Opinion & Analysis

The problem with golf instruction books

Published

8 years ago

Oct 18, 2016

“When I came to this seminar, I was confused. I’m still confused but on a higher level.” Enrico Fermi

I have worked with many great teachers in my life; men and women who really understood the nuts and bolts of teaching golf. Together we learned to correct golf swing errors. We learned that every golfer was unique, with their own personal learning style, swing problems, physique and habits. We understood there is no one way to play golf, and the more we allowed for individual differences, the more effective we were in helping them.

But the field of golf instruction is not unlike the academic profession, where the motto is and always has been “publish or perish.” Teachers feel the need to write a book, publish a video, or somehow get their message out to their devotees to be successful or to reap some gain, financial or otherwise. The result of this is often a deviation from their original approach to teaching. Authors choose a title, let’s say How to Swing or How to Set Up, and they set about expressing their belief in the best way to go about that task. When the same teachers are on the lesson tee, however, they’re dealing with a variety of ways to swing or set up, all based on the needs of the individual in front of them. And I think this problem is exasperated when the authors are former players, who are suggesting things almost entirely based how they achieved success at golf.

This is when instruction books and tapes are at their most vulnerable and, in my opinion, are least helpful.

Let me cite one very well-known example to make my point. There is perhaps no more famous illustration in golf books than Anthony Ravelli’s wonderful drawing of Ben Hogan’s grip. There is one very big problem with that picture, however. While Hogan’s hands are positioned perfectly for his swing, they demonstrate a position that may be too much to the left (weak) for many golfers. That grip can be very effective for those who fight a hook, perhaps 15 percent of the people who play golf. And of course, it is the way Mr. Hogan learned to hold the club to offset his own tendency to hook the golf ball early in his career. But the vast majority of golfers may very well slice from that “weaker” grip.

Ben Hogan was perhaps the finest striker of a golf ball who ever lived, very few people in our game would take issue with that at all, but by advocating his personal preference he is not taking into account many of the people who, of course, do not have his talent, his swing plane, his lag, his ball position and so on. And, what’s even more harmful is this: because the great man said it, it became the bible for many readers.

Alex Morrison said golf is a left-sided game, but Ben Hogan said he wished he had three right hands. Ernest Jones said swing the clubhead, but Eddie Merins said swing the handle. Jimmy Ballard teaches moving off the ball, but Andy Bennet wants you to stay on the ball. John Redman suggested a strong grip, but Tommy Armour a weaker one. On and on, ad infinitum… but here’s the catch. I’m willing to bet that every one of those great teachers would make exceptions based on the student that was in front of them on the range. That’s because in golf instruction, there is nothing that’s for everybody.

Some instruction manuals are decidedly more “choice” in their approach. Jim Hardy has always taken the more alternative approach in his work. “The Plane Truth,” criticized by some for taking an only-two-ways-to-swing approach, still offers a choice. In it, Hardy explains that IF you swing one way, THEN you should do this to to complement it.

John Jacobs wrote the seminal work on this subject in his book “Practical Golf” many years ago. Although science has gone on to disprove some of the findings in the book (the initial direction of the golf ball is NOT the result of the path of the golf club, for example), the information is still invaluable from an alternative approach to swinging the club.

If you are attempting to learn to swing from a method-oriented book, you must be very careful to get the whole picture before attempting to incorporate the method into your golf swing. This is one of the most common reasons I see players get stuck in the mud in their improvement. If you are reading a certain book and NOT getting anywhere, there is one of two reasons: the book is spewing misinformation OR you are not doing ALL the book suggests.

When the teacher becomes an author, he or she is entering another realm; an area often removed from the craft of teaching people to play golf and into an area of teaching golf. There is a quantitative difference between the two. Myself and many teachers like me teach people to play golf; we do not teach golf. If you read through my writings on GolfWRX or anywhere, really, they are always written in an if-then format. If you tend to do this, THEN try this… there is no other effective way, at least none that I’m aware of. And if anyone knows of one, I’d be happy to hear it.

Those of us who dare to teach must remain students of our individual disciplines, and our continuing education needs to be shared on a case-by-case basis. Offering universal prescriptions for individual problems is a dead end in my work, and unfortunately many golf instruction manuals are written in this way.

I have an online swing analysis program that many GolfWRXers have tried and enjoyed. If you’d like a diagnosis an explanation of exactly what you’re doing, click here for more info, or contact me on Facebook.

Your Reaction?

LIKE180
LEGIT25
WOW7
LOL2
IDHT1
FLOP2
OB1
SHANK14

Related Topics:

Up Next

Helping you make the decision of a lifetime: “Where should I play college golf?”

