Speaker 1: Hi.
Speaker 2: My name is Daniel from the Netherlands and I play
it over some golf club. Welcome to Gulf Smarter.
Speaker 1: My name is Bob Fairchild and I'm from sanen Samo, California.
My favorite golf course is Royal County down in Northern Ireland.
This is Golf Smarter number Oney ten.
Speaker 2: We're just trying to gather data on uneven lives and
I'm very guilty of this. I always thought that if
the ball is above your feet, the person is going
to hit it to the low side. Uphill lie is
going to hit it higher and shorter, and a downhill
lie is going to hit it lower. Well, you just
give people a chance to hit these shots. We don't
really necessarily see it. The results aren't as simple as
we think. Of the people we had today, probably twenty
five percent of them hit it higher on an uphill
lie than they do off the level line. So they're
on an uphill lie counter to it it but depends
on their swing. And we had some people and we've
seen this so far and gathering the stata that if
the ball is below their feet, they actually hit it
straighter and their clipheads feet increases. But what are they
thinking they're thinking that it's going to go to the
right because that's what people like me have told them.
And then they hit five shots and they're all going
dead straight, but they're aiming left, so they're thinking they're
doing something wrong in their technique. But maybe depending on
your golf spring, the ball below your feet, you'll hit
it pretty straight so you don't have name left.
Speaker 3: Instinct putting the revolutionary science based method at looking where
you put with Eric Albinfels.
Speaker 2: This is Golf Smarter, sharing stories, tips and insights from
great golf minds to help you lower your score and
raise your golf IQ.
Speaker 3: Here's your host, Fred Green. Welcome back to the Golf
Smarter podcast.
Speaker 2: Eric, thank you that nice to be here.
Speaker 3: It's great to have you back again. I just for
reference points, I want to say that you were on
episodes forty seven and forty eight. We did two weeks
in a row talking about Pinehurst in November of two
thousand and six. Then you came back after Instinct Putting
came out the book Instinct Putting, which we're going to
talk a lot about today. That was episode one thirty
eight in August of two thousand and eight. August fifth
we're doing in August fifth episode this week this year too,
and then you were on in twenty sixteen episode five
hundred and forty more talk about instinct putting and as
I progress in my journey of golf, and I keep
going back to that book and now it really is
starting to make sense to me instinct putting. But let's
start talking first about your latest book, called Evidence Based Golf.
It's it's not storytelling. It's a science based book, right,
and it's it's it's I don't know if dry is
the right word, but it's science. And so you have
to be able to you have to be prepared to
when you get into the book that that's where you're going.
Don't expect cute stories about somebody hitting a golf ball.
Speaker 2: No, it's pretty straightforward you it's a lot of it's
a summary of our research, for sure.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so let's talk about that and your research. You
had a partner on both of these books. What was
the what prompted you to say we need to talk
about the evidence.
Speaker 2: Well, that's a good question, I think for us. The
you know, Bob Christina, who's my research partner. We started
probably in nineteen ninety I actually reached out to him
via a friend of ours, a mutual friend, girl named
Carol Man, and I was looking for insight into how
to do a research study for the World Scientific Congress
of Golf which was held in Saint Andrew's University, and
I wanted to do a summary of our golf school
students and just needed his advice on how to present
that and how to gather the data and do a summary.
So anyway, we started this conversation and we started doing
research together with the thought of let's make it evidence based.
It's not anecdotal. Let's make sure it's research that can
stand up where we can stand up in front of
an academic environment and people will appreciate the steps we
went through, the protocols we follow, and that's really when
we started doing all this stuff. And the book was
just a natural transition where we thought we need to
we need to publish this and summarize some of our
at least to us the more important studies.
Speaker 3: Why did you need to be a scholastic, you said,
you know, for scholastic presentation.
Speaker 2: Well, just more academic. You know, if you go to
a World Congress of Golf where it's where you would
bring together researchers in different environments where they look at
human performance, maybe the biomechanics of a golf swing. They
do presentations on agronomy, equipment, things like that. So it's
the idea is that I didn't want to stand up
in front of an audience of researchers and not be
able to present the material the right way and not
have done the research the right way. So I guess
when I'm saying that more, it's certainly a more academic
environment where you're talking and presenting in front of researchers
who do research on human performance and other sports and
they so it's kind of a gathering of that type
of a group. That's hell pretty much every four years
at St. Andrews. It's off and on.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and what we haven't established is what you do.
Let's say, let's put this in perspective here.
Speaker 2: Well, my title here, I guess I have to kind
of think of what I do. I do a little
bit of different stuff, but I'm the director of instruction
as well as the Golf Academy at Pinehurst and I've
been here about forty years and so my my major
job is to teach in golf schools and run the
golf schools here at the facility. I do some individual
lessons as well, but not nearly as much individual lessons
as golf schools. And the flexibility I have is to
do things like the research, and that's part of my
job as well, is to do research projects that could
propel our information. We're giving our students a little bit
more forward and maybe try to be less anecdotal instructors
and more instructors that are based on research. And again
back to the evidence based instruction.
Speaker 3: And you're a PGA Master professional correct, Yeah, okay, so
that means you instruct instructors.
Speaker 2: Yeah, fair amount, yeah, fair amount, not a ton with
our schedules here, I do a fair amount for the
PGA have rather have done a fair amount over the
years as an adjunct faculty member. But you know, I
certainly trained the folks I work with here and then
the professional staff here. But yeah, I do lit that
as well. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So that's why you would need to get in
front of a large group to present the science based
Yeah okay, all right, now you talk about empirical versus
non empirical evidence in the book, Why don't you explain those.
