Archive for the ‘Teaching Techniques’ category

Improve Your Bunker Shots – Beginners

July 24th, 2011

Green Side BunkersBunker shots can be, for some, one of the most misunderstood shots in all of golf. I haven’t written anything in a while that golfers or coaches could use to improve a certain aspect of their game. So, here’s an installment that I use to teach beginners the concept for what needs to happen in the green side bunker.

In my experience, very few beginning players have a good concept (an idea stolen recently from Meindert Jan Boekel(Thank You)) of exactly what they are trying to learn and accomplish with that shot.  They’ve heard that it is different than all the other shots but not exactly sure what that difference is. The truth is that the shot is very similar to other shots but we miss the ball on purpose. So, here’s what I do.

The most important concept that the player needs to understand is sand control. By sand control, I mean the rate, the length it flies and the amount to name a few. The player needs to learn what things effect the aforementioned items and how those items affect what happens to the ball. Because the club and ball never make contact (sand squeezed between ball and club face like grass, thanks to Cameron McCormick), the player needs to understand how what they have done to the sand will affect the shots outcome.

I typically start off with how far the sand flies. I get players in the bunker and ask them to make some sand fly as far across the green as they can make it. Pretty quickly they figure out that the less sand they hit, the farther that sand will fly. Along with that, the faster the club is going the farther the sand will go. So I ask them, which sand is moving faster? The sand that goes far or the sand that goes short? Some get it right and some get it wrong but the answer is the sand that goes farther. So, in this first exercise, they start to piece together the concept that the less sand taken, the faster that sand is moving for the same club speed. They also learn that the shorter the sand flies the slower it was moving. This demonstrates how carry distance is created in the greenside bunker.

Next I explain the bounce, which you can read about here, and how that effects the sand. I ask them to try shots both ways (with bounce exposed and without) so they can see what effects it has to the sand itself and how the club interacts with the sand. Again, the whole exercise is designed to show the player how the sand reacts to different things. In this case, it’s the club shape. How does more or less bounce change the amount of sand taken and the rate that sand is moving?

The last thing I work on with beginners is where they enter the sand. I will draw a line in the sand and ask them to enter the sand where the line is. Where the club exits the sand is not important at this time. I’ll ask them to change the amount of sand they take when hitting the line and change the length they throw the sand when hitting the line. Now, they may not be able to do these things right away, but once again, this is an exercise in concept. I will offer set up advice at this time as well but won’t go into that for this post.

Before we try a shot, I want them to understand the concept behind how the shot works. I ask them, if you want the ball to carry farther do you want the sand to go faster or slower? I ask them, if you want the ball to carry farther do you want to take more sand or less sand? I ask them, if they want the ball to carry farther do you want the ball closer to the line or farther away?  The first two, they usually get right away. The last one usually takes a little thought on their part. After they grind with it for a while they almost always come up with the right answer. Of course, there are still other things happening like spin which I don’t typically discuss in a beginners class but will talk about in a future post.

At this point, they start hitting shots. I always draw a line in the sand and let them put the ball wherever they like relative to that line.  I remind them about the concept. The concept is sand control. It’s neat to see them make changes based on the results of the sand rather than the outcome of the ball.

If you’ve struggled with green side bunker shots in the past, I hope this post helps change the goal and the concept for you. Please consider sharing this with friends or if any coaches think it may help a problem student please fell free to share it on twitter and facebook by using the buttons at the bottom of this post.

Homogeneous Methods

June 18th, 2011

No Method for Golf SignAs the debate over method vs no method continues, I thought I would once again give us all something to think about. A big chunk of this post refers to another discussion about how some take pride in not teaching a ‘method’ but at the same time feel quite comfortable believing orthodox is the best way.

Stealing an analogy from Jim Hardy. If a trauma victim comes in after an accident they may receive 5 different methods/sequences of cure from 5 different doctors. Just depends at which hospital they arrive at. Hopefully, all of the doctors have made the same diagnosis. It is in the diagnosis that we(teachers) should all be very similar. The method of cure we prescribe can and will vary significantly.

Built into this analogy is the assumption that the end goal is that same. A healthy recovery. That in no way assumes that the victim will have the same abilities at the end of each treatment as they may vary depending on which method of cure is provided.

Are these doctors arguing over who was right and who was wrong? I’d be willing to bet they are. However, they all put the victim on a path toward recovery. We can analogize recovery as the things that golf coaches almost all agree on as necessary pieces of a good golf swing. So, that is how we operate.

Now, doctors work toward a common recovery ideal choosing different methods to get there (generally speaking).  How they achieve that recovery can and will vary UNTIL a specific enough case comes in where each Dr will use the same homogeneous method because it has been shown to be the only or most effective method in treating that specific case.  Is that a bad thing? Absolutely not.

The problem in relating to golf is that there is not one singly accepted way that has been shown to be the most effective for treating any specific case.  That isn’t to say that some may believe they have the single most effective way and I bet a million dollars it is every single coach making a living coaching. Each believing that they may have one or two or more of THE best ways to handle a specific case and they use that way every single time that case shows up.