Don't Miss

The myth of playing to your handicap, and why it’s ruining your expectations

Dennis Clark

Dennis Clark is a PGA Master Professional. Clark has taught the game of golf for more than 30 years to golfers all across the country, and is recognized as one of the leading teachers in the country by all the major golf publications. He is also is a seven-time PGA award winner who has earned the following distinctions: -- Teacher of the Year, Philadelphia Section PGA -- Teacher of the Year, Golfers Journal -- Top Teacher in Pennsylvania, Golf Magazine -- Top Teacher in Mid Atlantic Region, Golf Digest -- Earned PGA Advanced Specialty certification in Teaching/Coaching Golf -- Achieved Master Professional Status (held by less than 2 percent of PGA members) -- PGA Merchandiser of the Year, Tri State Section PGA -- Golf Professional of the Year, Tri State Section PGA -- Presidents Plaque Award for Promotion and Growth of the Game of Golf -- Junior Golf Leader, Tri State section PGA -- Served on Tri State PGA Board of Directors. Clark is also former Director of Golf and Instruction at Nemacolin Woodlands Resort. Dennis now teaches at Bobby Clampett's Impact Zone Golf Indoor Performance Center in Naples, FL. .

37 Comments

stephenf

Feb 16, 2017 at 11:25 am

“Exacerbated,” not “exasperated.”

Anyway…of course your idea is basically right. It’s hard to write an instructional book that allows for different inclinations and different habits a student might bring, but some have done better than others. Even with the best, though, it gets really difficult not to end up trying to cover all possibilities, so that the book becomes encyclopedic and (sometimes) overwhelming. Leadbetter’s stuff has been criticized for this, but the truth is that any individual player who goes to take a lesson with Leadbetter is going to get a couple of critical things to work on that will probably improve his game, not the whole range of possibilities, as ends up happening so often in a book.

I think this is why some of the best instruction books are often those that limit themselves to a specific approach or a specific problem. One that comes immediately to mind is Peter Kostis’ _The Inside Path to Better Golf_, which to me is the best almost-completely-unknown golf instructional book of all time. When I was teaching I almost never found a player who wasn’t, or wouldn’t have been, helped tremendously by both the concepts and the drills. Kostis (this is back when he was working with the Golf Digest schools, before he was a TV commentator and ended up glurging a variety of contradictory instructional approaches into one big ball) advances the specific and relatively limited idea that most amateurs do things in their swing that get them outside and steep on the downswing, and it kills their games, so the aim of instruction ought to be an inside and shallow approach to the ball, with a free and full release. Anything that helps that is good, and anything that hurts it is bad. That’s the simple mode of the book. He addresses the elements that contribute and those that impede, and he has the student go through organized stages of development, starting with the release of the clubhead from the hands, then adding the rotation of the arms that supports and adds to that release, then the movement of the trunk and legs that supports and enables the swinging elements (hands-arms-club), then the timing that makes it work.

In fact, the principles from that book (I had a live teacher who recommended it, actually) were what got me from being a sort of scrambling scratch-to-two-or-three handicapper — and I wouldn’t have been anywhere near scratch if I hadn’t had a ridiculously good short game (out of desperation and need, actually) — to a plus-2 and beyond (better than that when I was playing as a pro) who could actually, and finally, strike the ball as well as the other good players I was playing against, which had never been the case before.

It’s true that any approach like this is overdoable, and eventually you might have to do things to moderate the degree of the inside path and so forth (Kostis covers that possibility briefly at points, but doesn’t let it sidetrack him), and that in fact is what happens with a lot of pros and explains why what works for them at an advanced stage in their development might be literally the opposite of what works for a 12-handicapper. A pro who has already trained himself to swing the club from the inside with an emphatic and free release of the clubhead might need some adjustments that keep him from turning a draw into a hook or from getting so shallow the ground gets in the way (Haney had to cover that with O’Meara at one point, in fact), but almost any amateur who does the same things that pro does to address the opposite problem from what the amateur has is going to be driving the wrong way down a one-way street. (In my specific case, I _never_ had to stop working on shallow-and-inside, and still am to this day, probably because of basic physical characteristics — 6’3″, long arms and legs, etc. — and various natural inclinations. Some people will, some won’t.)

Anyway…that’s just one example of a book that avoids the “encyclopedia of everything” approach, instead preferring to focus on a specific solvable problem, in my opinion to great — and very underrated — effect.

Of course, you can be a true genius and write the kinds of books John Jacobs did, too, which manage to boil down a range of possibilities into simple explanations and conditional statements without being confusing or overwhelming at all.

Reply Report comment
- stephenf
  
  Feb 16, 2017 at 11:30 am
  
  Sorry, have no idea why hitting the enter key twice doesn’t space paragraphs apart.
  
