Why isn't Golf Teaching Better?

[dbl]

Why isn't it common? My guess is that instructor X who knows the wrong stuff already has his teaching appt. book filled. So he doesn't really need the right stuff, for business reasons. And there is an incentive where the wrong stuff keeps the book filled since people have to come back since his stuff didn't work.

Maybe in a 100 years the Manzella type knowledge will have swept the world, and then..I'd say we'll need and have less instructors. Perhaps the PGA will be bummed a bit, since they may have hit a high water mark of memebrship of 28,000 members long ago. Maybe they have an incentive to keep the golf world in the dark ages. They think they prosper by making people believe golf is "almost unfathomable" and the average person can't, of course, do what you did.

 

[ggsjpc]

Why isn't it common? My guess is that instructor X who knows the wrong stuff already has his teaching appt. book filled. So he doesn't really need the right stuff, for business reasons. And there is an incentive where the wrong stuff keeps the book filled since people have to come back since his stuff didn't work.

Maybe in a 100 years the Manzella type knowledge will have swept the world, and then..I'd say we'll need and have less instructors. Perhaps the PGA will be bummed a bit, since they may have hit a high water mark of memebrship of 28,000 members long ago. Maybe they have an incentive to keep the golf world in the dark ages. They think they prosper by making people believe golf is "almost unfathomable" and the average person can't, of course, do what you did.

I've been trying to figure out for a while why instructors don't seek out better information of try to improve themselves. I still don't have a good answer. In the Spring, I gave a PGA Section seminar on the topic of d plane. I couldn't believe two things.

First, how few people attended. Second, how few people knew what I was talking about. I know who in our section is ranked "best in state" and none of them knew what it was or attended the seminar.

I don't get it. I would be the guy that would make it a point to go especially if I didn't know the topic. It blows me away how many teachers think they have learned enough that there isn't more to learn. Lunacy.

 

[softconsult]

Here's my take on it. Based on experience and simple logic.

In general who are the people that become golf pro's? Answer. Jocks.

How many people did you know in high school and/or college who were both jocks, and shall we say intellectually curious? I think, not too many.

Short version is that jocks aren't generally brainiacs, and brainiacs aren't generally good athletes. Of course, exceptions to the rule exist, but they are the minority. Add in ability to communicate and it percentage decreases even more.

 

[tank]

Here's my take on it. Based on experience and simple logic.

In general who are the people that become golf pro's? Answer. Jocks.

How many people did you know in high school and/or college who were both jocks, and shall we say intellectually curious? I think, not too many.

Short version is that jocks aren't generally brainiacs, and brainiacs aren't generally good athletes. Of course, exceptions to the rule exist, but they are the minority. Add in ability to communicate and it percentage decreases even more.

That's an interesting theory that I could almost buy, except for the fact that coaches in other sports aren't generally as inept across the board as they are in golf.

I think the problem originates with the people who teach and certify the teachers. They have no idea how to teach golf, and that bad information that they teach just gets passed along as gospel. Maybe Brian's teaching summit will be a start to bringing about change. It's a long ways off though.

 

[billren2k3]

I think it's all relative. A lot of gifted athletes have a natural sense of internal timing and have a genetic disposition for a high percentage of fast twitch muscles which translates into any sport and no sometimes there is next to no understanding as to how they do it. I have also seen the opposite...those who work their tail off and have the intelligence and understanding of everything going on around them to succeed. I like your point on blending the best of both worlds. A tremendous amount of work, experience, and insight by Brian and his team to even allow most of us to have that "A-HA" moment.

Something is wrong with Golf instruction though ( from my less than expert opinion ). To your point, a lot of coaching comes from former athletes in other sports but the difference is they are generally very competitive with each other and from my experience will very quickly adapt to gain an advantage...I see a lot of that here.

Golf is hard! Based on past experience in other sports I would think if most instructors ( present company on the forum excluded ) were told they had to drop the average handicap of their membership by 5 strokes and had to have the best junior program in their area within a year or their services would no longer be required you would see a difference regardless of physical ability or intellect.

