There is a current hot button emerging in golf reporting that heightens a discussion about putters. Should long putters be allowed? Do we need a rule change? Who is for it and who is against it?
A sub-topic begs some to wonder if there is an advantage one way or another. Does it provide an unfair advantage if one goes to the long job? Such mental concerns as what it does to confidence, if not what it does for any mechanical issues, and then there are players like Watson and Woods who believe that it may interfere with sound putting mechanics, apparently aimed at the theory of both arms functioning equally, which appears to be movement that is modified by the "longjohn."
We are wondering what happened to personal preference on the one hand, and if it is a rules issue, why the USGA has not jumped in to make some sort of declaration, if for no other reason than clarification.
Clearly, those who have opted for the longer models have shown signs of stirring the order of leadership positions on tour, but is that tool-related, mental comfort-level related, or just plain player-preference related?
We suspect that there are some who believe that it has some bearing on player response to pressure in the game, which ultimately will be found to be no more than a temporary relief - but then that's been the lot of players for centuries - change something, anything, and you get a different response for awhile. Does it not cause one to question why there is so much temporary relief in the game?
Meanwhile, back to the putters. We all know someone who changes putters (and Drivers) often, looking for The One that will work, and most of them work for awhile. Johnny Miller named that the WOOD method - Works Only One Day. And that teases most players into a false hope that it is a solution to whatever problem is invading the game.
Sooner or later, players will discover that it is something within themselves, not in their equipment that is eating their lunch. But then that bears another look, too, because one can be suffering from ill-fitted equipment, which may need yet another kind of attention.
Until we see something of greater effect, we will opt for all the hullabaloo being related to personal preference, and if that affects one's mental frame of reference, find some help to deal with it.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Monday, March 7, 2011
Golf's Predictable Missteps
One may think that very little in golf is predictable, and based on typical views and perceptions of the game, it might seem that way. However, have an honest and unbiased look at what we believe to be a new insight into the game, or if you prefer, take the ostrich route and don't bother yourself with this blog.
Even a passing glance at a few golf forums is revealing. Just saw one post that asked for help with a repetitive "reverse pivot" problem - getting over it, that is. Respondents gave typical advice, pointing to mechanical "fixes," but none indicated they really knew what caused that issue. Some thought they knew where it started, but each one thought the "where" was in a different location in the body.
It certainly is in a different body part from any we saw mentioned. It starts in the mind (the front part of the brain) and ends in the back part. We have completed more than 50,000 player profiles in the past 25 years, each one telling a "story," and those collectively have painted a portrait of predictable swing faults such as "reverse pivot."
The profiling we do shows a number of issues, among them being a players genetically influenced personal style, changes that happen to that style from the player's intention, and responses to pressure that the player encounters, among others. 50,000 later, we have found that when players' intentions alter the genetic style that was given, there are universal consequences that emerge in the game.
If the player takes a "defensive game-posture" by lowering his/her normal, given intensity, typical missteps tend to follow, including deceleration in swinging and putting, "reverse pivot," inability to make a fully rotated movement in the swing, tension that restricts proper weight shift, and shortened back and through swinging along with shots that travel uneven distances with the same club, to name only a few.
If the player takes an "offensive game-posture," the glitches will commonly include over-swinging, balance issues that promote "over the top" moves alternating with "coming off shots," putts that are "popped" rather than stroked with poor distance management, and less than solid impact between club face and ball, among a number of others.
Such stumbles are typically blamed on mechanical faults, when, in fact they begin in the mind, as the cardinal principle says, "Every action is preceded by a thought and followed by a result." There is no such thing as a "thoughtless" action. That comes from innate (built-in) human conditions that we did not create and cannot change. And it makes no difference whether we see it or not, believe it or not, care about it or not. It is just as firmly entrenched in life as your heart beat, your lung action and the law of gravity, whether we like it or not or agree with it or not.
All that is testimony to the need for balance in life and golf between thinking and acting and a clarion call for golfers to get with it and stop the feeble attempts to solve all golfing problems by changing their swings or imitating somebody famous. The mind is the last frontier for every golfer, including Tiger Woods, you and me.
Before anymore of that is allowed to go on, it's time to get thinking clarified and straightened out so we can all play "a whole game."
Even a passing glance at a few golf forums is revealing. Just saw one post that asked for help with a repetitive "reverse pivot" problem - getting over it, that is. Respondents gave typical advice, pointing to mechanical "fixes," but none indicated they really knew what caused that issue. Some thought they knew where it started, but each one thought the "where" was in a different location in the body.
It certainly is in a different body part from any we saw mentioned. It starts in the mind (the front part of the brain) and ends in the back part. We have completed more than 50,000 player profiles in the past 25 years, each one telling a "story," and those collectively have painted a portrait of predictable swing faults such as "reverse pivot."
The profiling we do shows a number of issues, among them being a players genetically influenced personal style, changes that happen to that style from the player's intention, and responses to pressure that the player encounters, among others. 50,000 later, we have found that when players' intentions alter the genetic style that was given, there are universal consequences that emerge in the game.
If the player takes a "defensive game-posture" by lowering his/her normal, given intensity, typical missteps tend to follow, including deceleration in swinging and putting, "reverse pivot," inability to make a fully rotated movement in the swing, tension that restricts proper weight shift, and shortened back and through swinging along with shots that travel uneven distances with the same club, to name only a few.
If the player takes an "offensive game-posture," the glitches will commonly include over-swinging, balance issues that promote "over the top" moves alternating with "coming off shots," putts that are "popped" rather than stroked with poor distance management, and less than solid impact between club face and ball, among a number of others.
Such stumbles are typically blamed on mechanical faults, when, in fact they begin in the mind, as the cardinal principle says, "Every action is preceded by a thought and followed by a result." There is no such thing as a "thoughtless" action. That comes from innate (built-in) human conditions that we did not create and cannot change. And it makes no difference whether we see it or not, believe it or not, care about it or not. It is just as firmly entrenched in life as your heart beat, your lung action and the law of gravity, whether we like it or not or agree with it or not.
All that is testimony to the need for balance in life and golf between thinking and acting and a clarion call for golfers to get with it and stop the feeble attempts to solve all golfing problems by changing their swings or imitating somebody famous. The mind is the last frontier for every golfer, including Tiger Woods, you and me.
Before anymore of that is allowed to go on, it's time to get thinking clarified and straightened out so we can all play "a whole game."
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Search for the Impossible
"I very much like Tiger's new action, so much so that i've decided i'm going to start changing my action to approximate it as closely as I can." Those are words that showed up on a golf forum yesterday. Seems like a "nice resolution" for 2011 !...Right?
One of the most revered misconceptions among golfers at all levels of competency is "players need to play like the best is the game," which translates to "model your swing by someone else's."
If you do not know that there are no two folks exactly alike in this world, then you might benefit from a bit of study and research. It is futile to try to play like someone else. It is also not possible, at least not with any degree of success. You can try it, and maybe get the ball around a course, but your result will be nowhere near what your capability allows if you think you are doing it like Tiger or any other player or instructor.
