edteergolf
-
Posts
195 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
FAQ
Tests
Classifieds
Store
Group Buys
Posts posted by edteergolf
-
-
On 6/15/2020 at 4:10 PM, revkev said:
The key word in this question was "we" so I'm going to ignore any discussion about guys like Hogan or Sneed - they are not "we" nor is anyone else who plays golf for a living. Since I don't have any of your games, I can only go with me rather than we - I know what I do and how I tend to miss.
I will miss on both sides of the target but through course management and design I will miss left of a fairway or green more than right - all things being equal - I generally have enough control over the ball that I will aim further right is there is a penalty of some sort lurking left. Is it still possible for me to miss right? Hey I don't do this for a living, it's possible for me to miss behind by doing something incredibly stupid like hitting a ball marker or tree limb and having the ball ricochet. But generally my right misses will occur when I have to aim there to avoid a big number to the left.
I know from ARCCOS that I will miss a fairway left about twice as frequently as I will right and I only miss three to four fairways per round. Again this is by design. My shots almost always draw, I aim them at a spot where if they go straight they are still in the fairway, they never fade so even if they stay right of my intended line that is still almost always in the fairway. It's if I over cook the draw that I end up in the rough. But an over cooked draw still gets out there pretty good so at least I will normally have a shot.
I hope that makes sense -
What if you aren't missing? Maybe your pattern is appearing exactly as it should and you have failed to place that dispersion correctly to the golf course?
-
Play well and you have a chance to win. Play poorly and you have a chance to lose. Prepare to play well. All the other 'strategies' are made up and have zero statistical validity. The lowest score on each hole wins so go do that.
-
-
Even believing that you can eliminate one side of the golf course reveals a misunderstanding of the game. You never will so stop trying and come up with a better strategy.
Look up the thread on shot shaping and search for the offer I made to the people in that thread.
- DaveP043, Larryd3, silver & black and 2 others
-
5
-
-
On 6/6/2020 at 10:16 AM, juspoole said:
I was curious to take other's thoughts about how they approach a hole with a slight dogleg. Holes that obviously call for a draw or fade. I tend to have a natural fade to my ball so I will usually play on the right side to let it go straight or fade over and generally take out the right side of the course as often as I can(remember I'm a lefty)
Below as example: If I was a Righty, I would still be aiming at tree line to let my fade to over or if I hit it straight I'm ok. I normally wouldn't be going for the draw here.
If I have to play a draw, I usually can shape it without much difficulty, but usually have trouble knowing how much it will turn over since that's not my natural shape.
Also would be curious on straighter holes, what are you thoughts. Play down a certain side of the fairway to play your natural shape? Pick a spot and try to hit a straight ball? What has worked for you?
I've heard a lot of instructors with differing thoughts that make sense to me. If you can't break 80 by hitting it straight, you shouldn't be trying to shape it very often. Others will say the higher percentage is to have a shape in mind (rather than straight) to take a side of the hole out of play. Jack Nicklaus used to approach tough driving holes by aiming down the same side of OB and fading/drawing away from it dependent on what was needed.
Part of my ask on this was that I played with my boss the other day and he is probably a 36+ handicap that hardly plays and has a Wilson Box set that has "mid trajectory senior shaft" that are graphite and obviously not right for his game by any stretch (he is a 45 y/o former hockey player). But, he did not think about these things whatsoever. He would just aim down the middle or at the pin. I talked a bit about course strategy and had him playing left of greens for his push fade/slice and he ended with a 102 that could have easily been a 95.
What course and hole is this?
-
3 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:
To me, getting better means shooting consistently better scores. Better scores, to some extent, come from making better decisions. Many of the best players in the world have made the decision to play their standard shot shape unless it is absolutely natural to do something else. They certainly do practice all shapes, and can generally pull them off, but they have chosen to stay with one shot as much as possible. That's not a short-term thing, that's a long-term commitment to making the best possible decision each time.
Looking at the PGA Tour stats from 2019, from 100-125 yards the median scoring with regard to par was -0.17. That means the median Tour pro (typical handicap of +5 to +7) got up and down about 1 time in 6. If you're playing at a +0.5 handicap level from that range, I bet you're doing it 1 time in 10, or something like that. If you can't do better than that from an average of 45 yards, I'd be astounded. You already hit the green 2 times in 10 from 190, you're way ahead of the game by going for the green from 190. Obviously if there's a hazard to consider, that might change the decision.
