Instruction
Do old school teachings have a place in golf’s new school environment?
Every week, I watch golf telecasts that show the best players in the world playing tough golf courses and hitting shots that challenge their skills. It’s a joy to see what they can do with a golf ball.
Today’s players are so talented and golf analysts aren’t scared to say so. My favorite part of golf telecasts, however, is when former golfers (turned broadcasters) help us understand what is going through golfers’ mind, what could happen with the shot and what technique(s) would work best for them under pressure. Most of us have never been “there” on Sunday, so it’s nice to hear analysis from people who have.
One topic that consistently comes up in the world of instruction is the debate between “old school” versus “new school” teaching methods. The most vocal critic of new school instruction, which is characterized by the use of golf radar systems like FlightScope and Trackman that track the movement of the club and ball, is Brandel Chamblee. Like him or not, he’s not afraid to voice his opinion and that’s why I love to listen to him. You never know who he is going to target, but lately his criticism has been aimed directly at Sean Foley and Tiger Woods.
Everyone is asking why Tiger can win the non-majors, but he can’t seem to break through on the big stage. Chamblee’s answer is that Foley’s new school instruction has forced Tiger into playing “golf swing, not golf,” which compromises his ability to score when he is struggling with his swing.
But it’s not just Tiger. According to Chamblee, the new school methods that Foley and others like him teach produce robotic players who have little imagination. They’re not trying to hit the best shots; they’re trying to “please the machine” and make perfect golf swings.
As a full-time teacher for more than 20 years, I have seen both sides of the argument. I have taught with my eyes, using split-screen video, 3D motion analysis and now with golf radar in every lesson. So which style is better?
I’m here to say that instructors need BOTH styles to be able to teach better than their predecessors. Here’s few examples why:
If you only use your eyes, you CANNOT see everything going on
I’ve heard the debates that argue that I don’t need golf radar to see what’s going on. Heck, I’ve had one of the best teachers in golf tell me that he has the best eye in golf instruction, and doesn’t need anything to help him on the lesson tee. But he and the other instructors who claim to be able to see everything aren’t really seeing everything.
The most important part of the golf swing, impact, takes about 1/10,000 of a second. While teachers who trust their eyes can be right about certain things most of the time, there is no way that they can accurately judge angle of attack, true path, face angle and all the other variables golf radar provides by just looking at ball flight and divots. If an instructor’s eyes can see what’s going on during the 1/10,000 of a second, they should be ninjas, not golf pros.
It’s not about “pleasing the machine” on every shot
One of the inert dangers of using golf radar is the total reliance on the numbers to formulate a good or bad shot in the player’s mind. As we all know, perfection is IMPOSSIBLE, however, reasonable consistency is not. I have always tried to stress to my students (while using golf radar) that it’s not about making the numbers say the same thing every time. It’s about learning how to “feel” the differences between numbers.
If you tend to swing too much from the inside, try to make swings that have an outside-in path. Can you feel the difference? Now that golf radar has defined these feels numerically, you can now figure out how to keep your swing’s path in very tight parameters. It’s not the numbers that define you, but the feels of how you did it. If you can feel the difference between a slightly in-to-out path and a slightly out-to-in path, it seems to me that you would have better control of your swing path.
Feel is not real
As we all know, what we feel is not real in the aspect of how we are swinging the club and our body. Many players have fouled themselves up on the range by thinking they are doing one thing yet swinging in exactly the opposite manner. If you are relying only on your feel, you can run into problems. Homer Kelly said in his book The Golfing Machine, “Let mechanics produce and feel reproduce.” To me, that is the best way to practice.
If you are working on controlling your ball’s curvature, you could just focus on what you feel and what you see the ball doing in mid-air, or you could use golf radar to chart your “face-to-path” ratio. With a centered hit, the smaller the gap between the face direction at impact and the path of the club the straighter the ball will tend to go. Therefore, using “hard data” from golf radar to control the golf ball’s curvature and then feeling HOW you in fact made the ball go straighter will make it easier to reproduce shot shapes on the golf course when it matters. I prefer using golf radar to define feels, not the other way around — it saves time and stops wasted effort.
