One Under Par

A Newsletter from KeyGolf.....June, 2003

The Context of Game Development in Golf.

While golf may seem “sacred” to most players, it’s apologists often unwittingly foster a rather subtle, persistent and misleading bias. The “spin” on their words helps to shape perceptions of the game that compromise the progress that most players indicate they want. It is subtle. It’s sneaky, though seldom apparent that anyone is doing it on purpose. As such, it allows, if not coming very near establishing, an ethos that demands golf be seen as a thing unto itself and unlike any other life pleasure or function.

Maybe we should leave it that way. Perhaps part of the mystique of the game is to insure that it will be an unfinished product so we can all grumble, complain and mumble about it at the 19th hole. Perhaps “woulda, coulda, shoulda” is a necessary ingredient to mental health (I say with tongue in cheek, to leave you a tiny morsel of “spin” that might be turned into a white paper on “mental health.”)

Even casual observation of golf’s “most famous,” especially those afforded “guru status,” shows a tendency to promote the game as though there were nothing else like it. That leaves a lot of room for ideas and notions ranging from outlandish to outstanding. Add to that - there is no reliable measurement system to guide where on that continuum you may be looking. So, it is not difficult to fall victim to a view that is vague and ungoverned. In turn, that illuminates an impression that golf simply isn’t required to follow ordinary rules and natural laws.

That skewering is further ripened by images insisting that golf, therefore, is entitled to paternal and fraternal designs, organizational style, artsy twists, and eligibility for a set of standards remote from reality and exempt from all other agents and agencies.

It is often “taught” without consideration for the principles of learning. It tends toward social separatism, while claiming that it fosters friendship and business relationships (is that politics, perhaps?) It markets itself better on controversy than on relevant inclusiveness.

Of course, it isn’t happening only with golf. Look around and listen carefully. There is an essential, though covert, “conspiracy” among virtually all corporate/organizational/collective-enterprise approaches to development in any quarter one wishes to define. The “It” is seen in the “spin” put on almost everything that comes out through the media (You DO read the NY Times and watch TV). As often as not, that is twisted, “over-cooked,” sometimes arrogant, distorted and almost always displaying a self-consuming belief that the group, organization, corporate entity, church (electronic, in particular), whatever collective enterprise, is above any kind of need for common and/or mutual appreciation of natural order. Each one claims, either openly or with disguised humility, a self-appointed eligibility to function any way it wants to by whatever rules it decides to set. Miracles and exceptions are touted as if they were the holy grail. Just rub your little “jug” and your genie will do it for you.

One can see such a demeanor in the fierce defense of certain golf “traditions,” golf instruction and education. It’s not a lot different in other realms. You remember Enron and Martha Stewart, et al. And now we face the hero syndrome, too. Like the Sammy Sosa “incident,” which many were quick to assess as “cheating,” notwithstanding Sammy’s version of “mistake” being supported by 81 bats without cork and only the one with it.

Since when did we become a people of truth only residing in “exceptions?” Whatever happened to recognition of patterns as a mark of proportionate reality? I remember from somewhere in my counseling past that those who protest the most are likely as guilty as those they rant against. (Wasn’t it Shakespeare who observed “The lady doth protest too much!?)

Students of golf are urged to buy into a representation of “truth” and expertise that varies widely among those delivering it. The “truth” is often wrapped in so much hype that if anything of value can be found there, it would, indeed, be a miracle. (Try to find some real content on the webpages produced by or for golfers). There are promises, usually of results, galore - accompanied by veiled suggestions of the lousy game you will play if you fail to take advantage of this or that piece of equipment, set of tapes, “unique” school, or swing trainer that will make you “perfect.”

[Here we pause for an insert, the content of which came in an email after the above and below were already written, but the illustration is vivid].

“Carey- When you have a few moments, please visit the following site and then I would appreciate your opinion and comments concerning what they are trying to do, and how successful you think this approach may be. The site is www.virtuallyperfectgolf.com Thanks...”

The site (you can view it for yourself) promises the “perfect” golf swing by using a “perfect” model delivered in virtually “perfect” form.