Speaker 2: Well, I guess from my perspective, the terms are just
that you're trying to draw data that you're trying to
You're trying to utilize research and such that will make
the data hold that would that would hold up under scrutiny.
I guess is in my mind how we think of it.
At least I think of it. A fair amount of
instruction to me seems to be anecdotal, you know where,
and it's it's not it's not a criticism of teachers,
but I think as teachers, you naturally rely on what
works for you and the the sometimes the thought is
it's going to work for everybody. And so I think
our goal with the research we've done is trying to
cut through some of the some of the stuff that
happens that is successful for one teacher and not necessarily
applicable to other students. And I guess I'm thinking in
terms of let's say, I'm thinking of like a full
swing swing queue. Let's say somebody swings out to end
in a down swing, which is a pretty common error. Well,
one form of a swing queue would be to swing,
you know, kind of do some sort of internal queue
where you drop your right arm into your side or
try to have your right oble touch your side in
the down swing to change the path of the club.
And then another strategy could be to think more in
terms of the club hit. So those two types of
approaches are very good cues. I mean, they certainly work.
I mean you've certainly heard to you know, drop your
right oble in your side to swing out to the right,
you know, so I think we all have heard that.
But there are two distinctly different approaches. One is external
QUE where you're thinking about the club head, and the
internal Q is where you're thinking about the body. And
so there are two different strategies. And the side of
stuff that we like to do is we like to
pit those two against each other to see which ones
could be more effective in the down swing or making
the swing change. So the idea is that you have
research that would support one way could be better than
another way, or at least giving people the option to
know there's two ways to work on a downswings. So
kind of a long story, but that's kind of what
we enjoy doing. It's helpful for our teaching too, and
we're looking at a student that's swinging out in it's
nice to have two different approaches to fixing it versus
always relying on the one. And that's kind of where
we feel like we're helping our students have a different
way to approach the same thing. Hopefully that makes sense.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, And and I don't worry about long answers.
We like long answers here, take your.
Speaker 2: Time that you get everything a little bit.
Speaker 3: But okay, no, no, no, not at all, not at all.
But I'm curious now, this is directed for this information,
this content, this science is based and directed at golf instructors,
not the average golfer.
Speaker 2: Correct, well, what is Yeah, we're our goal with the research.
I mean, this is kind of back to the days
that Bob, Christina and I really set out to do
this research together. Our thought was that if we could
do research that would be beneficial to the students at Pinehurst.
So we could take two different swing ques and test
one or maybe a training aid. We could test a
training aid and see which one's more efficient, and that
could be beneficial to our students. But we also wanted
to do research that could be helpful for a golf
instructor to maybe see it in a different way and
maybe be able to think about it in a different
way and that could be beneficial to the instructor, which
would then be beneficial to the students. So beneficial to
our students, beneficial to the instructors out there, and then
also to something that we could present that could be
permeated out to the world of golf, like via a
golf magazine. So back in two thousand, I guess it
was we did. We've started really doing a series of
articles for Golf magazine and that have continued where we
just you know, again, back in that day, we worked
with Lauren Anderson and we might just do two or
three studies on the best way to practice lag putting. Actually,
that's where the Instinct Putting book came from because we
did a study for Lauren Anderson and we had people
practice looking at the hole while they were working on
their distance control, and that kind of shifted into that
that's that type of study.
Speaker 3: So with Evidence Based Golf the book. Again, would you
if one of your students, you know, a new golfer
versus a very serious golfer, but came to you and said, oh,
I saw that you have this book Evidence Based Golf.
You know, I'm just learning to play. Is this something
I should be reading or should I just listen to
my teacher and not get myself caught up in this.
You know, I'm new to the game. I play a
couple of times a year, and.
Speaker 2: Sure, well, I think that's that's interesting. I think for
some people the having that type of information is important,
and they they they have an appreciation for maybe the
simplicity of a study where we just look at how
high you should tee your driver and understanding that how
the study took place, the findings, the summary of the findings.
I mean, it's pretty simple. But at the same time,
maybe that person it would would kind of interest them
in that regard just that reading it, and it would
be interesting in it. I'd say probably for a beginner golfer,
it wouldn't really be something that would be a necessity
I would I would strongly suggest they read more material
on the ball flight laws and have a better understanding
what makes the ball do what it does. I think
one of the questions I've always gotten from folks over
the years, still, do you know if you're going to
if you're going to give somebody a book to read,
what book would you give them to read? I've always
told people go read the quick here's for the weekend golfer.
Whether you're a new teacher or you're a new golfer,
having a good sense of ball flight and the being
able to look at ball flight and diagnose what's going
on in your swing or the student swing is not
a bad idea. So that's a I mean, that book's
been around forever, probably nineteen seventy three, but it was
John Jacobs looking at ball flight, how you know, what
makes the ball do what it's doing. The new material
out there that's even more in depth because the track
man and some of the technology we have, I mean,
it's even better. So having a good sense of ball
flight and what makes the ball do what it is
do what it does rather, I would be suggesting to
any newer golfer, and I'd also suggest that to instructors too,
because there seems to be some misconceptions out there what's
really going on.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I can definitely see instructors like reading this saying, ah,
got it, Okay, I understand that. But then I also
see you know, because the audience on this show runs
the gamut from beginning. You know, new golfers too, and
I've had a lot of instructors say that they use
the show as research, which is really awesome. But the
beginning golfer, it's like, I'm I don't know what what
am I supposed to do with this, you know, But
I can see a teacher saying, absolutely it makes to
make sense.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think Yeah, for a beginner golfer, I'm not
too sure. I mean, I certainly have people say that
they've enjoyed it, but I think it's more there, you know,
they're not really they I guess probably I haven't met
a couple of people that were newer to the game
and read it, but I think they had probably read
any type of book like that and enjoyed just kind
of how their brain thinks and how they like that
side of things. So maybe more of it just their background. Yeah,
But as far as the beginner golfer, I'm not too sure.