But then, most won't know whether that is true or not since they most likely lack a set of principles against which to measure good, bad or indifferent in the result of a golf game. Oh we have an idea of what we will find acceptable, but we don't even know if our judgment has any basis in fact.
Unless you know behavior styles, have a grasp of golf swing essentials (imperatives),have an understanding of how people learn and how that is affected by years of growth and development, and truly believe that there are no two people exactly alike - even twins - then you will merely be lost in a maze of self-appointed confusion.
So Happy New Year to all, with a wish that you find a means to make judgments that are real, reasonable, measured, valid and tested.
One of the most revered misconceptions among golfers at all levels of competency is "players need to play like the best is the game," which translates to "model your swing by someone else's."
If you do not know that there are no two folks exactly alike in this world, then you might benefit from a bit of study and research. It is futile to try to play like someone else. It is also not possible, at least not with any degree of success. You can try it, and maybe get the ball around a course, but your result will be nowhere near what your capability allows if you think you are doing it like Tiger or any other player or instructor.
But then, most won't know whether that is true or not since they most likely lack a set of principles against which to measure good, bad or indifferent in the result of a golf game. Oh we have an idea of what we will find acceptable, but we don't even know if our judgment has any basis in fact.
Unless you know behavior styles, have a grasp of golf swing essentials (imperatives),have an understanding of how people learn and how that is affected by years of growth and development, and truly believe that there are no two people exactly alike - even twins - then you will merely be lost in a maze of self-appointed confusion.
So Happy New Year to all, with a wish that you find a means to make judgments that are real, reasonable, measured, valid and tested.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Friday, May 29, 2009
Dwight Howard's Clear Key
While I wasn't watching, a top golfer I know was. He heard the interview with Dwight Howard after game 3 (we think it was game 3) of the NBA playoff series between Cleveland and Orlando. Apparently, the commentator asked Dwight, in effect, how he managed to do so well from the foul line, in view of his rather dismal season average of 60%. Seems Dwight brought that to 80% for game 3. Dwight responded by saying he just sang a song he liked and it took his attention away from too much thinking about the shot.
Dwight Howard's own words come from his blog. He wrote on 5/26/09 from NBA Playoffs:
"For some reason, when I pick out a song and sing it at the free throw line it helps me not think so much about shooting them. I had a dance song in my head all last night, so I had that going on when I was at the line. Hey, whatever works, right? They were playing all kinda krunk music up in Cleveland, and it was helping me take my mind off my form. I gotta come up with some song for Tuesday in Game 4 to keep it rolling."
We wish he knew how right he is so he could use the process consistently in the future and keep his free shot average where it needs to be.
If you know him, let him know that we will gladly supply him with the research and studies that verify his new-found method as very real and completely valid
Dwight Howard's own words come from his blog. He wrote on 5/26/09 from NBA Playoffs:
"For some reason, when I pick out a song and sing it at the free throw line it helps me not think so much about shooting them. I had a dance song in my head all last night, so I had that going on when I was at the line. Hey, whatever works, right? They were playing all kinda krunk music up in Cleveland, and it was helping me take my mind off my form. I gotta come up with some song for Tuesday in Game 4 to keep it rolling."
We wish he knew how right he is so he could use the process consistently in the future and keep his free shot average where it needs to be.
If you know him, let him know that we will gladly supply him with the research and studies that verify his new-found method as very real and completely valid
Friday, September 26, 2008
A Zinger!!
That just about sums it up. This edition of the Ryder Cup was A Zinger! I'll wager that not many viewers heard it, even though they were glued to the set, or if they heard it, it made no impression. When Zinger reported that his plan had been to "put out the more aggresive players first, and the steadiest one last and the others in the middle," he was telling all of us that he has some understanding of playing styles.
Several years ago, the pair of hands typing this, wrote about paying attention to playing styles in a way that would facilitate the way we play. If you put the steadies (who are generally slower) out first, they tend to hold up the faster(more "aggressive") players, making the latter very annoyed and increasingly tense. That is clearly enough added tension and pressure to literally lose matches. The freedom from it is just as clearly sufficient to allow winning.
It's way too vast and important a matter to put it in a blog comment or two, but take note. It's all been said and taught for years now, and we noticed the fact that the two assistants Azinger had have both been well exposed to the style information we presented for 15 years through the PGA Education program. Stockton also had some of that at the Cup in 1991. Olin Browne may even have more information along the way than Dave.
We are glad somebody finally gets it clearly enough to put it to work. It has only taken 23 years of persistence in the message, while most others only blinked, and we all know that he who blinks first finishes last.
We join in congratulating the American team and those who led and coached them.
Several years ago, the pair of hands typing this, wrote about paying attention to playing styles in a way that would facilitate the way we play. If you put the steadies (who are generally slower) out first, they tend to hold up the faster(more "aggressive") players, making the latter very annoyed and increasingly tense. That is clearly enough added tension and pressure to literally lose matches. The freedom from it is just as clearly sufficient to allow winning.
It's way too vast and important a matter to put it in a blog comment or two, but take note. It's all been said and taught for years now, and we noticed the fact that the two assistants Azinger had have both been well exposed to the style information we presented for 15 years through the PGA Education program. Stockton also had some of that at the Cup in 1991. Olin Browne may even have more information along the way than Dave.
We are glad somebody finally gets it clearly enough to put it to work. It has only taken 23 years of persistence in the message, while most others only blinked, and we all know that he who blinks first finishes last.
We join in congratulating the American team and those who led and coached them.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Jaundice in the View
There's no need to make a fuss, but there is cause to correct a constant, reoccurring misperception that is based on inadequate knowledge and/or information. It came through again on ESPN Radio yesterday (my one and only radio listening station these days, since they make people think and try to get at the truth as they understand it).
The two commentators were discussing Tiger and Mediate, mostly admiring both, which certainly was mainline as far as I am concerned.
However, and this is of critical importance, especially to golfers, one was saying that he wished everyone could be as warm, outgoing and affable as Mediate, whom he observed smiling and communicating with everyone. He didn't criticize Tiger, though he saw in him the more severe countenance and tight lipped attitude that we all see most of the time when he is playing (though not so much in interviews).
The other commentator tried to make a point indicating that this was just a natural difference in people, while the first wondered why more players didn't try to be pleasant like Rocco.
The missing information centers in being unaware that there are four primary behavior styles, genetically conditioned, factory installed, that affect what we all see and do. Like it or not, each of us got one at birth. Over years, it may have been afforded so much support that it remained fairly constant, but that demeanor is more an exception that a rule. The rule shows up as the vast majority of folks winding up with a primary style that is bent out of shape (great or small) and leaving each of those persons literally screaming for "the real person to show up").
What is evident is that Rocco is the style we call "Persuader," with traits exactly as listed above - outgoing, jolly, friendly, people oriented, given to passionate expressions of satisfaction, and having a better than average short game with a flair for playing and something of an unorthodox action. (See Lee Trevino, Fuzzy Zoeller, ChiChi Rodriguez, and John Daly).
Tiger is, at least as he shows it - and his somewhat mysterious private life would tell more, but no one has access to that except his family and probably Steve Williams - appears to be the style we call "Driver," with a secondary "Persuader" that he employs for his short game wizardry. His demeanor is bottom line oriented, direct, looking dead ahead, staying completely focused, or if that is broken taking the moment for a "do over." That style is always the fist pumper with an exclamation point.