We responded to the question as follows:

"Any time I see the cookie cutter influence, I know the emphasis has been placed on some model of perceived "perfection." Sure, there are a lot of guys who appear to be on some ideal track and who have been taught via the cookie cutter method, but if you look closely enough, they tend to run into serious problems and have to go in for re-tooling. Of course, none of us have any way of knowing how many players have had the talent and got it wrecked by trying to go the "perfect route." We just see the success stories (and hear them as testimony for the gurus). Even then, we also have no way of knowing how many of those "successes" are savants, either. (They just do it - can't learn it or teach it, ala Freddie C, who once said, "I just take it back and take it through. That's as good as it gets.") I'm going to use your question (anonymously) in the coming issue of my newsletter. It is right on top of what I was writing about.”

The presentation of the game of golf, how to learn it, play it, appreciate and enjoy it has become so vividly sectarian, that it threatens to unravel the threads in the fabric of reality. Tradition, as important as it is, has become a fetish rather than an archive. (See Hootie and Martha Burke, not to mention the contentious crowd that didn’t want Annika to play in the Colonial).

Tradition is no longer there to inform and remind. It is being used as a whip, the marks of which leak over to retard the level of learning and progress, no matter it may be unintentional.

In the shadow of such comments, we offer the following illustration for those who are more thoughtful about what they see and do, which we have learned is a mark of those who “call” for our newsletter, including you, since you are reading this now. It may be only one of many such concerns that are far more critical to a healthy experience with the game than we might notice.

A “rule” emanating from natural “law,” at least the evidence points in than direction, concerns understanding, protecting and pacing one’s own genetic behavior style in golf, not to mention other avenues in life. That it doesn’t always happen as we’d like, seems to suggest that we have been less than effective in setting it forth. We do get questions even from the most ardent of those who try to gain from what personal styles mean and how that information can be supportive when put into action.

To that end, we offer a summary response to the most often asked questions concerning style as they relate to golf. This is no more than one illustration of our contention, albeit an important one.

Style Knowledge and its Application

The questions: "How do I use this to get better?" or "How do I apply this information to my practice and playing?"

Because those are essentially the same, we address them together. There are several references already in the Double Connexion book. In retrospect, we likely could have put them all together in a more summary manner. Our own familiarity with how styles work diverted our view from the need to gather that in one place at the time the book was written. We’ll change that in version 4.

#1 - Knowing your style, or better, confirming the style you have already recognized, is the way to own a measurement scale for determining the relationship between the traits Mother Nature gave you and what you may be doing that bends, estranges, disorients or otherwise prejudices those traits as you try to accomplish your life goals. That can be in golf or anything else.

It is important for anyone (everyone) to see, appreciate the reality, and familiarize him/herself with the traits that make up one’s style, so that a reasonably accurate perception of personal style becomes part of the way one thinks and not just something that is merely thought about.

#2 - The style you were given at birth is the one that needs full honor and regard. There is no instance of which we can conceive making it better to live outside your style than to live in it. There is a significant exception to that statement deserving careful understanding and honoring. That exception lies at the point of communicating with others and is most useful when understood by the communicator as an intentional and knowledgeable action. The action is of short duration for the primary purpose of creating a sufficient level of comfort to support maximum comprehension and understanding between people. Known as "Pacing," it is an important and primary communication skill, which deserves to become a habit.

All other pacing should be with respect to one's own style, as in golf. Anything other than that, where golf is concerned, lends itself to self-defeating perceptions, attitudes and actions. In golf, which is a peculiarly self-performed, self-isolated, self-contained, self-initiated, if not self-centered activity, it is particularly important to have the fullest possible measure of self-awareness and understanding.

No one can consistently and successfully go about this game like anyone else. Should you wish to reach your own peak of ability, performance, and outcome, follow your own style. We offer that admonition, notwithstanding the large number and frequency of advertised measures urging us to believe and undertake a path to the contrary. “Buyer beware,” especially if the “sale” is laced with the hypnotic “do it just like the best" do, as promised by many a teacher, journalist, commentator, guru and player. Training aids, especially swing analyzers, are marketed in quantity on that theme.