  Also a good example of a “limited and specific focus” book: Ernest Jones and his ideas about swinging versus levering. Or Eddie Merrins and “swing the handle, not the clubhead.” Ironically, both were talking about essentially the same thing, even though they put it in superficially contradictory terms — Jones advising to swing the clubhead, Merrins to avoid swinging the clubhead. If you read the substance of both, though, you’ll find that by “swinging the handle, not the clubhead,” Merrins is talking about avoiding a throw of the clubhead with a levering action, while Jones is talking about a true swinging motion that ends at the clubhead.
  
  Reply Report comment
  - stephenf
    
    Feb 16, 2017 at 11:32 am
    
    Also, of course it’s a good point about Hogan, corroborated by others. I forget who it was who said Hogan’s book should’ve been retitled “How not to Duck-Hook, by Ben Hogan.”
    
    Reply Report comment
- stephenf
  
  Feb 16, 2017 at 11:40 am
  
  As for Jim Hardy, he’s a smart guy who has had a good influence on some teachers (notably Hank Haney) and says a lot of true things, but the basis of his “two categories, 1P and 2P” idea is really flawed. Almost every tour pro and every great player in history, including the ones 1P devotees cite as being 1Pers, actually swings the club on two planes to some extent. Really it’s a matter of a continuum. If you’re exactly perpendicular to your spine angle and exactly across your shoulder line (assuming it’s also perpendicular) at the top, it’s true that you can do certain things and emphasize certain actions more than somebody who is dramatically off perpendicular. But the truth is that very close to 100% of good players are off perpendicular to some extent. It’s a matter of _how_ much they vary from perpendicular, and what they do to accommodate that. It’s also true that forcing a swing into that exact-perpendicular configuration isn’t possible for most players without creating a list of other necessary compensations or problems.
  
  It’s a good example of a theory that is oversimplified (in posing a bright line between the “two types of swing”), and yet a theory that has helped some players and is useful in certain ways.
  
  Reply Report comment
- John Mule'
  
  Aug 1, 2023 at 8:08 am
  
  I’ve been playing the game for decades – have read hundreds of instructionals – and taken lessons/advice from known teaching professionals but this is the single best, most helpful series of comments on the golf swing I’ve ever encountered. Only wish I’d have met someone with your insight and expertise much earlier in my development as a player. By the way, the Kostis book is brilliant. I now recommend it to many who want to improve (though I do get funny looks when recommending a 40+ year old golf book to them…).
  
  Reply Report comment
baudi

Oct 25, 2016 at 4:36 am

Nice article! What I like is the reasoning behind your thinking. Following ideas may/will lead to situations where the player gets stuck with his game. To solve this problem there are many possibilities but not any solution fits in as a solution. It takes hard work and a holistic view to get back on track. To get a holistic view on a swing expanding knowledge of certain types of swings is useful. Hence a lot of golf books to be studied.

However, the chosen examples of Hogan and Jacobs do not make your point. My study of golf books lead to the following futile remarks.

The grip as demonstrated by Hogan/Ravielli/Wind is not just a picture. It is explained, demonstrated in a full chapter of 19 pages! There is a complete and very consistent motivation behind it. Pages 67 and 102 will contain vital information related back to this chapter. These are the very best pages I’ve ever read on gripping the club.

Concerning John Jacobs: you write the initial direction of the golf ball is NOT the result of the path of the golf club.
There is no such claim in Practical Golf. Jacobs’ description and drawings of balllfight/impact geometry are very precise and clear. In the introduction he states : the direction in which the clubface looks is the most important of the four impact elements that determine the behavior of every shot you hit. In the early 70’s Jacobs was not aware of Jorgensens D-PLane but I am sure Jacobs’ would have acknowledged his ideas.

Reply Report comment
Steven

Oct 20, 2016 at 1:16 pm

Great Article Dennis. I 100% agree. A major problem is that most amateurs don’t have the time to ingrain the entirety of a “method”. Many golfers will also give up when getting the full method doesn’t happen quickly. I believe it is much better to work with the good parts of a swing that is natural for the person and then make adjustments for consistency, etc.

The classic example for a non-traditional swing is Jim Furyk, but you can also look to Dustin Johnson. His bowed wrist and closed clubface at the top are not advised, but he clears his hips fast and gets the face square when it matters. Jordan Spieth has a modified chicken wing finish. No one is the Iron Byron, so we all need something that works with our natural tendencies. The smaller the adjustments to our natural swing, the easier it is to take to the course.

Keep up the good work Dennis.

Reply Report comment
Bilo

Oct 20, 2016 at 6:44 am

Hogan 5 lessons and Stan Utley was all I needed to become scratch. Reading is fundamental!