A mark of the Persuader is that it sometimes shows in driving as pure as the driven snow and sometimes as wild as a March hare. And we see that both in Tiger and Rocco.
None of that is bad or wrong. Both sound, good and sufficient, witness the last 37 holes of the Open.
The other two styles are called "Craftsman" and "Analyzer," which are likely the majority of players, since those two styles own the natural traits that are most conducive to solitary, self-initiated activities like golf, and form the majority styles of the population in general, with the Craftsman comprising 50% of the total.
Craftsmen have the most rhythm and patience, consistency and perseverance of the four style. Analyzers are the most detailed, and rule conscious, careful and perfectionistic. From Craftsmen, we get expressions like "salt of the earth," since they are diplomatic to a fault and do not like conflict. From Analyzers we get expressions like "penny pincher" and "nit-picker," since that's how the other three styles tend to see them. None of the four styles are really like what they are referred to by the other three. But it does indicate that all of us would prefer that everyone else be like we are. Isn't going to happen ...Period.
If you are a commentator, we'd be happy to see you learn about the styles so you could refer to them with understanding instead of question marks. If you are a player, we say to you that the last 30 years of work and research and teaching we have done says you will not be able to reach your own personal zenith in your game or performance unless you understand your own style and live and work within that style. (Oh, you'll manage without that, but never to excel). The purveyors of the notion that there is a single "championship style" are simply wrong in their assertion. Any style can become a champion, given staying with the style they own.
If you are an instructor, stop trying to get players to do what you think they ought to do and tailor what you teach to what their styles natively support. In other words, pace the player, not what you believe makes the best set of moves in golf. If you don't know, find out the style of the player and go from there. In case you think that's a bit off - during the 15 years I taught in the PGA education program, I profiled more than 20,000 professionals (players and teachers). I found less than 1% that had ideas and approaches to their games matching their styles when they were profiled, so this is not something of a dream. It is a reality that needs to be heard.
And one final "bottom line." You cannot change your style to whatever you might think will work "best" or "better," without serious consequences. You can try, but you will bend, dent or break something in the process. And you cannot succeed while either restricting or overdoing the style you own, since either of those will shoot you in the foot. Maybe not all the time, but often enough to lose shots and cause to to say that your range game is scratch and your on-course game is like a ten handicapper.
Who is the closest to staying in style? Last weekend, it was Tiger and Rocco, and what a show they put on - getting more viewers than the NBA finals.
I'm waiting for the journalists and commentators to bring their portfolios current.
The two commentators were discussing Tiger and Mediate, mostly admiring both, which certainly was mainline as far as I am concerned.
However, and this is of critical importance, especially to golfers, one was saying that he wished everyone could be as warm, outgoing and affable as Mediate, whom he observed smiling and communicating with everyone. He didn't criticize Tiger, though he saw in him the more severe countenance and tight lipped attitude that we all see most of the time when he is playing (though not so much in interviews).
The other commentator tried to make a point indicating that this was just a natural difference in people, while the first wondered why more players didn't try to be pleasant like Rocco.
The missing information centers in being unaware that there are four primary behavior styles, genetically conditioned, factory installed, that affect what we all see and do. Like it or not, each of us got one at birth. Over years, it may have been afforded so much support that it remained fairly constant, but that demeanor is more an exception that a rule. The rule shows up as the vast majority of folks winding up with a primary style that is bent out of shape (great or small) and leaving each of those persons literally screaming for "the real person to show up").
What is evident is that Rocco is the style we call "Persuader," with traits exactly as listed above - outgoing, jolly, friendly, people oriented, given to passionate expressions of satisfaction, and having a better than average short game with a flair for playing and something of an unorthodox action. (See Lee Trevino, Fuzzy Zoeller, ChiChi Rodriguez, and John Daly).
Tiger is, at least as he shows it - and his somewhat mysterious private life would tell more, but no one has access to that except his family and probably Steve Williams - appears to be the style we call "Driver," with a secondary "Persuader" that he employs for his short game wizardry. His demeanor is bottom line oriented, direct, looking dead ahead, staying completely focused, or if that is broken taking the moment for a "do over." That style is always the fist pumper with an exclamation point.
A mark of the Persuader is that it sometimes shows in driving as pure as the driven snow and sometimes as wild as a March hare. And we see that both in Tiger and Rocco.
None of that is bad or wrong. Both sound, good and sufficient, witness the last 37 holes of the Open.
The other two styles are called "Craftsman" and "Analyzer," which are likely the majority of players, since those two styles own the natural traits that are most conducive to solitary, self-initiated activities like golf, and form the majority styles of the population in general, with the Craftsman comprising 50% of the total.
Craftsmen have the most rhythm and patience, consistency and perseverance of the four style. Analyzers are the most detailed, and rule conscious, careful and perfectionistic. From Craftsmen, we get expressions like "salt of the earth," since they are diplomatic to a fault and do not like conflict. From Analyzers we get expressions like "penny pincher" and "nit-picker," since that's how the other three styles tend to see them. None of the four styles are really like what they are referred to by the other three. But it does indicate that all of us would prefer that everyone else be like we are. Isn't going to happen ...Period.
If you are a commentator, we'd be happy to see you learn about the styles so you could refer to them with understanding instead of question marks. If you are a player, we say to you that the last 30 years of work and research and teaching we have done says you will not be able to reach your own personal zenith in your game or performance unless you understand your own style and live and work within that style. (Oh, you'll manage without that, but never to excel). The purveyors of the notion that there is a single "championship style" are simply wrong in their assertion. Any style can become a champion, given staying with the style they own.
If you are an instructor, stop trying to get players to do what you think they ought to do and tailor what you teach to what their styles natively support. In other words, pace the player, not what you believe makes the best set of moves in golf. If you don't know, find out the style of the player and go from there. In case you think that's a bit off - during the 15 years I taught in the PGA education program, I profiled more than 20,000 professionals (players and teachers). I found less than 1% that had ideas and approaches to their games matching their styles when they were profiled, so this is not something of a dream. It is a reality that needs to be heard.
And one final "bottom line." You cannot change your style to whatever you might think will work "best" or "better," without serious consequences. You can try, but you will bend, dent or break something in the process. And you cannot succeed while either restricting or overdoing the style you own, since either of those will shoot you in the foot. Maybe not all the time, but often enough to lose shots and cause to to say that your range game is scratch and your on-course game is like a ten handicapper.
Who is the closest to staying in style? Last weekend, it was Tiger and Rocco, and what a show they put on - getting more viewers than the NBA finals.
I'm waiting for the journalists and commentators to bring their portfolios current.
Monday, June 16, 2008
US Open
Watching the "overtime" today was a treat, if not a treatment. For one thing, as a Tiger fan, I still wasn't sold on who to pull for. Rocco and Tiger are an unlikely pair, but they are friends. I like Tiger for his uncanny ability. I like Rocco for his uncanny human awareness, stage presence, and unshakable optimism.
To tell the truth, I wish Rocco could have won, but I would not have wanted Tiger to lose. Go figure. It's one of those "damned if you do" and "damned if you don't" which is a throwback to "Catch 22."
