There seem to be two major schools of thought in learning golf.
#1 Sequential... Leadbetter's Links, TGM's Chapter 12-5, The Eight Step Swing, etc..
#2 Dynamic... The motion is not broken so much into segments, but is taught as a whole... Gravity Golf, AJ(Secret Revealed), DeLaTorre's teaching, I think is mostly as a whole swing concept, etc..
Payne Stewart would not think of positions, I am told. Couples, and I think Nicklaus are similar also.
Tiger and many others do use positions, or stages.
Do you think some people are better suited to one or the other, due to their learning style? Can TGM be taught as a dynamic whole from the start... with much success?
With a little instruction, a Broadway dancer could, in a very few minutes, produce a "golf swing" that to the untrained eye looks very much like the "real deal." It would be a thing of grace and beauty and would serve its purpose admirably: namely, to delight and entertain those beyond the footlights. But would it produce expert results on the playing field? Of course not.
Yet, it is this "dynamic whole" that constitutes the Golf Stroke's Basic Motion. It is the framework upon which the Golfer builds his entire Game. The only real difference between the Stroke of the Duffer and the Stroke of the Champion -- or any skill level between the two -- is the precision of the Component Relationships within that Basic Motion.
It is true that some people -- and golf players are people, too -- are more analytical than others. However, you simply cannot become a good player without paying at least some attention to Stroke Mechanics. No one can read the works of Bobby Jones and watch his films without knowing that he paid a great deal of attention to 'cause and effect.' Ben Hogan was the supreme Golf Stroke Mechanic of his time...perhaps of all time.
And Jack Nicklaus? He made modifications to his Grip throughout his entire career. He paid attention to both ends of his Pivot, from its bottom with his Rolling Ankles to its Top with his Stationary Head. He began each new year with his instructor, Jack Grout, and the request to "Teach me golf." They focused on the fundamentals, and as Jack grew older, they worked diligently on Flattening his Swing Plane and making his Stroke more rotary.
Players who choose to learn Feel from Mechanics (as opposed to the other way around) can enjoy continuous progress and a lifetime of better Golf. Homer Kelley wrote: "Is the player benefited by this fragmentation of the Stroke? Undoubtedly. Not only eventually, but immediately." [1-J]
As an example of the true learning process, think of tying your shoelaces. Could you have learned this very complex act as a "dynamic whole?" No. From the first attempt, you brought every bit of mental and manual dexterity you could to bear on the problem, but in the end, the only way you got the job done was to take it one segment at a time. But does that mean that you now must laboriously think through each of these steps each time you tie your shoelaces? Of course not. In fact, if you do, you will not tie your shoelaces nearly as well as you know how to tie them. The glorious news is that you have 'paid the price' and have integrated the independently learned segments into a unified, efficient motion. In other words, a "dynamic whole." You've done the work required and now can tie them with ease and with little, if any, conscious thought.
It is the same process we use learning to drive a stick-shift automobile.
Or learning to write...first in crude block letters...later in flowing, cursive script.
With a little instruction, a Broadway dancer could, in a very few minutes, produce a "golf swing" that to the untrained eye looks very much like the "real deal." It would be a thing of grace and beauty and would serve its purpose admirably: namely, to delight and entertain those beyond the footlights. But would it produce expert results on the playing field? Of course not.
Yet, it is this "dynamic whole" that constitutes the Golf Stroke's Basic Motion. It is the framework upon which the Golfer builds his entire Game. The only real difference between the Stroke of the Duffer and the Stroke of the Champion -- or any skill level between the two -- is the precision of the Component Relationships within that Basic Motion.
It is true that some people -- and golf players are people, too -- are more analytical than others. However, you simply cannot become a good player without paying at least some attention to Stroke Mechanics. No one can read the works of Bobby Jones and watch his films without knowing that he paid a great deal of attention to 'cause and effect.' Ben Hogan was the supreme Golf Stroke Mechanic of his time...perhaps of all time.
And Jack Nicklaus? He made modifications to his Grip throughout his entire career. He paid attention to both ends of his Pivot, from its bottom with his Rolling Ankles to its Top with his Stationary Head. He began each new year with his instructor, Jack Grout, and the request to "Teach me golf." They focused on the fundamentals, and as Jack grew older, they worked diligently on Flattening his Swing Plane and making his Stroke more rotary.
Players who choose to learn Feel from Mechanics (as opposed to the other way around) can enjoy continuous progress and a lifetime of better Golf. Homer Kelley wrote: "Is the player benefited by this fragmentation of the Stroke? Undoubtedly. Not only eventually, but immediately." [1-J]
As an example of the true learning process, think of tying your shoelaces. Could you have learned this very complex act as a "dynamic whole?" No. From the first attempt, you brought every bit of mental and manual dexterity you could to bear on the problem, but in the end, the only way you got the job done was to take it one segment at a time. But does that mean that you now must laboriously think through each of these steps each time you tie your shoelaces? Of course not. In fact, if you do, you will not tie your shoelaces nearly as well as you know how to tie them. The glorious news is that you have 'paid the price' and have integrated the independently learned segments into a unified, efficient motion. In other words, a "dynamic whole." You've done the work required and now can tie them with ease and with little, if any, conscious thought.