Reply Report comment
Riggie

Oct 19, 2016 at 7:35 pm

Many, like me, start with one or two golf instruction books, do not like what they read and end up buying more and more till the golf books are not really teaching nothing but becoming a hobby collecting golf books…my reason trying to find the same ideas in two different books…while after about 60 instruction books I gave up….no two teachers seem to highlight the same principal ( I even have 3 different versions of the Moe Norman single plane SIMPLE single plane swing). Just go to the driving range and find a way to take the club back and bring it back so club face points where you want to hit the ball..once you can hit it where you can find it you can figure out how to hit it higher, lower, farther.. or better yet one you can hit it “more or less” toward the green go and practice putting for hours and hours..that will lower your score..

Reply Report comment
Grizz01

Oct 19, 2016 at 3:58 pm

Periodicals are pretty much useless as well. Once you have 6 months worth they just start to repeat themselves. Seriously, this is not rocket science. Very few things are new to golf/golf swing for the last 40 years. In fact I think most average golfers are dying from information overload. Just hit the ball.

Reply Report comment
Stevo

Oct 19, 2016 at 12:17 pm

I have bought many instruction books (Nicklaus, Leadbetter, Watson, etc.). I agree that each one taught something different and were generally not much help.

I have gone thru 5 instructors (multiple lessons from some) who said I had a decent swing, but never really offered anything different to try. Of course, as often happens, I hit the ball pretty well when I was with them. But on the course, I never knew where the ball was going, usually not where I wanted it to. Scared of the hook, so I might over-compensate with a slice, and then vice versa. I tried every kind of swing change (including some useful info from Martin Hall on GC), but never found the magic elixer.

Ready to give up the game at 69, I recently decided to go back to the beginning, the grip. I felt I was all over the place at the top. I dug out my Ben Hogan Five Lessons, and used his grip concept. Wow, for the last 4 rounds I have been hitting them where I am aiming. I rarely lose a ball, whereas I could lose 10 a round before. Looking forward to practicing and using Ben’s concepts, recommend you at least give it a try.

Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 19, 2016 at 2:18 pm
  
  Precisely! Whatever works! That’s my core message if you read through my work. Thx
  
  Reply Report comment
ooffa

Oct 19, 2016 at 9:14 am

I would much rather read and study a book then work with a golf instructor.

Reply Report comment
dapadre

Oct 19, 2016 at 6:18 am

Great article as always Dennis and so very true! I was having this sort of conversation in the clubhouse the other day. Since every individual is so unique (long arms , short arms, flexibility levels, eye dominance etc etc) there is not perfect swing for everyone. I love BH 5 fundamentals an he was without doubt one of the greatest ball strikers BUT………….He fought a hook so his whole mind set was avoiding that left side. He set up pretty closed on his mid to long irons/woods, Trevino on the other hand setup crazy open with a strong grip in a time mind you they said with strong grip you couldnt win. Scott Percy uses a baseball grip, Steve Jones used a reverse overlap to win the 1996 US Open. I could go on and on. I believe you need to find that which works for you as it revolves around you based on sound golf basics. At the end of the day, im a firm believer that IMPACT (ZONE) is everything. Take all swings and see the impact position……..the same.

Reply Report comment
Mat

Oct 19, 2016 at 6:16 am

I guess that’s why Bobby Clampett’s stuff resonates with me. In a lot of ways, he isn’t teaching the “swing”, rather he’s focusing on making sure the student understands what the club head is supposed to do *at impact*. It’s something that 95% of players don’t fully grasp to a material level. You don’t have to know trackman stuff, but you do have to understand “compression” / the feel of proper impact, how your path affects it, and how to achieve it within your body’s abilities.

I’ve read many how-to-swing books, and most demonstrate what works for them, or a “majority”, or whatever. Perfect detail. But when a player reads it with a terrible idea of how to hit a ball, it engrains the wrong thing. It makes you better at hitting a bad shot!

Reply Report comment
Tim

Oct 19, 2016 at 12:54 am

Dennis, I get what you are saying, but don’t you agree that, ideally, biomechanics and physics would create swings that look very similar among golfers without viable physical handicaps or serious mobility issues? Other than small variances, we are all made the same with muscles that contract the same way and we all work within the limitations of the laws of physics. My point being that there should be and is a “best” way to swing that works within these scientific laws. This would give everyone the highest odds of making a repeatable swing that creates the greatest accuracy and distance possible given your physical make-up. I get that there are thousands of ways to play golf well. Hopefully I have made it somewhat clear that scientifically there should be a best way to swing that could be applied to the masses because of our shared, slightly varied, biological factors and the laws of physics that we are forced to operate in.

Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 19, 2016 at 3:43 pm
  
  Tim, I agree to this extent: Biomechanics and the resulting physics of ball flight are universal but the programming of those motions is individual. In my experience as a teacher, i have observed that the neurons activated to direct the physical motions are highly individualistic. Everybody I teach internalizes the result of an unwanted outcome differently. To some it is an abject failure and to others a learning opportunity. Therefore they will DIRECT their body to activate a quite different set of motions. Yes these too have existential limits as you noted, but if we, as teachers, disregard the mind’s effect on HOW to program muscle, tendon, skeletal movement, we are removing the “human element”, as Homer Kelly said. I have learned not to take that risk. That is what I meant by teaching people to play golf, not teaching golf. If I isolate the instruction to simply the motions and not the person, I’m on shaky ground…brain dead people unfortunately do not move. The uniqueness to which the article makes reference, is more neuroscientific than scientific, I suppose. I wonder if Jim Furyk learned to program his muscles to first lift the club straight up, OR did he first learn to drop it way behind him? It really doesn’t matter, does it? Thoughts? Thx
  
  Reply Report comment
- Bob Pegram
  
  Oct 20, 2016 at 2:39 am
  
  Tim –
  You are not considering that people learn physical performance habits from other sports or even other physical tasks before they ever get serious about golf. Those physical performance habits become second nature and are often difficult or impossible to get rid of when learning the golf swing. They affect what methods work. Sometimes only unorthodox methods work.
  There are also physical variations that greatly affect a golf swing. For example, there is no way a golfer on the loose-jointed end of the spectrum can swing the same as a golfer with very little flexibility. Their ranges of motion are extremely different, therefore their methods of swinging a golf club have to be different to be successful.
  Arnold Palmer learned to slash at the ball when he was very young. Even though, when he was middle aged, he could swing smoothly and gracefully when relaxed, as soon as it counted, the slashing swing overwhelmed any other type of swing he knew how to perform.
  We all have tendencies like that and so there will never be a standard swing for successful golfers. We all have to adapt our swings to our physical quirks.
  
  Reply Report comment
  - Dennis Clark
    
    Oct 20, 2016 at 4:02 pm
    
    True Bob. Many boys for example start with baseball; the biggest habit learned at a young age is “step into the pitch’. This “habit” often equates to what Brian Manzella calls “handle dragging” and…of course slicing!
    
    Reply Report comment
Rmauritz

Oct 18, 2016 at 9:23 pm

Faldo’s A Swing For Life is the best golf instruction book I have read.

Reply Report comment
Pingback: The problem with golf instruction books | Swing Update
Tom Stickney

Oct 18, 2016 at 6:10 pm

Great article Dennis

Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 18, 2016 at 6:35 pm
  
  Thx pro
  
  Reply Report comment
Tom

Oct 18, 2016 at 4:40 pm

Swing the club head through the sweet spot with a square (ish) face and a straight (ish) path at a high rate of speed.

Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 18, 2016 at 6:42 pm
  
  Yep simple as that!
  
  Reply Report comment
Mike

Oct 18, 2016 at 4:11 pm

So do you think the BioSwing guys are closer to getting it right describing various difference characteristics and coming up with screening tests to see where players fit?

This is not a pitch or a b*%#& about BioSwing either. I know little about it.

Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 18, 2016 at 6:41 pm
  
  Mike I think 3-D is the truest eval we have out there now. GEARS is the best!
  
  Reply Report comment
farmer

Oct 18, 2016 at 2:53 pm

The biggest problem is that feel is not real. What you think you are doing is not necessarily what you are doing. If you could video your swing and play it back on a life sized screen, you would see what an instructor sees, at least to scale. It is unlikely that a hdcp player could accurately identify where they go off the track, and even less likely that they could identify the cause.

Reply Report comment
- Philip
  
  Oct 18, 2016 at 4:48 pm
  
  Except even video is not necessary “real” – I can change how a swing looks by changing the angles used to take the video, or lens/camera combination, or f-stop. I think one just needs to use consistent perspective when evaluating their swing and understand how to compare it to anyone else if they want to. I used to think my swing was really flat and that I had very little back swing because I was viewing it by turning my head versus from a mirror in front of me.
  
  Reply Report comment
  - Dennis Clark
    
    Oct 18, 2016 at 6:40 pm
    
    True Phil. moving the camera even a few inched can make a difference. Radar better but 3-D Best! Look into GEARS eval, it’s well worth it!
    
    Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 18, 2016 at 6:44 pm
  
  Feel and real are not only NOT the same thing, in golf, they are not even close!
  
  Reply Report comment
James Lahey

Oct 18, 2016 at 2:12 pm

Nice article.

To me this underlies the importance of taking from a variety of sources. That way, any one teacher’s bias will be balanced out–not all that different in how we build our life values and philosophy. Just another way our the path through our golf lives mimics our real lives.

~JL

Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 18, 2016 at 6:38 pm
  
  True JL, golf is a microcosm of life. Have you read “Golf in the Kingdom”?
  
  Reply Report comment
- Dennis Clark
  
  Oct 18, 2016 at 8:36 pm
  
  Old Percy, turn-in-a-barrel, Boomer…Great contributor in early days of golf.
  