Focusing on numbers stunts imagination
One of my favorite things to do, now that I have a golf radar machine, is to actually see what my “stock shots” actually do in the way of the numbers. It’s funny, as a player I always had a few types of shots I would play under certain situations, making the ball react mostly in the way I could count on. But was the ball actually doing what I wanted it to do or was I making things too hard?
For example, I hit the ball left to right 95 percent of the time, but sometimes — like into a hard headwind — I would try to hit a hard, low hook to keep the ball under the wind and have it run more. What I found when I hit this type of shot on golf radar was that it indeed did go lower than my stock fade, yet it flew 20 yards on the average SHORTER than my normal shot and ran out about the SAME distance! I always felt it flew a touch shorter and ran out farther, but this in fact was NOT the case. I was making this shot much harder by not hitting my normal shot most of the time.
Short shots from 30-to-100 yards are all about feel from what most of my clients say, yet this new-school technology has help me define the feels of what these shots actually do in the air and how they will react when they hit the ground. I hit these shots and focus on a few things: overall carry distance, launch, spin, spin loft and decent angle. These things help me to determine how to control the ball.
After a few sessions on golf radar, I have a better idea how my knockdown 100-yard wedge will fly versus my stock 100-yard wedge versus my high soft 100-yard wedge. Without golf radar, I would NEVER know how these things would differ.
Final Analysis
So which style is correct? I think the new-school techniques have the potential to help players UNDERSTAND AND FEEL what they are doing and how they can improve their motion; however, you will never convince me that golfers can do it without old school experimental techniques.
My challenge to you is to find a new-school teacher that is well versed in old-school experience, and I bet you will find the person that will get you to the next level.
Thank you, Brandel Chamblee, for alerting us to the fact that “old-school” instructional techniques cannot be lost with our new school technology. Just be patient everyone. It will take time to integrate both.
There may be no more painful affliction in golf than the “yips” – those uncontrollable and maddening little nervous twitches that prevent you from making a decent stroke on short putts. If you’ve never had them, consider yourself very fortunate (or possibly just very young). But I can assure you that when your most treacherous and feared golf shot is not the 195 yard approach over water with a quartering headwind…not the extra tight fairway with water left and sand right…not the soft bunker shot to a downhill pin with water on the other side…No, when your most feared shot is the remaining 2- 4-foot putt after hitting a great approach, recovery or lag putt, it makes the game almost painful.
And I’ve been fighting the yips (again) for a while now. It’s a recurring nightmare that has haunted me most of my adult life. I even had the yips when I was in my 20s, but I’ve beat them into submission off and on most of my adult life. But just recently, that nasty virus came to life once again. My lag putting has been very good, but when I get over one of those “you should make this” length putts, the entire nervous system seems to go haywire. I make great practice strokes, and then the most pitiful short-stroke or jab at the ball you can imagine. Sheesh.
But I’m a traditionalist, and do not look toward the long putter, belly putter, cross-hand, claw or other variation as the solution. My approach is to beat those damn yips into submission some other way. Here’s what I’m doing that is working pretty well, and I offer it to all of you who might have a similar affliction on the greens.
When you are over a short putt, forget the practice strokes…you want your natural eye-hand coordination to be unhindered by mechanics. Address your putt and take a good look at the hole, and back to the putter to ensure good alignment. Lighten your right hand grip on the putter and make sure that only the fingertips are in contact with the grip, to prevent you from getting to tight.
Then, take a long, long look at the hole to fill your entire mind and senses with the target. When you bring your head/eyes back to the ball, try to make a smooth, immediate move right into your backstroke — not even a second pause — and then let your hands and putter track right back together right back to where you were looking — the HOLE! Seeing the putter make contact with the ball, preferably even the forward edge of the ball – the side near the hole.
For me, this is working, but I am asking all of you to chime in with your own “home remedies” for the most aggravating and senseless of all golf maladies. It never hurts to have more to fall back on!
Over the last couple of decades, golf has become much more science-based. We measure swing speed, smash factor, angle of attack, strokes gained, and many other metrics that can really help golfers improve. But I often wonder if the advancement of golf’s “hard” sciences comes at the expense of the “soft” sciences.
Take, for example, golf instruction. Good golf instruction requires understanding swing mechanics and ball flight. But let’s take that as a given for PGA instructors. The other factors that make an instructor effective can be evaluated by social science, rather than launch monitors.
