birly-shirly
New
It's wrong, and as you say, very and clearly wrong. The question is, is it particularly harmful? What would be the harm to a golfer in reading that a draw has topspin and believing this to be true?
I Learned The Hard Way..........
- Thread starter tallathlete
- Start date
- Status
It's wrong, and as you say, very and clearly wrong. The question is, is it particularly harmful? What would be the harm to a golfer in reading that a draw has topspin and believing this to be true?
tallathlete
New
Birly, the information in itself might not harm a student. However, the absurd and silly statements are direct reflections upon this teachers knowledge and credibility. If this man was a lawyer he would be disbarred. If he was a physician he would lose his license and would be facing millions of dollars in judgments in malpractice suits. Anyone who says a lofted golf club can produce topspin on a correctly struck golf ball should not be allowed within 40 miles of a lesson tee.
mgranato
New
Tall,
(Cough, cough) Now you see why I said to fix the face first with a slicer.
ggsjpc
New
Sorry, that was supposed to say, "Hopefully, I'll see you in Dallas."
ggsjpc
New
If correctly means solid, you can hit it solid and produce topspin. Doesn't turn out very good but quite possible. Based on everything you know I'm sure you don't need me to tell you how.
I'm not saying that draws create topspin.
birly-shirly
New
Tallathlete - I wouldn't be in such a rush to disbar. You said yourself, the information isn't harmful. I'm sure this forum could come up with a stack of teaching ideas that are positively dangerous - but I don't think this is one of them.
Much as I like ballflight-based teaching, I don't like seeing ballflight laws used as some kind of shibboleth to determine whether or not this teacher or that teacher is fit to teach.
Back to Jim Suttie though, how would you have reacted if, instead of saying "topspin" he'd said "less backspin"?
Much as I like ballflight-based teaching, I don't like seeing ballflight laws used as some kind of shibboleth to determine whether or not this teacher or that teacher is fit to teach.
Back to Jim Suttie though, how would you have reacted if, instead of saying "topspin" he'd said "less backspin"?
T.A.
So what are the morals of the story?
1. Golf, by and large, is slow to change in many areas.
2. Don't put a lot of weight on a particular magazine's "rankings" as they full of bias, and are motivated by political/marketing reasons.
3. Concepts in golf presented as scientific truths should be varified.
So what are the morals of the story?
1. Golf, by and large, is slow to change in many areas.
2. Don't put a lot of weight on a particular magazine's "rankings" as they full of bias, and are motivated by political/marketing reasons.
3. Concepts in golf presented as scientific truths should be varified.
birdie_man
New
I agree! Or at least, it did for me.
Mad Hatter
New
Guys when I was at the Trackman Summitt in December and heard about D-Plane for the first time and no offense to the presenters it confused the hell out of me. I came home to understand it better which lead me to this site. Thank you to Brian and everyone else for explaining it in a simple way. Being able to explain things to our students so they understand is a great trait of an instructor. I know a lot of people with above average knowledge of the golf swing but they have no way to explain it in simple terms that people can understand.
On a side note the 2000 PGA Teacher of the Year was at the Trackman Summitt
On a side note the 2000 PGA Teacher of the Year was at the Trackman Summitt
Richie3Jack
New
I run into this a lot on the internet and off the internet and the usual response is ‘surely these guys (Harmon, Leadbetter, etc) understand the ball flight laws now.’ Or they’ll say ‘they own a Trackman, they just don’t use if for lessons because it’s not needed (or helpful).’
I think there is some people being very polite in giving these guys the benefit of the doubt. But the facts are that every one of them that I have encountered or whose disciple instructors I have talked to flat out refuses to change their beliefs on the laws of ball flight and always gives a cockamamie explanation as to why and just sticks with that cockamamie explanation. Or they’ll say that I’m calling Jack Nicklaus ‘a liar’ for the way he worked the golf ball.
EVERY one.
Even worse, I’ve had a few tell others that ‘he doesn’t know what he’s talking about’ and some of them will say that to my face.
I find that most instructors are there to help their students. But there are plenty of instructors who are more interested in $$$ than helping their students get better. Read the Haney interview on Sports by Brooks and he keeps talking about how he was worried that his association with Tiger would hurt his ‘brand.’ So for most of these big name guys, it’s really a $$$$ issue when it comes to not wanting to give a mea culpa on the laws of ball flight.
I feel that there’s a lot of things in life that are far more important than money and integrity is one of them. And I understand that golf instructors are going to be wrong on theories from time to time. The name of the game isn’t about being right 100% of the time on theories, it’s about improving golfers.