Would it perhaps be more appropriate to say he gained two strokes in spite of not hitting the all fairways? I know fairways hit doesn't always correlate well with scoring as well as some other statistics, but in general its better to hit them than to miss.
In spite of not hitting all the fairways is a very good question. I'm not sure I have a statistical way of saying yes or no unless I have access to each hole & his ball position. My gut tells me that it is more correct that he gained two strokes off the tee using proper strategy and length. His length may not apply to many but his strategy certainty does. Fairways are in no way bad but finding trouble when just trying to hit the fairway is a flawed strategy. Great question.
Look back a few posts - join us on Sunday if you can.
-
On 6/9/2020 at 8:07 PM, THEZIPR23 said:
I’m sure he has said something similar about this on here but I would love to hear @edteergolf thoughts on this.
Not picking on you, I just think that if you are serious about getting better this thinking is completely backwards.
This is to everyone who has commented on this topic!!
I'm not sure where to begin. This isn't an easy topic because it challenges everything that we believe is true about the game. For the moment, I want to share some data with you and premise it by saying that it doesn't matter than the player is on tour and makes a lot of money. Shots gained, in its truest form, compares how you played to everyone else in the field. Think of it as similar players. So if the stat/skill is true for a bunch of tour players the stat/skill will be true for a bunch of 18 handicap players. Bryson DeChambeau has gained two strokes or more on the field 5 of the last 8 rounds. Historically gaining two shot on the field happens about 1% of the time. In those rounds he hit 9/14, 9/14, 9/14, 8/14 & 7/14 fairways per round. I will remind you that he gained two shots on the field by not hitting all the fairways.
I'm going to make everyone a free no-strings attached offer! I've been contemplating entering online coaching market. I know everyone provides swing instruction, but I want to provide more than just swing work. I want to provide holistic training for golfers interested in understanding the game, what to train, how to train, how to prepare to play, and how to play. I don't care if you are trying to win a soda, club championship, us open, or break 100. To do it well, I need to practice presenting online via zoom or similar. I am inviting everyone on this thread to join me for a free webinar on strategy that will cover tee shots, approach shots, Scott Fawcett's DECADE, & any other questions you have about strategy. You will not hear anything about my program, I will not make a sales offer to you, or answer any questions concerning my online coaching endeavor.
I simply want to share information that I have compiled as a coach that has helped my private students and my women's college team. If you are interested, reply to this post with your email address. I will use the address for the Zoom invitation only and you will never receive an email from me for any other purpose. This offer is not about sales in any way!!
I'm thinking Sunday evening at 8:00 pm eastern time.
- THEZIPR23, FrogginBullfish, Kanoito and 2 others
-
5
-
Weird drill. It is useful for someone who is too steep or shallow.
-
I don't care what the labels or names of the clubs. I want something 12-15 yard gaps between 90 yards to 200ish. After that about 20 yards. What I actually have is the following:
97, 115, 132, 145, 160, 174, 188, 200, 215, 225, 245, 265, 280+ ( this is a 58wedge, a 54 bent to 53, a 50 bent to 47, 9 iron - 4 iron, a weakened driving iron, hybrid, 3 wood, driver) Not many clubs are standard lofts. I gap to get the distances desired. Some are bent strong and some are weak with gaps between 3* and 5*. Some wedges are bent because they are what I had but most exists and are bent to get the distance and bounce desired. Once I got everything I wanted the pw was retired.
I want 15 yard gaps because it is my responsibility to hit a club a standard yardage, - 5 yards, & -10 yards.
-
46 minutes ago, Middler said:
I missed this the first time, tells me I was misguided in paying for a Club Champion fitting to tighten my driver dispersion - I wasted almost $400. It also further confirms my suspicion that the 4 shot dispersion groupings I got had little to do with the shafts I hit, and more to do with random chance. I didn’t schedule a fitting for more distance - and in hindsight 1) the distance I got was almost the same with every shaft and head I hit, and 2) my smash factor was very high according to the fitter - so he had nothing to offer distance wise if I’d wanted that.
