Your Step Into the Foray of the Meaningless World of Golf Blogging.
No better example than Lietzket o show how method instruction could be a bad thing.
Great video, and important point about teaching. You have to wonder...how much bad teaching is out there, and how much harm has been done? No way to know.That was one of Bertholy's sayings...like they tell doctors...."first, do no harm."
I winced at McLean talking about the advantages of 'position golf' swing instruction. I think he doesn't get that 'postion golf swing' instruction is method instruction for the most part. *Alignment* golf would more likely promote a Lietzke type of swing because all it really concerns itself with is a few aligments in the swing, most particularly the alignments at impact. If your alignments at impact are pristine and you can repeat them, then 'alignment golf' doesn't even worry about the other alignments in the swing and certainly doesn't concern itself with positions.One other thing on Lietzke is that I think he shows 'swinging left' but not by the definition of 'swinging too far left to hit it straight.' Lietzke couldn't hit it straight, but certainly swung to the left properly.
Nice video from Jim M. the x-factor guru, whose teachings have assumingly ruined more golfswings as anybody elses ?:-)Yes, the old mantra about the backswing. It sounds as fresh as ever. Here's another one: the ball doesn't know and so on... So, all we need to learn, are Isaac's first and second laws from seventeenhundreds? Get those clubheads moving!Well, seriously, wouldn't it be time to try to understand, what really is good about the backswing for the particular swing and what could be done better. "Too far inside" for somebody really can be too little for someone else, can't it.
Post a Comment
(click 'Add To Cart' button)
4 comments:
No better example than Lietzket o show how method instruction could be a bad thing.
Great video, and important point about teaching. You have to wonder...how much bad teaching is out there, and how much harm has been done? No way to know.
That was one of Bertholy's sayings...like they tell doctors...."first, do no harm."
I winced at McLean talking about the advantages of 'position golf' swing instruction. I think he doesn't get that 'postion golf swing' instruction is method instruction for the most part. *Alignment* golf would more likely promote a Lietzke type of swing because all it really concerns itself with is a few aligments in the swing, most particularly the alignments at impact. If your alignments at impact are pristine and you can repeat them, then 'alignment golf' doesn't even worry about the other alignments in the swing and certainly doesn't concern itself with positions.
One other thing on Lietzke is that I think he shows 'swinging left' but not by the definition of 'swinging too far left to hit it straight.' Lietzke couldn't hit it straight, but certainly swung to the left properly.
Nice video from Jim M. the x-factor guru, whose teachings have assumingly ruined more golfswings as anybody elses ?:-)
Yes, the old mantra about the backswing. It sounds as fresh as ever. Here's another one: the ball doesn't know and so on... So, all we need to learn, are Isaac's first and second laws from seventeenhundreds? Get those clubheads moving!
Well, seriously, wouldn't it be time to try to understand, what really is good about the backswing for the particular swing and what could be done better. "Too far inside" for somebody really can be too little for someone else, can't it.
Post a Comment