If you are a recreational golfer looking for a golf instructor, here are my top three points to consider.
1. Cultural mindset
What is “cultural mindset? To social scientists, it means whether a culture of genius or a culture of learning exists. In a golf instruction context, that may mean whether the teacher communicates a message that golf ability is something innate (you either have it or you don’t), or whether golf ability is something that can be learned. You want the latter!
It may sound obvious to suggest that you find a golf instructor who thinks you can improve, but my research suggests that it isn’t a given. In a large sample study of golf instructors, I found that when it came to recreational golfers, there was a wide range of belief systems. Some instructors strongly believed recreational golfers could improve through lessons. while others strongly believed they could not. And those beliefs manifested in the instructor’s feedback given to a student and the culture created for players.
2. Coping and self-modeling can beat role-modeling
Swing analysis technology is often preloaded with swings of PGA and LPGA Tour players. The swings of elite players are intended to be used for comparative purposes with golfers taking lessons. What social science tells us is that for novice and non-expert golfers, comparing swings to tour professionals can have the opposite effect of that intended. If you fit into the novice or non-expert category of golfer, you will learn more and be more motivated to change if you see yourself making a ‘better’ swing (self-modeling) or seeing your swing compared to a similar other (a coping model). Stay away from instructors who want to compare your swing with that of a tour player.
3. Learning theory basics
It is not a sexy selling point, but learning is a process, and that process is incremental – particularly for recreational adult players. Social science helps us understand this element of golf instruction. A good instructor will take learning slowly. He or she will give you just about enough information that challenges you, but is still manageable. The artful instructor will take time to decide what that one or two learning points are before jumping in to make full-scale swing changes. If the instructor moves too fast, you will probably leave the lesson with an arm’s length of swing thoughts and not really know which to focus on.
As an instructor, I develop a priority list of changes I want to make in a player’s technique. We then patiently and gradually work through that list. Beware of instructors who give you more than you can chew.
So if you are in the market for golf instruction, I encourage you to look beyond the X’s and O’s to find the right match!
Most pros take months, even years, to win their first tournament. Lottie Woad needed exactly four days.
The 21-year-old from Surrey shot 21-under 267 at Dundonald Links to win the ISPS Handa Women’s Scottish Open by three shots — in her very first event as a professional. She’s only the third player in LPGA history to accomplish this feat, joining Rose Zhang (2023) and Beverly Hanson (1951).
But here’s what caught my attention as a coach: Woad didn’t win through miraculous putting or bombing 300-yard drives. She won through relentless precision and unshakeable composure. After watching her performance unfold, I’m convinced every golfer — from weekend warriors to scratch players — can steal pages from her playbook.
Precision Beats Power (And It’s Not Even Close)
Forget the driving contests. Woad proved that finding greens matters more than finding distance.
What Woad did:
• Hit it straight, hit it solid, give yourself chances
• Aimed for the fat parts of greens instead of chasing pins
• Let her putting do the talking after hitting safe targets
• As she said, “Everyone was chasing me today, and managed to maintain the lead and played really nicely down the stretch and hit a lot of good shots”
Why most golfers mess this up:
• They see a pin tucked behind a bunker and grab one more club to “go right at it”
• Distance becomes more important than accuracy
• They try to be heroic instead of smart
ACTION ITEM: For your next 10 rounds, aim for the center of every green regardless of pin position. Track your greens in regulation and watch your scores drop before your swing changes.
The Putter That Stayed Cool Under Fire
Woad started the final round two shots clear and immediately applied pressure with birdies at the 2nd and 3rd holes. When South Korea’s Hyo Joo Kim mounted a charge and reached 20-under with a birdie at the 14th, Woad didn’t panic.
How she responded to pressure:
• Fired back with consecutive birdies at the 13th and 14th
• Watched Kim stumble with back-to-back bogeys
• Capped it with her fifth birdie of the day at the par-5 18th
• Stayed patient when others pressed, pressed when others cracked
What amateurs do wrong:
• Get conservative when they should be aggressive
• Try to force magic when steady play would win
• Panic when someone else makes a move
ACTION ITEM: Practice your 3-6 foot putts for 15 minutes after every range session. Woad’s putting wasn’t spectacular—it was reliable. Make the putts you should make.
