The Non-thinking Golfer

I recently re-read John Novosel's 'Tour Tempo' and, while I personally cannot go along with the detailed instructions for implementing the theory therein, or bother buying additional timing gismo/s, I can go along with the concept of a consistent tour ratio of 3 to 1 for the backswing and downswing.

One of the main causes of poor and inconsistent shot making is undoubtedly changes of tempo (or loss of rhythm). Pros and amateurs alike often say 'I was too quick', or words to that effect, when analysing their latest disaster shot. But Pros don't hit many really bad shots in a round, and the reason is they generally maintain a consistent tempo in their swings, regardless of the club being used.

'Tour Tempo' makes the point that golfers swing at different speeds, which is fine, but that good golfers consistently swing the club back at one-third of the speed of their downswing, while weekend hackers (excuse the term) vary their backswing and downswing speeds, often from shot to shot, and generally swing the club back too slowly in relation to the downswing (e.g. at a four or five to one ration). This finding is based on very extensive research.

The result is that hackers hit a far greater variety of shots (mostly bad) than better golfers. What's more, the pro golfer looks like s/he is swinging slowly and smoothly (aka Ernie Els) when, in reality, they are swinging very fast - and generating much higher clubhead speeds. The smooth and rhythmic effect is created because of the 'perfect' relationship between the backswing and downswing. The pro swing looks slower than it really is.

The good news is anyone who can count can strive to achieve the 'perfect' (and it's not necessarily an absolutely perfect) ratio. Simply by counting 'one and two', where 'one' is the start of the backswing, with 'and' being the transition from backswing into the 'set' or the top of the backswing (difficult to describe), and 'two' is impact. The 'and' is the slowest of the counts and represents two-thirds of the backswing count. It's easier to repeat the count this way than, for example, counting 'one, two, three', but any system that helps generate a smooth, rhythmic and repeatable swing pattern is good.

This is all very fine, but there are additional benefits in using a theory that promotes a rhythmic, professional looking, swing.

One of the main benefits is that by using a mantra (the counting), a technically very easy process for most of us, the mind is sufficiently occupied to shut out most, if not all, of the technical 'do's' and 'don'ts' that normally come into our minds as we prepare for and commence our shots. By counting, we not only promote a consistent swing routine (and tempo), but eliminate or limit conscious interference with the process of hitting the golf ball - a procedure that our unconscious mind can handle quite easily - like walking or riding a bike.

I have found that limiting this conscious interference with the golf swing, minimises the last split-second adjustments that often result in the pulled or duffed or sliced shot. The ball, if struck squarely, will tend to go straighter and further. The execution will also tend to be more effortless, free from anxiety, and more enjoyable.

I was gratified to note, on second reading, that 'Tour Tempo' refers to Fred Shoemaker, the creator of 'Extraordinary Golf' (balancing enjoyment, learning and performance, etc. - see my earlier blog), and to the great Percy Boomer, 'On Learning Golf', who was years ahead of his time with his swing thought ideas.

Summing up, once a golfer has learnt the fundamentals of grip, alignment, posture, etc., it is time to learn about tempo and rhythm. and to try to minimise technical adjustments, tips to eliminate this or promote that, and thoughts about things to avoid or things to remember. Most of the key mechanical or technical elements of the swing can be committed to the unconscious mind to function perfectly well without conscious  'help' (read interference). This is my belief - and my experience to date. The next round or two will be interesting.