The Talent Code - meylin & golf

[mandrin]

In “The Talent Code” by Daniel Coyle there are fascinating ideas about developing skills and the teaching aspects of developing such skills.

For instance, Ron Gallimore, professor emeritus at UCLA, about teachers:

“A great teacher has the capacity to always take it deeper, to see the learning the student is capable of and to go there. It keeps going deeper and deeper because the teacher can think about the material in so many different ways, and because there's an endless number of connections they can make.”

Interestingly the quote above is taken from a paragraph titled:

''THE MATRIX, THE FIRST VIRTUE.''

I am sure that Brian does not disagree too much with above.

There are probably two important distinct ways to teaching golf.

Trying to find the simplest possible approach using a minimum amount of key thoughts and/or instruction elements. One usually tries to find everywhere support for the approach, even bending things a bit in the desired direction. Ending up with a paradoxical situation one sees pros being used to support contradicting philosophies.

The other approach is more akin to a continuous searching for anything useful and worthwhile teaching. A rather open ended approach, requiring a keen interest and passion as it is not really very business like and not easy to sell as there is not really a specific method but instead an ensemble of many different elements to be used adopting to any type of student.

In general the last approach is seemingly typical for teachers who are capable of developing superior skills in their pupils. Usually they are not very young and have spent much effort, tirelessly, and over a long period of time, to develop their extensive knowledge base.

 

[Kevin Shields]

Great post and I couldnt agree more.

 

[ScottRob]

Interesting book. It confirmed what I suspected all along about so-called "winners." They are simply prepared to do what the also-rans are not prepared to do.i.e. whatever it takes. The kind of practice that he suggests is essential for myelin developments is excruciating! The idea that you stop and correct immediately makes sense. I can imagine that was what Hogan was doing when he stopped and took a couple of hard draws on his Chesterfield. I may have figured out D-plane if I had stopped to think a bit more. OK probably NOT.

I recall watching a world class body builder sitting on the edge of a bench for a good long while with his eyes closed. At first I thought he had nodded off! I couldn't resist so I asked him what he was up to. He told me matter of factly that he was running through his work out set for set, rep for rep! Why? I protested! To make sure that I recruit the correct muscles during the actual work out. Well alrighty then! Even if this technique did not work, his diligence was impressive...and of course he looked like a mutant.

I tell my students from time to time, a secret to success is desperation. Just how badly do you want to secure an outcome. It seems our host is a pretty desperate fellow! Me, not so much!

 

[Dan44GT]

For those that have read The Talent Code and "Talent is Overrated" by Geoff Colvin, which do you prefer and how would you compare them? I have read Talent is Overrated, but not Talent Code, yet.

 

[birly-shirly]

Read them both. It's going to take you 10,000 hours to get good at anything. You've got time to read a couple of paperbacks.

@ScottRobb - I kind of agree and disagree. The desperation is a big factor in making the necessary effort, but I would add that you have to have the focus on quality of practice also. I agree that the intensity and attention to detail is difficult and you would have to be highly motivated to sustain that. But I also think that some people put in the hours, but not the thought or quality effort, and don't get the benefits that they should.

I think this is almost what you were saying anyway - but the "simply prepared to do what it takes" made me question that a little, as I don't think it's as simple as just putting in the hours. And I don't think it's all that simple or obvious to set up your practice in order to get and respond to constant and accurate feedback. Look at the way most people practice putting.

 

[golfdad]

In “The Talent Code” by Daniel Coyle there are fascinating ideas about developing skills and the teaching aspects of developing such skills.

For instance, Ron Gallimore, professor emeritus at UCLA, about teachers:

“A great teacher has the capacity to always take it deeper, to see the learning the student is capable of and to go there. It keeps going deeper and deeper because the teacher can think about the material in so many different ways, and because there's an endless number of connections they can make.”

Interestingly the quote above is taken from a paragraph titled:

''THE MATRIX, THE FIRST VIRTUE.''

I am sure that Brian does not disagree too much with above.

There are probably two important distinct ways to teaching golf.