If a teacher believed that they had a way that they felt was the best, wouldn’t we all expect that teacher to teach it to everyone? We can debate best way until we’re blue in the face but that is what would happen. Just like each of us have pieces that we all think we can fix the best so we teach it to everyone when that situation presents itself.

Is this a method? It certainly seems that way to me.  Is it a homogeneous method? Maybe in specific cases. To me, this homogeneous method is what I would call teaching the exact same thing to all. Again, I don’t think anyone does this because as soon as you take the player into account some things will be different between players. Because all players are different, all swings will be different also.

In all my watching of great teachers teaching, I would say every single one of them had a pattern they followed and a sequence they went through. A method. Not a homogeneous method. That isn’t to say that all of their students looked alike. Which, if they did, I’m not so sure would be a bad thing. However, many looked orthodox.

Isn’t Orthodox (Of the ordinary or usual type; normal) just an example of what we expect golf swings to look like? Isn’t orthodox an acceptance of what a homogeneous method should produce?

Should we compare orthodox against the rest? Win for win. Who’s got more? Orthodox or non orthodox? Does it matter? When is orthodox defined and how long does it last? What percentage of swings have to be similar to be considered orthodox? 75%? I don’t know the answer. Isn’t orthodox an organic thing that we expect to mold and change over time as new information, technology and methods are created?

Is this argument happening with tennis? or other sports? I don’t know. I watch tennis and it’s looked the same for 30 years except for the fact that the players are faster and stronger and some use two hands for a backhand and some use one and I know there are different grip types etc. If all the players are doing an orthodox method, how do we rate the teachers ability? Does the teachers ability really matter?

Generally speaking, this is really a debate between Stack and Tilt and non Stack and Tilt.  Stack and Tilt being the method teachers and a bunch of others claiming they are not a method teacher. Since when is teaching orthodox, which by definition, is teaching players to look similar not a method. Does it matter? Clearly, there have been many successful non-orthodox swings in the hall of fame and on the course today. Also, at some point in the past, successful non-orthodox has become the future time periods orthodox.

In my opinion, this all comes down to a belief. Certain people believe in what they are doing and I think that is a good thing. To tell someone what they believe is wrong will always trigger a response. It’s like telling someone that their opinion is wrong. Opinions can’t be wrong. Only facts can be wrong. It is more appropriate to say you don’t understand how they can hold that opinion based on these facts but you can’t say it is wrong.

Let’s just get back to coaching and let history tell the story.

Stack and Tilt Seminar

April 29th, 2011

Stack and Tilt - Axe ManStack and Tilt. The mere mentioning of the words can typically create polarization in most groups of golf professionals and players. It’s amazing to me how extreme that can get. For me, it’s just another opportunity to learn. Today, I attended a Stack and Tilt seminar given by Mike Bennett and Andy Plummer. It was our annual Western New York PGA Education meeting.

I’ve written a bunch of times how I feel that information should be given a level ground to play on. Once on the field, the information can be investigated, studied and evaluated. However, sometimes you have to go right to the source to get the correct information before you can put it out into the field. This is where I think Stack and Tilt has suffered. The information that continues to get criticized isn’t the information that I saw today. The information that continues to get criticized should get criticized because it’s bad information but it’s not the information that I heard today. It’s also not the information that I hear coaches and players mention all the time.

As far as an instructional seminar goes, I thought it was excellent.  The information given was excellent. The stories were excellent. The demonstration was impressive. A little side note on the demonstration as it was rainy and 46 with a pretty strong crosswind from the left. Mike Bennett can flat out hit the ball. No question about that. I was able to take some nice video of Mike to add to my information and swing analysis library.

Back to the seminar. There was an extensive talk about taxonomy. Here’s a definition from dictionary.com:

tax·on·o·myTaxonomy Example

[tak-son-uh-mee]

–noun

1. the science or technique of classification.

This is the science that Stack and Tilt is based on. It is a system of measurement and classification of elements in a golf swing.  Looking at pictures and video one could attempt to classify and organize the elements of a golf swing and then look for any causality that may exist.  The more extensive and complete the investigation, the greater the likelihood to find causalities that exist or don’t exist.  I think this taxonomy aspect is either not known or often overlooked by its critics. This was the area that I learned the most about and wish to continue learning more about.

Based on their taxonomy, Mike and Andy have attempted to put together a sequence of elements that they feel would be able to help all golfers and decrease the barriers of entry to the game (too difficult).  In order to do this, they have put together certain elements that they feel will decrease the amount of time it takes a new golfer to improve enough that they will continue playing.  In its simplest form, Mike and Andy are trying to grow the game of golf.

To aid in this task, they have also put forth their own idea about which items should be considered as fundamental and why. Their taxonomy has led them to see that the typical fundamentals of Grip, Aim, Stance and Posture simply don’t occur the same way or in the same shape for all players, including elite players. By default, this means that those elements of grip, aim, stance and posture can not be fundamentals. However, their taxonomy has shown that they all control low point well, generate enough power to play the game at a high level and have a fairly predictable movement of the ball. So, using these fundamentals as the focus to breaking down the barriers of entry into golf, Stack and Tilt was created.

