Fairy Dust and Truth Serum

I have been in the golf business for over 40 years and it was late in my career when  I finally figured out something important. One of them is fairy dust and how it applies to golfers and the other is the truth about golf instruction.  I haven’t decided if nobody is aware of it or just chooses to ignore it.

Fairy Dust

Fairy dust is what I call natural talent or potential. I guess it could be described in a lot of different ways but I prefer to call it fairy dust because it doesn't apply only to golfers or just athletic ability.

 At birth everyone has fairy dust sprinkled on them in varying kinds and amounts. Sometimes it's in the form of athletic talent other times it may be in the form of musical talent or a great singing voice but certain individuals are just simply potentially more gifted than others.  They got more more fairy dust.

Truth

 The truth that nobody seems to be aware of is that we only get the fairy dust at birth. Nobody else has the ability to sprinkle it on us.  I think one reason golfers get so frustrated is they are often led to believe that with proper instruction or equipment there is no limit to how good they can become and this is a complete falsehood.  Saying that with proper teaching and enough lessons and practice any can become a scratch golfer is like saying with enough work and training everyone can be an accomplished musician, singer, or artist.

Unfortunately that just simply is not true.  When I was younger and played baseball and football I wanted to be able to run faster.  I learned that even with good athletic talent and hard work I could shave of a few tenths of a second off my speed but was never going to be able to run fast.  I didn’t get dusted with the speed potential at birth.

One of the things I did get was the power dust.  Even in little league I led the league in home runs and triples.  In golf I could hit the ball 300 yards as a teenager with balata golf balls and persimmon woods but even at that there were a few that got more of the dust than I did.  I don’t think you can learn it.  You are either born with it or you are not.  On average, most recreational golfers, according to Golf Digest, average somewhere around 195-205 yards with their drivers.

Research shows that most of them can improve by only around 11 percent .  That means 195 yards becomes 216 yards.  That is the amount of fairy dust they got at birth.  This unfortunate truth does not fit well in marketing of golf lessons and golf equipment but it is true nonetheless.  Any time averages are discussed there will be exceptions at both ends but the odds are against you.

The same is true with putting.  If you are a poor putter you can improve but only to a certain level.  If you don’t have the sprinkle of dust you will never be a great putter.

Have Fun

Golf is a wonderful game that can be played by all ages for a lifetime and anyone that has not tried is probably missing a wonderful experience.  The point here is to realize and accept your limitations but learn to have more fun doing it.

We hear all the time about lowering scores or hitting the ball better, etc. but how often do you hear anyone promising that you can have more fun.

For all but a very tiny percentage of people golf is just a hobby or a pastime like fishing or painting or many other things.  It is something you do for enjoyment.

Even if you can’t become a long hitter or a scratch player you can learn to have more fun while playing the game.

Think about what you enjoy the most in golf.  Surveys indicate hitting more good shots is more enjoyable for the average golfer but golf instruction seems to be fixated on shooting lower scores.

Which is more fun and gives you a bigger rush, shooting a lower score or hitting it stiff and making birdies and bragging to your buddies?  Since instruction seems to be fixed on scoring you are constantly being encouraged to hit to the middle of the green.  In a recent study it showed that golfers with handicaps in the 15 to 20 range only hit an average of slightly less than 4 greens a round.  If you are aiming at the middle of the green how many birdie putts will you have.  Unless you are a great putter the answer is none.

If you want to have more fun follow spots psychologist Dr. Bob Rotella’s advice.  Always pick a small, well defined target.  If you want to have more fun aim at the flag stick.  If you are successful you will have a short birdie putt.

Conclusion

We all have potential in some area and very few end up realizing their full potential .  I think that is the real point of golf instruction.  Helping people develop their potential and not building a perfect swing.  I also think we need to be honest with students and give them realistic expectations.

The talent we are born with is what we have.  Nobody can give us more later.

Once a player's knowledge level matches their talent level, more knowledge does not improve scoring or ball striking much.

Who Are Really the Best Teachers?

I was watching the golf tournament last weekend and kept seeing ads from Revolution Golf and the Golf Channel promoting how great their golf instructors are and it reminded me of a recent conversation I had.

