Defining "Golf Science" & Selling Ice to Eskimos

[Brian Manzella]

As a leader—along with several of my good friends— n the movement toward Golf Science, I thought I should DEFINE what I mean when I use the term....

"GOLF SCIENCE” - The application of Physics, Engineering, and Bio Mechanics to study the workings of the movement of the golfer, golf club and golf ball in space and their interaction with each other.

The “movement” toward this “Golf Science” is to find the fundamental truths of these movements, in order to move the sport and the profession of teaching the sport forward and away from the limitations of pseudo-science, folklore, and seems-as-if-feel based information.

 

[Billy McKinney]

Sir Bri-saac.

 

[Brian Manzella]

The funny thing about "Golf Science" is how many yahoos think they can "out smart" it or avoid it.

Their stuff will all wither and die on the scrap heap of junk ideas unless they learn from the science and scientists. Mark it down.

 

[Keefer]

The thing I will find interesting with all the new science is if it will actually lower the average hackers score.

Seems the really good golfers could always figure it out somehow. However, the average hackers score over the last however many years never really changed.

Basically golf instruction as a whole would be judged a failure based on that metric, because it (instruction) was all over the map.

Once the science permeates down the line of instruction we should see a slow progress in golfers actually getting better. Yes?

I see instructors like Martin Hall on the Golf Channel mention some of the same scientists that Brian Manzella does.

Once the so called big name teachers (like a Hall or Manzella) move towards golf science based teaching, I would think it would be adapt or be left behind.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Martin is a friend and he is a member of Golf Wise Guys.

It is starting to trickle down....folks who previously taught handle-dragging are talking about the "flick."

 

[DCgolf]

I believe the next frontier is communication; how is the new science being conveyed to students. The profession breaks down to research and field work. The very best information in the mind of a poor communicator is of no help. How can the torques, 3-D movement, etc help a teacher in a 30 minute lesson with a serious up and over shanker? At what speed and how can these new findings be delivered? Taking the research lab to the lesson tee is akin to a student taking a swing change to a golf course. The information, however scientific, remains finite; the presentation of it, including content and style, is infinite. Our knowledge is growing exponentially but we are still seeing arithmetic progression (if that) for the 20 caps. Interesting times to be sure.

 

[wulsy]

I agree very much with DC. This information has been great for me personally because I am an elite golfer with elite understanding and elite theory-to-practice skills. But in many ways I feel that little of this new info will dramatically change a standard lesson for a high handicaper, where the same skills as in recent years are still valid.

 

[Frans@France]

Golf Teachers using a TM and then requesting Trackman to calculate the angle between face and path for them and make it a special field in the screen is best ever indication of the quality of teaching and the skills present.

Getting into golf teaching here in this country is for people that did not succeed at school at whatever level but do have the ability to shoot 75. Do you really think that group will ever read any of this scientific stuff or even start integrating it into their teaching?....Don't think so!

Until the intellectual and technical skills of golf teachers gets to a higher level I don't think that the scoring average will change.

 

[Frans@France]

And I forgot to mention the backstabbing mentality of the golf OEM's. While keeping up appearances by "helping" this search for the "scientific truth" they also are the main reason for making it impossible for most to play this game with the tools (clubs) needed.

Making people like Tom Wishon having to explain the reason behind those weird loft and distance gaps

The 3* separation between long irons today is unfortunately and sadly a marketing/market perception driven decision. it is forced by the fact that the companies have been lowering the lofts so much over the past 20+ yrs that they now are at a point that they know they cannot possibly keep a 4* loft gap between all the irons or the 3 iron would literally be unhittable for anyone but a tour pro.

So in order to keep making the 7, 8, 9, PW lower in loft to allow ANY golfer to hit these irons longer and want to buy the set, the lofts on the lower end have to be compressed more together to 3* and with some companies you see 2* or 2.5* between the 3 and 4 irons. This continued loft shrinking is now forcing a 5* loft spacing between the higher numbered irons - without that 5* spacing between the 8 to 9 to PW to AW, then you would be forced to have yet another wedge before the Sand wedge.

In truth, from a pure performance standpoint, loft spacings between the low loft side of the set should be 5* to deliver the same exact distance gap between low loft irons as you get from a 4* spacing between higher loft irons. This is because plain and simple, for most golfers at lofts under 25*, it is just too difficult to get the ball well UP to fly its maximum distance for the ball speeds generated by normal golfers.

This matter of the lofts today is really not a good thing at all, not for the golfers, and not for companies that want to do the most to help golfers. I know for sure that I would love to design my iron sets so there could be 5* spacing between the 3 to 4 and 4 to 5, then 4* spacing between irons the rest of the way. But if I try to do that, there is not a good way to get the lofts on the 7, 8, 9, PW as strong as they need to be to be sure our sets could stack up for distance against most of the big company's sets.

It really is a crappy situation.

 

[wulsy]

That's the same in most countries Frans. And if you are talking about the pathetic standard of state school education in the UK where most school leavers can neither read nor count properly you are looking at regression rather than progress. Most private schools are not much better because the pupils are often not the brightest, the difference being that their parents use their money to help them get the most out of themselves.

I await the response of the incensed little Englanders!

 

[Frans@France]

Pathetic in the UK, Tragedy in France...

