For those in the US, I should also mention that most of my playing partners have found the instruction at GolfTec to be very useful. At GolfTec, your are placed in an electronic harness while your swing is digitally recorded, analyzed by computer and analyzed by a PGA professional. The instruction is conventional but excellent.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I tried Stack and Tilt because I was having trouble hitting the ball fat. S&T cured this problem. Other instructional approaches might also have cured my problem. Some of the comments in the NY Times Golf Blog point out that the biggest challenge of golf instruction is communication. The theory and rationale for S&T made sense to me. Not everyone will find the S&T approach to golf instruction very communicative. If the theory doesn't make sense to you, look for something else.
Also, the communication of the S&T swing has changed over time. I actually find the earlier explanations more informative, particularly the explanation of the "stand up" move which I'll discuss in a future post.
My problem with Stack & Tilt is we're now on Stack & Tilt 2.0. Additionally, any time someone says they had difficulty with S&T, the S&T devotees respond, "Yeah, but was your instructor a certified S&T instructor?"
ReplyDeleteIf you've got a system so complex that PGA pros with 20 years of experience need a certification to teach it, something's not quite right.
The golf swing is about about staying centered and letting gravity, momentum and centrifugal force do their job. You work with your anatomy and gravity, not against them. While I see some of those concepts in S&T, from my view, it's got a few positions which seem unnatural.
Wade, Thanks for the comment! So many questions: Is there one golf swing for everyone? Can you learn S&T on your own? Can you use parts of S&T and ignore "positions which seem unnatural"? Why haven't more tour players adopted S&T?
Delete