A bunch of friends of mine either work for or teach a particular method. For a while, I could have been classified as a method teacher. My first year or so of teaching, I tried to make everyone swing the same way. I quickly discovered that this was not a very good way to help all people. It worked with a little more than half and worked very well for new golfers. The fact that it didn’t help everyone and actually hurt some led me to find new and better ways.
If you think about it, if someone teaches a method, the only thing that separates their students is their students athleticism. I would much rather work with a philosophy that provides help to all golfers. I admittedly still feel like I help new golfers the fastest. Helping someone that has done it the wrong way for a long time is a little trickier than teaching someone the right way first.
Be wary of the method teacher. Unless your swing type fits nicely into their method, you may find yourself worse off than how you started. Going for a golf lesson should be a good thing and you should walk away knowing that you hit some better shots at the lesson than when you arrived.
Related posts:
By definition I am a method teacher. I want all my students to have
A – Constant Low Point
B – Enough Power to play the course with reasonable score
C – Predictable Curvature on the flight.
Now this happens to be the same principles of S/T.
At the same time, is this not what we want all our students to have?
The difference might lie on how to achieve A and B.
Javier,
I would not call that a method teacher and I would also not call SnT a method. Diagnosis and treatment are two very different things and I would hope that, teachers, we would all have a very similar diagnosis. However, the treatment could vary. If everyone came in and got the same diagnosis regardless of their symptoms and always received the same treatment regardless of the symptoms, that would be a method teacher.
Don’t believe there are that many out there, but this is what I used to do.
John
I have always catagorized instuctors as either teaching a method or having a system. The method instruction model of course gets the most press but helps the least amount of people. Teaching with a solid fact based system allows you to create a lesson plan that is based upon the students physical abilities and limitations.
Phil,
Thanks for the comment. I really don’t think there are that many method teachers out there even though I know there are some. In my opinion, when most pro’s start to really research the swing and all the things around it work away from that model.
JG
Nice posts john
What method you find works very well for new golfers. At our academy we have a few keys ideas, interested to know urs!
Kind Regards
I am 71 years old and over the years have had lessons from a number of pros. Looking back I feel that TGM instructors were the best. They corrected flaws, were all on the same page. Other instructors taught whatever was in at the time. Stuff that had to be undown and relearned when they left my area. So when I retired I decided to stick with only TGM stuff. I have been rewarded. As Clampett said “nothing Ben taught me was wrong”. I feel the same way. So I avoid the golf channel and the golf magazines. Despite all of the criticism of TGM I find it works and time tested. A teacher based in TGM with trackman helping is my choice. I have had lessons from Tomasello, Ben Doyle, Greg McHatton, Tom Ness, Lynn Blake and Jeff Hull – all on the same page. Lesson from a club pro who taught Ballard ruined me. Lessons from a former LPGA pro also got me off track. Local pros always were critical of TGM and tried to misdirect me. So in my old age wisdom I think it is a mistake to sign on to some new method which will be gone tomorrow
Russel,
I’ve stated in the past, that I like the student to first learn the feel of the head, the shape of the face and then to have some speed. Assuming that grip and stuff like that is within acceptable parameters. I feel this combination gets them off to a good start with the sequencing they will need as they advance.
JG
Dave,
Thanks for the comment. I think TGM is a wonderful piece of information with a very broad scope and reach. As I mentioned in my post, as people delve into it, myself included, the best nuggets are found.
If people are criticizing and promoting an idea, it must have some serious influence that both threatens and rewards. I think TGM certainly fits in there.
JG
John,
You certainly hit some cords with a variety of golfers. I am wondering if, like you said in one post, “that as one learns more, instructors will work away from the model of being method teachers”, that maybe the key word is MODEL. Maybe as instructors/coaches what we learn is that there are several models that are based on size, shape, strength and personality. There are probably more than what I listed here, but gathering information from a variety of instructors is most helpful in identifying a pathway to success for our students.
I am also betting that your stated goal of helping students improve their scores is far broader than that if you examined yourself more closely. Just a thought! Thank you for the great content, keep it up.
Bill