I'm aware, having visited a number of forums, that Tiger's knee got a lot of negative call. The divisions in the those who like Tiger and those who hate him are strong - very strong. Some thought it was an excuse. Others didn't.
Having worked with players who were injured, I happen to believe it is, and was, real and that he did play through it. But you may want to see that differently, so be my guest, but if you have the guts, go check it out and make an informed decision.
It's not so much the injury itself as the anticipation of pain that causes problems. Anticipation builds anxiety and anxiety brings tension and tension leads to tight motions and loss of flexibility and freedom in motion. Even for Tiger - he is, after all, human, and subject to all the same issues that fall in the natural flow of human behavior. Exceptional? Yes, indeed, but nonetheless human.
So two hats off - one to Rocco for an outstanding elder statesman's performance, and to Tiger for his series of 11th hour bailouts. It was a show well beyond "worth the price of admission." This one was "priceless."
And if you ever had doubts about Tiger's humanity, all you had to do was watch him with Sam and watch her not wanting to be separated from him.
To tell the truth, I wish Rocco could have won, but I would not have wanted Tiger to lose. Go figure. It's one of those "damned if you do" and "damned if you don't" which is a throwback to "Catch 22."
I'm aware, having visited a number of forums, that Tiger's knee got a lot of negative call. The divisions in the those who like Tiger and those who hate him are strong - very strong. Some thought it was an excuse. Others didn't.
Having worked with players who were injured, I happen to believe it is, and was, real and that he did play through it. But you may want to see that differently, so be my guest, but if you have the guts, go check it out and make an informed decision.
It's not so much the injury itself as the anticipation of pain that causes problems. Anticipation builds anxiety and anxiety brings tension and tension leads to tight motions and loss of flexibility and freedom in motion. Even for Tiger - he is, after all, human, and subject to all the same issues that fall in the natural flow of human behavior. Exceptional? Yes, indeed, but nonetheless human.
So two hats off - one to Rocco for an outstanding elder statesman's performance, and to Tiger for his series of 11th hour bailouts. It was a show well beyond "worth the price of admission." This one was "priceless."
And if you ever had doubts about Tiger's humanity, all you had to do was watch him with Sam and watch her not wanting to be separated from him.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Crown on the Crowne
Mickelson came through, with not unexpected results, but with a surprisingly unexpected finish. His shot from jail will make it to the gallery of the best remembered, as it should.
What may not make it to the unforgettable came from a Golf Channel discussion (we think it was on Friday, but if not, it was Crowne connected) when Tim Rosaforte talked about Rod Pampling's putting which did not appear to him (Tim) to be quite up to Rod's more recent performace. Reason: he didn't have his wife's sport psychology input as usual, or as Tim put it, Rod's "own Rotella" to keep him calm and on his game.
Of course, we now know that Rod hung in there to the last hole of the tournament, falling to a tie for second purely via Phil's spectacular second shot on 18. We don't know if Tim thought that happened because Rod's "coach" (and wife) wasn't present, but we doubt that was the case.
What really caught our attention was not so much that Tim mentioned that early on, but that he made it sound like players need their "sport psychologist" like Linus needs his blanket. And he makes "Rotella" sound like a synonym for golf psychology.
We have a "flash" for you. If what Tim implied is the way it is today, both players and coaches are in a lot of trouble. The mental game coach's job is to provide the means for players to manage themselves in the game. It is not to have a symbiotic attachment that requires an umbilical feeding tube necessitating the proximity of the helper to the player, in order to avoid death and dying on the course.
If the coach is not an enabler and the player is a poorly prepared dependent soul, it may be necessary to have access to breast-feeding, but if everyone is doing "the job" that isn't even in the blueprint.
The point:
It is high time that players, gurus and commentators opened the box and climbed out of that dark place they have hunkered in for the past 80 years. When someone as bright as Rosaforte doesn't hear it, it's getting pretty bad.
Conventional wisdom doesn't provide one iota of memorable content addressing how to move from a dependent, defensive, cautious, doubt-ridden view of what ought to happen, to a content rich, balanced, trustworthy, flexible, researched process that brings independence and freedom to the self-management required for effective solo, solitary, self-initiated, self-executed activities like golf.
Truth is, we thought Pampling handled himself pretty well without his "shrink," but that evidence will likely be overlooked since he didn't win.
We will be glad to explain all of the "how to's" in the game that others seem either not to recognize or are unwilling to share.
http://clearkeygolf.com
What may not make it to the unforgettable came from a Golf Channel discussion (we think it was on Friday, but if not, it was Crowne connected) when Tim Rosaforte talked about Rod Pampling's putting which did not appear to him (Tim) to be quite up to Rod's more recent performace. Reason: he didn't have his wife's sport psychology input as usual, or as Tim put it, Rod's "own Rotella" to keep him calm and on his game.
Of course, we now know that Rod hung in there to the last hole of the tournament, falling to a tie for second purely via Phil's spectacular second shot on 18. We don't know if Tim thought that happened because Rod's "coach" (and wife) wasn't present, but we doubt that was the case.
What really caught our attention was not so much that Tim mentioned that early on, but that he made it sound like players need their "sport psychologist" like Linus needs his blanket. And he makes "Rotella" sound like a synonym for golf psychology.
We have a "flash" for you. If what Tim implied is the way it is today, both players and coaches are in a lot of trouble. The mental game coach's job is to provide the means for players to manage themselves in the game. It is not to have a symbiotic attachment that requires an umbilical feeding tube necessitating the proximity of the helper to the player, in order to avoid death and dying on the course.
If the coach is not an enabler and the player is a poorly prepared dependent soul, it may be necessary to have access to breast-feeding, but if everyone is doing "the job" that isn't even in the blueprint.
The point:
It is high time that players, gurus and commentators opened the box and climbed out of that dark place they have hunkered in for the past 80 years. When someone as bright as Rosaforte doesn't hear it, it's getting pretty bad.
Conventional wisdom doesn't provide one iota of memorable content addressing how to move from a dependent, defensive, cautious, doubt-ridden view of what ought to happen, to a content rich, balanced, trustworthy, flexible, researched process that brings independence and freedom to the self-management required for effective solo, solitary, self-initiated, self-executed activities like golf.
Truth is, we thought Pampling handled himself pretty well without his "shrink," but that evidence will likely be overlooked since he didn't win.
We will be glad to explain all of the "how to's" in the game that others seem either not to recognize or are unwilling to share.
http://clearkeygolf.com
Sunday, May 18, 2008
What's That You Say?
For more than 25 years now, we have sought to give golfers as much practical information as possible, coupled with the steps required for implementation, so they will not still be needing to asking the question: "But how do I do that?"
For that same time frame, we have chased down what others have said, and there is a lot of repetition among them, and we still have not found anyone who follows one of those "Here's-what-you-need-to-do" comments with a description of actually how to do it. That appears to be either because their goal is only to "motivate," "inspire," or perhaps because they simply do not know how objectives are actually reached through action (mental or mechanical).
We have tried to be careful not to offend anyone by pointing specifically to what is missing in the words and deeds of our peers, but that is terribly hard to avoid, especially after so many years.
