Cause and effect

I've been thinking about my quest for excellence in the golf swing and realised that I probably played my best golf ten years ago (or at least played as well as now) before I got bogged down in a whole lot of golf theory. In saying this, I should emphasise two things: I'm actually hitting the ball further, so age is not a big factor and also I've had a huge amount of fun with golf theorising.

This realisation about my failure to progress during that timeframe has made me think about cause and effect, and the consequences of confusing the two things. These are initial thoughts only; I haven't got it worked out at all. And I'm sure there is stuff written about this issue that I haven't yet come across.

Anyway, my suspicion is that by focusing on positions in the golf swing (the mechanical, technical, video-related analysis, etc.) our attention is being drawn to the effects of the golf swing rather than the cause.

By 'cause' I am referring to the whole swinging motion, roughly equating to the entire period from set-up to completion of the follow through. On the other hand, 'effect' is the individual positions that are created during that swing - a series of 'effects' in fact.

When instructors or individuals examine, for example, where the clubhead is in relation to the hands, or where the trailing elbow sits at the top of the backswing, they are looking at an 'effect' rather than a 'cause' of and in the golf swing. As we know, it is very difficult during a golf swing to consciously control these positions; it takes time to work on any one swing element, such as the elbow position. It's not impossible of course to do this as I'll discuss, but there are barriers, especially if we are talking short-term cures, as in trying to modify something as a result of getting a 'tip'.

So why do good golfers have good swings and poor golfers (even those who have had many lessons) have poor or very inconsistent swings? I think it's mainly because those players who have been suckered into focusing on effects that are ultimately very difficult to influence or control, and are failing to look at the whole swing.

These players are stuck in a loop and I've been on that loop for a long time myself. Once I discovered the 'cause' of my slice - an outside, across the line swing plane - I was able to find a cure. For me that was a relatively simple closing of my shoulders as I set up, thereby changing my swing plane, together with a focus on rhythm. Other slicers will probably have slightly different causes to address, such as leaning back, swaying or trying to hit too hard, but the cure will often be a simple set up change and perhaps a greater emphasis on swinging freely rather than steering.

The main point is that once you have a solution or cure for a fundamental swing flaw, such as a slice, to try to take on or take up a whole series of supposed game improvement ideas or theories can be hugely detrimental. Most of these ideas are addressing effects, which are positions or moves that occur naturally as a result of the whole swing. They are not readily modified. Nor is there often a 'right' answer or cure. Contradictory advice on elements of the golf swing is rife.

There are many golfers who don't care that their golf swing is not perfect; they live with their slice. That's fine. But for those like me who seek improvement, be it straighter hitting, more consistent golf, more distance, whatever, we need to be careful and avoid the temptation to treat an effect as a cause, because trying to modify an effect and ignoring the cause is usually doomed to failure.