I mean, certainly the studies where we talk about those
two types of cues, internal and external would be interesting,
but I'm not even too sure a beginner could really
apply that to their own game as much as an
instructor could to their teaching.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we've had a lot of scientists on and mental
coaches talking about internal versus external targets and that how
if you're focusing on your mechanics while you're hitting a ball,
or while you're making your swing, let's not even talk
about hitting a ball when you're making your swing. If
you're thinking about your mechanics, chances are it's not going
to go well.
Speaker 2: It's really hard, yeah for sure, yea. And yet you
know what, when we're kind of looking at that and
not you mentioned earlier the rabbit hole, you can kind
of go down the rabbit hole some of the stuff.
But I think what's interesting from my perspective is that
if you talk to the amateur golfer, you know, we
have them fill out a questionnaire to start before they
start the school, and it's overwhelming the amount of internal
swing cues they have. When they walk in the door.
You ask them what they're working on, and they'll give
you a probably the average befour or five things they're
working on in their swing when they're hitting golf ball,
which is of course that's challenging, but they all tend
to be internal in nature. So I turned my shoulders,
I shift my weight, I drop my right over to
my side, whatever it is, and they don't really think
a lot about what the club's doing, and their awareness
of what the club's doing is really challenging for them
because they think, again, they pick up a book and
it's probably going to be geared towards internal cues. They're
going to read a blog and it's going to be
probably internal cues. They're going to hear tour players talking
about what they're working on. They're probably going to be
some internal cues, and it's challenging for them. So I
think for the student, at least, my experience has been
as if they recognize that there's two types of swing
queues and that they can if they just give it
a thought, they can figure out an external swing queue
where they think about the club that could replace the
internal queue, and they're going to probably be a little
bit better off with that if they just took the
time do that. But they kind of default into left arm,
straight shoulder turning, whatever.
Speaker 3: You do right, and there's a myriad of things that
they're thinking about. Oh, all the way across and you
were saying you started doing this research back at the
let's call it the turn of the century. It seems
like I know it's when you say that, folks our age,
we always think of going eighteen hundred to nineteen hundred,
but that's not where we are. But the technology from
when you started to today is so radically different. How
has it impacted the results of your studies? And if
you had to redoce.
Speaker 2: Some you know, I think we were always pretty lucky
with any type of study that we were doing. We
always had outcome. It was always based on well, not
of them, but outcome is probably the majority of the studies.
So if we didn't have the technology where we could
measure it with a track manner back in two thousand,
the Titleist launch model they had, if we couldn't utilize that,
we could always measure it just the old fashion way,
which would be hit a bunch of golf balls on
a flat surface and measure how far they are offline,
you know, look at the dispersion rate that way. So
it's we've always been able to do that, but the
technology makes it a lot easier, and certainly we can
get more into some of the finer, the secondary measures
that we'd be looking at. But I remember years ago
we did a study on the length of a driver
out on the first hole of number two, which is
at the time was relatively flat wall to wall grass
and so there wasn't any of the waste areas and
they mowed the area down slightly for us, and we
just had people hit drivers off the first tee and
they hit drivers that were one inch over standard length
standard length and one inch under standard length. And of
course everybody liked the longer shafted driver, but they were
more accurate with the shorter shafted driver, which was kind
of the name of the game.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the longer one, you're getting more distance.
Speaker 2: Yeah, on the one out of hit a little bit further.
The other nine were its good and then the shorter
shafted driver they hit a lot straighter. And at the
end of the day the average was greater. But they
always remember that one or two drivers that went with
the longer clubs. But that's everybody knows that. But we
did the old fashioned way. We had a rope down
the middle of the fairway and we measured the dispersion
off the center line of the fairway and we did
it that way. So nowadays that'd be a lot easier
with TrackMan, how.
Speaker 3: High tech of you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we didn't even use We didn't even we didn't
even use later range finders. We just had a we
had one of those longs yards yards or the measuring
tools that would run for fifty feet, so we just
run back and forth with that. So, yeah, we we
did it old school for a while, but the technology
has really changed it because we can look at so
many different things. You know, right now we're looking at
we're just trying to gather data on uneven lives and
at least and I'm I'm very guilty of this, but
I always thought that if the ball is above your feet,
the person is going to hit it to the low side.
So the balls above my feet, it's going to go
to the low side. If the ball is below my feet,
it's going to go to the low side of the
right side. Uphill lie is going to hit it higher
and shorter, and a downhill lie is going to hit
it lower. Well, if you just give people a chance
to hit these shots, we don't really necessarily see it's
that easily defined, or the results aren't as simple as
we think. We were running some people through the uneven
lies today and we've had of the people we had today,
probably twenty five percent of them hit it higher on
an uphill lie than they do off the level lie,
so they're on an uphill lie. I could see that counterintuitive,
but depends on their swing. And we had some people
and we've seen this so far and gathering the data
that if the balls below their feet, they actually hit
it straighter and their cliphead speed increases. But what are
they Yeah, but what are they thinking. They're thinking that
it's going to go to the right because that's what
people like me have told them. And then they hit
five shots and they're all going dead straight, but they're
aiming left. So they're thinking they're doing something wrong with
their technique. But maybe, depending on your golf swing, the
ball below your feet, you'll hit it pretty straight, so
you don't have to name left. So that's you know,
that's where track man can be so helpful. Some of
the other technology can be so helpful because you can
really measure this stuff and get a really good sense
of what the ball is doing. We're watching it live.