One gets the impression that many think all one needs to do is "Don't worry, be happy," and take a positive path to thinking. Indeed that sounds so good that we are almost ready to shout - "Yeah Man!" But then we awake and wonder "OK, but how does one do that?"
There is not enough room here to detail the whole of it, but the outline is that one needs to master and implement what the automatic principle calls for and get it done through the automatic process.
We have described that, including the actions, both in our books and on our website at clearkeygolf.com
The process is quite simple. It centers in using a clear key as the only tool you need to learn, practice and ultimately play the game at your best level, without anxiety and tension wrecking your train. Of course, you will need to address your "mechanical" game issues, so get some help from a competent instructor - and there are enough to be found that understand and know how to teach within the automatic principle to help you integrate what you need for your game.
If you need help finding someone like that, just let us know.
For that same time frame, we have chased down what others have said, and there is a lot of repetition among them, and we still have not found anyone who follows one of those "Here's-what-you-need-to-do" comments with a description of actually how to do it. That appears to be either because their goal is only to "motivate," "inspire," or perhaps because they simply do not know how objectives are actually reached through action (mental or mechanical).
We have tried to be careful not to offend anyone by pointing specifically to what is missing in the words and deeds of our peers, but that is terribly hard to avoid, especially after so many years.
One gets the impression that many think all one needs to do is "Don't worry, be happy," and take a positive path to thinking. Indeed that sounds so good that we are almost ready to shout - "Yeah Man!" But then we awake and wonder "OK, but how does one do that?"
There is not enough room here to detail the whole of it, but the outline is that one needs to master and implement what the automatic principle calls for and get it done through the automatic process.
We have described that, including the actions, both in our books and on our website at clearkeygolf.com
The process is quite simple. It centers in using a clear key as the only tool you need to learn, practice and ultimately play the game at your best level, without anxiety and tension wrecking your train. Of course, you will need to address your "mechanical" game issues, so get some help from a competent instructor - and there are enough to be found that understand and know how to teach within the automatic principle to help you integrate what you need for your game.
If you need help finding someone like that, just let us know.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Christmas for Golfers
This is taken from a forum member who goes by the name: ShortsTuff. Enjoy! and Merry Christmas and Happy New year to all.
(Apologies to Clement Clarke Moore)
by ShortsTuff, on the ISG forum.
‘Twas the night before comp, and all through the land
Golfers lie waiting, woman and man.
The Footjoy’s placed (polished) in the hallway with care
Trusting that Saturday soon would be there.
Sticks in the Falcon, and I in my bed
While visions of plane angles fly through my head
When all of a sudden, in the study, a clatter
I fly to my feet to see what was the matter.
There at my PC, no jolly old elf,
I hardly believe it – Homer, himself!
“Son” he said sadly, “I’ve seen you play.
How could you get round the course in that way?
Now, let’s ISG, in the time you have left
You really must learn some G.O.L.F.”
So, on to the web, and into the site,
He counselled me well, deep into the night.
Started a journey to open some doors
“Learn the imperatives, accumulators”
Opened those doors, (he gave me a key)
“Monitor lag at your pp3.”
Hinging and cocking, but what is a swivel?
Answers by courtesy DGLaville.
Continually pulling your pill from the hedges?
Toolish: “Look to your flying wedges.”
Problem at impact? Dart makes the call
“Geometry, geometry, geometry’s all!”
Don’t make that move getting round to the left –
Visions in lycra provided by Jeff.
Looking for research – how, what and why?
Can’t go past Loren (not an AI).
Guru advises “Pull it out of your back”
(Mate, my best ones are from lower than that!)
Carey with keys, and Spike with his Zen,
Tai on this cruise ship, here now and then.
He left me then, with plenty to play with,
And guidance from you guys to be on my way with.
From one of the Seekers, to those of the trust,
I feel that I should, nah, I know that I must
Share these words from Homer, going into the night
“Merry Christmas to all, and to all, a good flight!”
(Apologies to Clement Clarke Moore)
by ShortsTuff, on the ISG forum.
‘Twas the night before comp, and all through the land
Golfers lie waiting, woman and man.
The Footjoy’s placed (polished) in the hallway with care
Trusting that Saturday soon would be there.
Sticks in the Falcon, and I in my bed
While visions of plane angles fly through my head
When all of a sudden, in the study, a clatter
I fly to my feet to see what was the matter.
There at my PC, no jolly old elf,
I hardly believe it – Homer, himself!
“Son” he said sadly, “I’ve seen you play.
How could you get round the course in that way?
Now, let’s ISG, in the time you have left
You really must learn some G.O.L.F.”
So, on to the web, and into the site,
He counselled me well, deep into the night.
Started a journey to open some doors
“Learn the imperatives, accumulators”
Opened those doors, (he gave me a key)
“Monitor lag at your pp3.”
Hinging and cocking, but what is a swivel?
Answers by courtesy DGLaville.
Continually pulling your pill from the hedges?
Toolish: “Look to your flying wedges.”
Problem at impact? Dart makes the call
“Geometry, geometry, geometry’s all!”
Don’t make that move getting round to the left –
Visions in lycra provided by Jeff.
Looking for research – how, what and why?
Can’t go past Loren (not an AI).
Guru advises “Pull it out of your back”
(Mate, my best ones are from lower than that!)
Carey with keys, and Spike with his Zen,
Tai on this cruise ship, here now and then.
He left me then, with plenty to play with,
And guidance from you guys to be on my way with.
From one of the Seekers, to those of the trust,
I feel that I should, nah, I know that I must
Share these words from Homer, going into the night
“Merry Christmas to all, and to all, a good flight!”
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Who Fired That Shot?
There is a theme that is repeated over and over, legion in number, on golf forums. Actually there are numerous such repetitions covering other issues, too, but in particular we point to, "What should we do when the swing doesn't seem to be working today?"
The "answers" come thick, if not fast. Everything from "Just quit and walk in," to "Go back to basics." In between, we see things like "Well, the pros often can be seen on tour taking half swings with a 6 iron while waiting to hit, since they have trouble like that too" or "Get yourself a 'choke shot' so you can keep playing."
While reviewing such comments, we regularly resist the urge to grab a pitching wedge and spilt a few heads in the hope that someone will ask the question, either out loud or to themselves, "What am I missing in the meaning of this kind of patter that intimates such helpless feeling? Why do we keep asking the same questions?"
To begin with, if your game won't survive a night's sleep, that should be the first clue that something is unfinished or out of kilter. If you had to treat driving your car, dressing yourself, or any of the other things you do regularly or frequently, with such a question, surely you would stop yourself and ask, "What's the problem here?"
At the risk of offending a few people and their furtive answers, those who may be trying to help, but lack enough information to do that, while trying to do it anyway, here's our take.
If your swing is not working, it only means that you haven't finished your most effective learning and built a bridge between your skills and your habits. If your habits were well developed, such occurrences would be so infrequent as to go unnoticed. On a day when your swing is not working to your liking, that bids for a more careful approach to the information you need and the utilization of that information in learning and development of your game, though there is the outside chance that something already learned is in need of repair. The extent and severity of the symptoms, however, would tell you whether you were in need of habits, or in need of reinforcing something already in your possession. Unfinished habit development would show in the entire game. The repair issue would be less severe and more transient. Neither of those is ominous, mysterious, or insidious, but just a matter of putting a proper, accurate, effective plan into your portfolio and proceeding to manage it well.