I understand your frustration. I have heard or seen many tour players go to Club Champion for their club work. The important thing to note is that they are going to a specific person and they would go to them if they did fittings at Dick's Sporting Goods. It is more about the person than the company. It is very difficult to get uniformity across multiple locations of one company. Chick-fil-A has probably the best model for consistency of food and level of service. That is why they are so far past the competition.
I didn't get many fittings wrong. When I did, I fixed it. One of the reasons is the vast majority of my fittings were from my students, many of whom I had coached for months or years. I have played golf with them and had launch monitor or observational data to help guide the process. As a group we succumb to the marketing machine of massive improvements that a fitting or custom club build will provide. Remember, success leaves clues. When you find out info for tour level fittings, they are often about solving a singular problem or having to play new clubs but getting them to perform exactly like the old ones. Amateurs seem to have an approach that is a bit different.
Listening to the forum groups or even MGS provides anecdotal information at best. Not out of bad intent, but people are individuals and their nuances make equipment perform differently for you then they would for me. It is very difficult to provide information that is truly applicable to each individual. I'm sure we will see some less than complementary ball data when the full test i published. Regardless, there is some player who is out there shooting par with it.
- aerospace_ray, HeathS16 and cnosil
-
3
-
13 hours ago, jaskanski said:
Amen to that.
I hope that if anyone can take anything away from this thread it's that you need to do your homework before starting your journey to getting the clubs you want to fit your game. It's OK to ask loads of questions before you buy! And if you're not happy with the answer - don't buy, it's that simple.
Go out, demo as many clubs as you can, ask around, check credentials, seek professional advice and come up with an idea of what you want to achieve - never go blindly into a fitting and have a sense of entitlement if you haven't put in the groundwork first. The old saying is (like most things in life) : you will get the type of fitting in keeping with the amount effort put in by yourself. If you take the lazy big box store route to finding the right fit, then expect the kind of fitting that your effort deserves.
Lastly - you get what you pay for. If you want to go out and buy the raw materials yourself, then that's fine by me - but if you want them fitted and assembled then you pay for my time and expertise. The odd thing is - it tends to be cheaper in the long run.
Well said. IMO - be careful with credentials. Often credentials or certifications are simply sitting through a class and then continuing to pay a monthly fee. It is the application of the what is learned that is important and the willingness to be a little bit of mad scientist and try stuff out and see what happens. There is more science and means of measurement than when I was doing to frequently. My years of 'trying' were always way more useful than the classes or other resources.
One of the biggest problems with fitting is that the majority of players really don't understand their game very well. Our memories are skewed to what we want to believe and often time a players problem has little to do with the tool in their hand than it does the application of skill to the golf course. Both are relevant to a good fitter. Unless incredibly useful and accurate stats are kept by the player the fitter has nothing more to go on than the players word and their perceptions.
Lastly, some fittings can be 100% correctly done and can still be wrong. Years ago as I was becoming proficient as a fitter there was a time when 100% correct was valued more than a useful fitting. A local player came to me who was a true 1 handicap but wanted new clubs. His old ones were very worn and it was causing control problems. We used them as a model and we both the next clubs to very similar to his current ones. Essentially I delivered a nearly identical set except for a small change in the shaft. He liked the feel in the fitting and they performed as good as his old set. We even weakened the lofts to get the exact yardage numbers he preferred. When we tested lie angles, the demo club I had constructed had a similar lie angle to his current set and they were measured to be about 3* too upright. We had some evidence in a controlled environment that the getting the lie angles correct would prove helpful. I give this guy credit, he played 7 rounds and couldn't hit the broad side of the barn. This is a guy who routinely hit 15 or more greens a round! Turns out his simply new how to control 'wrong' lie angles. He played 7 rounds because he said impact felt perfect and way better than his old set. I bent the club back to his old spec and he was thrilled. Played great, felt like he had more control with a slightly better trajectory. He did miss the solid feel but he would rather control his golf ball. A 100% technically correct club fitting doesn't always work!
You do get what you pay for and it usually is cheaper in the long run. I can assure you that next year's model simply won't provide a life changing amount of performance.
-
56 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:
This on both accounts. When one goes to CC, TXG or similar place you are paying for a service. Whether you but from them or not it’s the same price. Local pro shops that offer to take the fitting off the price of the club is to get a sale.
