This is mind bending stuff, as you say it removes the shackles from thinking. It's so good to see in golf instruction now that it's based in science and not local superstition or woo woo. Thankyou for bringing the episode.
Technique, Wizards, luck - and the weirdness of golf. This week I heard of Jason Day's use of "dead hands" (no wrist action) in pitching. My wife and I are playing the back nine. On the 17th hole facing a 25 yd shot, false front, pin cut about 20 feet from the front edge. I'm thinking should I try Jason's method now (of course I have not practiced it) or my favorite "flip" shot with the 58* lob wedge? I chicken out, try the flip, skull the ball over the green into the rough above the hole. Gary Player whispers in my ear "go low for dough, high to cry". I chip out with the lobber (low), sink putt for par (driveable par 4). 18th hole par 5 I'm just right of the green in two under a massive bunker with that same 25 yd shot - no chance to go low. I try Jason's "dead hands", ball comes off the sand wedge perfectly, hits exactly where I wanted it to, I hear the clink of the ball striking the pin, my wife shouts "it went in" - for an eagle. We were playing the back nine only, I started with two sloppy bogeys, 6 pars, and an eagle for even par. Go figure . . . .
Question: At which point do you know that you know and stop the investigation? That is, when do you stop chasing unclear details, speculative evidence, theories, imitation of current celebrated playwers? The reductionist approach in nearly all the fields of though in our day has ruined medicine, sports conditioning, peace of mind. Why? Because no one entering with analytical tools realizes at the beginning how deep and nearly endless it all is. It is important to recall and withdraw, that is, to remove oneself from the jungle of good (but not necessarily relevant) details to look at the overal, organic problem. Plus, speaking frankly [writing frankly!], these trivialities can lead to pedantry and removal of any sense of what is actually imporntant and has the priorities. Actually, the interest in these subjects is a form of intellectual amusement, not of any real value but distracting from harder thinking or doing! Right. That's what I said. How many fine, imperfect golf swings have been damaged, crippled, debilitated, diminished, adulterated by so-called coaches and teachers? How many healthy young men are over-training and ultimately subject to repetitive stress injuries before their 30th year? And how can one even tak golf technique without someone citing ball spead, MOI, inertia, rotational and ground forces, blah, blah...? Too much financial success and too much clelebrity exposure of famous golfers allows firms to invest in engineering and technical equipment, mostly uncritically. They of course are victims of philisophical pragmatism gone mad: if it succeeds, it must be right. The test of a truth is more than its success in competition. And, because nearly all 'success' in golf is measured by tournament wins by (generally) men under 35 (now women too) we are faced with using those few players as a measuring standard, without defining the standard in any other manner than wins/cash/visibility. But, I end on a sad admission: I too, am constantly injecting myself with useless golf information and data. It may or may not be of value at all, but it seems to gratify, on some level. If I had invested the time used following 'golf,' into an actual valuable subject - say French History - I would be a) fluent in French; b) familiar with the country past and present; c) munch a croissant while cursing the Assemblée nationale for raising taxes and, best of all, d) go out and hack terribly on a nearby course and actually enjoy the total experience of golf too.
Your very informed response is the very reason I started my podcast with the sole goal of remaining holistic in my quest to present all manner of information and insight to golfers around the world. My hope is that within my shows there is something that will guide the listener/viewer to a better understanding of a concept, so that they can make more appropriate and correct decisions as they approach the improvement of their personal games. And as it pertains to this show I am pretty confident there is something that is going to alert the misinformed golfer, or the golfer shackled by myth or tips from friends, on how a quality wedge shot is actually struck
I repeat: you have a great podcast/youtube series and even when you and the guest enter the weeds, you always find something in there worth mentioning. I also second the holistic approach, whatever that means today. I hope it means that we use our entire body/mind in harmony with our environment and possibly our intentions?
Awesome podcast Mark. Appreciate this information.