It is the same process we use learning to drive a stick-shift automobile.
Or learning to write...first in crude block letters...later in flowing, cursive script.
And so it is with Golf.
As usual, spot on... A week or so ago there was a long debate over at the GEA about where all the TGM'ers had gone. Not to bring that up again, but the thread evolved to a discussion of learning/teaching methodologies, the "whole" swing vs the "fragmented" approach, how golf instruction had been backwards for 500 years and other "Broadway Dancer" approaches to teaching the golf swing. I asked, and am still waiting for an answer to the question: Name one activity that a human does/learns(except neurological functions) that is not an incremental learning activity? I'm still waiting for Mr. Instruction has been Backwards for 500 years to respond with an answer.
G2M
I just posted my answer at GEA. I have been banned from teaching on this forum. You may never see my reply here for that reason....
And I do respect that this site IS proprietary: I should have cleared my posts/comments first with the administrator.
George,
You should have cleared your desire to teach on this site with Lynn first, not me. This is his site and participation here is a privilege, not a right. You are welcome to learn here and to post here. But since you are a teaching professional you should at least intuitively know better than to express your own teaching on this, or any other teaching professionals site for that matter, without clearing it first.
We are discussing the possibility of setting up a special area for dissenting discussion. I'm far from being closed minded about other ways of teaching and learning the golf swing. But we need to get some ground rules established so that the area doesn't turn into a mud wrestling pit. So give us some time and maybe we'll come up with something.
I just posted my answer at GEA. I have been banned from teaching on this forum. You may never see my reply here for that reason....
And I do respect that this site IS proprietary: I should have cleared my posts/comments first with the administrator.
from the other forum, rhetoric limited:
"And who introduce OTHER THINGS that while not in opposition (to TGM) are at least in addition. If he (HK) said them, they are too buried and obscurely refenced (the role of balance as concerns impact on heel or toe, the elasticity of the body, how impact position is SO different from address, how stretching occurring by virtue of centrifugal force lengthens the arms...for a couple - what I call Elephants in the Living Room. Which are universally applicable, but ignored or unknown by TGM disciples."
"And who introduce OTHER THINGS that while not in opposition (to TGM) are at least in addition. If he (HK) said them, they are too buried and obscurely refenced (the role of balance as concerns impact on heel or toe, the elasticity of the body, how impact position is SO different from address, how stretching occurring by virtue of centrifugal force lengthens the arms...for a couple - what I call Elephants in the Living Room. Which are universally applicable, but ignored or unknown by TGM disciples."
I have tried to explain TGM to this guy for many many years. He has selective cognizance on the subject. He rather battle and spin arguments then try to understand. There is a big difference between someone that has original opinions and can intellectually go beyond what Homer laid out and this guy that only wants to be irritating.
The fact that he has access to all the videos, a treasure chest of information is an insult. He has been one of the biggest TGM bashers on the internet since the last century and now can profit from it.
If you saw the youtube of him swinging a golf club- no more needs to be said.
I have tried to explain TGM to this guy for many many years. He has selective cognizance on the subject. He rather battle and spin arguments then try to understand. There is a big difference between someone that has original opinions and can intellectually go beyond what Homer laid out and this guy that only wants to be irritating.
The fact that he has access to all the videos, a treasure chest of information is an insult. He has been one of the biggest TGM bashers on the internet since the last century and now can profit from it.
If you saw the youtube of him swinging a golf club- no more needs to be said.
I saw the video, which he claims isn't real by the way, but he hasn't posted anything else. I know he is FOS, but sometimes just can't restrain myself from trying to correct someone so off base as he was with his "backwards" claims.
G2M
I have tried to explain TGM to this guy for many many years. He has selective cognizance on the subject. He rather battle and spin arguments then try to understand. There is a big difference between someone that has original opinions and can intellectually go beyond what Homer laid out and this guy that only wants to be irritating.
The fact that he has access to all the videos, a treasure chest of information is an insult. He has been one of the biggest TGM bashers on the internet since the last century and now can profit from it.
If you saw the youtube of him swinging a golf club- no more needs to be said.
I hate when ppl generalize TGMers like that....
i.e. "we" don't accept any non TGM ideas...
...
The truth is....Homer has laid it all out pretty damn solidly....so if you have a case (most of these ppl it seems are trying to prove a point of theirs or have just been debated against) you'd better have a good one....
...but in relation to all that....you do have options....(this is TGM)
Paul bertholy teaching approach revolved a around a primary set of drills with the beginning ones static positions with a weighted pipe and no ball. Does anyone feel this approach can be effective since there really is no dynamics involved just posed positions.
Also he was trying to remove the right hand hitting impulse. Doesn;t that occur to happen more likely when you are hitting balls and trying to hit the ball hard and square up the club and use your right hand in the process.
My point is some of the learning has to be done in the real swing mode and even though it may have evolved from chipping and pitching there is a step in the getting to the full swing that can be difficult especially since the motions are faster and it is harder to feel what you are doing.
The question then is if you are trying to learn without a instructor watching you what means do you use to diagnose your problems.
For example at repeated impact your ball goes right. Is it the grip. Is it failure to swivel. Are you sliding past the ball etc etc etc.
Hybrid Mode