 

[Shot Limit]

I'm not sure these instructors are geared for helping established players. I've had two 1 hour lessons, unfortunatly not from the Manzella Golf Academy, and heard the same damn things at both. THESE "LESSONS" WERE TEN YEARS APART! Are you f**king kidding me. Maybe "just turn your hands over through the ball" may work for my girlfriend, who's never actually made contact with a golf ball, but sorry, I need a little more info. Try showing me something I don't know.

Is there no standard? I know B is good, most of us know this, but it's kind of a shame that I can get more usefull info from a DVD that I can actually implement with good results than a in-person "lesson" from these other so-called instructors. This is not a blanket insult to all instructors but my two experiences were lame and actually made my game worse. I'm sure I don't have to state the old cliche.

So, a big thanks to Brain and all the other Manzella instructors for all of the great advice on the forum, the youtube videos, and the instructional videos that actually made me a better golfer before I got worse. No more lessons from these gimps because if I hear "just turn your hands over through the ball" one more time, I gonna f**kin wack somebody.

Lots o Love.

 

[ZAP]

As someone who teaches in the schools I understand the difference between knowing something and having the ability to explain it to others.
Brian seems to be able to convey exactly what he wants you to know.
I have seen "instructors" who think you will magically learn by watching them hit shots.
I have learned more about the golf swing through purchasing two of the videos than I have in reading a library of golf instruction books.
Perhaps I am just a visual learner?

 

[Shot Limit]

I only took two lessons in ten years is unimportant; the content of the lessons is what's important.

I’ve had more than 2 in my life. My first lesson was ten years ago. I was 21 years old, broke and really didn't have the means to pursue every golf avenue. I maybe played once or twice a year for about a ten year span. I honestly really wasn’t concerned about getting any better during that period. Five or six months ago I was in a company golf tournament, nothing serious. I didn’t want to completely embarrass myself so I decided get a lesson to brush up the skills a pinch. I thought it was funny that I got pretty much the same lesson from a different instructor 10 years later. Needless to say, I embarrassed myself anyway at the tournament but it wasn’t too big of a deal. The three other guys in my foursome sucked just as bad. I didn’t give up on golf this time though. I’ve been going to the practice range at least three times a week and playing at least one round of golf per week since March of this year. I have had three other lessons from three different instructors since then with no real positive impact. I may not be as seasoned as most on this forum, but that is not my point. I bought a one hour DVD from Brain and I’m hitting the ball 100% percent better and have taken about 13 strokes off of my game. You do the math.

These guys weren’t giving lessons for charity; they were PGA instructors charging me my hard earned money for a service. I was unsatisfied with this service and they still have my money. I took an economic leap myself and if the instructor had “too much on their plate” then charge me for the portion of the plate I received.

Neil.

 

[cal7426]

Reality check.

Take your average club golfer with his slice and his extensive knowledge of the golf swing based on reading Leadbetter's "Faults and Fixes" ten years earlier. Take your average club pro, who started life with ambitions to win a major and ended up selling soft drinks and chocolate bars. Sadly, this is the usual scenario - the hopeless being taught by the disappointed.

The members of this forum do not fit these stereotypes, everybody here is searching for knowledge to improve their game and/or their teaching. Thus billren2k3 recognised a bad lesson, the golfer I referred to would probably blame himself for his lack of progress, pretend he didn't care and go buy the latest driver.

To change this situation the status of the "teaching" pro should be elevated and thus the way a pro qualifies to be a teaching pro should be made much harder. It's a status that should be earned rather than acquired.

 

[btp]

Shot Limit- If you came to me right before you played in a tournament after never having lessons, I would have told you that we should have met down the street at the local church. I'd even light a candle or two for you.

It takes time to become good at golf and anything in life. Keep working on your game. Find a good one. Most pro's aren't worth 60-100 per hour. A few are worth way more.

For $10 bucks, the web version of Building Blocks would do wonders for somebody like you.

 

[Richie3Jack]

My thoughts...

