said in the foreword to Practical Golf, ‘Putting golf technique down on paper is extremely difficult. I think Jacobs does it superbly. This book is a wonderful distillation of an exceptional man’s knowledge, and I don’t see how it can fail to help any golfer play better.’ My sentiments exactly.
Steve Newell
Golf is what the ball does, which is totally dependent upon what the club is doing at impact. The variants at impact are:
The clubface: which can be open, closed or square (strong or weak).
The swing path: which can be in-to-out, out-to-in, or straight.
The angle of attack: which can be too steep, too shallow, or correct for the individual club.
The clubhead speed: to suit the shot in hand.
These dimensions, the clubface, swing path, and angle of attack, all of which determine the flight of the ball, are very influenced by the set-up at address.
The grip has a direct bearing on clubface control at impact.
The clubface aim and body alignment has a direct bearing on the swing path at impact.
The body posture at address has a direct bearing on the degree of shoulder tilt during the body turn, affecting the swing plane and therefore the angle of attack at impact. This does not mean that everyone will set up to the ball in exactly the same way. As teachers, prescribing the correct set-up for the individual is our greatest teaching tool.
Turning to the swing itself, which is conditioned by the position of the ball relative to the player, which is to the side and on the ground. The fact that it is to the side requires the club to swing through the ball from the inside back to the inside with the swing path on line at impact, with the clubface square to that line. The correct body action facilitates this arc of swing.
Since the ball is on the ground, at the same time as the body turns, the hands and arms swing the club up, down and up again in unison with the body action.
The above, I believe, is applicable to every player, allowing for individual variations.
The shape of a golf lesson would normally take the form of: diagnosis, explanation accompanied by demonstration and finally, correction. The pupil is best viewed down the line to facilitate this approach. The set-up to the target can be observed and the subsequent swing path through the ball can be clearly seen. The flight of the ball relative to the swing path will give a valid indication of the clubface at impact. This is not to say the side view for players of all levels is on occasion very appropriate.
It is vital that the correct diagnosis is made and that the explanation and accompanying demonstration be fully understood by the pupil in order to encourage the necessary perseverance since any correction is likely to be, initially, uncomfortable.
Understanding Golf’s Fundamentals
On reading golf
One reason, I have always thought, why golf can become such a difficult game is simply because there are so many different ways of playing it correctly; and that one secret, for any golfer striving to improve, is to decide first which is his or her own correct way. It is my sincere hope that this book will help any reader to do just that.
The correct way, I’m firmly convinced, is invariably the simplest. What may prove simple to one, though, may not necessarily be simple to another. One of the difficulties in studying golf in books lies in learning to select from other people’s experiences, ideas and theories, and adapt them to your own personal needs. I think I have found truth in almost every book or article I have read on golf! Yet, in spite of that fact, there is often one thing or another in any particular book which, read by the wrong person, could cause a real setback in his or her game.
As an illustration of this I remember two ladies, both good performers around 8-handicap, who arrived for tuition. Both were accustomed to playing together. One lady hooked her shots, the other sliced. Here were two ladies with faults that I must tell each other to copy! I wanted each to try to do precisely what was wrong in the other! In other words, my instruction was of a completely contradictory nature.
It had to go even further than that, though. Needing contrasting advice, it followed that since they were both avid readers on golf, they also needed different advice on what to read. I told Lady No.1 with her too-flat swing and hook, to read Byron Nelson’s book, because he was an upright swinger; and Lady No.2, with her too-upright swing and slice, to read Ben Hogan’s, because he was a rounded swinger. This was 50 years ago, of course. Today, I might replace these two role models with, say, Colin Montgomerie (upright) and Ian Woosnam (rounded).
The point I’m trying to make is that it is as well to appreciate what we are doing wrong before we seek remedies by reading, from no matter how impeccable a source. The golfing public has been saturated with golf books, most of which have been very good, in many ways. I feel, however, that the titles have been wrong. Most of them should have been called How I Play Golf – and how the writer of each book plays golf may not be the easiest way to teach each of his readers.
I sincerely hope that this book will make it easier for you to decide which is your own best way of playing. As with every lesson I’ve given, I hope to teach people not just to hit the ball better but to understand why they’re hitting it better.
Swing, or move from position to position?
Should you really swing the club? Or should you merely move through a series of contrived postures, a pattern of carefully thought-out conscious movements, a set of deliberate muscle contortions? The question may seem silly but it is of prime importance, especially if you are new to the game or have never achieved the golfing prowess of which you feel yourself potentially capable.
A Rolls Royce without an engine might look impressive, but it’s never going to get out of the garage. In exactly the same way, a golf swing without an engine, however beautifully contoured each part might be, is never going to move the ball very far out of your shadow. To do that, your swing, whatever else it lacks, must have power, motivation. It must be a swing. In the simplest of golfing terms, you must ‘hit the ball’.
Am I stating the obvious? I think not. Most of the great golfers up to the early 1960s learned the game as caddies. They watched the people they carried for and tried to copy those who played well. They were copying an action, a fluid movement. It would never have occurred to them, even if they had known how, to break the swing down into parts and study it segment by segment in static form. Golf was action, and was learned as such.
Now the camera plays an increasingly large part in the exploration of golf technique, with the result that today a great many people tend to learn golf as a ‘static’ game rather than as a game of movement. Instead of watching good players in the flesh, and trying to emulate the action of a good golf swing, they study static pictures and try to copy the positions in which the camera has frozen the players. They are learning positions which, in themselves, without the essential motivating force