The reality is that one can be a great teacher and get the laws of ball flight wrong, but there are plenty of instructors who are better at improving golfers from all different skill levels than Butch and a big reason for that is they understand the laws of ball flight and how to correctly diagnose a golfer’s problems based on the way the ball flies. The embarrassing part is when these top ranked teachers just bury their heads in the sand when the physics experts tell them that they are dead wrong about the physics behind the flight of the ball.
3JACK
I think there is some people being very polite in giving these guys the benefit of the doubt. But the facts are that every one of them that I have encountered or whose disciple instructors I have talked to flat out refuses to change their beliefs on the laws of ball flight and always gives a cockamamie explanation as to why and just sticks with that cockamamie explanation. Or they’ll say that I’m calling Jack Nicklaus ‘a liar’ for the way he worked the golf ball.
EVERY one.
Even worse, I’ve had a few tell others that ‘he doesn’t know what he’s talking about’ and some of them will say that to my face.
I find that most instructors are there to help their students. But there are plenty of instructors who are more interested in $$$ than helping their students get better. Read the Haney interview on Sports by Brooks and he keeps talking about how he was worried that his association with Tiger would hurt his ‘brand.’ So for most of these big name guys, it’s really a $$$$ issue when it comes to not wanting to give a mea culpa on the laws of ball flight.
I feel that there’s a lot of things in life that are far more important than money and integrity is one of them. And I understand that golf instructors are going to be wrong on theories from time to time. The name of the game isn’t about being right 100% of the time on theories, it’s about improving golfers.
The reality is that one can be a great teacher and get the laws of ball flight wrong, but there are plenty of instructors who are better at improving golfers from all different skill levels than Butch and a big reason for that is they understand the laws of ball flight and how to correctly diagnose a golfer’s problems based on the way the ball flies. The embarrassing part is when these top ranked teachers just bury their heads in the sand when the physics experts tell them that they are dead wrong about the physics behind the flight of the ball.
3JACK
You really think in today's world that you can be a "great teacher" and not know the correct physics of ball flight. I have my doubts. I think in any other form of teaching if a fundamental principle is so far off and your teaching that principle even when told that it's incorrect and you refuse to look at the evidence that supports the correct version... well what you don't know ,can hurt you and unfortunately also those you teach. That's not so great.
The "top 100" that own a Trackman HAVE TO know. One look at the data sheet would show 'em.
Why drop 30 grand on a machine you think is lying to ya?
Take the "marketing hit" now - the window of forgiveness is closing fast.
Richie3Jack
New
Being a great teacher is about improving students. I think there were 'great teachers' around before the laws of ball flight were corrected because despite their lack of properly understand the ball flight laws, they had enough good information and new how to apply it so they could improve the vast majority of their students. I do think those teachers could be even better if they understood D-Plane and improve even more students.
3JACK
Richie3Jack
New
savydan - we've been thru this here a million times before. Tuxen has said that pretty much every top 100 teacher owns a trackman, but only a handful use them for actual lessons and instead use them for clubfitting.
When I went to rent Trackman for an hour:
1) I was the only person they had ever had that asked them to rent Trackman for their golf swing
2) They still had no idea about the D-Plane.
It never ceases to amaze me how I can tell somebody that probably 90% of Trackman owners don't use it for lessons and don't understand the D-Plane and they still don't believe me.
3JACK
Improved the vast majority of their students? "Great" very few.
Last edited:
gmbtempe
New
I think you are drinking a little too much kool aid around here. While there certainly is some terrible teachers in that list of 100 teachers there are many many great teachers.
While I don't agree with much Jimmy Ballard has to say to think he is not a top 100 teacher would be dishonest.
Richie3Jack
New
Isn't the term 'great' related to 'very few?' People wouldn't be great if most people were 'great.' They'd be 'average.'
3JACK
I think your standards for greatness are different than mine and i hate kool-aid, but i heard it taste's "Great" ...lol
There can be many as in a "lot of" great teachers, i don't think there are. Get it.
Last edited:
Rich,
I believe you, but I think you missed the point.
We all know the "they only use it for fitting" line. Trust me. We get it, OK?
My point is that line doesn't give them an "out".
They are either being "stupid" for dropping 30k on machine they don't believe, or they are being disengenuous between what they know and what they say. Take your pick. Ain't no grey area.
I say they KNOW, but don't want to take a marketing hit now, hoping beyond hope that some thing comes along and saves them. Big mistake.
I believe you, but I think you missed the point.
We all know the "they only use it for fitting" line. Trust me. We get it, OK?
My point is that line doesn't give them an "out".
They are either being "stupid" for dropping 30k on machine they don't believe, or they are being disengenuous between what they know and what they say. Take your pick. Ain't no grey area.
I say they KNOW, but don't want to take a marketing hit now, hoping beyond hope that some thing comes along and saves them. Big mistake.
- Status