Many teachers are not full time in instruction. A guy may be the 'head pro' who also gives lessons to supplement his income. So his main interest is to improve the operations of the club and he has little or no interest in learning more to improve his teaching skill. Or you can have the assistant who gives lessons, but his main focus is also the operations of the club as his main goal one day is to be the Head Pro or Director of Golf and run the club. A lot of it in these scenarios is these people don't want to go out and sell themselves to the public. Regardless of teaching skill, an instructor needs to sell themselves in order to generate business and that's doesn't fit many PGA pros' personality. Also there's a bit of a 'stability' issue and things like health insurance, etc that may be a concern for the local club pro that may get them focusing more on the operations of the club than becoming a better instructor.

Secondly, the instructors who are hardcore instructors tend to fit into the concept of that there's only one way to swing a club with little variation to it and/or that the quality of golf relies heavily upon the golfer's hand/eye coordination or 'talent.' I'd like to articulate upon this in a better way, but a lot of times these instructors would teach say Geoff Ogilvy the same way they would teach Joe the 15 handicapper from Binghamton and then pretty much deduct that Joe the 15 handicapper cannot play good golf because they simply don't have the hand/eye coordination or 'talent.'

Lastly, there's the instructors who preach and preach 'the way' with little variation and when faced with something new that contradicts their 'way' or shows how in some cases their 'way' is flawed, they just refuse to own up to it...probably in fear of looking like a fraud and losing clientele. Believe it or not, I can actually see their thinking to a degree. Personally, I understand that research and science can discover many new things all of the time and to realize that a certain method may be flawed later down the road is going to happen. But not all golfers think that way.




3JACK

 

[needham]

once again, 3Jack is spot on.

 

[Slicer McGolf]

Lastly, there's the instructors who preach and preach 'the way' with little variation and when faced with something new that contradicts their 'way' or shows how in some cases their 'way' is flawed, they just refuse to own up to it...probably in fear of looking like a fraud and losing clientele. Believe it or not, I can actually see their thinking to a degree. Personally, I understand that research and science can discover many new things all of the time and to realize that a certain method may be flawed later down the road is going to happen. But not all golfers think that way.

This hits the point where teachers aren't adapting to new school thoughts and are stuck in the ways they were shown by their mentors. Things change and teachers need to change with it. They can't be scared because of some new ideas that go against the flow of the old boys club but research and learn what the new stuff is all about and adapt. I see you trying to learn some new things R3J and its good. Keep dabbling in the darkside and you'll be new school in no time.

How many years ago did we think that path was the cause for initial ball flight? Research, learn, adapt, change.

 

[Chip Putterman]

Cal7426, that was perfect.

 

[Shot Limit]

Shot Limit- If you came to me right before you played in a tournament after never having lessons, I would have told you that we should have met down the street at the local church. I'd even light a candle or two for you.

It takes time to become good at golf and anything in life. Keep working on your game. Find a good one. Most pro's aren't worth 60-100 per hour. A few are worth way more.

For $10 bucks, the web version of Building Blocks would do wonders for somebody like you.

It did wonders. That was kind of the point of the post.

 

[softconsult]

Here's another thing that goes along with 3Jacks Club Pro thoughts. Politics.
The Pro is not on the top of the totem pole. He must keep the board members happy, the members happy, etc. Often, that can mean keep your head down, and don't make waves.

I have an acquaintance, who occasionally, does instruction. He was a head pro at , I think, 3 private clubs. Studied under some well known people. He knows his stuff. He finally packed it in. Couldn't stand the politics.

 

[Shot Limit]

Ok.

All things considered, who would benefit from Club Pro instruction?