We've been doing that with players for 30 years, even though only a few have been paying attention. More recently, the number is growing. Why? Because all of a sudden, it is dawning on players that their thinking has been truncated into no more than a 3% conscious mental function when what they need is to add and understand the 97% non-conscious mental activity - at least well enough to inform the building of habits and stop the process of trying to survive on skills alone.
This, by the way, is, by all available evidence, the most formidable underlying reason that the observable performance standards in the game have hardly moved in the last century, even with the marvelous advancement in high tech equipment and in the understanding of swing movements and skills.
If you can soak that into your thinking and not be ready to advance your knowledge, skill and habit development, then it would be a good time to take up tennis, badminton, ping pong or bowling.
There is plenty that can be done, so when you are ready, let us know.
The "answers" come thick, if not fast. Everything from "Just quit and walk in," to "Go back to basics." In between, we see things like "Well, the pros often can be seen on tour taking half swings with a 6 iron while waiting to hit, since they have trouble like that too" or "Get yourself a 'choke shot' so you can keep playing."
While reviewing such comments, we regularly resist the urge to grab a pitching wedge and spilt a few heads in the hope that someone will ask the question, either out loud or to themselves, "What am I missing in the meaning of this kind of patter that intimates such helpless feeling? Why do we keep asking the same questions?"
To begin with, if your game won't survive a night's sleep, that should be the first clue that something is unfinished or out of kilter. If you had to treat driving your car, dressing yourself, or any of the other things you do regularly or frequently, with such a question, surely you would stop yourself and ask, "What's the problem here?"
At the risk of offending a few people and their furtive answers, those who may be trying to help, but lack enough information to do that, while trying to do it anyway, here's our take.
If your swing is not working, it only means that you haven't finished your most effective learning and built a bridge between your skills and your habits. If your habits were well developed, such occurrences would be so infrequent as to go unnoticed. On a day when your swing is not working to your liking, that bids for a more careful approach to the information you need and the utilization of that information in learning and development of your game, though there is the outside chance that something already learned is in need of repair. The extent and severity of the symptoms, however, would tell you whether you were in need of habits, or in need of reinforcing something already in your possession. Unfinished habit development would show in the entire game. The repair issue would be less severe and more transient. Neither of those is ominous, mysterious, or insidious, but just a matter of putting a proper, accurate, effective plan into your portfolio and proceeding to manage it well.
We've been doing that with players for 30 years, even though only a few have been paying attention. More recently, the number is growing. Why? Because all of a sudden, it is dawning on players that their thinking has been truncated into no more than a 3% conscious mental function when what they need is to add and understand the 97% non-conscious mental activity - at least well enough to inform the building of habits and stop the process of trying to survive on skills alone.
This, by the way, is, by all available evidence, the most formidable underlying reason that the observable performance standards in the game have hardly moved in the last century, even with the marvelous advancement in high tech equipment and in the understanding of swing movements and skills.
If you can soak that into your thinking and not be ready to advance your knowledge, skill and habit development, then it would be a good time to take up tennis, badminton, ping pong or bowling.
There is plenty that can be done, so when you are ready, let us know.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Wishy Stroke
Love that comment from a commentator at the current Las Vegas affair (they don't show them talking so it's hard to know which one said it). We suppose a "wishy stroke" is nothing more than a bad putt, brought on by the likes of anxiety. Who says the pros never have any of that (anxiety)?
Some day soon, we hope that the golfing world will take full recognition of the relationship between the mind and the body, so that all can move another notch forward with their games and find a new level in understanding who they are and why and how the mind and body work together successfully.
That is all for now. We return you to your regularly scheduled trivia.
If you are interested to know, give us a shout.
Some day soon, we hope that the golfing world will take full recognition of the relationship between the mind and the body, so that all can move another notch forward with their games and find a new level in understanding who they are and why and how the mind and body work together successfully.
That is all for now. We return you to your regularly scheduled trivia.
If you are interested to know, give us a shout.
Friday, October 5, 2007
A Thought Worth Notice
Jesper Parnevik, after firing 61-65, was asked about the space between his last win in 2001 and his low scores in the first two rounds at the Valero Texas Open. Rightly or wrongly, after a bit of discussion, he noted that most sports give you a good result if you work harder at them, but golf is the only one that can leave you in worse shape if you work harder.
We are inclined to agree with that. Without going into all the reasons, we think what he means is that golfers start making too many changes and thinking too much. Understanding those two elements of the game is critical. Why? Because change within a refined set of physical motions as golf requires needs a lot of time to settle in and become habitual. Continual changing denies that result. Numerous changes really show that the one doing the changing does not have a reasonable grasp on what needs to be accomplished, so the regimen becomes one experiment after another. That will never find the finish line.
On the thinking side, if one keeps rattling the brain, simply put, it will rattle the hands, arms, legs and back, not to mention the brain. If you think that's good for your golf, we know a shrink you can visit.
Jesper is right. Let's hope he doesn't start making more changes after the first two rounds.
We are inclined to agree with that. Without going into all the reasons, we think what he means is that golfers start making too many changes and thinking too much. Understanding those two elements of the game is critical. Why? Because change within a refined set of physical motions as golf requires needs a lot of time to settle in and become habitual. Continual changing denies that result. Numerous changes really show that the one doing the changing does not have a reasonable grasp on what needs to be accomplished, so the regimen becomes one experiment after another. That will never find the finish line.
On the thinking side, if one keeps rattling the brain, simply put, it will rattle the hands, arms, legs and back, not to mention the brain. If you think that's good for your golf, we know a shrink you can visit.
Jesper is right. Let's hope he doesn't start making more changes after the first two rounds.
Monday, September 3, 2007
The "What Are They Thinkng?" Department
In the last two days, we have read or heard several comments about the importance of having good hand-eye coordination for golf. Our question is, "What are they thinking and how are they placing that value on something a blind person can do?"
We don't deny that hand-eye coordination, generally speaking, is a good thing, or that it borders on necessity for some sports, like baseball, tennis, hockey and basketball. However, we will steadfastly hold to the view that it is not important, at least not in the sense it gets talked about, for golf.
Why? Because the ball is not in motion. All the other named sports have an object that is in motion, which does need hand-eye coordination. But a blind person can hit a golf ball. Clearly, by definition, that player is not in the game, if hand-eye coordination is required.
The only reason to "need" it is when one must be able to see the movement in the object s/he wishes to "hit." A golfer can set up, close the eyes, swing the club and make pure contact. For a tennis player or baseball player that would be unlikely if not impossible.
Make no mistake. We are neither denying nor downplaying the value of hand-eye coordination, just calling on the gurus to stop telling people it is either important or necessary for golf.
We don't deny that hand-eye coordination, generally speaking, is a good thing, or that it borders on necessity for some sports, like baseball, tennis, hockey and basketball. However, we will steadfastly hold to the view that it is not important, at least not in the sense it gets talked about, for golf.