Trying to find the simplest possible approach using a minimum amount of key thoughts and/or instruction elements. One usually tries to find everywhere support for the approach, even bending things a bit in the desired direction. Ending up with a paradoxical situation one sees pros being used to support contradicting philosophies.

The other approach is more akin to a continuous searching for anything useful and worthwhile teaching. A rather open ended approach, requiring a keen interest and passion as it is not really very business like and not easy to sell as there is not really a specific method but instead an ensemble of many different elements to be used adopting to any type of student.

In general the last approach is seemingly typical for teachers who are capable of developing superior skills in their pupils. Usually they are not very young and have spent much effort, tirelessly, and over a long period of time, to develop their extensive knowledge base.

mandrin, interesting topic.

i find that the two approaches you have mentioned are not in conflict with each other. whereas there is a need for ongoing research and exploration, on a person to person level during a teaching session, simplicity is the key. of course there is a difference between simple/correct vs simple/incorrect teaching. if the teaching is correct, the simpler the better.

in talent code, the foci are on the most talented groups. as much as we do not like to think that way, we the average golf students are different. we need simple, easy to understand instructions. we often need the same instructions repeatedly often.

 

[Richie3Jack]

I believe in The Talent Code's philosophy even though I've only read about 1/4 of it so far. I think there is a case for some talent. I'm not really sure Moe Norman had 'deep practice.' He just kinda figured things out and hit balls until the cows came home. I've seen video of a Moe Norman practice session on the range...nothing deep about it...just rapid fire shot after shot. However, for most they really need 'deep practice' and lots of it.

What I've found about learning golf in the past year is:

1. Learn feel from mechanics first and foremost.

2. Learn mechanics from feel as a last resort and be very careful about it.

3. The stuff that is causing you problems...take away the reward (a good shot) when you make a compensation or flaw in your swing.

4. Truly understanding something about the golf swing, regardless of how complicated and detailed it may be, is never a bad thing.






3JACK

 

[ScottRob]

.

I think this is almost what you were saying anyway - but the "simply prepared to do what it takes" made me question that a little, as I don't think it's as simple as just putting in the hours. And I don't think it's all that simple or obvious to set up your practice in order to get and respond to constant and accurate feedback. Look at the way most people practice putting.[/QUOTE]


doing what it takes includes the "deep practice" that Coyle refers to. It is a tough mindset to explain. It is not a matter of "just" time and effort. The brain is engaged in a very specific way. I would perhaps draw a comparison between the way Jack Nicklaus practiced and most everybody else. Jack arrived with a purpose and stayed on task thereby maximizing the time and sweat equity. As a junior I was a ball-beater. I improved a great deal, but the law of diminishing returns soon reduced my time and effort to exercise. I had fallen into the category of just throw "hard" work at it. The old addage of smart work winning the day rings true here. I just could not stop hitting balls!

I understand "deep practice" a lot a better as it relates to playing an instrument, or coaching a team sport like basketball, or soccer i.e. when execution is less than perfect you stop and do it again. I am not sure how to put it in golfing terms. I think Hogan's slo-mo deal is a good example. I also remember Gary Player taking an extra practice swing after an unsatifactory shot.

I definately do not think it is just a matter of putting in the time. I decieved myself into beleiving that as a younger player. I cannot brag about blistering my hands, my callouses we much to thick for that! I got too much short-term psychological impetus from people crediting me with being the "hardest worker we have ever seen."

So, was my intent (desperation quotient) truly directed toward being the best golfer I could be, or was there another agenda. I can tell you this much. When my competitive career came to an end in college...I was relieved! I am still the hardest working player my coach has seen in 35 years. Sadly, I am proud of that moniker. My tendency is still to throw a crap load of work at things and see what sticks. There are worse tendencies I suppose!

