What's in a word or two?

I've recently revisited what some would call 'the holy grail of golf' - and that's CONSISTENCY.

I looked at a variety of videos on the topic, a range of well regarded golf swings and some old scientific data. My conclusion was that there is one thing in particular that separates the good golfer from the hacker - and I will come to that shortly.

This thing might not be a surprise to some (especially the golf tragics amongst us), but the fact is it is not high up in the lexicon of golf instruction. There are a million other aspects of golf instruction - I hardly need name them - that are higher up the list of do's and don't's.

Having experimented with just shy of million of those, I've found that my length and dispersion of shots off the tee, my greens hit in regulation and my overall scoring pattern has stabilised somewhere around INCONSISTENT.

Frustration mixed with occasional satisfaction seems to be my lot - as it is with almost every golfer since time immemorial. However, a little more than a decade ago a couple of guys set out to find a solution to this cycle of inconsistency - for all levels of golfer - by developing a new type of swing.

You might have guessed, I am talking about 'Stack & Tilt'- from Mr Plummer and Mr Bennett.

This idea has many elements that I will not go into here, because most of them like grip, set up, swing plane, etc. are pretty much in line with much other golf teaching, but one of the major tenets of the method rings very true to me - CONTROL OF THE LOW POINT OF THE SWING.

S & T has its critics, some of whom have never tried it - nor needed to try it I must add. Most of these critics focus on the technical elements that S & T includes, especially the Tilt ones, and some of their criticisms have justification, even if it's only because these technical elements do indeed seem very technical.

I should say, however, that it is a myth that S & T players are required to set up with the ball further back - it's not true. It's also not true that S & T is unsuitable for driver; stable centre is no bad thing when you are using a long shafted club.

Anyway, that one aspect of S & T - the importance of control of the low point - reminded me of some data I saw many years ago (I can't find it now) about the correlation between handicap and the observed swing low point in a group of players whose handicaps ranged from high to pro.

High handicappers typically had a swing low point that not only varied somewhat but averaged out at 3 or more inches behind the ball (with mid irons). However, the pros and top amateurs (scratch or better) typically had a low point 3 or 4 inches in front of the ball. Across the range, the correlation of handicap to low point was very high.

There are so many advantages of hitting the ball first, ground second, I'm struggling to find the words, but they include compression of the ball, spin control and distance control. If the top players do it, why don't all golfers? Do we not realise that quality of contact must be one of the major factors in consistency?

The issue that I think S & T is mainly dealing with, especially in relation to the Stack part of the equation is finding this low contact point, the major factor that directly affects the quality of contact with the ball. Stack is all about staying centred in the swing, not swaying back, not needing to transfer weight forward to bring the swing arc forward in order to achieve good ball contact.

As such the great benefit of this stacking with a stable centre is to make it much easier for the player of average or less than average ability to bring their swing arc forward and make solid contact with the ball.

I am not suggesting that a forward swing arc solves all golfing problems - we have lots of other faults. Nor am I suggesting that S & T should be adopted in full by every player. But I think a health dose of stack in many inconsistent ball strikers swings (the mostly high handicappers) will help them (us) in the search for the holy grail of golf.

We don't need to become true believers in S & T, or slaves to every part of it; we can adopt the aspects of it that suit us - as long as we understand the importance of low point control.

Finally, I should say I don't much like the words stack and tilt, they make the swing method sound somehow rigid or over-technical, which puts some people off. But I couldn't find any better words to describe the ideas when I dived into the thesaurus, and after all what's in a word or two? Maybe a lot?

Naturally it's difficult

Golf is said to be the hardest of all ball sports. Not sure about that, but it certainly does mess with your mind; it has with mine anyway for many years.

Recently, I've received a couple of comments regarding this blog and my golfing journey and I'd like to apologise to anyone (especially James) who has read my rambling theorising and wrecked their games as a result.

By way of explanation (excuse!) and to go back a bit, I started out on this so called journey in 2006, well before the blog began, trying to work out how to cure my slice. It took me several years to do that, but briefly, all I had to do was square up my shoulders (in particular) and swing on plane rather than over-the-top.

Perhaps I should have left it to that because ever since I've been searching for the holy grail of golf - CONSISTENCY. And although I've reached some goals (single figure handicap) and had some modest success (club competition wins and a hole in one) the fabled consistency I have not mastered.

I suspect that consistency to a fair degree relates to playing level. Pros and very low handicap amateurs are likely to play quite well most of the time (even if they don't see it that way). Weekday hackers on the other hand will pull out a good round once in a while, but are never really sure where the ball will go.

I'm somewhere in the middle and it might well be that I have to accept that I have reached my level of competency. If there is a secret to golf, I haven't found it. I will watch the Masters this week and contemplate how I would score on the fabled Augusta course. I think 120 might be achievable? But only because I prefer wide fairways and fast greens.

Anyway, there is a great deal to be said for acceptance. The reality is that those of us who can get out onto a pretty golf course, joke and joust with friends and hit a few good shots and maybe a few stinkers, are really very lucky. 

Naturally it's difficult for me to accept that really top class golf is beyond me because naturally golf is difficult.