Why? Because the ball is not in motion. All the other named sports have an object that is in motion, which does need hand-eye coordination. But a blind person can hit a golf ball. Clearly, by definition, that player is not in the game, if hand-eye coordination is required.
The only reason to "need" it is when one must be able to see the movement in the object s/he wishes to "hit." A golfer can set up, close the eyes, swing the club and make pure contact. For a tennis player or baseball player that would be unlikely if not impossible.
Make no mistake. We are neither denying nor downplaying the value of hand-eye coordination, just calling on the gurus to stop telling people it is either important or necessary for golf.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Backspin by the Press
Here's a good one for you. Read the headline. Then check out what he really said.
Notes: Finchem Disappointed in Tiger
By Associated Press - August 22, 2007
HARRISON, N.Y. -- PGA TOUR commissioner Tim Finchem's news conference Wednesday at The Barclays opened with a question about Tiger Woods' decision to skip the first event of the four-tournament FedEx Cup playoffs.
"Obviously, I'm disappointed with his decision," Finchem said. "It's not a decision that I like to see him make, candidly, any week of the year, but he doesn't play them all. ... From the standpoint of the sponsor here, the fans in New York, it's certainly a negative. You know, I would like to see it the other way."
It is misleading to say the Finchem is disappointed "IN" Tiger. From a news media that is constantly looking for anything that is sensational, or if it is not spicy enough, make it sound that way no matter what the truth is, it is not surprising that they would seek to mislead us into believing that Tiger is a disappointment and that Fichem is upset with him.
Reading the article, one can clearly see that is not true. Finchem's disappointment lies in the concern that even though Tiger is a free man, it will likely make a difference in the interest taken in the tournament.
After that came another news article (we lost the source) that made it sound like Westchester will now show The Tour the door since Tiger was not there. We don't know if that's true or not, but it certainly is far-fetched, not to mention short-sighted.
Our take is that there is no one coming or going that knows Tiger, his needs and desires, better than Tiger. He's who he is and does what he needs to do. And that's that. If others see him as the king of the golf world, without whom the kingdom falls, so be it. Even kings need a vacation once in awhile. Ask any king.
Notes: Finchem Disappointed in Tiger
By Associated Press - August 22, 2007
HARRISON, N.Y. -- PGA TOUR commissioner Tim Finchem's news conference Wednesday at The Barclays opened with a question about Tiger Woods' decision to skip the first event of the four-tournament FedEx Cup playoffs.
"Obviously, I'm disappointed with his decision," Finchem said. "It's not a decision that I like to see him make, candidly, any week of the year, but he doesn't play them all. ... From the standpoint of the sponsor here, the fans in New York, it's certainly a negative. You know, I would like to see it the other way."
It is misleading to say the Finchem is disappointed "IN" Tiger. From a news media that is constantly looking for anything that is sensational, or if it is not spicy enough, make it sound that way no matter what the truth is, it is not surprising that they would seek to mislead us into believing that Tiger is a disappointment and that Fichem is upset with him.
Reading the article, one can clearly see that is not true. Finchem's disappointment lies in the concern that even though Tiger is a free man, it will likely make a difference in the interest taken in the tournament.
After that came another news article (we lost the source) that made it sound like Westchester will now show The Tour the door since Tiger was not there. We don't know if that's true or not, but it certainly is far-fetched, not to mention short-sighted.
Our take is that there is no one coming or going that knows Tiger, his needs and desires, better than Tiger. He's who he is and does what he needs to do. And that's that. If others see him as the king of the golf world, without whom the kingdom falls, so be it. Even kings need a vacation once in awhile. Ask any king.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
More Applause
The ladies are rockin'. Two weeks ago, Karen Davies, from Scottsdale, AZ won the Tennessee Womens' Open at Bear Trace in Crossville, TN. The runner-up there was Lisa DePaulo from Austin, TX.
Yesterday, it was turn about, at Pinehurst, as Lisa won the National LPGA Teaching Division Championship and Karen, the defending champion, was runner-up. They have to be on the classiest list of players out there right now.
If that were not enough, last time out, Lisa and Karen teamed up in the LPGA team championship to win that one, as well. We give both of them kudos for their performance and especially for the consistency of their play. They clearly know how to do it.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
The Magic of New Golf Clubs
A top notch instructor and friend in Australia sent me a couple of rather formidable questions.
"Why is it that people really think they play better with some off the rack stuff that is suited to bugger all people? Why is it that they may score better for a couple of rounds and then the magic wears off?"
That's heard a lot, too, isn't it? I wonder if there is a golfer alive who has not had some variation of the experience that prompts the question. New putters used to be my thing. And up until more recently, even Arnie used to haul five or six out to the putting green before playing to see which one would work best that day.
We call it the "distraction factor." Anything new requires a different focus of attention from the usual. That takes the mind away from mechanical issues for a moment or two, and that's when things get better. Never mind that it's an unfinished form of the principle. It will work in the short term. The moral is that we could go through golfing life changing our equipment every other day (disregarding the cost, of course) and likely play better until that drained us of money or pleasure.
The sad part is that no one bothered to check into the principle lying behind that phenomenon. Most players keep on trying to think about what they are doing while they are doing it - which is a procedure containing several fatal errors.
A new piece of equipment stops, or postpones that kind of thinking for a day or two, till the player becomes accustomed to the "new" and it is now "old," so it's back to the same "old" kind of thinking.
What makes that "fatal" is the mismatch occuring between thinking and acting. We can think much faster than we can act, which in nature's scheme, inevitably produces either a balk or "hot pursuit" trying to catch up. Either of those is ultimately fatal. Oh, of course, we get away with our misses, even teach people that's a desirable way to go, but it is a "wounded" way to go.
So all us clever folks thought up what can now be seen as a "tic-tac" solution - get a new set of clubs. And the rest of the story is, where this message is concerned, it makes no difference if they are "fitted" or just off the rack, since it's not the clubs. Its the NEW in our minds about the clubs.
If that's not an elongated way to face a problem, then we've missed something somewhere.
Cheers
"Why is it that people really think they play better with some off the rack stuff that is suited to bugger all people? Why is it that they may score better for a couple of rounds and then the magic wears off?"
That's heard a lot, too, isn't it? I wonder if there is a golfer alive who has not had some variation of the experience that prompts the question. New putters used to be my thing. And up until more recently, even Arnie used to haul five or six out to the putting green before playing to see which one would work best that day.
We call it the "distraction factor." Anything new requires a different focus of attention from the usual. That takes the mind away from mechanical issues for a moment or two, and that's when things get better. Never mind that it's an unfinished form of the principle. It will work in the short term. The moral is that we could go through golfing life changing our equipment every other day (disregarding the cost, of course) and likely play better until that drained us of money or pleasure.
The sad part is that no one bothered to check into the principle lying behind that phenomenon. Most players keep on trying to think about what they are doing while they are doing it - which is a procedure containing several fatal errors.
A new piece of equipment stops, or postpones that kind of thinking for a day or two, till the player becomes accustomed to the "new" and it is now "old," so it's back to the same "old" kind of thinking.