Course Management 101: Play Your Game, Not the Course’s Game
Woad admitted she couldn’t see many scoreboards during the final round, but it didn’t matter. She stuck to her game plan regardless of what others were doing.
Her mental approach:
• Focused on her process, not the competition
• Drew on past pressure situations (Augusta National Women’s Amateur win)
• As she said, “That was the biggest tournament I played in at the time and was kind of my big win. So definitely felt the pressure of it more there, and I felt like all those experiences helped me with this”
Her physical execution:
• 270-yard drives (nothing flashy)
• Methodical iron play
• Steady putting
• Everything effective, nothing spectacular
ACTION ITEM: Create a yardage book for your home course. Know your distances to every pin, every hazard, every landing area. Stick to your plan no matter what your playing partners are doing.
Mental Toughness Isn’t Born, It’s Built
The most impressive part of Woad’s win? She genuinely didn’t expect it: “I definitely wasn’t expecting to win my first event as a pro, but I knew I was playing well, and I was hoping to contend.”
Her winning mindset:
• Didn’t put winning pressure on herself
• Focused on playing well and contending
• Made winning a byproduct of a good process
• Built confidence through recent experiences:
- Won the Women’s Irish Open as an amateur
- Missed a playoff by one shot at the Evian Championship
- Each experience prepared her for the next
What this means for you:
• Stop trying to shoot career rounds every time you tee up
• Focus on executing your pre-shot routine
• Commit to every shot
• Stay present in the moment
ACTION ITEM: Before each round, set process goals instead of score goals. Example: “I will take three practice swings before every shot” or “I will pick a specific target for every shot.” Let your score be the result, not the focus.
The Real Lesson
Woad collected $300,000 for her first professional victory, but the real prize was proving that fundamentals still work at golf’s highest level. She didn’t reinvent the game — she simply executed the basics better than everyone else that week.
The fundamentals that won:
• Hit more fairways
• Find more greens
• Make the putts you should make
• Stay patient under pressure
That’s something every golfer can do, regardless of handicap. Lottie Woad just showed us it’s still the winning formula.
FINAL ACTION ITEM: Pick one of the four action items above and commit to it for the next month. Master one fundamental before moving to the next. That’s how champions are built.
PGA Professional Brendon Elliott is an award-winning coach and golf writer. You can check out his writing work and learn more about him by visiting BEAGOLFER.golf and OneMoreRollGolf.com. Also, check out “The Starter” on RG.org each Monday.
Editor’s note: Brendon shares his nearly 30 years of experience in the game with GolfWRX readers through his ongoing tip series. He looks forward to providing valuable insights and advice to help golfers improve their game. Stay tuned for more Tips!
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Rick Altham
May 25, 2014 at 8:41 pm
Some of the greatest ball strikers of all time figured out their swing without radar or a camera. They also did it with blades and persimmon woods. You would think with all the new technology the current tour players would be superior ball strikers. However, Hogan, Knudson, Player etc are still considered the gold standard.
Dennis Clark
May 22, 2014 at 2:17 pm
I agree Tom; It’s not simply what radar sees but what we have LEARNED from what radar sees. Hence the “new ball flight laws” etc. Good article.
Dave
Oct 1, 2013 at 9:34 pm
I’ve never cared for Chamblee, but his method’s do tie him to additional attention by bashing Tiger. He gets mentioned more often because of it and I don’t agree with that approach to success by members of the media. Tiger has made the rest of his competitors look at all aspects of their games in order to improve. The rubber-band effect, or, forcing them to start looking at diet, fitness, sports psychology, and coaching differently, kicked in a few to several years after he came on Tour. Since then it has become harder to consistently dominate out there. Personally, I think Tiger could survive without a coach and win. I also think that since his early childhood he had an influence over his shoulder, his Dad, watching him practice and guiding his direction. It’s familiar for Tiger to have someone, and up until Foley they’ve all been older, father type figures. As technology comes along, naturally it gets integrated and embraced as part of getting better. I’d imagine almost everyone on Tour has a launch monitor by now, if not their coach does. I get the “Playing golf swing” comments as I’ve gotten into the same rut with my own swing and trying to make a perfect backswing, ugh. However, Brandel’s comments have always rubbed me the wrong way given how comparatively lacking his career on Tour actually is. He knows nothing about winning a major, being the best player in the world and all those expectations, dealing with everyone scrutinizing your golf swing and some shaking their head in disapproval. Brandel is just after ratings, job security. Wanna be Johnny Miller.