When I was running my academy, demo days were free and I was there helping the fitting. Outside of that, I had a fee for fitting and the club was not discounted or offset by the fitting fee. I was good and good often comes with a fee. I also never made false statements like a driver will make you hit more fairways and I would refuse to sell a club that went farther but lost accuracy. Some exceptions but not many!
- aerospace_ray, Golfspy_CG2, cnosil and 1 other
-
4
-
Maybe I have missed a post or two, but I have not seen a post the identifies what is actually required in a warm up. What tasks are required on the course?
1. Tactical decision or strategy. These are often pre-determined. Choices have already been made based on your strategy standards.
2. You have to be able to swing so a physical warm up must be employed.
3. You have to swing your pattern more or less. Pattern reminder movements.
4. You need to hit the ground in the same place. Line drill without a ball.
5. You have to hit the ball solid and in the center of the face. Hit balls and make the corrections you already know to make to hit it on the face.
6. You have now warmed up your movement.
7. Randomize and chose different targets and clubs, possible in playing order until you have played 3 or 4 holes.
You are now warmed up your ability to make decisions, you have executed shots that meet your strategy, and you have done so in a order that replicates the game you are about to play.
Outside of the physical warm up, this plan takes about 15 minutes.
Similar plans should be in place for your wedges and putter. Great players do this. It is likely we aren't as good as them so it makes it more important that we do it. They are better and can get away with less effort.
Whacking balls in just a maddening waste of time. Plus, why would you hit it good if your body isn't ready to move. Doesn't it make it more frustrating to see bad shots when you are preparing to play. Doubt sucks!
Creating standards and a procedure just isn't that hard.
- GolfSpy AFG and THEZIPR23
-
2
-
On 5/29/2020 at 2:59 PM, Middler said:
I did a driver fitting at Club Champion in Feb, got my new pured shaft-adapter-grip in Mar. The only paid fitting I'd ever done before was pre launch monitor, but I have hit on launch monitors at Golf Galaxy, PGA Superstore and a small independent golf store (also used the Mizuno Swing Analyzer there). I made it very clear I was looking to hit more fairways, presumably tighter dispersion. I told him I didn’t care about distance, I’d even give up distance for more fairways. He said he understood - though he kept highlighting when I was getting more or less distance. Here's my experience and preliminary results FWIW.
Fitting
I warmed up, to my satisfaction – though in hindsight it’s possible I should have hit a few more.
I first hit 5-6 shots with my driver as is. The dispersion was pretty bad, though I didn’t have any frame of reference until the fitter showed me all the dispersion's to come. I don’t recall if he threw out any of my baseline shots. [I will always wonder if that base line stock driver dispersion was bad because I was less warmed up than for subsequent shafts and heads.]
The fitter chose a current model driver head most like the 2018 model I came in with (a reasonable place to start). He told me we'd start with shafts and told me 80% of the result would come from getting the right shaft.
I then hit 4 good shots (bad shots were thrown out, fitters judgement…) each with 7-8 different shafts. One clearly had a tighter dispersion than the others.
I then hit 4 good shots (bad shot thrown out) each with 3 other heads. They were no better than the first head.
The Club Champion fitter recommended a new head, shaft and grip. Since the CC fitter had told me at the start that the right shaft would give me 80% of the desired improvement, I opted to buy just the new shaft-grip-adapter with my almost new 2018 driver head (replaced a few months ago). The list price for the new head was exactly the same as MSRP for the stock driver with the same head-stock shaft-adapter-grip, no reduction for omitting the stock shaft-adapter-grip --- that seems unfair to me.
Preliminary Results
I’ve now played 10 rounds with my new shaft and I have averaged 7 of 13 fairways on my regular course – I hit 10 fairways once. My last 25 rounds prior with the old stock shaft I averaged 8.1 of 13 fairways on my regular course – and hit 11 fairways 3 times. The new custom fitted driver does not feel any different to me, and my dispersion hasn't changed at all that I can see. There has been no change in distance, but I wasn’t looking for any.
Discussion
Unless you’re a very consistent ball striker, I would contend that 4 shots is nowhere near enough to establish dispersion with any combination of shaft and head, no matter how good or bad your swing is. I’ve seen several articles using from 30 to 70 shots to establish dispersion, though I realize that’s not practical for a fitting especially with 8 shafts and 3 heads. But 4 to draw meaningful conclusions???
