One Under Par

A Newsletter from KeyGolf...January, 2001

Pre-Shot Routines

This issue of ONE UNDER PAR examines one of the more frequent questions from many players regarding the nature, character and quality of pre-shot "routines."

Clearly, this is one of the game's cliched activities that has shaped our beliefs and playing behaviors, and been shaped by it in turn, more by myth than by clear definition. Conventional views and applications have left golfers at the mercy of what can be described clinically as a well developed obsessive-compulsive reaction to anxiety, rather than elevating them to a well informed, systematic platform that puts them in command of a comfortable, reasonable function for planning their shots - no more, no less.

What are you doing with, and getting from, your pre-shot routine? There is no doubt that we need "Pre-shot Something," but there is plenty to suggest that "Routine" is an inappropriate label for it. If your first reaction to that is "Huh?" it is safe to say that it needs examination. Any suggestion that stops you in your tracks means either that it hasn't occurred to you previously or that its meaning did not readily impress you. To the extent the idea was missed, what emerges, on examination, may be surprising. There are rituals in the game that are followed almost categorically by most players without knowing, or even wondering, where they came from, what they do or why they continue to be honored. They have been accepted arbitrarily, without question, as part of the "common-law" of the game.

"Pre-shot routine" is one of the more persistent examples of that kind of ritual. The claim has been that doing the same thing in connection with each shot relieves pressure and promotes consistency. As an isolated statement, that is true. The problem is that the pre-shot period in golf is not an isolated event. It is one step in the shot-making process, and what may be essential in the time period before the shot will be different at the moment of execution.

Knowing the difference between what really belongs to "pre"- shot , everything to be done before the actual execution, and what is not "pre" is critical.

It is not unusual to find players continuing the "pre" activities as they move into the process of making their swings. That must be considered "post," or after the pre-shot activity. Further, "pre-shot" activity cannot correctly be referred to as "routine." Since it is very difficult to imagine occasions in which two identical shots will follow each other, it is not likely that the shot planning that should be the core of planning the shot is apt to be the same often enough to be the object of a "routine." If what is meant is that it should be routine that a player plans his shot, that's fine, but if you read the print, most of it points to doing the same thing, the same thing, before every shot and to continue that thought process until the shot is finished.

In researching this, I found an article in Golf for Women (April,1992, p.24) which carried a "Quick Cure" message containing very good advice for a pre-shot routine, except for one thing. Their recommended routine flowed all the way through the beginning of the swing. Even if the methodical nature of that sort of routine does manage to diminish anxiety, it puts a full damper on any possibility that shot-making will be "on automatic." Physiologically, it eliminates the essential "breathing room" our systems need for "shifting gears" from one task to another, and it retains the process of thinking about what we are doing while we do it, which eliminates any possiblility of exercising the automatic principle (using our habits).

The March '92 issues of Golf Illustrated (p.39) and Golf Digest (p.76) supported a similar format for putting and advised it for other shots, as well. It is hard to avoid the subtle implication from such broad coverage of the subject that this is the way it's done. But let's take another look from a different perspective.

Pre-shot is just what it says - PRE - shot. If it's more or less than that, it should be called something else. A close look will show that continuing the PRE into execution, as many (most) players do, is mis-placed. Likewise, trying to regulate the pre-shot period so that it is always the same length of time is mis-directed. That produces a mental bias that players should do the same things (exactly) in their pre-shot routines each time. Under scrutiny that won't hold up. Since every shot in a round of golf is likely to be different, what is there that is sacred about the same pre - shot every time?

Useful comprehension of the term "pre-shot" shows that it is the moment for planning the up-coming shot, delivering direct commands to the internal memory bank of habits for the shot ahead, rehearsing any necessary additions or variations the shot requires, eliminating anything not wanted (by specifically issuing appropriate "delete" messages to oneself), assessing distance and direction, and selecting the shot and the club. If you use a Clear Key for shot execution, pre-shot is also the designated time for notifying your "system" that you are shifting from manual thought and action to automatic thought and action. Now...if this paragraph sounds academic to you, we suggest that you read it again and pay close attention. The only thing academic about it is the necessity to alter the way you think about the pre - shot process. And that may require a bit more of a detailed description than those with which our minds have been drenched.