  Reply Report comment
  - Greg V
    
    Oct 19, 2016 at 8:07 am
    
    Dennis,
    
    I think that “turn in a barrel” is an over simplification of Boomer’s concept. What is lost in that, is that Boomer wanted the hips to turn “high”; if they sink, they can get stuck in the barrel – which can happen when the legs flex too much, or when the spine angle is lost.
    
    Reply Report comment
Bobalu

Oct 18, 2016 at 11:49 am

Spot on article!

Reply Report comment
Greg V

Oct 18, 2016 at 10:58 am

Excellent article.

This is precisely why I love to read, and re-read Percy Boomer’s book “On Learning Golf.” It is precisely because Boomer taught by feels, and not by “do it this way.”

Fortunately for me, Boomer’s “feels” are still relevant today: the braces, the feeling of keeping the hips and shoulders “up” but the arms “down” and others.

Reply Report comment

Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s LIV Golf Singapore betting preview: Course specialist ready to thrive once again

Published

3 days ago

Apr 30, 2024

Matt Vincenzi

After another strong showing in Australia, LIV Golf will head to Sentosa Golf Club in Singapore looking to build off of what was undoubtedly their best event to date.

Sentosa Golf Club sits on the southern tip of Singapore and is one of the most beautiful courses in the world. The course is more than just incredible scenically; it was also rated 55th in Golf Digest’s top-100 courses in 2022-2023 and has been consistently regarded as one of the best courses in Asia. Prior to being part of the LIV rotation, the course hosted the Singapore Open every year since 2005.

Sentosa Golf Club is a par 71 measuring 7,406 yards. The course will require precise ball striking and some length off the tee. It’s possible to go low due to the pristine conditions, but there are also plenty of hazards and difficult spots on the course that can bring double bogey into play in a hurry. The Bermudagrass greens are perfectly manicured, and the course has spent millions on the sub-air system to keep the greens rolling fast. I spoke to Asian Tour player, Travis Smyth, who described the greens as “the best [he’s] ever played.”

Davis Love III, who competed in a Singapore Open in 2019, also gushed over the condition of the golf course.

“I love the greens. They are fabulous,” the 21-time PGA Tour winner said.

Love III also spoke about other aspects of the golf course.

“The greens are great; the fairways are perfect. It is a wonderful course, and it’s tricky off the tee.”

“It’s a long golf course, and you get some long iron shots. It takes somebody hitting it great to hit every green even though they are big.”

As Love III said, the course can be difficult off the tee due to the length of the course and the trouble looming around every corner. It will take a terrific ball striking week to win at Sentosa Golf Club.

In his pre-tournament press conference last season, Phil Mickelson echoed many of the same sentiments.

“To play Sentosa effectively, you’re going to have a lot of shots from 160 to 210, a lot of full 6-, 7-, 8-iron shots, and you need to hit those really well and you need to drive the ball well.”

Golfers who excel from tee to green and can dial in their longer irons will have a massive advantage this week.

Stat Leaders at LIV Golf Adelaide:

Fairways Hit

1.) Louis Oosthuizen

2.) Anirban Lahiri

3.) Jon Rahm

4.) Brendan Steele

5.) Cameron Tringale

Greens in Regulation

1.) Brooks Koepka

2.) Brendan Steele

3.) Dean Burmester

4.) Cameron Tringale

5.) Anirban Lahiri

Birdies Made

1.) Brendan Steele

2.) Dean Burmester

3.) Thomas Pieters

4.) Patrick Reed

5.) Carlos Ortiz

LIV Golf Individual Standings:

1.) Joaquin Niemann

2.) Jon Rahm

3.) Dean Burmester

4.) Louis Oosthuizen

5.) Abraham Ancer

LIV Golf Team Standings:

1.) Crushers

2.) Legion XIII

3.) Torque

4.) Stinger GC

5.) Ripper GC

LIV Golf Singapore Picks

Sergio Garcia +3000 (DraftKings)

Sergio Garcia is no stranger to Sentosa Golf Club. The Spaniard won the Singapore Open in 2018 by five strokes and lost in a playoff at LIV Singapore last year to scorching hot Talor Gooch. Looking at the course setup, it’s no surprise that a player like Sergio has played incredible golf here. He’s long off the tee and is one of the better long iron players in the world when he’s in form. Garcia is also statistically a much better putter on Bermudagrass than he is on other putting surfaces. He’s putt extremely well on Sentosa’s incredibly pure green complexes.

This season, Garcia has two runner-up finishes, both of them being playoff losses. Both El Camaleon and Doral are courses he’s had success at in his career. The Spaniard is a player who plays well at his tracks, and Sentosa is one of them. I believe Sergio will get himself in the mix this week. Hopefully the third time is a charm in Singapore.