 

[strav]

When an instructor becomes a professional he needs to secure his position and provide for his family. His position and prospects among his peers becomes similar to that of a politician. He may have personal beliefs but his tenure is far and away more assured if he is seen to support party ideologies. He soon learns that his income is predicated on repeat business. Repeat business is much easier with a large target market. He recognises that the largest target market consist of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com

Jo</st1ersonName>e Yukovich, Mrs Fabersham and their ilk. In most cases their expectations will never materialise because they are unaware of the talent, effort and commitment required by the average golfer to begin to master this game. If they were told the truth and were made aware of the time, effort required and chance of success many would baulk at the proposition. The instructor would stand to lose his customer base, his income and his chosen profession. He succumbs to the temptation to cater to the customer’s unrealistic goals. Flattery and insincerity becomes tools of his trade. He sells himself rather than his wares. He has taken the line of least resistance and takes comfort in the knowledge that his future and that of his loved ones is now more certain. He becomes a victim of self interest and there is little incentive to modify a quality of instruction that if modified would appeal to fewer and fewer people.
And so another snake oil salesman polishes his shingle and the main stream of golf instruction remains static.
Those who do have the temerity to seek and speak the truth are now perceived as a threat and in the time tested manner vilified and labelled cultists and worse. Nothing much changes.

 

[ggsjpc]

Wow!!!!

When an instructor becomes a professional he needs to secure his position and provide for his family. His position and prospects among his peers becomes similar to that of a politician. He may have personal beliefs but his tenure is far and away more assured if he is seen to support party ideologies. He soon learns that his income is predicated on repeat business. Repeat business is much easier with a large target market. He recognises that the largest target market consist of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com

Jo</st1ersonName>e Yukovich, Mrs Fabersham and their ilk. In most cases their expectations will never materialise because they are unaware of the talent, effort and commitment required by the average golfer to begin to master this game. If they were told the truth and were made aware of the time, effort required and chance of success many would baulk at the proposition. The instructor would stand to lose his customer base, his income and his chosen profession. He succumbs to the temptation to cater to the customer’s unrealistic goals. Flattery and insincerity becomes tools of his trade. He sells himself rather than his wares. He has taken the line of least resistance and takes comfort in the knowledge that his future and that of his loved ones is now more certain. He becomes a victim of self interest and there is little incentive to modify a quality of instruction that if modified would appeal to fewer and fewer people.
And so another snake oil salesman polishes his shingle and the main stream of golf instruction remains static.
Those who do have the temerity to seek and speak the truth are now perceived as a threat and in the time tested manner vilified and labelled cultists and worse. Nothing much changes.

It's amazing to me that the above belief is held for "mainstream" instructors. I can understand it but to actually hear it and see it is something else. Clearly, like politicians, everyone thinks that their representative is a good one and the problem is with all the other ones. Funny how the correlation exists.

Any teacher that doesn't have student improvement as their sole motivation is not a teacher. I get into arguments all the time with other teachers when I tell them I won't or don't care to teach clinics. They all say "Why not, that's the only way to make a bunch of money." I say, yea I know, but noone learns anything. What good does it do me as a teacher to provide this clinic when noone learns anything or gets better.

I'd rather and continue to teach almost exclusively 1 on 1. It's the only way to ensure that the information they are getting is tailored to them and that they actually can do it or understand it.

If you don't have that at your core, you are not teacher no matter what you call yourself.

 

[softconsult]

Not doing group clinics is one way to look at it. But maybe the clinics show the participants just enough to give them hope of improvement. I would think the definition of a clinic certainly varies from a group of beginners, to a group of older golfers at a corporate sponsored clinic.

On the other hand, and I have said this before, over the course of my golfing experience, 50 years (ugh), I really haven't known very many people who were serious about getting better. Most never took a lesson and I can't think of very many that even practiced much. Now this is just my experience, but from age 13 to 20, I couldn't afford lessons (thought never crossed my mine). 20 to 30, could have afforded them but spent most of my time skiing. 30 to 40, married, now I would have had to justify lessons to someone who stayed pissed off about the amount of time I spent on the course. 40 to 50, took a few here and there, but I was comfortable with my 8-12 handicap. 50 - 58 didn't play, too busy with business. 58 on took a few more dissapointing lessons. My 1 lesson with Brian was helpful, but didn't result in remarkably better ball striking. It depends on where you are starting from.