In the Netherlands 75% of students (Community College background or Vocational Education..) trying to become school teachers fail the language and math test that most kids at age 10-12 will have to take. After three(!) tries that failure rate is still around 50%(!) Those are the teachers of the future.....

 

[wulsy]

Wow, Frans, I didn't know it was that bad. All part of the bigger plan though - the dumber people are the more you can sell them. But let's not go there....

 

[DCgolf]

I have a Masters Degree and learned to shoot par. Perhaps I shouldn't teach in France. The really good teacher studies and interprets this stuff and regurgitates it for the student simply and in a language they can understand. And it must be done in a short order. One does not have the luxury of research projects and hiding behind an anonymous identity in a golf forum when they are on the firing line. Those of us who do field work need to be quick on our feet to do the job at hand. Good teacher? One who hangs his shingle at a facility, with NO free supply of lesson, charges a fair rate, and fills up his lesson book day after day. The golfing public will buy bullshit once maybe twice, but then it's bye bye wordsmith, I'm gonna go find a teacher.

 

[DCgolf]

I have a Masters Degree and learned to shoot par. Perhaps I shouldn't teach in France. The really good teacher studies and interprets this stuff and regurgitates it for the student simply and in a language they can understand. And it must be done in a short order. One does not have the luxury of research projects and hiding behind an anonymous identity in a golf forum when they are on the firing line. Those of us who do field work need to be quick on our feet to do the job at hand. Good teacher? One who hangs his shingle at a facility, with NO free supply of lesson, charges a fair rate, and fills up his lesson book day after day. The golfing public will buy bullshit once maybe twice, but then it's bye bye wordsmith, I'm gonna go find a teacher.

 

[Frans@France]

Good teacher? One who hangs his shingle at a facility, with NO free supply of lesson, charges a fair rate, and fills up his lesson book day after day.

The irony of such a definition in this thread that tries to define "Golf Science"....

If financial success it THE prove of being good the Madoff was the best and VHS is better then Betamax.................or.....

The golfing public will buy bullshit once maybe twice, but then it's bye bye

bye bye to buy an other fantastic new driver that is again 20yards longer and straighter. Bye bye to the shop to buy that 9Degree driver head with that USD500,- X-stiff shaft.....

 

[Brian Manzella]

Do you really think that group will ever read any of this scientific stuff or even start integrating it into their teaching?....Don't think so!

I disagree....we are making a BIG dent.

The irony of such a definition in this thread that tries to define "Golf Science"....

If financial success it THE prove of being good the Madoff was the best and VHS is better then Betamax.................or.....

A full book with no help from the facility FROM SCRATCH is a PREREQUISITE for joining the ranks of the best.

 

[Frans@France]

A full book with no help from the facility FROM SCRATCH is a PREREQUISITE for joining the ranks of the best.

Depending on the country ALL independent PGA instructors have no help at all from the facility in order to get a full book. Because if he does get help then in accordance to the tax laws he is not longer independent.

But again you did not reply to the real response which was the financial success has no relation at all how good a teacher someone is. It only explains that he was successful in selling his services. Noting more, noting less.

For one of the many fitting organizations I once was member of I suggested to list every golfer fitted on the website, including the starting hcp before the fitting and then keep track of the hcp while the golfer was playing his newly fitted clubs.....

 

[wulsy]

I have to agree with Frans here. A full lesson book says nothing about your ability as a teacher, at least in Europe.

I know personally golf coaches who are fully booked who are clueless. Not by my definition of clueless but by the results they produce. Students who after a two hundred lessons cannot hit it more that 100 yards and would need 200 shots to get it round a normal golf course. The same people are breaking 100 when they switch teachers. NEVERTHELESS these clowns are always fully booked cos they are "nice guys", "put a lot of effort into the lesson", "speak a language that I understand", "don't confuse me", "don't talk too much and let me hit balls during my lesson", "give me a discount" and all the other stuff that clueless beginners are attracted to.

To suggest that people will buy boolshit once and never again is refuted by Frans in his argument about equipment and by observation of the wider market in free market economies - see junk food, and crap products made in China as your first examples.

There is a market for good coaches and there is a market for bad coaches - the qualities of those suppliers which affects their financial success goes far beyond the ability to teach.

NOT JMHO.

 

[DCgolf]

I should add year after year, after year...I see no irony in it at all. The science is also a marketable commodity. Brian Manzella stood countless hours on the lesson tee doing yeomen's work before he began his scientific investigations. In fact that's how he knew to go looking for deeper truths. The point I'm making is the cyber golf world is loaded with scientific minded folks who have never stood behind anyone on the lesson tee. Try teaching for 30 years making a living at solely it. You either find what works or starve. I study all the new stuff I can and apply it to my teaching where applicable. Which, in my case, amounts to maybe 10% of the students I teach. All pros BTW. THE practical experience I have gained applies to the other 90%. But I will NEVER stop learning.

 

[Frans@France]

You either find what works or starve.

It's not a personal attack towards you, I read most what you write where with more then average interest and attention. It's just that I do not agree with your definitions at all. They apply to you and your personal world only and as such are not definitions applicable to the rest of the world.

And as Wulsy said (better then me) you can still starve doing the correct thing and have a happy life telling bullshit as long as people think you are a nice person. It's that what allows an imposter to make a decent living. And the OEM & MSM spoon-feeding the golfing public with total nonsense day and night doesn't help.