Paul Casey +3300 (FanDuel)

Paul Casey is in the midst of one of his best seasons in the five years or so. The results recently have been up and down, but he’s shown that when he’s on a golf course that suits his game, he’s amongst the contenders.

This season, Casey has finishes of T5 (LIV Las Vegas), T2 (LIV Hong Kong), and a 6th at the Singapore Classic on the DP World Tour. At his best, the Englishman is one of the best long iron players in the world, which makes him a strong fit for Sentosa. Despite being in poor form last season, he was able to fire a Sunday 63, which shows he can low here at the course.

It’s been three years since Casey has won a tournament (Omega Dubai Desert Classic in 2021), but he’s been one of the top players on LIV this season and I think he can get it done at some point this season.

Mito Pereira +5000 (Bet365)

Since Mito Pereira’s unfortunate demise at the 2022 PGA Championship, he’s been extremely inconsistent. However, over the past few months, the Chilean has played well on the International Series as well as his most recent LIV start. Mito finished 8th at LIV Adelaide, which was his best LIV finish this season.

Last year, Pereira finished 5th at LIV Singapore, shooting fantastic rounds of 67-66-66. It makes sense why Mito would like Sentosa, as preeminent ball strikers tend to rise to the challenge of the golf course. He’s a great long iron player who is long and straight off the tee.

Mito has some experience playing in Asia and is one of the most talented players on LIV who’s yet to get in the winner’s circle. I have questions about whether or not he can come through once in contention, but if he gets there, I’m happy to roll the dice.

Andy Ogletree +15000 (DraftKings)

Andy Ogletree is a player I expected to have a strong 2024 but struggled early in his first full season on LIV. After failing to crack the top-25 in any LIV event this year, the former U.S. Amateur champion finally figured things out, finished in a tie for 3rd at LIV Adelaide.

Ogletree should be incredible comfortable playing in Singapore. He won the International Series Qatar last year and finished T3 at the International Series Singapore. The 26-year-old was arguably the best player on the Asian Tour in 2023 and has been fantastic in the continent over the past 18 months.

If Ogletree has indeed found form, he looks to be an amazing value at triple-digit odds.

Your Reaction?

LIKE3
LEGIT3
WOW1
LOL2
IDHT0
FLOP2
OB0
SHANK0

Opinion & Analysis

Ryan: Lessons from the worst golf instructor in America

Published

3 days ago

Apr 30, 2024

Brendan Ryan

In Tampa, there is a golf course that boasts carts that do not work, a water range, and a group of players none of which have any chance to break 80. The course is overseen by a staff of crusty men who have succeeded at nothing in life but ending up at the worst-run course in America. However, this place is no failure. With several other local courses going out of business — and boasting outstanding greens — the place is booked full.

While I came for the great greens, I stayed to watch our resident instructor; a poor-tempered, method teacher who caters to the hopeless. At first, it was simply hilarious. However, after months of listening and watching, something clicked. I realized I had a front-row seat to the worst golf instructor in America.

Here are some of my key takeaways.

Method Teacher

It is widely accepted that there are three types of golf instructors: system teachers, non-system teachers, and method teachers. Method teachers prescribe the same antidote for each student based on a preamble which teachers can learn in a couple day certification.

Method teaching allows anyone to be certified. This process caters to the lowest caliber instructor, creating the illusion of competency. This empowers these underqualified instructors with the moniker of “certified” to prey on the innocent and uninformed.

The Cult of Stack and Jilt

The Stack and Tilt website proudly boasts, “A golfer swings his hands inward in the backswing as opposed to straight back to 1) create power, similar to a field goal kicker moving his leg in an arc and 2) to promote a swing that is in-to-out, which produces a draw (and eliminates a slice).”

Now, let me tell you something, there is this law of the universe which says “energy can either be created or destroyed,” so either these guys are defying physics or they have no idea what they are taking about. Further, the idea that the first move of the backswing determines impact is conjecture with a splash of utter fantasy.

These are the pontifications of a method — a set of prescriptions applied to everyone with the hope of some success through the placebo effect. It is one thing for a naive student to believe, for a golf instructor to drink and then dispel this Kool-Aid is malpractice.

Fooled by Randomness

In flipping a coin, or even a March Madness bet, there is a 50-50 chance of success. In golf, especially for new players, results are asymmetric. Simply put: Anything can happen. The problem is that when bad instructors work with high handicappers, each and every shot gets its own diagnosis and prescription. Soon the student is overwhelmed.

Now here’s the sinister thing: The overwhelming information is by design. In this case, the coach is not trying to make you better, they are trying to make you reliant on them for information. A quasi Stockholm syndrome of codependency.