Without that technology, it's hard to kind of gauge that, Okay,
that was two more degrees left. It's hard to do there,
but the technology allows us to do that. So kind
of a long answer, but the technology has been a
huge change and helpful for us.
Speaker 3: It's very funny that you talk about the scientific process
is you know, you got to look at the process
versus the outcome. But when we're teaching golf or when
we're telling people about golf, it's all it's like, just
think about the process, don't worry about the outcome. And
on the scientific one, you're thinking about the outcome the process, right,
But golfers, yeah, stop thinking about the outcome.
Speaker 2: Yeah for sure, Yeah, that's true. I mean, if you're
gonna go hit a golf ball over water, don't be
worrying about the water. Think about the process that will
help you hit it over the water. For sure. The
outcome will wear you out, but we'll make it harder,
for sure.
Speaker 3: We'll wear you out.
Speaker 2: Absolutely well, you know the outcome. You can get sideways
on stuff. But the yeah, I mean it is. It
is interesting. We did a study a year ago, a
couple of years ago, rather I guess now. And so
there's two ways to aim. If you know, if you're
out on the golf course, do you use an intermediate target? Yes, okay,
and then.
Speaker 3: There's the shot yeah yeah, for me, every shot.
Speaker 2: You like that it works for you. So we did
a study where we had people come in and they
they did multiple ways of aiming. One way was using
the intermediate target and they would hit shots. So we
just measured the outcome. And then there's another way obviously,
or you aim at the target of the distance. We
phrase that, or we think of it as term as
distal target aiming, So you're aiming at a pan or
a middle of fairway, whatever it is. So you've got
two distinct ways. And we had people just hit shots
and we just measured the outcome. You know, aim it
up and hit it and let's see what happens. And
we found that as groups, one way was not really
more effective than the other. Now I had cameras mounted
on the ceiling at the same time and looking at
the club fase, and I would say that the intermediate
target people seem to be aiming a degree or two
more square to that to the target line than if
they didn't have the intermediate target. So but again we
didn't see anything significant in the outcome. So at the
end of the day, figure out which one's best for you,
either intermediate or the distal target. But again as a
as a golfer. Maybe that would be helpful for you
to now say, Okay, I'm going to go practice and
I'm going to hit twenty shots with my six iron
with one strategy than twenty shots with my six arm
the other way, and see which one I perform better
with kind of look at the dispersion, or maybe go
out on the golf course and play around a golf
with one way or the other. And so you know,
that's kind of where I guess I'm kind of circling
back to. That's kind of what we try to do
here research wise. That just makes it a little bit
more research driven than just anecdotal, where my generation would
have been told, you know, use the intermediate target no
matter what, it's the only way to do it, which again,
maybe that's not always the case for everybody.
Speaker 3: Right right, And let's define intermediate target for those who
are now their ears are perked like, wait a minute,
is that something that's a few inches in front of
the ball or is that the midpoint of where my
distal target is?
Speaker 2: Well, where would you define We defined it as two
feet in front of the golf ball. Okay, so now
the idea of it being that close to the golf
ball was most people can look at the club face
and perfectly aim the club at that intermediate target without
having to move their head. And so that was the
idea of just making it simpler that way. And we
did meet some people that used intermediate targets and they were,
you know, eighty yards away, so maybe God.
Speaker 3: Keep my golf. It varies from person to.
Speaker 2: Person, but when we tested it, we did two feet
just to streamline it.
Speaker 3: Okay, well, that is the perfect opportunity to pivot when
you talk about looking at it, you know, while you're
hitting it or not. Let's move on to instinct putting. Sure,
I've become pretty obsessed with it lately. I've been reading
the book and finding that I really like it good
a lot. And when I talk to people about it,
they're like, that is the most radical thing, the most
heretical thing. Yeah, heretical concept that I've ever heard. And then,
you know, you bring up the obvious conversation of when
you're shooting a basket, are you looking at the ball? No,
when you're when you're hitting a baseball, you know, and
they're like, oh, yeah, hitting a baseball, No, no, you yeah,
you're you're looking at the ball, but you're not looking
at the bat like with tennis. And what I've really
been very pleased with is what I'm doing shorter putts,
especially because that's the bugaboo for me is you know,
you you've got to make those four and five footers,
six footers, eight footers. When I'm looking at the hole
versus looking at the ball, I don't think about or
I don't get caught up in the mechanics of the
swing like I do. When I'm looking at the ball
and watching the buttterhead move around, I'm like, oh, no, no, no,
you know, and then the distrust, the doubt just flares
up like fireworks versus when I'm looking at the hole.
Speaker 2: Ye. No, I agree. I think most of the time,
when I'm somebody that is doing the idea of looking
at the whole, it really just frees them up a
little bit and makes the whole motion a little bit
more athletic. And even though there could be flawed in
their stroke, if they just make it a little bit
more athletic, it tends to be a little bit more consistent.
