Instruction
The dark side of too much change
In 2010, I wrote a book called “You are a Contender!” that highlighted a key characteristic of high performers called high achievement drive. Achievement drive is essentially your ability to set your own personal standard of excellence and not be constrained by the expectations of others.
Athletes with a high achievement drive set their own standard, and this is how they can separate themselves from the pack. They have little concern for how others are doing, and a singular focus on their own abilities. Obvious examples are Tiger Woods winning the 1997 Masters by 12 shots, The Open Championship in 2000 by 8 shots and the 2000 U.S. Open by 15 shots. Recent examples are the runaway major championship victories by Rory McIlroy and Jordan Spieth.
But can this pursuit of achievement be taken too far? Can achievement drive actually damage your game after a certain point?
Golf’s law of diminishing returns
Having experience consulting to world-class athletes, I often see achievement drive taken too far and misdirected. Some athletes believe that making big changes will always create big results. Change is healthy and change is good, but I can tell you it can be overdone. It can sometimes lead to an obsessive search for perfection that can inevitably lead to performance decline and frustration.
You are likely familiar with the economic principle of the law of diminishing returns. It basically states that the tendency for a continuing application of effort or skill toward a particular project or goal will decline in effectiveness after a certain level of result has been achieved. Very simply, if you reach a certain level in something, there comes a point where the quest to perfect it no longer creates important returns for the time invested.
The law of diminishing returns applies in everything, including golf. At some point, as we are currently seeing with Tiger Woods, the investment in trying to constantly improve swing technique and ball-striking does not generate better results.
You know and I know that it isn’t reasonable to expect to hit perfect golf shots. After all, we are surrounded by imperfection, and it is a fact that nothing in golf or life is perfect. The human body isn’t perfect, and neither are golf equipment or golf courses. So to expect to reach a level of perfection in striking a golf ball is an unreasonable goal.
I think you would agree if you saw Tiger Woods in 2000 that a golf ball has rarely been struck with the precision and power that he demonstrated at that time. And through 2005, Tiger won most of the events he entered. He owned the game.
Is it reasonable to think that a ball could be struck, or the game could be played, that much better than Tiger did it in 2000?
The greatest hitter of a golf ball may have been Ben Hogan, who worked and worked to perfect a swing that would not hook the ball. Hogan did this through necessity; a lack of control in his early days as a young pro led to disappointing results. But even Hogan admitted that he only hit 5 to 6 shots in every round round that were exactly what he wanted. The rest were expected misses.
Less science, more art
Golf is a subtle mix of art and science. In the pro ranks, we see extremes of both. At one end of the spectrum there are “technical” players who focus mostly on their mechanics. At the other end of the spectrum there are “feel” players who play primarily by instinct. In the period of time from 2000-2005, Tiger Woods may have been the perfect blend of art and science. His fundamentally sound, fluid golf swing created great speed and precision, and his mechanics were blended with an instinctive genius and courage to create and invent shots around the greens that others might not have attempted. And, to top it all off, Tiger was also arguably the Tour’s best putter!
Some golfers forget, however, that once the basic, fundamental science has been achieved, the development of the art becomes the key. Creativity, feel, imagination, decision-making, life balance and other little details continually help a golfer develop into something better and more consistent. Jack Nicklaus seemed to understand this. Like Woods, he also had prodigious talent, but he knew his limitations. He continued to refined his game, had great life balance and became the most consistent golfer in history.
A golf ball can only be struck so well. When science becomes the obsessive focus, the art part of the equation suffers. In continually trying to be more technical and more perfect with the swing motion, the genius within players can be diluted and other areas of the game, that have been reliable strengths can suffer.
Achievement drive is important, but proceed with caution
Achievement drive is important in golf and everything else in life, as is the ability to set a personal standard of excellence. Pushing yourself beyond your comfort zone to take on new challenges is key, but you must also remember the law of diminishing returns. Because perfection is not attainable or possible, at some point in your development the pursuit of art should be more of a priority over the unattainable, seductive goal of perfect science.
While swing coaches, short game experts and putting gurus are all important to develop your capabilities and are key to building your skills, don’t forget to pay attention to instinct, the object of the game, simplicity and other less scientific factors as important factors to continue your development as a player. Exercise caution when you think about changing what already works.
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...
Scott Thomson
Sep 6, 2015 at 8:16 am
In other words, “Golf is not a game of perfect”. Took me years as a young player to understand this phrase and now I spend every day explaining it to others. Excellent read John.
martin
Sep 3, 2015 at 8:20 pm
All heroes will die in eventually. There is no miracles out there to stop the declining process. It is just the way the life, as we know it, works… But Go Tiger! You will beat Sneads record, but Jacks record will stay unbeaten… “This is The End, my only friend The End”…
Mat
Sep 3, 2015 at 9:27 am
An argument could be made that the graph should actually be an upside-down U.
Cons
Sep 4, 2015 at 10:20 pm
I think they call that an n.