Why don’t I hear this information being talked about when I hear discussions on the Stack and Tilt swing? I think the answer is because most times, the person talking hasn’t researched the topic enough to know. I also think that the look and terminology have created a division amongst those that know and those that don’t. Constantly, I hear talk about how this Stack and Tilt player is no good or how this player left Stack and Tilt and went to someone else yet I never hear the reverse.  I am not saying that I want to know when players leave coaches for someone else but it does seem to create a false dichotomy of Stack and Tilt vs Orthodox Instruction. I don’t necessarily believe that they are opposites in whole but certainly contain some differences.

All in all, I have to say that the seminar was a great event for me. I learned some information that I know I can use to help golfers of all skill levels improve. I know that I have a greater understanding of some elements in the golf swing.

What more can you ask from an educational seminar?
Don’t let the three little words Stack and Tilt scare you.

Golf Swing – Proper Alignment

April 17th, 2011

Parallel Left Golf AlignmentProper Alignment. Is there such a thing? I must admit that this is one of my pet peeves. This whole alignment thing.

It seems that not nearly enough people understand that alignment is relative. It’s relative to the intended shot. It is such folly to look at a still image of someone and say where they are aligned to. I just don’t get it. There are so many things wrong with that idea I don’t know where to start.

The other thing that bothers me is this whole aim parallel left idea that I read about in magazines and see on television all the time. Above is a picture of what parallel left looks like. That’s not what I see people talking about and demonstrating. Quite the contrary.

I see people taking the two feet or so they are away from the ball and lining up to what appears to be 2 feet of distance from a distant object. In other words, they aren’t looking at it with the same perspective as the railroad track picture. Or I’ll see a club down that points 2 feet away from the target at the distance the object is. For example. Take the railroad picture above and draw two perfectly vertical lines on it where the railroad tracks start at the bottom of the picture.(see picture below)

Parallel Left Alignment WrongIn this picture, the distance of the rails has been expanded by maintaining that parallel look into the distance. Clearly the distance between the top of the picture and the bottom of the picture or very different in real terms. But because they look parallel, they appear to be the same. Do not make this mistake.

You will be much better off, assuming you want to hit a straight shot, to aim your feet directly at the target. I know that in order to hit it actually straight, you have to swing or aim left(when hitting down on the ball) and that’s probably why this whole parallel left thing got started. Generally speaking, I think most players should just aim there feet directly at the target (assuming they want to hit it straight)because it’s easier. If they hit a perfectly straight shot, they’ll only be a few feet away instead of way, way left by doing it the wrong way because the ball is only a few feet away from their feet. Other than that, if you are trying to curve the ball just remember to use perspective when aiming not this parallel left idea. You may be surprised at the results.

Hope this helps some of you that are putting clubs or alignment sticks down and gives you a better place to put them. If you think this will help a friend of yours, please consider sharing it on Facebook or Twitter by using the buttons at the bottom of this post. Thanks again fore reading.

The Golf Swing Camps

April 15th, 2011

Golf Swing CampsA little over a couple years ago, I entered the arena of online golf instruction forums. I had two goals. One to learn more and the other to create some exposure. I’m happy to say that I was able to do both. I grew up with a strong desire to debate and it served me fairly well in my dealings in this area.

I was comfortable holding multiple conflicting hypothesis and challenging all of the things I thought were correct. I know I’ve upset some people with this method and I apologize for that. However, at the same time, I feel I was always fair and open minded. Granted, some times I needed a little help opening my mind but it has never been more open than it is today.

Recently, I’ve become completely disinterested in the constant bickering, arguing, petty shot taking, and a whole list of other words I care not to mention that has been occurring in the world of online instruction forums.

It’s a disgrace.

I don’t know how else to put it.

I’m embarrassed to be associated with the actions of some golf professionals simply because we both teach the golf swing or something else related to golf.  I have slowly been pulling myself away from certain places because there is simply no way a person can have a conversation without someone taking a shot at them because of their teaching beliefs or their marketing or their science or their charts or their whatever doesn’t jive with what they believe. That’s not to say that I haven’t also behaved poorly at times and for that I apologize to anyone and everyone I offended.

I’m sorry.

I need to thank the person who put in their last shot as it got me so pissed I planned on doing things that I was not proud of and it got me to see the light and come to this realization. It upset me so much that it brought forth actions. I will not visit certain places anymore. I will no longer participate in talks that include certain people.

I have found a new place to have conversation that is both stimulating and built on the platform of sharing vs attacking. It is far more positive and I can only hope that the infection of the golf swing camps ideology stay away. Luckily, if it does, I can always block them.

I hope many of you that have read this and share this view will pass it along in hopes that the thoughts behind this video above will creep in and this constant antagonism will stop. Please share this on FB and Twitter using the social media tools at the bottom if you agree.

You can now consider me in a new Golf Swing Camp – Possibilianism