And if it's a little bit more consistent, there's a
little bit more predictability to it. And it's one of
those things where just it can be very helpful for them.
And and I agree, I think a lot a lot
of golfers will are looking at the putter on a
two footer. They're looking at the putter going back and
forth and saying, oh, I should I arcutter straight back
straight through as the face open, and really just it's
very challenging to make that putt when you're kind of
preoccupied looking at all this other stuff. So for sure, yeah,
I agree, And it was very It was a big
surprise to me when we did the study, I'll be
honest with that. When I we did all the measurements,
we had the groups do their routines, and then when
I went to put in a format for my research
partner to throw it in the system and analyze it,
I really thought I had typed, I had done the
formula wrong because it was so it's so different, you know,
the results were so much surprising towards looking at the hole.
I really thought I must have done this all wrong
because there that can't be that big a deal. And
I had went through it again and it was right on.
It was just.
Speaker 3: Please expand on those results, and so we get a
sense of.
Speaker 2: Sure, yeah, well we just you know, we had people,
we had people doing different distances, randomizing their practice session,
doing different distances, and at the end of the day,
when we measured old school way, how far was the
ball away from the cup from the center of the cup,
you know, with a measuring tool, it was a lot
closer when they practiced looking at the hole. And again
that was just surprising that it would be that big
a difference, and it really was very significant. And but
again we then you think about it, and then you
talk to people, and it's to your point, well, basketball
player are not going to look at the basketball when
he's trying to shoot a shoot a free throw. And
so it talked to a couple of researchers and they said, well, sure,
it makes a lot of sense that they would have
a better sense of the distance because they're looking at
the cup and they're now equating energy and speed of
the stroke to get there. And I find it extremely
effective because a lot of people if you watch them putt,
if you just go out on a golf course with
people and watch them put and watch their routine, they
will very often aim up at the putt, at aim
up at the pen like they want to and then
do two or three strokes off to the side without
ever looking at the at the distance they're trying to
hit it. So by the time they stand over the
golf ball, they have no sense of the distance, and
so they're distancing very good. We'll just have them, if anything,
just ha them do the rehearsal strokes looking at the hole.
We're looking at the distance they want it to go.
It's just the simple fact of that will help them,
or the step of that will help them hit at
the right distance. And a lot of people do a
lot better looking at the hole the whole time. And
you're kind of doing it from all different distances, not
just a set, not just the eight footers or something
like that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, No, I'm trying to get comfortable with it.
And like the closer I get to the hole, then
I'm not just looking the hole. I'm picking a spot
like you know it, if I'm going uphill, I'm looking
at the back edge of the cup right right behind
the pin. Or I also do you know, when I'm
when I'm putting, I look at the hole as a
clock and I'm standing at six o'clock and it's like,
where's the ball? Where do I feel the ball is
going to break and go into the hole. It is
going to go in four o'clock, is going to go
into seven o'clock. Right, So I'm looking at that specific
spot when I'm looking at the hole. And trust is
such a big part of this. You know, you've got
to remove the doubt. You've got to And that's like
I remember shooting free throws all the time is just
feeling it, feeling it, and now with the putter and
just being able to hit that spot, my my distance
control is so much better my and now you know,
not worrying about oh did I get it over that
spot eight inches in front of the you know, eight
in front of the ball. Oh no, I'm you know,
it's just focus on something else. But you really have
to trust this. It's not something you just go out
and do. No because you've heard a podcast.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I agree, but I think if you were
to In fact, I did this on the golf course
just the other day with some folks that were doing
on course in our golf school, and they're they're just
really struggling with distance control. They self admittedly said they
always struggle with that so we just went out on
the I guess we were on the second green of course,
number one, just doing some lag putting, and I had
them try just three putts where they looked at the
hole or looked where they needed to put the ball
to compensate with the break, and they immediately did better.
But again it was just it wasn't It didn't change
their strokes. It just simply gave them a better sense
of how hard they need to hit it to make
you go the right distance. It's a it was a
sixty five foot putt. They're not going to make it.
All they need to do is just get it close
enough to tap it in. They're trying to read the break,
they're trying to figure out what to do with their stroke,
should I arc it or go straight back straight through?
You know, they're they're deubbing and all this stuff. Where
it's point, it really just becomes a distance. But make
it go sixty five feet, And I think if anything
simplifies it for people when you do that out on
the golf course, it simplifies it. And again kind of
the if you don't necessarily do that while you're putting,
if you just did the rehearsal strokes with the same strategy.
You're looking at of okay, how you know where's the
ball going to enter the cup? Is it going to
be nine o'clock or six o'clock or four o'clock? And
then from there, how hard am I trying to hit it?
Just the rehearsal strokes, if they're more in line with that,
are going to be be effective for you much better.
And the amount of people that just basically look at
the ball where they're doing the rehearsal strokes amazes me.
They're never looking at the distance they want it to go.
Speaker 3: Taking the rehearsal strokes, and of course we're all like
taking the rehearsal strokes. You look over at the hole,
you look down at the ball, you look at your
putter head, and you're taking your rehearsal strokes, trying to
remember how far right, Oh yeah, I've got it locked
in exactly how far it is, you know, and you
kind of lose sight of the distance that you're doing
when you're looking at the putter ahead.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I agree, I did. And they're say, and
I'm not too sure there's gonna be people out there
that swearing I am with all this stuff. But if
you have a I know that in our when you're
making a swing change with somebody. I tell people this
because it's based on motor learning that I've read and
been told by accountless people. But if you do a
rehearsal swing of what you want to do and you're
changing your technique. So let's say you're working on not
swinging out, then you want to swing from end out
classic thing, you do the rehearsal swing, You step up
to the ball and you give it a hit, and
you've got about a five or six maybe seven second window.