This is mind bending stuff, as you say it removes the shackles from thinking. It's so good to see in golf instruction now that it's based in science and not local superstition or woo woo. Thankyou for bringing the episode.
Seriously impressive podcast. Great information.
Much appreciated!
Technique, Wizards, luck - and the weirdness of golf. This week I heard of Jason Day's use of "dead hands" (no wrist action) in pitching. My wife and I are playing the back nine. On the 17th hole facing a 25 yd shot, false front, pin cut about 20 feet from the front edge. I'm thinking should I try Jason's method now (of course I have not practiced it) or my favorite "flip" shot with the 58* lob wedge? I chicken out, try the flip, skull the ball over the green into the rough above the hole. Gary Player whispers in my ear "go low for dough, high to cry". I chip out with the lobber (low), sink putt for par (driveable par 4). 18th hole par 5 I'm just right of the green in two under a massive bunker with that same 25 yd shot - no chance to go low. I try Jason's "dead hands", ball comes off the sand wedge perfectly, hits exactly where I wanted it to, I hear the clink of the ball striking the pin, my wife shouts "it went in" - for an eagle. We were playing the back nine only, I started with two sloppy bogeys, 6 pars, and an eagle for even par. Go figure . . . .
Nice playing in the end. Jason Day's action is so repeatable.
Question: At which point do you know that you know and stop the investigation? That is, when do you stop chasing unclear details, speculative evidence, theories, imitation of current celebrated playwers? The reductionist approach in nearly all the fields of though in our day has ruined medicine, sports conditioning, peace of mind. Why? Because no one entering with analytical tools realizes at the beginning how deep and nearly endless it all is. It is important to recall and withdraw, that is, to remove oneself from the jungle of good (but not necessarily relevant) details to look at the overal, organic problem. Plus, speaking frankly [writing frankly!], these trivialities can lead to pedantry and removal of any sense of what is actually imporntant and has the priorities.
Actually, the interest in these subjects is a form of intellectual amusement, not of any real value but distracting from harder thinking or doing! Right. That's what I said. How many fine, imperfect golf swings have been damaged, crippled, debilitated, diminished, adulterated by so-called coaches and teachers? How many healthy young men are over-training and ultimately subject to repetitive stress injuries before their 30th year? And how can one even tak golf technique without someone citing ball spead, MOI, inertia, rotational and ground forces, blah, blah...?
Too much financial success and too much clelebrity exposure of famous golfers allows firms to invest in engineering and technical equipment, mostly uncritically. They of course are victims of philisophical pragmatism gone mad: if it succeeds, it must be right. The test of a truth is more than its success in competition. And, because nearly all 'success' in golf is measured by tournament wins by (generally) men under 35 (now women too) we are faced with using those few players as a measuring standard, without defining the standard in any other manner than wins/cash/visibility.
But, I end on a sad admission: I too, am constantly injecting myself with useless golf information and data. It may or may not be of value at all, but it seems to gratify, on some level. If I had invested the time used following 'golf,' into an actual valuable subject - say French History - I would be a) fluent in French; b) familiar with the country past and present; c) munch a croissant while cursing the Assemblée nationale for raising taxes and, best of all, d) go out and hack terribly on a nearby course and actually enjoy the total experience of golf too.
Your very informed response is the very reason I started my podcast with the sole goal of remaining holistic in my quest to present all manner of information and insight to golfers around the world.
My hope is that within my shows there is something that will guide the listener/viewer to a better understanding of a concept, so that they can make more appropriate and correct decisions as they approach the improvement of their personal games.
And as it pertains to this show I am pretty confident there is something that is going to alert the misinformed golfer, or the golfer shackled by myth or tips from friends, on how a quality wedge shot is actually struck
I repeat: you have a great podcast/youtube series and even when you and the guest enter the weeds, you always find something in there worth mentioning.
I also second the holistic approach, whatever that means today. I hope it means that we use our entire body/mind in harmony with our environment and possibly our intentions?