I'm just wondering if the advent of video cameras may have diminished the quality of golf teaching. It seems that many teachers now reach straight for the video camera and use the footage to attempt to get the pupil into certain positions, usually with Stuart Appleby or some other USPGA tour pro on the other side for reference. I'm curious as the best lessons I've had didn't involve a video camera and I always seem to be playing with guys who have a lot of lessons but are never actually improving.

At the end of the day, has the widespread introduction of the video camera resulted in an improvement in teaching outcomes? Or are the outcomes the same but the delivery has changed? Has it resulted in a collective dumbing down of the knowledge of teachers? Could lessons be improved if reliance on the camera was reduced (a feel vs actual argument I suppose)?

PS, I'm thinking here of the area in the middle of the Bell curve.

In my opinion, video analysis will only show you what you are doing but not fix a problem. It still requires a good coach to instruct/show you how to overcome the problem. It's not a bad thing...

If used properly I think camera's help the lesson...but over reliance is a bad thing for sure.

I find it great for seeing what is actual happening...

e.g. I may feel like I have spine ange at adress, but upon seeing the tape notice i don't, teacher can tell me as much, but actually seeing it will reinforce the point.

Had a lesson a few years ago the pro got out his camera shot some vid played it back slo mo and said i am coming ott ok so how do i fix it umm i dunno but you are coming ott i never went again.

Its why i now do what i do.

QUOTE: porkchop @ Jan 13 2007, 09:46 PM

It seems that many teachers now reach straight for the video camera and use the footage to attempt to get the pupil into certain positions, usually with Stuart Appleby or some other USPGA tour pro on the other side for reference.

Without claiming any expertise on the topic, it would seem that any teacher who does this should be avoided. I say that because it would seem logical that a good teacher would look at what you have 'naturally' and work with that modifying slightly as necessary. In theory, that should arrive at the perfect swing for you, which should not involve major reworking. Even if your swing looks like Appleby's (for example) you still may not be able to be exactly like Appleby, so there seems to be little reason to compare the two.

QUOTE: chestnuts @ Jan 14 2007, 05:04 PM

Its why i now do what i do.

What do you do now?

I often wonder if, had Jim Furyk been trained by a 'camerman' coach, whether he'd have turned out as good a player as he is.

I doubt it.

Had a lesson a few years ago the pro got out his camera shot some vid played it back slo mo and said i am coming ott ok so how do i fix it umm i dunno but you are coming ott i never went again.

Its why i now do what i do.

QUOTE: LowFlyingHawk @ Jan 14 2007, 05:10 PM

What do you do now?

Bitch about bad teaching pros?

It's like going to the doctor with a broken arm and he doesn't give you an x-ray. All the world's best teachers use video today.

QUOTE: austria @ Jan 15 2007, 08:38 AM

It's like going to the doctor with a broken arm and he doesn't give you an x-ray. All the world's best teachers use video today.

So do all of the crap ones as well.

The video camera can be an absolute "time-burner" in a half hour lesson with significant proportions of a half of the lesson taken up by video/view.

It is a great tool for reference/comparison but too many ordinary teachers base their lessons around the camera and not their teaching.

I hear and I forget
I see and I believe
I do and I understand
(Confucius)

I think this sums it up for me.

Often when doing a lesson the pro explains something to me, and I logically understand it, but don't necessarily agree, because I don't feel like I am doing what they say.

When I then see the video of the same swing, immediately I am a believer.

However unless this can directly translate to a change in the swing that I can feel, I really struggle with the change.

E.g. I overswing the club, but don't feel like I do. When I see it on video (when the pro has asked me to do a full swing, then a 3/4 swing). I can see that the full swing is overswung, and the that 3/4 is very close to the mark. So when we go back to the lessons, the feel of a 3/4 is what I want to stick to.

Grass Hopper

QUOTE: Postie @ Jan 14 2007, 01:13 AM

I often wonder if, had Jim Furyk been trained by a 'camerman' coach, whether he'd have turned out as good a player as he is.

I doubt it.

Of course he would have, because he's talented way beyond most of us.

QUOTE: Postie @ Jan 14 2007, 05:13 PM

I doubt it.

Of course he would... he still has guidelines through impact - especially with that grip of his.

Video is one of the best tools available today, it is like a launch monitor for fitting clubs. As long as you have some kind of skill in interpresting the video - then you are fine.

The wonderful quote from Confusius says it all... How am I going to get you to change your swing if you do not trust what I am saying... and seeing as the real good golf swing doesn;t haven't too much effort and doesn't feel powerful., how are YOU going to see the difference...

Take a look at my swings yesterday . . . the coloured circles show the differences - Now I know the problem is the left knee pointing towards the ball and that in turn causes the other problems... bad coaches may say - you need a shorter backswing, or more upright backswing. having a crap coach won't save you either way

You have to have good visuals, and Video saves more time than any other way.

The video camera can be an absolute "time-burner" in a half hour lesson with significant proportions of a half of the lesson taken up by video/view.

And the problem is ???

Especially for the better players - you will spend more time talking and less time hitting pills. Better players need to understand WHY they are changing. Not as good players just want instant gratification which is why they rarely get better.

Video - Good.

One big negative about video, is that you can see people who wear their bluetooth headset while practising

QUOTE: Virge666 @ Jan 18 2007, 09:57 AM

Of course he would... he still has guidelines through impact - especially with that grip of his.

Video is one of the best tools available today, it is like a launch monitor for fitting clubs. As long as you have some kind of skill in interpresting the video - then you are fine.

Video - Good.

Fair enough Virge.

Now, what i was getting to was, Furyk no doubt would've been swinging it like he does since day 1.
He has learned to compensate for all his faults until it has all become very natural for him.