Arguments back and forth that you have to hit the
ball within that timeframe before you start losing the field.
So somebody standing over the they've looked at the pin, and
I think it carries over to this as well. If
they look at a sixty five foot putt and then
they start looking at the ground and looking at their
putter and the ball and looking at their putter and
kind of thinking about their technique, most likely they've probably
lost the sense of how hard they're going to hit
it to make you go the sixty five feet because
they're getting distracted by other all this other stuff and
so I think it would hold up. Just that, do
the couple practice strokes, looking at how far you want
it to go left to the if his brake's left right,
look past the hole to the left to give yourself
plenty of room for the break, and do a couple
of strokes and put it, and you're probably going to
be better off than not doing it that way. But
certainly the rehearsal swings and that hitting the ball right
afterwards is very helpful and making any type of swing change.
For sure.
Speaker 3: We had Tim Tucker on the show a while ago
in the eight hundreds, was that in twenty twenty three?
Do you know Tim?
Speaker 2: I know the name for sure.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, So he is a putting guru, but also
he's a PGA tour caddie. And the week after he
was on the show, he started carrying the bag for
Kit Kitty Yama and Kit one that week. The thing
that stood out to me in that conversation that kind
of blew my mind was his emphasis of the point
that we take a GPS out on the golf course
all the time, we take a rangefinder and we're like, okay,
I'm one hundred and thirty yards from the hole, I'm
eighty eight yards from the hole, I'm one hundred and
seventy five yard. You know, we're looking at these distance
to determine which club to take and how you want
to approach that swing. But when we get on the green,
we just stand there and look at the ball and
the hole and he says, which, I have implemented my
game and it's been quite it works well. From my head,
step it off. Realize what your distance is, not just
by look, but tell yourself, Okay, I've done an eighteen
foot put before. Okay I've done a thirty foot putt before,
or seven foot whatever it is, so you get a
feel for the feel.
Speaker 2: Sure right, oh absolutely.
Speaker 3: And that to me, I mean, do you advocate of
stepping it off or you guys just like take the practice,
rehearsal strokes and move forward.
Speaker 2: You know, it depends on the skill set of the golfer.
With the vast majority of people I meet, pacing it
off that linear distance, knowing how far it is is
a really good stepping stone to getting good distance control
on their putting. If they know it's sixty five feet,
they at least if they practice a sixty footer, they
can easily add five more feet to it, just because
they can recollect what sixty feet felt like and when
they're making trying to do that putt that distance. So absolutely,
Now there's some players. In fact, I was watching somebody
putt today and they have really good touch. No matter
what any scenario I put them in. Really they had
a good sense of how hard to hit it to
make it go that distance, and then they just had
to take a little off or add a little bit
because it was uphill or downhill or against screen or whatever.
But they're just instinctively really good at that. So I
would say, you know, that person doesn't have to. But
most of the people, if you say pay them off,
they're kind of surprised with I think they don't really
have a good sense of you know, how far is
twenty five feet? You know, sometimes people are looking at
a twenty five foot and they're you know, if you
ask them how far it is, they'll say twelve feet.
It's like, well not quite, So it's just kind of funny.
Their awareness of it is just not so good. So anyway, yeah,
definitely past it off. And in what we do quite
often in the schools, we'll set up a station where
almost like a ladder drill. In fact, we recreate the
study and instinct putting that started that where we have
them putt from different distances. We randomize it so there
might be a five ten, fifteen twenty twenty five thirty
foot putt. They bounce around between the different distances trying
to make it go that to the cup, and you
don't do it in like five ten, fifteen twenty. Bounce
it around a little bit, and then they start getting
to where they can have they have a good sense
of a thirty foot putt is this much energy? So
then you just turn and say, okay, now make it
go thirty feet and make you go twenty feet. They're
already start starting to get a sense of it, or
like a template maybe of how hard to hit it
to make it go the right distance. And it's but
it's the beginning part of it, knowing if they pace
it off, it's it's a thirty foot putt. Well, I
know how hard to hit it. Now at least I
can get I'm closer to knowing how hard to hit
it for sure. That's a great way to do it.
Speaker 3: I've talked to instructors and brought up the concept of
instinct putting, of looking at the hole while you're putting,
and a lot of them are like, well, you know,
that's that's really an interesting method, but it's probably better
for when you're practicing, not on the course, and you're
even saying what we should be doing is when we
take our rehearsal swings on the course looking at the whole.
Speaker 2: Well, absolutely, yeah, yeah, no doubt about it. I find it.
Now that's a little bit ancdotal because I'm just going
by my experience. But for sure, everybody I've ever had to,
any time I've ever watched anybody never look at where
they want the ball to go the distance they needed
to go. If they just do that, if I add
that step to their routine, they improve immediately, they automatically,
and they'll actually they'll actually hit one every once in
a while and immediately say, oh, that's too hard because
they recognize I put too much energy in that one
to make it go that distance. So it is very
helpful for sure.
Speaker 3: No wait, let me let me stop you. And when
you say that's too hard, is that when they're looking
at the hole, well, or when they're looking at.
