Didnt know that won, but totally plausible. Because nobody knows what the key points are let alone how to teach them.

If DJ, Bubba, or Furyk rocked up to any pro, and, without hitting a ball, showed them their swing, not a pro in the world would recognise any of them as having swing fundamentals that are to a level that allows them to at the extreme 0.0000001% of best golfers in the world. If they asked him how can I improve, the pro would start straighten out wrists, changing alignments, altering turns etc to make them conform to what the body of pro espouse as the 'correct' method. Yet these guys hit is essentially as good as its possible to hit it already!
There are oodles of 'perfect', 'textbook', 'model' swing players out there who cant get within a mile of those players even in the aspect of long game alone (ie. leaving aside short game, competitive nerve, etc)- yet by the Pro's logic, they should be even better.

Pros are pros because - and they dont know why - they hit it better than the rest. They dont hit it better than the rest because the understand the swing and can implement it, and the hacker doesnt.

If I recall correctly Jim Furyk's dad was a Pro.

If you look at all the top players swings from hip to hip they are mainly the same, Ben Hogan and Doug Saunders being a stark example.......what happens before and after does not matter much IMO.