I would contend that if I hit 28 consecutive shots with my previous stock driver, and grouped every 4 consecutive shots into 7 dispersion sets, they would a) not be the same even though nothing had changed, and b) one would probably be tighter than the others just out of pure random chance.
So I strongly suspect the shaft that seemed to perform the best that day was more by chance than anything else. I could have gone another day and hit all the same combinations in the same order, and another “best” could have easily emerged.
Every once in a while people go to fitters and their stock setup is as good or better than anything else the fitter puts in their hands. That might also be just chance, unlucky for Club Champion. Again since you establish a base line first with your stock driver, odds are you will hit better as you go, while using a shaft-head given to you by CC.
I will continue to play with the new driver, and reserve judgement until I’ve played 20-25 rounds, but so far it doesn’t appear there was any value added with my driver fitting at Club Champion. I wouldn’t have gone and paid for a fitting if I wasn’t hoping I’d actually see an improvement - I certainly didn’t want the exercise to fail.
While I am sure there are shaft-head-grips that best suit each of us that will improve our results (a little in most cases, a lot in a few cases) --- I don’t think the methodology above is a reliable way to find it at all. If MGS ever did a Buyers Guide of Club Fitters, that could be very interesting...but I'm not actually recommending it, way too controversial.
1. Fittings, good or bad, don't make you hit fairways. Good fittings provide a tool capable of enough power and enough precision. In other words, fittings provide a tool best suited to the task. Strategy/Golf IQ lessons help you make decisions to put the ball in play and training helps you to aim or align to increase your ability of hitting the ball where you require.
2. Shafts are not 80% of the equation. Heads matter most, shafts fine tune. Once this was shaft thing was stated the opportunity for a good fitting was over. Therefore, switching heads but keeping the shaft would have compromised a tour level fitting.
End of Story!
Soap Box Moment - the drivers on tour have a 50+ yard wide dispersion cone. How big are fairways? Stop the madness about fairways!!!! If you don't understand but want to, please contact me!
-
very small chance this was caused by over prepping the shaft. most likely it has been damaged just under the ferrule and the shaft had the damage while you played with it and over time it has peeled away. it is done and the shaft should be replaced.
- aerospace_ray and JohnSmalls
-
2
-
On 5/16/2020 at 7:19 AM, Granata13 said:
Hey guys I got fit for a set of irons last year, and I think I might have gotten to caught up with trying to get longer. I am a solid scratch golfer, I drive it straight and have a good short game and putt well. Irons have always been the issue. When I am on I can go low, but more times than not if I am going to play bad its going to be because of the irons. It might not be a horrible round but I just don't hit it close or miss greens I shouldn't
I went to a fitting at Club Champion last summer looking to get a new set of irons and gain a little bit of distance. I hit a lot of different irons and shafts, it came down to Mizuno MP20 HMB and Ping i210. For shafts the 2 best were Steelfiber 110Cw and Project X LZ 6.5. I ended up going from a set of Ping Ie1s standard length and loft, orange dot with Dynamic Gold s300 to a set of Ping i210s standard length, Power Spec loft, brown dot with Steelfiber 110CW stiff shaft
Here is the problem, the ball is moving a lot more than it ever has with my irons. I will think I hit it well and look up to see the ball turning left a lot more than I thought it should be. Even the slight mishits move more than I expect them to. I find myself aiming more to the right than I feel like I should have to. I went back and looked at my trackman numbers for the set I ended up getting and they are very similar to the numbers I am getting off my Skytrak. Here are the trackman #s from my fitting:
Ball Speed: 122mph
Launch angle: 18.7*
Spin Rate: 4568 (obviously this is off a mat, I know that lowers spin but is this still too low?)
Carry: 180
Attack Angle: -1.3
Club Path: 6.2
Face Angle: 1.35
Please let me know what you think, did I get too caught up in the distance gain? I gained about a half club throughout my irons
Is the lack of backspin the cause for lack of accuracy / control?
Holding greens isn't a big issue because my descent angle is fairly steep (45* off skytrak). I am just struggling with the lack of control on my irons.