Those are the functions that fit the description of "pre- shot," and need to be completed as such - before the shot, not during it. The only "routine" involved is that players need that function regularly, lasting whatever length it takes (within the rules), before each shot, to inform the "system" adequately about the shot to be made. Clearly, it is not likely that all shots will need exactly the same information. It is more likely that no two shots in any round will require precisely the same kind of attention. Close, maybe, but not exact, which eliminates the notion that pre-shot should be the same, with identical time-frames, every time the player approaches a new shot. (The obsessive-compulsive mode). It is hard to say which came first. Did the notion come from the action or the action from the notion? In either case, however, it has led to a firmly held, but false, belief.

False belief is a pernicious and chronic human problem. It isn't likely to be intentional, but that does not prevent the potential for impaired results that go with it. Any premise will look good as long as one accepts its basis, even if mis-conceived. There is not any guardian angel out there to keep us from taking action on whatever we perceive. If the premise is twisted, whatever action we take will twist with it. That means that any failure on our part to understand the function of pre-shot activity is apt to meander around the edges of reaping its real benefits for our games.

It is mind-boggling to watch how carefully players go about their rituals, only to "stumble" over execution when they omit a step in whatever routine they may have adopted. Now we have another problem. Did the "stumble" relate to insufficient "data-input" needed to inform the shot, or did it come from a break in the timing of the obsessive-compulsive defense from ritual itself? Unless we have a clear image of what we are doing and how it works, it will continue to undermine what we expect and desire as a result.

In effect, the current trend toward even more "precise" pre-shot routine comes from "magical thinking" - an untested, but strongly held belief that a ritualistic approach to anything (in this case, pre-shot) guarantees the "right" outcome. It is more concerned with "form," than it is with "substance." It fails to take into account that pre-shot (routine) activity is only a step in the process of playing. It is no more than the first of three steps needed for effective shot-management, not the complete manager.

We are not suggesting that taking a rhythmic approach to shot-making is unnecessary or unimportant, but that those values are better served AFTER the pre-shot "routine" is completed, especially when we understand the role and function of transition from manual to automatic process. The walk to the ball, set-up and execution give plenty of time and direction to that purpose. Remember, pre-shot follows a manual set of "rules." Transition and execution respond best to the "automatic" principle.

It is quite typical for players to consider everything up to, and including the waggle, setting the club, and starting the swing as part of pre-shot. As long as that perception persists, any expectation of getting to automatic is futile. There simply is not enough separation time between manual function and automatic process for our systems to accommodate the change in direction and action.

There are natural physiological responses that are instantly triggered by the future orientation of shot-planning. (Whenever one entertains a planinng mode, one enters the future. Anxiety is an inherent, instinctive, inescapable part of the future and the past. Planning initiates anxiety. We must have a way of managing that). The anxiety from planning produces instant, spontaneous resistance (blocking) in one's autonomic system, however small they may be. That can disturb rhythm, unless there is a "safety zone" placed between the planning and execution. The fact that we often get away without that "space" shouldn't, (but often does), tease us into believing that we are OK with what we are doing. That is sufficient reason to suggest that Ben Hogan's comment about hitting no more than five or six "perfect" shots a round was less based on something in his skill (or his personal perception of "perfect") than on an incomplete understanding of anxiety and how to manage it. When it comes to the effect anxiety has on our physiological systems, we are all equal. Of course, the greater the skill level, the less any "damage" may show, but it will be there, even so, and is bound to catch us at the most inopportune moments - when we need the shot the most.

The pre-shot period may be considered a routine event by most players, but what takes place within it is not - unless you should have one of those days in which every tee shot splits the fairway, leaves you with a perfectly level lie on perfectly manicured grass, every iron shot hits the green and every putt is straight in, so that everything in that round takes on the appearance of "easy" similarity. That can happen, and may have, with many players, but it is more likely to be an exception than a rule. Hopefully, none of us need a reminder of the pitfalls that go with trying to set our sights based on exceptions.

Unfortunately, the cultural and social forces around us have conditioned us to pay more heed to exceptions than to rules. Exceptions are unquestionably more titillating and "newsworthy," and stimulate lots of conversation. Who wants to spend time contemplating routine matters? No matter how much time we take to organize our perception of pre-shot routine, it is important to have a clear image of its role in the game if for no other reason than to decrease the chances of shooting ourselves in the foot.

It's time to put our pre - shot houses in order.

===============================

Let us know if you have questions or comments.