JH
Sep 3, 2015 at 9:11 am
I was left a bit confused as to the message of the article. At first I took it as too much change is bad and you shouldn’t do it, as the title suggests. Then it goes into Tiger and how he has performed, followed by the law of diminished results, followed by something else. I’m sure they are all inner related, but I don’t understand the message. Is it to accept my own ability and when I see a peak in performance no matter what the score sheet suggest I should take that as the best and at that point will never play better? I think I kind of took the message that way, which leads me to think this is a dangerous article for the average golfer. The average golfer will probably read this and think oh that explains why I shoot in the 100s all the time. I guess I’ll accept that and realize I can never get better because of the law.
If I’m off base let me know.
John Haime
Sep 3, 2015 at 1:09 pm
Hey JH,
Thanks for the comment – completely understand your thoughts.
For everyone, the situation is different. For Tiger, reaching the pinnacle in 2000 – after years of developing his skillset – the law of diminishing returns applies to the swing motion. As you know, you can only hit the ball so well – does it really matter if you are in the middle of the fairway or almost in the middle of the fairway? In his case, completely changing the science instead of refining with the art – will only produce marginal returns – maybe.
For the “average” player, based on their effort levels, talent, time put in etc. – will determine their point of diminishing returns. If an average player can keep the ball in play and generally hit the ball solidly – will the time constantly changing the swing motion generate return in their scores? Or, will effort to manage their game better, understand emotional trigger points, additional work on short game/putting and a better perspective on the game help them lower scores? I think each individual has their own point of diminishing returns based on a variety of factors.
I am a big believer in change to improve and move forward. But, when achievement drive runs amok and change is done for the sake of change – and ego runs the show – this is when change becomes unhealthy. And, remember, that “other” change continues by improving the little subtle “art” parts of the game that can improve scoring.
Hope this makes sense.
Aren
Sep 3, 2015 at 2:05 am
Good article and in my respectful opinion on the money.
marcel
Sep 2, 2015 at 11:54 pm
nice article and great comparison. however there is major difference between individual sports person and anonymous economic sphere. Tiger is going thru what every sports man will go thru – Decline in physical elasticity and recovery. More prone to injuries and longer time to recover. Tiger is no longer looking for perfection but rather to find what can he do best at the age and body he has. Tiger is still a stellar player by every measure… but there are these kids that play better.
We are going to see decline in 30+ major winners and winners in general. I believe there was lots of performance juice in the game before… and now you can see that young bodies keep being consistent and old guys one good week in 2-3 months.
John Haime
Sep 3, 2015 at 1:19 pm
Hey Marcel – thanks very much for your thoughts and comment.
IMO diminishing returns applies in everything. There is always a relationship between effort and results in performance. At some point, athletes determine when additional effort does not produce additional results.
other paul
Sep 2, 2015 at 8:59 pm
Tigers initial changes with Haney were to try and take pressure off his knees. Then they just kept going. I am in the process of a huge over haul and can’t wait to have my new swing finalized.
Christestrogen
Sep 2, 2015 at 2:20 pm
Didn’t he win like 79 tournaments? Hard to argue with his formula.
John Haime
Sep 2, 2015 at 4:13 pm
Good point Christestrogen – agreed.
But, I think you’ll agree that the law of diminishing returns applies here as the swing motion has become less effective after 15 years of major changes. We all know Tiger is a genius and could have won (and did win) with a variety of swings, but imagine the long-term performance with the swing that had all 4 majors in 2000 with the addition of an incremental mastery in the “art” part of the game and emotional stability off of the course?
Hopefully the article will make readers think about change – and the potential risks in performance.
Christestrogen
Sep 3, 2015 at 2:10 pm
Personally I think he was at his height at the 2006 open championship…hoy lake…
Faldo was paired with him and said it was the greatest ball striking he had ever witnessed…and think of the people Faldo has seen hit irons…Seve, Jack(well late 1970s jack), Watson, Trevino, Norman and the list goes on….
Faldos son was on his bag and nick asked tiger if his son could have the driver since tiger only hit it once over the first two days.
Also Haney said that performance was the greatest example in history of the nine shot clinic…
-great article but I find it incredibly difficult to argue with his results
Pugster22
Sep 2, 2015 at 5:17 pm
I agree it is hard to argue his winning formula. However, he changed the equation over the last four or five years and I think that is what the author is trying to express. At least that is my takeaway from the article.
Frank McChrystal
Sep 2, 2015 at 12:51 pm
Never underestimate the life balance. This game tests your heart and soul. If your personal life is in limbo, everything seems monumental under the pressure of a round. If your heart and soul are somewhat wounded, you have no chance of performing at your highest level. So quit wasting time. Get rid of the “gray” area in your life and then try this “game” again.
Prime21
Sep 2, 2015 at 7:01 pm
Well said!
Mats "PUMP 2" Bergsten
Sep 3, 2015 at 10:35 am
Couldn’t have said it better myself! 🙂