When I received the irons the SW was around C8-9, I attributed this to the high balance point of the Steelfiber. I added about 5-6 grams of weight to the irons to increase the SW a couple points to D1. It has helped but the ball is still moving a lot more than I am used to!
What club? Either way path and face are too far apart and you don't hit enough down which is part of the reason the spin is low. Of course, low is relative to which club you are hitting. If it is a 5 iron you are just a click low. If it is a seven iron then you 2500 too low and no chance to go far or be controlled. I'm a huge fan of SteelFibre shafts, but many better players have a hard time controlling them. Adding weight to the head made the shafts softer and probably increased the problem. Again, great quality shaft but quality has nothing to do with precision. You are a +.5 - just stop it with the distance!!!! If you want it, learn to swing faster!
-
10 minutes ago, Getoffmylawn said:
One quick follow up: how do you recommend one can identify when it is time for one-on-one lessons with a teaching pro? Is it a question of golf skill or emotional maturity to pay attention and be coached?
Great question and probably many correct answers. I don't believe it is about the time, but about learning how to ask for help when we don't meet our goals. Humans are resistant to change for reason too many to write about in this forum. Some of the reasons are good and some can cause big problems down the road in teams, groups, jobs, & relationships. Guiding your kids to understand that it is ok to seek help and that the frustrations of learning new skills will be rewarded in the end. (path of learning) Asking for help is a great habit and one you can foster. Obviously the level of guidance you provide should be appropriate to their age and development. You know best for your kids.
As part of lessons or coaching, I ask that the student/child communicate with me as often as possible so they learn to be proactive in their training. Again according to their age & development. I have a young boy who would text me from mom's phone when he was 8 and now at 12 he texts me in a group chat that includes his parents. He asks me for a time and if his parents are available to take him. He drives the bus but also understands how involved his parents are in the journey.
I know I'm guilty with my own kids of stepping in and doing too much taking away learning opportunities.
- Nolan220, cnosil and BrownBearGolf
-
3
-
13 minutes ago, Getoffmylawn said:
So these are my kids, 6, 5, and 3. My daughter (the 3 year old) will start coming out with me every now and then, but for the past couple years now I have taken the boys with me for 9, sometimes 18 if they are up for it, and put a tee in the fairway about 120-150 yards out and let them go for it. In between, they get to drive the cart while on my lap (I'm on the brake & throttle), I pack junk balls and let them blast them into water hazards, pack snacks they like, and do everything I can to keep it as fun as I can even if it means I'm not really playing.
My older boy shows genuine athletic ability; he's got a good swing for a 6 year old and seems to have really strong hand-eye coordination. His younger brother is a little less interested and aggressive but does well too.
So, I'm not trying to be Earl Woods and raise the next prodigy, but I do hope they grow to love the game, and I do hope to at least facilitate that they learn to play to their potential, whatever that might be.
Questions for anyone with junior golf teaching experience, or who "successfully" raised golfers...am I doing it right so far?
What I really struggle with is when to make technical inputs, especially with my oldest. His wants to set his top hand incredibly weak so I try to coax him to something stronger, and he keeps setting up waaaay right of the target. So, stance, grip...fundamental stuff. Sound about right?
He also tends to swing out of his shoes sometimes to the point that he misses and nearly falls down, but when he makes contact he hits it pretty well. I don't want to tell him to swing slower...everything I've read says to let kids hit it as far as they can and straighten them out later when they're older.
Sorry, bit of a rambling post, but any insights or advice is appreciated. (And when is a junior ready for lessons?)
You are doing fine. Don't teach them - they won't listen to you because they are too busy watching you! The time for group lessons is now. They will learn socialization, how to be coached, how to watch, how to learn, the etiquette of the game, and the learning will be more fun than you coaching them. As you said, it is about potential, when they recognize (your guidance) that they aren't improving any more than you might off the experience of a lesson. They will either like or they won't. I believe that junior golfers spend too much time in private lesson and too little time learning how to train and play in groups - supervised by a great coach. Private lessons should be less frequent and related to the group system. Playing golf drives learning as the pain points create the desire to improve. Challenge them to ask questions when they are lost.
