Instinctive Golf

...those that read the blog with any regularity will be aware that I am an enthusiastic client of the Instinctive Golf team. I travel 131 miles to catch up with them, a commitment they thank me for each time we meet up. They have no need to thank me- they're quite simply that good.

What makes them so good? Quite frankly it's their focus. Instead of focusing on what positions you need to be in during the swing, looking on video comparing swing with a tour player, they focus on results. That's not to say they don't look at things like Posture Grip and Alignment, they do, as they encouraged me to explore a different finesse grip (I'd mimicked Mr Furyk's double overlap grip, Kendal encouraged me to look at a baseball grip using hockey player's split grip as an analogy). What they don't do is focus on these aspects heavily before allowing players on to the fun stuff. They spoke to us for about 20 minutes, showed us a few videos on putting then out for a series of skills challenges - all the while prowling around, quietly correcting anything that was going to unduly hinder us, asking us searching questions and encouraging us to question that which we'd considered a given. They'd also spoken to us about SAM putting labs data, about how Tiger was often 4-6 degrees open at set up, but bang on line at impact. Another key pro, a hard practicing 3 time major winner was always ideally square at setup, but all over the place at impact. This freed us up. I can't speak for the others, but I'd been starting to get a bit obsessive compulsive about my set up. Now I'm looking to get about right, and using things like their skills test and my putt-pucks rebound test to get feedback.

Short game teaching was similar- this time there were a few slow motion videos of impact with wedge, mid 7 long irons, fairway wood and driver and then a discussion on how to achieve this. Then on to the skills test, with Kendal and Scott prowling.

The long game session was revelatory. Kendal reminded us that golf balls do not have volition, and therefore have to do as we tell them. We spoke about the influence of the clubface, and of swing path and how Trackman has belied the myth that the "swingpath sends it and the clubface bends it", how the clubface angle at impact is responsible for about 80% of the ball flight (although the higher the loft the less influence this has) and then he had us swinging with a very shut clubface and swinging hard to the right, then slightly less closed, slightly less right etc. We also spoke about the need for altering the ball position for these changes.

The above is revelatory enough, but it's not even the main benefit from this. It's the start of the road to self coaching that is the real take home from this. After every shot: the questions : "is that what I wanted to happen?" if not "why did that happen?", "did I successfully reproduce my rehearsal swing?" if not "why not? what got in the way?" if yes "why didn't it work?" "what can I change to make it work next time?".

Experiential learning. And a focus on coaching golf, not just golf swing.

It's not an easy path - hence the post on conviction- as it swims against standard wisdom. Many pros are scornful of the Instinctive Golf method "oh, that's how you can swing way". But that attitude needs examination. If one did have a hideous, looping swing worse than Mr Furyk's but if if were repeatable, and you could hit a high draw and low fade and all shots in between, without putting undue stress on the body, how much would you wish to change that swing? I certainly wouldn't. The other thought is that most people, whilst trying to get the clubface coming through the impact area in a predictable repeating fashion will end up swinging the club in what could be considered a classical fashion. It's just that the focus was on getting the correct ball flight, rather than getting into the correct positions throughout the swing and assuming that will automatically produce the desired ball flight.

My parents took up skiing in their fifties, and were enthusiastic participants but found that traditional ski instruction wasn't the best for how they needed to learn; a friend's recommendation led them to Ally Ross, a septuagenarian who went through the physics with them, and explained his frustrations with traditional instruction, as he felt that effect was often being taught as cause. I wonder if that might be the case with traditional instruction; I obviously don't know enough about the physics of the swing to comment on this, but what I can say is that this seems to be the best way for me to learn this.

Hence the 131 mile drive!