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