If he had come to you or, any coach with a video during his early days (before he got good), any/every coach would have taken his swing to pieces until it looked 'proper'.
What i was suggesting at the start was, had he been video'd and made to work on making his swing look picture perfect, would he have become as good a ball striker as he is?

I seriously don't think he would have. I believe his compensations have made him a good ball striker.

QUOTE: Postie @ Jan 18 2007, 06:19 PM

If he had come to you or, any coach with a video during his early days (before he got good), any/every coach would have taken his swing to pieces until it looked 'proper'.
What i was suggesting at the start was, had he been video'd and made to work on making his swing look picture perfect, would he have become as good a ball striker as he is?

I seriously don't think he would have. I believe his compensations have made him a good ball striker.

I agree Postie.

Take a look at Duval. He was the #1 player in the world until some guy decided to 'fix' his swing.

Mick

QUOTE: Postie @ Jan 18 2007, 06:19 PM

Fair enough Virge.

Now, what i was getting to was, Furyk no doubt would've been swinging it like he does since day 1.
He has learned to compensate for all his faults until it has all become very natural for him.

If he had come to you or, any coach with a video during his early days (before he got good), any/every coach would have taken his swing to pieces until it looked 'proper'.
What i was suggesting at the start was, had he been video'd and made to work on making his swing look picture perfect, would he have become as good a ball striker as he is?

I seriously don't think he would have. I believe his compensations have made him a good ball striker.

If you can get side by side video of Furyk when he joined the tour and Furyk now you can see he has actually reduced the loop a bit...not sure if that is due to video or not though?

I once had a discussion with Geiberger about Sybervision tapes of his swing. My thinking then, and now, is that, if you want proper use of video, make a tape of your own swing, when you are at what you consider you best. Then have the best of the best in your own swing duplicated as per Sybervision, so that you have your own "sybervision" tape. Watch that till you have it glued into your mind. The only player Geiberger's tape will ultimately help is Geiberger.

Now, obviously, if your swing is lousy, and you get bad results from it, get that worked out first and then make your tape.

Bottom line - Go by your own swing, not one that belongs to someone else. That's the most productive use of video. Comparisons to other players is useless and wasteful. It encourages imitation, which is a poor excuse for YOU.

Using video to point out faults showing in players' swings comes out as negative reinforcement. Use video for positive reinforcement.

Like anything else, video is best used within a given set of parameters, not as a be-all, end-all for teaching.

P.S. I guess it sounds like a rant, so I'll own up to it.

we use video cameras a lot in martial arts as a lot of the time you will tell someone "your stance isnt long enuf or you knee should be bent more" and they will go pffft.

then when they see it on video they go "wow, my stance is pretty short" then they start making attempts at fixing it.

it may not be the be all and end all, but it wont do any harm.

QUOTE: Zorba @ Jan 19 2007, 12:35 PM

we use video cameras a lot in martial arts as a lot of the time you will tell someone "your stance isnt long enuf or you knee should be bent more" and they will go pffft.

then when they see it on video they go "wow, my stance is pretty short" then they start making attempts at fixing it.

it may not be the be all and end all, but it wont do any harm.

Make them do impact work or sustained resistance training.

That will fix a stance deficiency quicker than videoing them.

impact work might help there striking techniques, but will do nothing for stance.

unfortunately whacking their knee with a stick is frowned upon these days

QUOTE: vman @ Jan 18 2007, 06:40 PM

Take a look at Duval. He was the #1 player in the world until some guy decided to 'fix' his swing.

That is bad coaching - not the fault of video... not more than the launch monitor being at fault for a dodgey fit...

Anyhoo . . . Duval looked good last night in places...

QUOTE: Virge666 @ Jan 19 2007, 01:14 PM

That is bad coaching - not the fault of video... not more than the launch monitor being at fault for a dodgey fit...

Anyhoo . . . Duval looked good last night in places...

Spot on...That is the whole thing...the camera is a tool...it is not an answer.

That is like saying a trowel is at fault for a dodgy bit of brick work...nope the brickie using it is!

Would love to see Duval back up there too!

QUOTE: keygolf @ Jan 19 2007, 10:47 AM

I once had a discussion with Geiberger about Sybervision tapes of his swing. My thinking then, and now, is that, if you want proper use of video, make a tape of your own swing, when you are at what you consider you best. Then have the best of the best in your own swing duplicated as per Sybervision, so that you have your own "sybervision" tape. Watch that till you have it glued into your mind. The only player Geiberger's tape will ultimately help is Geiberger.

Now, obviously, if your swing is lousy, and you get bad results from it, get that worked out first and then make your tape.

Bottom line - Go by your own swing, not one that belongs to someone else. That's the most productive use of video. Comparisons to other players is useless and wasteful. It encourages imitation, which is a poor excuse for YOU.

Using video to point out faults showing in players' swings comes out as negative reinforcement. Use video for positive reinforcement.

Like anything else, video is best used within a given set of parameters, not as a be-all, end-all for teaching.

P.S. I guess it sounds like a rant, so I'll own up to it.

Did Geiberger get a word in? What were his thoughts?

QUOTE: keygolf @ Jan 19 2007, 10:47 AM

Comparisons to other players is useless and wasteful. It encourages imitation, which is a poor excuse for YOU.
Using video to point out faults showing in players' swings comes out as negative reinforcement. Use video for positive reinforcement.

Bollocks . . . In my humble opinion of course... The golf swing has fundementals for a reason, if you are looking at elbow positions and fingers - then you may have a point... But NOTHING apon NOTHING shows a fault and better that comparing to a model pattern and comparing. And it SO does not have to be yours...

Like anything else, video is best used within a given set of parameters, not as a be-all, end-all for teaching.

Can't agree more there !