Practice

One of the most important scientists of the 20th century was Ivan Pavlov. As you might recall, he found that animals, including humans, could be conditioned into biological responses. In golf, the idea of practice has made millions of hackers salivate that they are one lesson or practice session from “the secret.”

Sunk Cost

The idea for the worst golf instructor is to create control and dependency so that clients ignore the sunk cost of not getting better. Instead, they are held hostage by the idea that they are one lesson or tip away from unlocking their potential.

Cliches

Cliches have the effect of terminating thoughts. However, they are the weapon of choice for this instructor. Add some hyperbole and students actually get no information. As a result, these players couldn’t play golf. When they did, they had no real scheme. With no idea what they are doing, they would descend into a spiral of no idea what to do, bad results, lower confidence, and running back to the lesson tee from more cliches.

The fact is that poor instruction is about conditioning players to become reliant members of your cult. To take away autonomy. To use practice as a form of control. To sell more golf lessons not by making people better but through the guise that without the teacher, the student can never reach their full potential. All under the umbrella of being “certified” (in a 2-day course!) and a melee of cliches.

This of course is not just happening at my muni but is a systemic problem around the country and around the world, the consequences of which are giving people a great reason to stop playing golf. But hey, at least it’s selling a lot of golf balls…

Your Reaction?

LIKE17
LEGIT2
WOW0
LOL4
IDHT1
FLOP0
OB0
SHANK19

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans betting preview

Published

2 weeks ago

Apr 22, 2024

Matt Vincenzi

The PGA TOUR heads to New Orleans to play the 2023 Zurich Classic of New Orleans. In a welcome change from the usual stroke play, the Zurich Classic is a team event. On Thursday and Saturday, the teams play best ball, and on Friday and Sunday the teams play alternate shot.

TPC Louisiana is a par 72 that measures 7,425 yards. The course features some short par 4s and plenty of water and bunkers, which makes for a lot of exciting risk/reward scenarios for competitors. Pete Dye designed the course in 2004 specifically for the Zurich Classic, although the event didn’t make its debut until 2007 because of Hurricane Katrina.

Coming off of the Masters and a signature event in consecutive weeks, the field this week is a step down, and understandably so. Many of the world’s top players will be using this time to rest after a busy stretch.

However, there are some interesting teams this season with some stars making surprise appearances in the team event. Some notable teams include Patrick Cantlay and Xander Schauffele, Rory McIlroy and Shane Lowry, Collin Morikawa and Kurt Kitayama, Will Zalatoris and Sahith Theegala as well as a few Canadian teams, Nick Taylor and Adam Hadwin and Taylor Pendrith and Corey Conners.

Past Winners at TPC Louisiana

2023: Riley/Hardy (-30)
2022: Cantlay/Schauffele (-29)
2021: Leishman/Smith (-20)
2019: Palmer/Rahm (-26)
2018: Horschel/Piercy (-22)
2017: Blixt/Smith (-27)

2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans Picks

Tom Hoge/Maverick McNealy +2500 (DraftKings)

Tom Hoge is coming off of a solid T18 finish at the RBC Heritage and finished T13 at last year’s Zurich Classic alongside Harris English.

This season, Hoge is having one of his best years on Tour in terms of Strokes Gained: Approach. In his last 24 rounds, the only player to top him on the category is Scottie Scheffler. Hoge has been solid on Pete Dye designs, ranking 28th in the field over his past 36 rounds.

McNealy is also having a solid season. He’s finished T6 at the Waste Management Phoenix Open and T9 at the PLAYERS Championship. He recently started working with world renowned swing coach, Butch Harmon, and its seemingly paid dividends in 2024.

Keith Mitchell/Joel Dahmen +4000 (DraftKings)

Keith Mitchell is having a fantastic season, finishing in the top-20 of five of his past seven starts on Tour. Most recently, Mitchell finished T14 at the Valero Texas Open and gained a whopping 6.0 strokes off the tee. He finished 6th at last year’s Zurich Classic.

Joel Dahmen is having a resurgent year and has been dialed in with his irons. He also has a T11 finish at the PLAYERS Championship at TPC Sawgrass which is another Pete Dye track. With Mitchell’s length and Dahmen’s ability to put it close with his short irons, the Mitchell/Dahmen combination will be dangerous this week.

Taylor Moore/Matt NeSmith +6500 (DraftKings)

Taylor Moore has quickly developed into one of the more consistent players on Tour. He’s finished in the top-20 in three of his past four starts, including a very impressive showing at The Masters, finishing T20. He’s also finished T4 at this event in consecutive seasons alongside Matt NeSmith.

NeSmith isn’t having a great 2024, but has seemed to elevate his game in this format. He finished T26 at Pete Dye’s TPC Sawgrass, which gives the 30-year-old something to build off of. NeSmith is also a great putter on Bermudagrass, which could help elevate Moore’s ball striking prowess.

Your Reaction?