Less Shots or More Shots? - a hypothetical by Brian Manzella

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brian Manzella

Administrator
I vote strongly for golfers would be better.

Too many crazy ideas made their way into golf teaching JUST BECAUSE they "looked good on video" and had NO BASIS for being other than someone's opinion.
 
I want to say no change.

I do know that without pictures and magazines and other poor sources of information, and just the ball to tell me if I was doing something right or wrong, there is a strong chance that I would have been a scratch player at 18 years old. FYI, I'm 33 and creeping lower as a 4 right now. I will get there one day.

All that said, what is the "world scoring average" and how do we accurately measure it accross periods of time? Pre-steel, post-steel? Fairway woods, fairway metals. Balata, Pro-V? High speed video, no video at all? 6,400 yds or 7,600? A string and pocketknife, TrackMan? Shoot, scratch used to mean you were as good as the guy who finished dead in the middle of the pack in the US am. That used to mean you were a 0 handicap. Now it would mean you are a +3ish.

There doesn't seem to be any way to have enough commonality to tell if the world is getting better at this game.
 
Got it, so next time at the range I'll leave the casio at home and.. oh my god I forgot what to do at the range without a camera.
 
Here's my thought and I'd like to have yours: the technology is only as good as the user. TRACKMAN has taught us a ton about impact and resulting ball flight. But at some point a human being has to make corrections, and then the student, complete with old habits, learning styles, personality, and all their personal baggage, has to be communicated with, corrected. It is then in the hands of teacher. Completely. So the machine did it's job, now what? At that point the teacher has an arsenal of fixes at his/ her disposal OR NOT. I watched a guy at a demo day recently who had not a clue what to do with 8 degree inside out hooks except to stiffen the shaft and add loft!!!
 

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Here's my thought and I'd like to have yours: the technology is only as good as the user. TRACKMAN has taught us a ton about impact and resulting ball flight. But at some point a human being has to make corrections, and then the student, complete with old habits, learning styles, personality, and all their personal baggage, has to be communicated with, corrected. It is then in the hands of teacher. Completely. So the machine did it's job, now what? At that point the teacher has an arsenal of fixes at his/ her disposal OR NOT. I watched a guy at a demo day recently who had not a clue what to do with 8 degree inside out hooks except to stiffen the shaft and add loft!!!

No doubt.

To me, all real good "on the line" teaching is, is moving the numbers with sound mechanics.


My prediction is that club delivery numbers will be considered more important than positions within 5 years.
 
I do not know what would have happened starting from 1985 but I know what old Hogan once said. He said if he had got video camera back then he would have literally killed them all on the course. Since he was pretty damn good at killing them all without video camera I presume he knew what he talked about.

Cheers

Was this pre or post-accident D?
 
Obviously was not possible in the 30-ies or 40-ies or 50-ies. Do you think they had video cameras in the modern sense these days ? Besides, I am not imagining things, I am quoting more or less what the man said.

Cheers

Have you seen the Bobby Jones instructional series D? Surely Ben could have done the same.
 

Dariusz J.

New member
side note - Dariusz, that's gotta be a record setting threadjack - post #3

less than five minutes late or your record could've stood forever.

It was no threadjack at all. It was just quoting the man who was probably the most knowledgeable of all Tour pros as regards swing mechanics. And I am sure he wanted a modern video camera back to his prime not to improve the look of his swing but exactly to look at certain important things. He would have been even happier if he had Trackman for his services because he would surely find his latest goal (how to maintain the same trajectory for all lofts).

Saying that video is of no help is just equally silly to treating all people as stupid narcissts who would have used it only to improve their look. You know, even mirrors can be used for more serious goals.


Have you seen the Bobby Jones instructional series D? Surely Ben could have done the same.

D, he wanted a video camera in the sense of having a compact handy one as they were in the 90-ies. Jones recorded his swings (and Hogan also did as we can find on YT) but it wasn't even comparable to recording 200 motions just to compare effects that one wants to compare. I am astonished why it is so hard to understand this.

Cheers
 
I have to agree with Dariusz on this one. Can you imagine the feedback loop trying to improve your swing mechanics with an 8mm cine camera?

Film. Hit. Drive to chemist for film processing. Wait a week. Drive to chemist to pick up developed film. Drive home. Set up projector. Turn off lights and draw curtains. View swing. Make notes. Drive to practice ground. Repeat.

Actually, I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned this. If you took away video technology, I think it's likely that the golf instruction industry as we know it would hardly exist. Instead, we'd have Harry Vardon, sorry Lee Westwood, ghost-written columns in Golf Digest not very sure about whether his left arm was bent or not. The cottage industry of specialist instructors with no playing profile would hardly get off the ground without the technology.
 
No change to down.

In 10 years time, the video camera will get its just blame. Only the Uncle Ricos will still be relying, deriving, and misleading from them.

4343-8
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top