 

[mandrin]

mandrin, interesting topic.

i find that the two approaches you have mentioned are not in conflict with each other. whereas there is a need for ongoing research and exploration, on a person to person level during a teaching session, simplicity is the key. of course there is a difference between simple/correct vs simple/incorrect teaching. if the teaching is correct, the simpler the better.

in talent code, the foci are on the most talented groups. as much as we do not like to think that way, we the average golf students are different. we need simple, easy to understand instructions. we often need the same instructions repeatedly often.

golfdad,

I did not claim a conflict between the two approaches. Just that they are very different. When one has a teaching method, claiming to have one magic move to a perfect swing in only one bucket of balls, one is sure however to be in another universe then when considering a teacher working hard to understand all facets of golf, and there are many, and spending many years to develop a rather sophisticated cocktail of knowledge and instructions.

I am fairly sure that we are all quite aware that there is an apparent simplicity, which really is simply astute marketing, but also quite aware of an authentic simplicity shown by a real instructor who perhaps knows it all but yet only instructs in very simple terms.

In ''The Talent Code'' there is also much about ordinary subjects with no special talents and yet through appropriate teaching reaching a very high skill level, be it in various sports, academic performance or otherwise. This is the magic of creating myelin in our brain. We all have the potential to be very good at anything we might get real interested in persuing.

 

[golfdad]

i think marketing can apply to both method teachers as well as person teachers. i don't regard marketing in a negative connotation. to properly present what we have to offer, even if it is wrong according to others, is something we owe to ourselves.

perhaps i have a hard time digesting what you are saying. perhaps this is brian's site so that as a courtesy everything said should be considerate.

but we are all adults here and i think we can regard things in a thoughtful manner but still with a sense of integrity and dignity.

friend of mine is a top orthopedic surgeon in nyc, doc for couple prof team. the guy is good. he says: i am so freaking good that even if i tell exactly what i do others cannot do as well as i do."

to me, that is truly good.

i think brian is good. therefore, he is no greenhouse flower that needs pampering from his followers. too much sugary stuff can be nauseating.

i think to bash others as method teachers and regard brian differently is fine, but after a while it becomes old. just my opinion.

i have a medical degree. i think i know enough about myelin to know what it can do vs what it cannot do. there is a big difference between using it loosely to market a book based on some preliminary studies on lab rats vs concrete double blinded studies in humans.

 

[mandrin]

If it was simply putting in time doing things over and over to improve skill level to a very high level then many would be very skilled. In effect many golfers spent countless hours beating balls on the range without any improvement. But it is something very special which has to be done, not easily explained in a few lines in a post. It is a very fastidious and long process requiring long time commitment, hence very difficult to do by one self. It normally requires continuous encouragement and appropriate coaching.

Tasks, of any kind, have to be broken down in very small steps and each completely mastered before proceeding to the next. Slowly but surely, over weeks and months, myelin is being formed in the brain around the neural pathways, specific to the task, augmenting dramatically the propagation speed of signals. Also the myelin seems to have a yet unexplained feedback capacity to harmonize and modulate the propagation speeds through various channels to get them arriving synchronized at the right place, very similar to information processing on the web, i.e., information to be sent is disassembled in small chunks, taking very different routes, and yet assembled at destination in the right order.

Hence, there is a new fascinating perspective being given in Daniel Coyle's 'The Talent Code' but it should however be taken also with regard to a very related perspective portrayed in Geoff Colvin's book, “Talent is Overrated”, another fascinating book, clearly showing that it takes typically, for any activity, about 10.000 hours of diligent practice to obtain a master level. So those dreaming and aspiring to start creating a great quantity of myelin in their brain, it takes lots of time. But really nothing of substance comes for free, perhaps with the exception of modern instantaneous idols backed up by massive marketing.

 

[golfdad]

it is myelin, by the way, not meylin who is the receptionist in the chinese restaurant i go to

i think you have touched on many fascinating areas on learning. but i think you can achieve that without going too deep with myelin. the person who penned that book is not a neuroscientist, let alone a pioneering one.

i still believe that there is much to gain from talent code if average joe and jane put in the hard work, preferably from an early age. most joe and jane, not necessarily people on this board, do not have the time, interest and physique to put in hard work.

in the talent is overrated book, there is an emphasis on having a good support team, ie coach and parents. from my own experiences with my kids, i totally agree. most of the time when young kids quit something, sports or music or school interest, it is because there is no family support and teacher and coach can do only so much.