What makes that "fatal" is the mismatch occuring between thinking and acting. We can think much faster than we can act, which in nature's scheme, inevitably produces either a balk or "hot pursuit" trying to catch up. Either of those is ultimately fatal. Oh, of course, we get away with our misses, even teach people that's a desirable way to go, but it is a "wounded" way to go.
So all us clever folks thought up what can now be seen as a "tic-tac" solution - get a new set of clubs. And the rest of the story is, where this message is concerned, it makes no difference if they are "fitted" or just off the rack, since it's not the clubs. Its the NEW in our minds about the clubs.
If that's not an elongated way to face a problem, then we've missed something somewhere.
Cheers
Monday, August 13, 2007
Attitude
We like Woody Austin, or at least we want to. He's a gamer, got grit and can play. If we could watch him from a distance and not have to listen, we'd have him on our short list of very fine players. His interviews this week cleared some things up, at least in our mind.
He's got attitude, just like most who play the game. Trouble is, his is a "little" on the over-extended side and he's got it localized down to what looks like a single displacement now, but he still isn't listening to himself. The chip on his shoulder has grown, but he's right about one thing - the media love Tiger more than they like him.
In short, the message that comes through is filled with a rather transparent need to knock Tiger off the top rung and a growing resentment that he hasn't done it yet. Or maybe he's waiting for Tiger to step aside and let Woody ascend to the throne. Meanwhile, he's blaming the media and the galleries for their failure to notice and using his verbal "forthrightness" as an excuse, rather than a reason, for why that is.
He rightly sees some similarities between himself and Tiger and doesn't understand why the galleries willingly fuss over Tiger and need a challenge from him (Woody) to raise a cheer. It's all in attitude. It's in how a person carries himself. What Woody misses is that Tiger has no persistent chip and his (Woody's) keeps getting bigger and louder.
Some have chips that are tough and fleeting and others carry a single one like a piece of baggage everywhere they go. Woody doesn't understand why Tiger can slam a club and be called "competitive," while he (Woody) can show what he believes to be similar and be called a "loose cannon." It's all in the way the attitude is carried. Some call it "bearing." There is a mature version and one that has a lot of unfinished business.
It is true that perception can be fickle. It appears to us that sometime back, when Woody hit himself in the head with his own putter and broke it, the "loose cannon" myth got started and that kind of folklore tends to remain. We think it's quite likely that fed Woody's chip. Those things get heavy, so we hope that Woody can now start shifting the load a bit before the President's Cup. He also needs to put aside his "I'm 43 years old" bit and keep playing his game. He thinks it used to be better. We disagree. He's a better player (seems to us its the score that counts) than he used to be.
A lot of people didn't like Tiger's fist pumping at first, but it became clear that he didn't carry that everywhere he went. It was fast, short and gone - part of his natural style. Woody needs to see that dynamic, but it is hard to be "unique" when somebody with a better record that he admires and resents at the same time is standing there with all the trophies.
Woody is not likely to see this, but we'll hope for him that he loses the chip and puts it where others can't see it. It is time for him to get through this particular "sticking point" and finish his "business." We think he's a winner. Now if only he can see it, too. Winners are as winners do.
He's got attitude, just like most who play the game. Trouble is, his is a "little" on the over-extended side and he's got it localized down to what looks like a single displacement now, but he still isn't listening to himself. The chip on his shoulder has grown, but he's right about one thing - the media love Tiger more than they like him.
In short, the message that comes through is filled with a rather transparent need to knock Tiger off the top rung and a growing resentment that he hasn't done it yet. Or maybe he's waiting for Tiger to step aside and let Woody ascend to the throne. Meanwhile, he's blaming the media and the galleries for their failure to notice and using his verbal "forthrightness" as an excuse, rather than a reason, for why that is.
He rightly sees some similarities between himself and Tiger and doesn't understand why the galleries willingly fuss over Tiger and need a challenge from him (Woody) to raise a cheer. It's all in attitude. It's in how a person carries himself. What Woody misses is that Tiger has no persistent chip and his (Woody's) keeps getting bigger and louder.
Some have chips that are tough and fleeting and others carry a single one like a piece of baggage everywhere they go. Woody doesn't understand why Tiger can slam a club and be called "competitive," while he (Woody) can show what he believes to be similar and be called a "loose cannon." It's all in the way the attitude is carried. Some call it "bearing." There is a mature version and one that has a lot of unfinished business.
It is true that perception can be fickle. It appears to us that sometime back, when Woody hit himself in the head with his own putter and broke it, the "loose cannon" myth got started and that kind of folklore tends to remain. We think it's quite likely that fed Woody's chip. Those things get heavy, so we hope that Woody can now start shifting the load a bit before the President's Cup. He also needs to put aside his "I'm 43 years old" bit and keep playing his game. He thinks it used to be better. We disagree. He's a better player (seems to us its the score that counts) than he used to be.
A lot of people didn't like Tiger's fist pumping at first, but it became clear that he didn't carry that everywhere he went. It was fast, short and gone - part of his natural style. Woody needs to see that dynamic, but it is hard to be "unique" when somebody with a better record that he admires and resents at the same time is standing there with all the trophies.
Woody is not likely to see this, but we'll hope for him that he loses the chip and puts it where others can't see it. It is time for him to get through this particular "sticking point" and finish his "business." We think he's a winner. Now if only he can see it, too. Winners are as winners do.
Saturday, August 4, 2007
As My Grandmother Would Have Said...
"Land Sakes, that's no way to do anything!"
Sitting here watching, observing, evaluating what is going on at the Firestone course, it suddenly comes to mind that, "Land Sakes, we really don't want golfers to become good enough to play consistently well. It's too much fun to watch them go up and down, try to deal with frustration, hit funky shots and see if they recover and who can do that best."
We can feel for a guy who goes from the lead to 6 shots back in two holes, or one that has advertised temper issues that announcers keep mentioning as needing "control," (which of course, those in the know, understand is an impossibility). Emotion cannot be "controlled." The harder you try that, the "worser" it gets. He can learn to manage it if he decides to do that, but..."control"...no way.
So maybe we just need to quit trying to help golfers and sit back, relax and watch the circus. It is definitely an 18 holer - circus, that is.
(Please note - there is a bit of tongue in cheek - about what we will choose to do).
It's just that we've seen shots today that even we could hit!
Cheers
Sitting here watching, observing, evaluating what is going on at the Firestone course, it suddenly comes to mind that, "Land Sakes, we really don't want golfers to become good enough to play consistently well. It's too much fun to watch them go up and down, try to deal with frustration, hit funky shots and see if they recover and who can do that best."
We can feel for a guy who goes from the lead to 6 shots back in two holes, or one that has advertised temper issues that announcers keep mentioning as needing "control," (which of course, those in the know, understand is an impossibility). Emotion cannot be "controlled." The harder you try that, the "worser" it gets. He can learn to manage it if he decides to do that, but..."control"...no way.
So maybe we just need to quit trying to help golfers and sit back, relax and watch the circus. It is definitely an 18 holer - circus, that is.
(Please note - there is a bit of tongue in cheek - about what we will choose to do).
It's just that we've seen shots today that even we could hit!
Cheers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)