What is it About Golf....................

[3565]

One thing that you don't count on when your getting lessons from your Pro, and the countless hours you put in to practising/improving and getting custom fitted to give you the best opportunity to get lower, is...... Plateau's


They are something that you can't account for and you'll find you will reach a certain hc and seem to be stuck in the never never land and can't get out of the constant fluctuation between one number and the next. The lower you go the longer the plateaus last for, the more frustrating it gets as it then gets harder to even get half a shot reduction let alone 1 full shot.
I agree with some comments on here that your natural ability will peak at a certain level and that even with constant hard work, you may never get to your hc goal.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I have never been blessed with huge ability in any of the sports I've been reasonably proficient in and with golf in particular, regular practice is the only way I can get a modicum of consistency into my game. I actually enjoy the work I put in and have always been a believer in "you only get out what you put in" for all aspects of life.

 

[robert.redmile]

I'm one of those who falls into the "I want to be an "X" handicap golfer - the reasons why golf attracts me, and I guess others to do the same are.

1. its easily measurable for both yourself, and to compare vs others.
2. golf is a sport, not unlike snooker or darts or bowls, where it is possible to get to a certain standard, regardless of age, or athletic ability. You'd struggle in many other sports to reach a decent standard if you didn't have the requisite skills eg in rugby, if you are old, or weak you'll struggle, there are loads of other sports where you need to be of a certain athletic ability - yes, you can play them, but the limit of your development and standard comes sooner in other sports.
3. its the most addictive sport imaginable, and inspires people to set targets, and strive for improvement.
4. the people who play golf, in my opinion are the sort of people, who in general want to do well in whatever they do - be it sport or business.
5. that the people who play golf, in general enjoy their sport and live it more than people in other sports.
6. that golf is not just about the sport - its about the outdoors, the countryside, the camaraderie, the golfing, the pint afterwards, the talking about "that shot" - and thus you have to get better at it!
7. its more enjoyable, the better you get at it.

Just my two penneth, and

 

[guest100718]

Non golfers don't realise how hard it is.

And then are egged on by people who should know better...

 

[Deleted member 1147]

...
At Cat 1 - unless they are extremely talented - the next goal is always just 1 shot lower.

I would personally change that to:

"At Cat 1 - unless they are extremely talented - the next goal is always just stay there"

 

[SugarPenguin]

I think it is because golf is a very personal sport. Its all bout continuous improvement that is measurable (hcp).
You do not get a handicap in football to measure your ability against.
Every sportsman has a competitive streak, whether its against other people or themselves and having a quantifiable rank makes people strive to be better.

oh.. and it gets you away from the missus for a decent amount of time unlike a game of 5-a-side

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

In his Modern Fundamentals book Ben Hogan says

"The average golfer is entirely capable of building a repeating swing and breaking 80."

I wonder 'who' he thinks of as the 'average golfer'. Perhaps he is indeed stating that in his view there are such things as innate ability that will determine whether or not you will be an above or below average golfer - or just an average golfer. And so without that innate ability then quite possibly NO amount of application and teaching will get you to scratch.

 

[londonlewis]

Each to their own really.

I think it is good to have a target and the belief you can reach the target.
The way I look at these things is to think what the opposite approach would be. If we had the opposite of people who practiced hard and believed they could get to scratch, we would have the following;

- people who never practice because they don't think it will do them any good
- people who say things like 'oh, I'll never lower my handicap'
- people who have no goals, people who have no direction, people who are likely to give up golf altogether

It doesn't bother me at all when someone makes a claim of being a scratch golfer in a year or whatever big claim they want to make. Good for them for aiming high. They might not make it but do your best to go for it.

How many people will have told Ian Poulter 'no offense mate but you run a club shop and play off 3, you don't belong on the tour and you won't make it', well he believed in himself and has smashed it. He is definitely living proof that your belief in yourself is incredibly important as he is not the most gifted golfer out there but is one hell of a competitor.

 

[robert.redmile]

Each to their own really.

I think it is good to have a target and the belief you can reach the target.
The way I look at these things is to think what the opposite approach would be. If we had the opposite of people who practiced hard and believed they could get to scratch, we would have the following;

- people who never practice because they don't think it will do them any good
- people who say things like 'oh, I'll never lower my handicap'
- people who have no goals, people who have no direction, people who are likely to give up golf altogether

It doesn't bother me at all when someone makes a claim of being a scratch golfer in a year or whatever big claim they want to make. Good for them for aiming high. They might not make it but do your best to go for it.

How many people will have told Ian Poulter 'no offense mate but you run a club shop and play off 3, you don't belong on the tour and you won't make it', well he believed in himself and has smashed it. He is definitely living proof that your belief in yourself is incredibly important as he is not the most gifted golfer out there but is one hell of a competitor.

couldn't agree more!

 

[Keeno]

I would personally change that to:

"At Cat 1 - unless they are extremely talented - the next goal is always just stay there"

This is me, its hard to stay at Cat 1, 4.4 feels like miles away. 5.5 could be 3 weeks

 

[Liverbirdie]

As already mentioned, read Bounce by Mathew Syed, it's a great book and says a lot about how people become good at sport and other things. The gist is that purposeful practice is the way people excel at anything and natural talent is vastly overrated, sometimes used as an excuse (you should never tell your child that they are not just cut out for something as that will reinforce negative mindsets) and it will only take you so far, and in a lot of cases not very if you don't practice properly.