- GolfSpy AFG, cnosil, Nolan220 and 2 others
-
5
-
If you are not provided a plan to improve that relates to how you play and the difficulties you face, I would question the value. In the end, you want to know what to do, how to do, when to do, and why! If that entire plan isn't present, then they are just training you to swing. If that is what you want then it is great!! They should also provide how long it will take, their expectations of you, and your expectations of the coach. Some coaches solve problems for the player and each lesson is a honey moon. I personally don't. I provide enough proof that a change will work and then guide you to discover, learn, and guide your own improvement. I believe in teaching/coaching self efficacy.
Just like any business - what is the mission, what is the strategy to win/achieve, what are the skills necessary, how do you train them, and how to you execute them when playing. Pretty simple.
-
2 hours ago, PMookie said:
I was on Instagram and saw a post by Claude Harmon III with a down-the-line of Koepka in slo-mo. I noticed that Koepka doesn’t have his shaft on his elbow line on the way down, so I messaged Harmon. Well, he actually replied. Here’s what he said:
“I don’t know much, but I do know it’s hard to hit a fade with the club behind u coming down, shallow and the path to the right. U can draw it from there, but u can’t start it left enough to hit a fade.”
Guess what I asked my coach to help me hit?
A fade.... Guess what he taught me? Dropping the club behind me, and swinging around like the Planemate teaches. Wow.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProHere is the rub. Koepka's club is still inside his hands. Let me explain. The camera is setup somewhere between the golf ball/target line & the player's body and at some height based on Claude's preference. In that image Koepka's club appears to be slightly outside the hands. To hit a fade, he needs to swing some amount left of the target line with a closed face producing a ball starting left and fading right. If the ball starts left, meaning a new start line and you were to move that camera to the right, it would then appear that Koepka's club was back inside his hands some amount. This is the downfall of using only a camera if you don't understand what you are looking for. Change the height and angle of the camera and you have no basis for comparison. There are not many, if any, good golfers that swing the the club head outside of the hands.
Take what you are doing a simply baseline shift left a bit and might see your desired fade. Baseline shifts are infrequently employed among amateur golfers and frequently employed with professional golfers. There is a reason few very good players appear setup like the so called desired railroad tracks. The reality is the railroad track alignment is not a true fundamental of golf.
- cksurfdude, cnosil and yungkory
-
3
-
10 hours ago, cnosil said:
@edteergolf thanks for the detailed response and there is lots of information in there to process digest. I really find your reference to Mike Adams interesting; I saw him on an episode of Swing Expedition and was definitely intrigued by what they showed of his approach. I looked up Andreas Kali and he definitely teaches a system; all his students look basically the same.
The reason I like getting instruction from you is discussions like this. To me it is more than just learning to play better; it is also about why we are trying to do the things we do.
Thank you. The key take away is concerning systems. What Kali does works, not because they look the same, but because his kids score well. So, whatever system you chose, commit to it and do not deviate.
- cnosil, Cincyfish and cksurfdude
-
3
-
1 hour ago, ChasingScratch said:
Thanks for chiming in coach. I never want to give away your info without your say, thus the proximity concepts as a general idea rather than your exact standards.
Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpyI appreciate it!
-
7 minutes ago, Lacassem said:
Most of the similarities are where/how these guys look at contact I.e. lead arm straight and extended, forward leg straight and parallel with upper body, head down etc etc. see below DJ and Wolfe exactly the same at impact but prior too very Different. Biggest thing to me is that Wolfe has his lead elbow bent on his backswing
Exactly my point, good golfers deliver the club to very similar positions at impact. I'm saying the club is a very similar position at impact. There are slight varieties of body positions that get the main task done. When people talk about positions, they are talking about body parts. Your body may look different than mine but if we are good, the clubs in space will be very similar. Top of the back swing is only relevant to the individual golfer and how they deliver the club. There are some similarities in body positions but less so than club delivery.
- GolfSpy_SHARK and tony@CIC
-
2
How'd you play?
in The Daily
Posted
Seems to me you are chasing shot shape. 50/50 this is a swing issue or a strategy issue. Your words sound like you are chasing a pattern and hoping a ball does something rather than know it will do something. It is possible that you are aiming too much into trouble hoping that the flight will "bring you back." Ideally, the entire cone is placed so the majority of shots will allow for more access to the greens. As for the putt, you simply didn't get a good read. The bigger issue is it went 3-4' past the hole. Speed is more important than read.