Ninja radar
May 21, 2014 at 12:10 am
bottom line is, they should be ninjas, not golf pros!
Carlos Danger
Sep 12, 2013 at 5:28 pm
Chamblee’s opinion on how to hit a draw……Aaron Rodgers, he is beyond combative and makes himself look like an uneducated tool. Once Chamblee and Mclain wake up we can then invite them in to the circle of an intelligent golf swing cause and effect conversation. Until now dismiss the rhetoric and know that Chamblee is purely scared to explain the proper way in which to swing a club due to lack of knowledge.
Andrew Cooper
Sep 14, 2013 at 4:31 am
“…the proper way in which to swing a club..”?! Anyone who thinks there’s a “proper way” really doesn’t understand golf.
RG
May 23, 2014 at 1:29 am
You can hit a ball properly, but there is no proper way.
Jack
Sep 11, 2013 at 2:36 am
Easier to said than done, especially on things that can’t be proved. What’s a talking head to do though.
larrybud
Sep 9, 2013 at 2:54 pm
Tiger may lack many things, but imagination is not one of them.
David
Sep 9, 2013 at 12:12 pm
Seems like a good eyes teacher works well…Remember when Stricker helped Tiger with his putter stance by just watching him and he went on to win WGC.
Ni
Sep 9, 2013 at 2:56 am
If I could say what I want to say to Brandel, it would be this:
“Don’t just blame it all on the instruction! Tiger has just as much to blame for hiring the coach and allowing the coach to be there all the time! A player like Tiger is good enough to know what to do with his own game, so if we see that he allows Foley to hang around all the time, it’s not necessarily the coaching or the coach’s fault that he, the coach, is allowed to hang around and disrupt the student’s game.”
DocWillie
Sep 9, 2013 at 8:52 am
Tiger hasn’t won, BECAUSE IT IS HARD AS HELL TO WIN A MAJOR!!! In fact, it is hard to win any PGA TOUR event. But he has largely contended through all of these events. Dude has won five times this year alone! If his Sean Foley swing hadn’t been so damn accurate and hit a flagpole in Georgia, Adam Scott may still be waiting for a win. How many people have won more than one major over the last 5 years? How many first-time major winners have there been? I despise Chamblee’s capricious critique of Tiger; he’s supportive when clearly he will win, he’s dismissive when Tiger even slightly struggles. But how many missed cuts does Tiger have? Is Tiger at Q school with his new swing?!? Gosh, whose golf swing does Chamblee like? I would guess he loves his own. (I wonder, is there youtube footage of Chamblee?)
Ken Lines
Nov 2, 2013 at 9:10 am
I found some of Chamblee’s swing on the internet and it does not have 10% of the athletic components of any PGA or LPGA star. It is a good swing to study for those with shoulder/neck issues. His swing would work well in strong winds and with some hybrid clubs. If he had a real sense he would be teaching recreational golfers. Tiger, Ernie, etc. need excessive game to have any shot at winning a major. Can these players see into the future and know if every change will hold up? No. One simple/tidy golf move is not going to beat the field often. People do age and need to adjust.
Martin
May 19, 2014 at 6:11 pm
I he spent his time teaching recreational golfers he would make $40k/yr instead of 6 figures.
Martin
May 19, 2014 at 6:13 pm
His beef with the instruction Tiger gets, is the biggest compliment Tiger can have, he’s Tiger.%4&&% Woods.
Like it or not, Tiger can’t hit a fairway to save his life when it matters anymore. So the notion that he is trying to swing golf instead of play certainly applies off the tee.
naflack
Sep 8, 2013 at 7:36 pm
i think radar has taught us that what looks on or off plane in many cases in simply not true. i think this in turn will give golfers more freedom to swing the way they swing with less focus on reaching a position for what would now be an arbitrary reason.
Mark in Scotland
Sep 8, 2013 at 7:07 pm
John Jacobs (old school) knew a thing or two about teaching the game. He said the purpose of the golf swing was to deliver the club head to the back of the ball perpendicular to the intended line of flight. The method employed is of little consequence so long as it can be repeated.