An example is that top level batsmen can anticipate where a ball will go not through some natural gift, but from hours of practice so they subconsciously can work out where the ball will go by the way the bowler moves and delivers the ball out of his hand. Same for top level tennis players, they can return serves at over 100 mph not through any magic mojo or lightning quick reactions, but because through practice they can anticipate where the ball will go by watching how the server moves up to the point the ball leaves the racket.

I think the problem a lot of these people who want to go to scratch is that the practice is fit for purpose, if their purpose is to get to scratch.

Your two examples are sports that are reactive and a defined "opponent" is involved.

Golf has a static ball, and you are playing against the field.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

To paraphrase Roland Rat
"All this Scratching is making me itch"

Its just about me against the course, on the day, result or score doesnt matter...as long as I beat Imurg

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I understand Matthew Syed wrote the book "Bounce" - what is the synopsis of it ?

Is it about training and practising enough to be good at something ?

Is it something he did when playing Table Tennis ? Wonder why he never made an impression on the "big stage" if he dismisses talent in favour of practise ?

 

[londonlewis]

Wonder why he never made an impression on the "big stage" if he dismisses talent in favour of practise ?

From Wikipedia - he used to be an English table tennis international, and was the English number one for many years. He was three times the Men's Singles Champion at the Commonwealth Table Tennis Championships (in 1997, 2000 and 2001),[SUP][1][/SUP] and also competed for Great Britain in two Olympic Games.[SUP][2][/SUP]

Is that stage not big enough for you Phil? No, you are right, his book is total (insert suitable expletive here)...

 

[Deleted member 15344]

From Wikipedia - he used to be an English table tennis international, and was the English number one for many years. He was three times the Men's Singles Champion at the Commonwealth Table Tennis Championships (in 1997, 2000 and 2001),[SUP][1][/SUP] and also competed for Great Britain in two Olympic Games.[SUP][2][/SUP]

Is that stage not big enough for you Phil? No, you are right, his book is total (insert suitable expletive here)...

Table Tennis big stage includes the Chinese from what it seems

Understand he himself says he froze in Sydney and went out in the first stage

So yes whilst doing well in this country and commonwealth - when against the powerhouses of Table Tennis ( China , Germany etc ) he didnt do so well.

So did his talent have him as far as the top in this country but that's the plateau ?

 

[londonlewis]

Table Tennis big stage includes the Chinese from what it seems

Understand he himself says he froze in Sydney and went out in the first stage

So yes whilst doing well in this country and commonwealth - when against the powerhouses of Table Tennis ( China , Germany etc ) he didnt do so well.

So did his talent have him as far as the top in this country but that's the plateau ?

I'm trying to work out your angle on this one Phil. sounds like you are sceptical as to the validity of bounce and Matthew Syed's expertise in the subject. It also sounds like you are trying to argue 'it's all very well and good but you weren't world number one, didn't win Olympic golds and aren't regarded as the very best table tennis player ever to grace the game, EVER, EVER, EVER .... therefore ... what do you know?'

If you were slightly more open minded, you might learn a thing or two.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I'm trying to work out your angle on this one Phil. sounds like you are sceptical as to the validity of bounce and Matthew Syed's expertise in the subject. It also sounds like you are trying to argue 'it's all very well and good but you weren't world number one, didn't win Olympic golds and aren't regarded as the very best table tennis player ever to grace the game, EVER, EVER, EVER .... therefore ... what do you know?'

If you were slightly more open minded, you might learn a thing or two.

My angle is simple - Syed headline appears to say the "Myth of Talent - Power of Practise"

So i asked the synopsis of the book to see if the person was dismissing natural ability and talent in favour of practise

So I was questioning if it's all about practise and talent, ability is a myth why did Syed only reach a certain level and didn't move up to the top level of the top Table Tennis players in the world alongside the Chinese and Germans and even the Swedish ?

So did Syed only get so far because that's as far as his natural ability took him and he platued at that level ?

And the reason for asking is because when ever a thread about Practise and Ability comes up - his name and book appears like it's the bible on the matter ?

 

[londonlewis]

My angle is simple - Syed headline appears to say the "Myth of Talent - Power of Practise"

So i asked the synopsis of the book to see if the person was dismissing natural ability and talent in favour of practise

So I was questioning if it's all about practise and talent, ability is a myth why did Syed only reach a certain level and didn't move up to the top level of the top Table Tennis players in the world alongside the Chinese and Germans and even the Swedish ?

So did Syed only get so far because that's as far as his natural ability took him and he platued at that level ?

And the reason for asking is because when ever a thread about Practise and Ability comes up - his name and book appears like it's the bible on the matter ?

They aren't mutually exclusive though are they?! We aren't saying there are only two types of people

People A - naturally talented but don't work hard or practice
People B - talentless but very hard workers who will practice, practice, practice

This would be to dismiss natural talent and the part it plays in life.

The argument is simple. If you are prepared to work hard, harder than anyone else, you will be a success. No one is saying 'you will be the best in the world at whatever it is you are trying to do'.
The argument is also trying to point out that people who are successful, who you may believe are only successful because of luck / chance / natural ability, are in fact hard workers.

 

[guest100718]

Some people certainly have an eye for a skill but talent on its own isn't enough. The people at the elite levels of sport etc also practice a huge amount.

 

[garyinderry]

Natural ability will only take you so far without hard work. It's pretty much the same in reverse. How far? it is not clear.