Speaker 2: The bull look at the ball? They might be looking
at the ball on this one, but they'll hit it
and immediately no, that's too much energy for the distance
they needed to go. And they're knowing it as the
ball's ten feet off the face of the putter, so
they're even their their awareness of speed becomes increased very
quickly or improved very quickly. Yeah, I think it's a bit.
I think it's hard for people to do that out
on the golf course. But I mean a lot of
people that I know that have switched to that strategy,
that looking at the hole do it because they get
so distracted with the putter, you know, watching the putter
go back and forth and getting consumed by that that
if they just take that out of the equation and
the strokes are not that bad, and if they's got
to free free themselves up a little bit just to
get the right distance and the right speed. But it's
amazing how quickly people can adapt to it. I've gone
out on the golf course and tried it some. But
it is awkward, no doubt it is awkward, But some
people it's about the only way thing, but they really
struggle with putting without that.
Speaker 3: Do you recommend instinct putting to putters to be looking
at the hole all the time, or you know, once
they get comfortable with it. Is this something you use
just on your short puts inside ten feet maybe or whatever,
you know, or take it all the time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's good. That's a good question. I think probably that.
And this is just more my observation of people who
use that strategy. It makes it instit you could use
it all the time, but I think some people really
are more comfortable with it in like, for fact, I'm
just thinking of a person the other day that if
they were outside of ten feet they use that, but
then inside the ten feet they felt like they had
a good they had a free stroke, it was not
bogged down by mechanics, and so they weren't worried so
much about the speed. But on the on a forty footer,
they're always kind of defaulting to I got to have
a better sense of how hard to hit it. So
they felt like their speed was really the issue for
those types of putts, which means statistically it's probably true.
I mean, you're probably gonna three putt from forty five
feet more so by you know, by distance and by
by misreading the green I suppose. I mean not all
the time, but certainly the people I see they're gonna
they're gonna miss a forty foot or because of speed
more so than the green or the slope, so that
they do that more. But I think it was Jordan speed,
wasn't he He was kind of doing it more on
the shorter putts, you know, the maybe the fifteen feet,
and I mean for a while. So I think it
just depends on the person, I guess.
Speaker 3: But yeah, every time I talk about this, people go, oh,
Jordan Speith did that for a while. Yeah. Yeah, And
did you ever work with him?
Speaker 2: No, No, actually I did not. I think Cameron. I'm
not too sure if his coach took the information because
he saw it we published it someplace, or maybe it
fit in you Later on he recognized that, you know what,
we've kind of done a study that matched up with
what they were doing. But he certainly was for a
while doing that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, absolutely, all right. So when you started doing
this research, and this is what like now fifteen eighteen
years old or even older, when you started doing the
instinct putting.
Speaker 2: Mosh yeah, oh sorry, yeah, yeah, the instinct putting. Yeah,
I guess we did we did probably two thousand and
six or something like that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, right, right. Since then, there's been a huge, let's
call it impact on the golf commun unity by zero
torque putters, especially LAB Golf leading the way and the
success they've been having. Yeah, more and more. Do you know,
Sam han over it Lab Golf.
Speaker 2: I do not know. I mean it is. I mean
it's They're pretty hot right now for sure.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the hottest. Have you seen a putter company explode
like that, or even any golf independent golf company explode
like that.
Speaker 2: I don't. I don't think so, and I think it would.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: In fact, I was just virtually having a conversation today
with a guy who was asking me if I had
any remember the back in the day when Jack Nicklaus
won Jack Nicholas won the eighty six Masters, and he
had that really big aluminum putter that McGregor made for him,
and he was for some reason looking for that putter,
And we are talking virtually in terms of that was
the hottest putter of the week after the Masters, for sure,
and nobody could nobody had them. These guys have really
changed the way people are thinking about the putter. It's
it's certainly going to be. It'll be around a lot
longer than the aluminumutter. Nicholas, I think so. But yeah,
it's it's amazing really what they've done. Yeah, it's great.
It's exciting. Tact people wander by the putter.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And now you have companies going we
have a zero torq putter. We have a zero tork potter.
And then you do the test that Sam usually does
with the revealer and it's like, yeah, it's not really
a zero torg putter. Have you tried using a lab putter?
Have you worked at all?
Speaker 2: I have? I have messed around with it. Somebody one
of our staff had one. We were out there trying
it and it felt great. I mean, as far as
I think I'm probably a little bit to old school
and the head designs, but I mean as far as
it's still it's still had a great putt. And I
would love to see I'd love to see somebody do
some research on and I'm sure they've got this someplace.
But you know, just how the ball comes off the
face slightly different than not to pick on any but
the Scottie Cameron or something like that, is there all
that much difference? In how the ball comes off the face,
and it'd just be interesting to see that. But that
feels good to me. I like the butter, nothing bad.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I'm going to leave that scientific research to you.
Speaker 2: Oh no, no, I don't do equipment. I don't do equipment. No,
that's way too hard. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Well, it's interesting when I even when I started to
play golf not long before. I mean I was in
my forties when I started playing, not long before I
started doing the podcast, and you were on the show,
and so I was really ignorant about so much of it.
And I'm not saying that I'm not ignorant still, That's
why I keep asking questions. But to me, my I
always went to a center shafted mallet putter. Yeah right,
And so when I first saw a LAB and it's like,
oh well, this is definitely for me. And the one
thing that I think that LAB users will agree on
is that no matter where you hit it on the face,
you're pretty much going to get the line that you
set up for. Yeah right, it's gonna you know, it
maybe affect the speed a little bit if you hit
on the toe or on the heel, but the lines
trying to be true.