That, of course, is not to say that one cannot learn anything from others or with device assistance. What it does say is that no one can expect to precisely imitate the style, form, structure and motions of another. And that is exactly what many golfers try to do - try to imitate the "best." They do it with swings, approaches to practice and playing, the way they perceive the "greats" approaching their pre-shot, walking to and standing over putts, addressing the ball, taking practice swings, buying their equipment all the way to the golf balls they use and the clothes they wear. And, if you believe advertising, it may even influence what kind of car one drives.

The "problem" at issue is simple, but it also is complex. Human beings have much more going on at the unconscious level than they typically suspect. Most unconscious, or nonconscious, behavior is nondiscriminatory. Even so, it is common among people, especially golfers, to assume that it is controllable, if only we can develop “mental toughness,” whatever that is. (We think it might be callouses on the brain). Worse, some believe that such things should simply be ignored. (We can learn to manage nonconscious elements, but we will never control them, and to ignore them is just plain bad judgment). The principle must rest on our ability to distinguish those things we can change from those we cannot, and to act in harmony with what we find.

To illustrate, if a player practices outside his/her style on the range, and then moves to the course, Mother Nature insists that under normal pressure, the style "she" provided at birth to that person will come into full play. Now all the work done on the range must go through entirely different "screens" and is apt either to be lost or very confusing to the player. If you have been practicing in the manner of someone else’s style, that will not be available to you when you reach the course since, by force of nature, and for better or worse, you will default to your own style. It’s one thing on the range with no pressure. It’s another entirely on the course, even with only the normal pressure of imagining being, or actually being, watched and judged by others. (And take note that to the nonconscious mind, “imagining” and “actual” are undifferentiated). That is exactly what precipitates players’ complaints of "doing it well" on the range and then "fouling it up on the course."

The moral is equally simple: Understand your style and how that style tends to play. Then deal with learning and playing effectively by setting your learning and practice accordingly. That will not be lost in transfer to the course, since it will be more likely done "within yourself." That is made easier as one learns to manage oneself. Managing oneself is only accommodated by self-knowledge that is accurate.

“Practicing accordingly” means, for instance, that Drivers may need to focus on the pace of the swing without trying to make it slow and rhythmic; Persuaders need not practice trying to hit the ball straight, but focus on the strength they have for the short game and getting out of “remote” vistas; a Craftsman gains little working on routine and rhythm, but much from playing strategy that makes the best use of an orderly game by things as simple as picking the right club to get the distance factor effectively; and an Analyzer may need more work on the mental game to avoid fixation on mechanical thinking, and more time playing than hours on the range putting the club in sequential positions to guarantee a perfect swing.

So what's the point? You will always develop your ability to learn and play this game at maximum if you honor your own style and work on the complementary issues that support that. What behavior style profiling does is provide a picture of how you see yourself both in the "suit" you brought with you from birth and as you may have attempted to adjust that for other purposes - golf in particular. We can see the principle in golf because all of us tend to default to the “real thing” when playing. It will be there, but it may not be so observable on the range, unless you have learned to practice the way you play. It will appear as a beacon on the course, so long as you have recognized and confirmed your style. (It won’t be helpful just to guess at it).

For example, if we are aggressive at work, so we will be at play, at home, even in church, though the intensity may be shaded from one environment to another, or we may insert some “personality” attributes to gain the endorsement of others. But, the fact is, we are far more integrated than we may think. It may seem that we act one way in one place and differently in another, but close observation will show considerable consistency. Our behaviors are convincingly similar no matter where we are, who we are with, or what we are doing.

Know your style, distinguish it from personality, appreciate it, work and play within it and reap the benefits: less stress and discomfort, more effective results, longer life, and better playing and scoring in golf.

===============================
We have placed past issues in an Archive at http://keygolf.0golf.com . The link is just beneath the American Flag.
Let us know if you have questions or comments.
Email Us