 

[wulsy]

mandrin last post rings very true to me. Puttin the hours in by simple repetition of the whole is pretty much useless. As he says, the tasks have to be broken down and then re-assembled, whilst constantly monitoring the individual tasks and the re-assembly.

I learned to practice about 4 years ago after wasting my time practicing wrongly for my entire life. And now I'm shit hot

 

[golfdad]

mandrin last post rings very true to me. Puttin the hours in by simple repetition of the whole is pretty much useless. As he says, the tasks have to be broken down and then re-assembled, whilst constantly monitoring the individual tasks and the re-assembly.

I learned to practice about 4 years ago after wasting my time practicing wrongly for my entire life. And now I'm shit hot

well, if one is doing something wrong, no matter how one slices it (no pun intended), be it simple repetition or complicated repetition, it is still wrong, therefore, to expect a very different outcome is unrealistic. just to break it apart and re-assemble it does not necessarily lead to a correct path because there are many ways to reassemble. the reassembly is best done under supervision by qualified people. and since there is an ongoing bash against method teachers, the qualified people need to be qualified further i guess.

meanwhile, if one is doing something right, repetitive practice is wonderful.

 

[mandrin]

golfdad,

These two books are giving a very interesting perspective on what talent is all about. A subject continuously intriguing people. I am sure it to be a fascinating read for most.

On the internet many are perfect. Some are flagging their diplomas. In other words please take it easy. I am sure you know it all but just a bit of modesty would do just fine.

I hope that your kids are taught in school how to deal with the first letter starting a new sentence, as daddy's myelin re. to this skill seems to be a bit underdeveloped.

 

[golfdad]

no question my kids are smarter than i am to which i am grateful. if something goes right, it is their effort. if something goes wrong, it is my idea.

i think there is a difference between being boastful vs being factual. i was pointing out to you that the myelin take is too extreme.

you don't sound like you think i know it all

 

[islandgolf629]

And I thought axon diameter was a factor in determining myelin growth. Oh Gee, all those years and dollars for school down the drain.

 

[mandrin]

mandrin last post rings very true to me. Puttin the hours in by simple repetition of the whole is pretty much useless. As he says, the tasks have to be broken down and then re-assembled, whilst constantly monitoring the individual tasks and the re-assembly.

I learned to practice about 4 years ago after wasting my time practicing wrongly for my entire life. And now I'm shit hot

wulsy,

Sorry, to hear about having wasted so much time. But golf is an activity one can enjoy till old age hence there is still plenty of time, just refocus and start afresh, increasing your myelin stuff.

Some old timers had an intuitive knack for teaching such as Percy Boomer. Learning small successive motions and learning to recognize the associated feel. From there on eventually evoking the feel to produce the motion.

This is very much in line with the ideas in 'The Talent Code'. Building up layer upon layer of feelings, in small systematic steps, and finally integrating it all in one composite holistic kind of feeling, triggering instantly complicated motions.

I can't mention it here but there is an interesting dynamic golf school basically built around the procedures, generating myelin, as described in 'The Talent Code'.

If we had to wait for those infamous 'concrete double blinded studies in humans' for everything in life the world would grind to a halt. I am just curious for such testing with regard to the placebo effect.

Einstein's brain contained surprisingly large quantities of myelin but that probably should be considered just some random fact, not statistically significant

 

[golfdad]

mandrin, i see you can be quite entertaining and facetious. that is a wonderful asset to the internet.

let me ask you this: if golfers do something right, you stated that more myelin is produced?

 

[mandrin]

golfdad,

I am surprised, I thought you had read both books, having such definitive views on the matter. I suggest hence to read them and you will eventually come across the reference to Einstein.

I think it would be more appropriate to write Einstein instead of einstein, he definitely merits some respect, being truly a real scientist.