Speaker 2: Well, that's I mean as far as if you can,
if you can create consistency in that, you can really,
at least to me in putting, if I have somebody
that has the buttterface a degree open at impact every
time and it's more or less centered hit, I mean,
you can change it. But maybe that's not where you
got to put your attention. Maybe you just need to
worry about distance control or better reading of the greens
or something like that. So yeah, if you can, if
you can minimize the dispersion coming off the face by
head design, it makes a lot of senses of being
very popular. And I'm sure they're going to sell a
bunch and there'll probably be a lot of people trying
to recreate some of the same ideas in the next
wave of products. But yeah, I mean it makes sense.
It's just like anything else we we mess around with
the Sam Putt lab in our school and the amount
that people how much the starting direction is so different.
So with golfers, amateur golfers at least that there's just
no consistency in that, and if you can influence influence
that by that putter design, or if they tow it
and heal it you still get the same start point.
Not too bad.
Speaker 3: And that's part of why I'm feeling so strongly about
doing instinct putting now, is that I feel that if
I'm looking at my target spot, not looking at the ball,
but where I want the ball to go or end
up or pass through. I mean, it depends on how
far the putt is and what the break is that
the lab putter is going to just obey my command. Basically, right,
I'm feeling comfortable. So then to me, it's all about
the distance control. Always has but now looking at the target,
my distance control is even better because I know where
it's going better feel for it. And again you got
to trust it. You can't use any doubt. You can't
like in their backstroke going is this right? I'm not, Yeah,
You've really got to trust it.
Speaker 2: Well, I think one thing that I would I would
tell I'd say to golf professionals who when they when
they we talk about this, I'll say, the one thing,
the one flaw of the study, and we just didn't.
We just didn't think about this. We should have had
cameras set up that looked at the putting strokes, the
differences between the stroke without looking at the hole and
when they did look at the hole, because in hindsight,
we were you know, Bob and I were standing back
there along. We had a lot of people helping us
with the study, and a lot of a lot of
the folks that were helping us with the study were
saying that they thought the strokes looked better when that
people were looking at the hole. Now, it was just anecdotal,
but it we started thinking about that, and then it was, well,
you know, we're watching somebody and it doesn't seem like
they were moving their body so much, because if you
move your body a bunch, it's probably pretty hard to
hit the putt solid when you're looking away. So maybe
it's simplified the strokes a little bit, and that could
be an argument for why people should give it a try,
just because it could improve your stroke slightly. But we
felt like that's what we saw happening. But we didn't
have any We didn't gather any data on how did
the stroke change. We just were basing it on.
Speaker 3: Outcome so interesting and one of the huge elements of
the instinct putting that I think it solves a big
problem for so many golfers is that in their normal
stroke when they're looking at the ball instead of the target.
As soon as the ball leaves the putter face, their
head is turning to see where it's going, and that's
going to impact and they don't really realize. Please correct
me if I'm wrong, but they don't realize that when
they turn their head like that, their shoulders are now
turning and it's going to affect their stroke. Sure, they'll
probably be offline.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I agree, And I think the other for sure.
And I think the other benefit of it is that
it's hard for people to catch really where the so
the ball gets struck. By the time you really see
where it is, it's probably five feet in front of
you already, and so they do miss that first five
feet of potential break or starting direction. So I think
some of the benefits of it as well is that
you're looking at the hole, but you've already got a
perfectly You've got a good sense of where the ball
is starting out on your line. I think sometimes it's
hard to see the starting point on your line when
your head's down. Then trying to catch it five feet
off the face, you missed thatily, So that's kind of
one of the things I like about it too.
Speaker 3: Right, is that your head has already turned, it's already there. Yeah,
and it makes it and it makes a difference. It
really does make a difference.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm glad you like it. I'm glad you're having
some success with It's great.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And that's why I'm so glad that you after
I reached out to you to have you come back
on that, you did respond to because this has been
everything i'd hoped it would be. In our conversation. I
got all the information and I now have more confidence
in the idea of looking at the hall when I'm putting,
and I highly recommend. Now there is a new version
of the book, right, it's a revised version. Tell me
about that real quickly. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, we just we wanted to update the information
and just kind of add a few more things to it.
I think it's you know, it's just one of those things,
like anything, information changes over the years, and we just
tried to update some of the information and it's I
think it's still still a good read. It's a little
bit less dry than our evidence based golf book, but
you know, off is pretty much straightforward with here study
one and here's what we found, you know, so which
again I think I think knowledge is information for the
amateur golfer is not a bad thing. Having a better
you know, a good sense of what goes on, whether
it's ballflight or the putting stroke, the new information that's
coming out and putting, or even the ball flight laws
with all the new technology, all that stuff is very
helpful for golfers. So if you like reading a book,
it's not a bad one, I suppose no.
Speaker 3: And again it's called instinct putting revisited. Look where you
want to put the ball Advised edition The Breakthrough Science
based on Target Vision Putting Technique a great read, fascinating read.
It's really going to spark your imagination. And at the
very least, do it while you're practicing your putting, don't,
you know. Don't start with it on the course, do that.
Definitely practice with it a while before you take it
out there, because you have to trust it, and you
do it. Eric Alpinfels from Pinehurst, again, I want to
thank you so much for coming back on the show
and for your longtime friendship with Golf Smarter. Appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much. It's always it's great to see.
It's hard to believe it's been that long. So thank
you so much and congratulations on all your success is great.
What you're doing is great for for golfers across the board,
so professionals as well as amateurs. H