Most teachers know all about the various ‘methods’ but which is right for you? They can help you understand all about the importance of grip, stance, posture and alignment. The set up is more than 50% of the golf swing, the rest is load and then release. A 30 year old teacher with all the latest gadgets and up to the minute information still doesn’t and can never know what it’s like to live in a 50 year old body.
With all the benefits technology has brought to the game, there is a danger of information overload. The game is best kept simple – certainly for the average recreational golfer, which means most golfers. More shots are lost from 100 yards in. How often has it been said – learn to pitch and putt (all about feel) and see your scores tumble!
As for the professional game – it’s become almost unwatchable. An obsession with distance, a ball that goes too far and is designed to reduce spin – all to pander to television to give us a weekly ‘show’ with winners posting ’20 under’ and collecting obscene prize money on courses set up like dart boards – who do they think they are fooling?
Good to see Mickleson and Rose triumph on real courses with imaginative golf in this year’s two most important championships. Don’t bother waiting for the integration of methods. So long as the game is played in the air and along the ground no machine will ever combat those vagaries. It’s all about feel – if you don’t actually have it, you’ll never understand it. blame your parents for messing with your DNA.
BigBoy
Sep 9, 2013 at 5:52 am
well said.
Bob
Sep 10, 2013 at 7:58 am
I totally agree.
Forsbrand
Sep 10, 2013 at 4:40 pm
Absolutely spot on, John Jacobs and Peter Alliss on BBC Play Better Golf, GASP! Personally I blame leadbetter 🙂 golfers today don’t appreciate great old school students such as Howard clarke , Paul way you know the guys with great GASP basics and great hands, fast hands, because to play good golf you need a good pair of hands, which I think is massively overlooked these days!
t
Sep 11, 2013 at 12:21 pm
i don’t get excited for golf as much as i use to. i don’t get excited for new equipment. watching it on tv or in person doesn’t have the same appeal it did 20 years ago. but i do get excited seeing pictures of golfers holding persimmon drivers and watching old utube videos of lee trevino and george knudson. hopefully one day people will understand the stupidity of whats happening in golf and change their thought process. oh, this game is too tough, lets make equipment to hit it further. oh, now its too easy, lets make golf courses longer to accommodate the new equipment. oh, now its too tough again, lets make new equipment to make the ball go even further. so now i can spend $200 on shaft to hit it passed my buddy and then he can spend $300 on a shaft to hit passed me. oh, now i have to pay $120 for a round of golf because the golf course is longer. stupid stupid stupid.
big meech
Sep 11, 2013 at 1:19 pm
please don’t take lessons from that 30 year old with gadgets. Just go “find it” on the range with your “natural swing.”
Duane
Sep 8, 2013 at 6:58 pm
Chamblee is a high priced hater. He keeps his eye on Tiger, and creates critical commentary to make himself relevant. Too bad…he has the talent to be good without it.
Andrew Cooper
Sep 8, 2013 at 6:40 pm
Is a coach helping a pupil get better or not? Whatever the coaching style, that is the bottom line.
mark
Sep 8, 2013 at 6:18 pm
Tiger has 105 or more victories than Chamblee really!!!! Lets see do i take a lesson from Tiger or Chamblee.If ee don’t get new info we become announcers
nils jonsson
Sep 8, 2013 at 7:37 pm
And how many victories does Sean Foley have (and Hank Haney, Butch Harmon, and David Ledbetter…)?
Chamblee does not have to have more victories than Tiger etc in order to be able to comment on their golf swings. If that was the case, all golf coaches and commentators would be out of a job……
t
Sep 11, 2013 at 12:09 pm
don’t be confused by great golfers and great teachers. 99% of better than average PGA tour players can’t teach. why? because they can just do it. they can just hit the ball. where as, some guys like butch harmon have an incredible eye for detail and understand how to communicate swing instruction to people who have a difficult time hitting the ball.
Bman
Sep 8, 2013 at 4:56 pm
While I think Chamblee is a blow-hard for the most part, and for some reason mainly criticizes Tiger and Foley for this (Justin Rose seems immune from it), too much old or too much new in the way of instruction is not ideal. Like my mom always said, “moderation is the key”.