In that discussion about golf instruction  it was pointed out to me that golf instruction is almost completely subjective.  All about marketing and taking peoples word for how good they are and how good their theories and methods are.

SUBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is evidence that you cannot evaluate -- you have to simply accept what the person says or reject it.

OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is evidence you can examine and evaluate for yourself.

My friend, Judge Tinker, frequently talks about how few people are interested in taking golf lessons and how few golfers actually take them. I think there may be a correlation between that and SUBJECTIVE EVIDENCE.  Today's consumers tends to be very cynical so simply trying to market to them by saying trust me, I am better or trust me, I can help you isn't going to work with most people.

In the past golf professionals were held in much higher esteem than they seem to be today so what worked in the past may not work as well today especially with younger people.

With verifiable data would golfers tend to trust you more?

Is it possible that more people would be prone to take lessons if there was OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE to prove how good someone and their methods are?  With today's technology it seems to be very doable. It be a simple matter of using technology to establish a baseline for each student. Prior to the first lesson simply chart club head speed, smash factor, center line variance, carry distance etc. After 4 lessons do the readings again and compare them to the baseline readings. That would give objective evidence of how much a teacher can actually improve his or her students in 4 lessons. No debate, no simply proclaiming that you help everybody, it would just recording the facts.

I know that those people that are successful today are not interested in seeing anything change and I don't blame them.   It is like the old saying, “If it ain't broke don't fix it,” but for the younger teachers coming up and trying to get themselves established and build a clientele I would think that they would embrace the idea of objective evidence. I think it might have a very positive effect on the golfing public if someone can say here is the evidence that, x percent of the time my students improve by X percentage with only 1,2,3,4 lessons etc.

Can you imagine a Top 100 List based on OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE?  Might be interesting.

Has Golf Instruction Evolved in the Best Direction?

Here is a little food for thought for all the golfers out there and I know before I write this that a lot of my fellow professionals are probably not going to agree with this but that’s fine.  We are all entitled to our opinions and this just happens to be mine and it is my blog.

Over the years I have learned a great deal about the golf swing, how people learn it, and about helping people strike a golf ball effectively.  The one thing that I have found is that the more I learned the clearer and more simple it has all become.

Recently I have been involved in many conversations and debates on how a golf club should best be swung.  Invariably, sooner or later, it evolves into a discussion of positions and frequently includes pictures, videos, graphs, etc. in order to prove a point.

The Modern Premise

Golf instruction has evolved over the years and especially since the introduction of high speed photography.  With the most recent developments in technology it has accelerated.  We now even have scientist in disagreement.  The prevailing theory is that if we can break the swing of successful players down into small enough increments we can discover why they strike the ball so well and pass that information on.

My Conclusion

My conclusion, after years of research and personal experience as both a teacher and a player, is that great ball strikers didn’t become great ball strikers because of working on positions.  Those positions evolved as a result of  improving ball striking.

I think most can agree that Ben Hogan and Moe Norman could control ball flight as well or better than anyone.  In their pursuit of ball flight do you really think either of them said to them self “If I just work on achieving this position my ball flight will improve?”  I personally don’t think so, however, I do think that it is far more likely they would hit a shot and say “What does the club need to at impact to achieve the ball flight or shot that I want?”

That is how they ended up with two totally different swings that could both control the ball.

Bobby Jones summed it up very well in this statement:

"Apart from the intention to deliver the blow in a proper way, there is nothing more important to the golf swing than that it should have the qualities of smoothness and rhythm, and I can conceive of no reason why it should not possess both these qualities so long as it is not interfered with by the conscious effort to pass by rote through a series of prescribed positions."

My final conclusion is that we need to return to teaching ball striking and how to use the tool (club) and not concentrate so much on positions.  I have a pretty strong hunch that great teachers have always understood this with all levels of players.

Technology

I am not asking anyone to abandon technology.  There is some very good technology out there that is particularly useful in certain situations and can be used to reinforce what the student sees and feels.  All I am recommending is that we go back to teaching from a student centered impact backwards and stop teaching from an instructor centered club/body positions forward.


That is it from the cave for now.