Interview with Erik J. Barzeski

[jeffwarne]

Erik,

I've seen technology used in dubious fashion too, and i'm pretty sure i'm not the only one.  About 6 years ago, my clubs were stolen out of my car and my insurance gave me a surprising amount of money to replace them.  So instead of just buying replacements, i had the driver, 3 wood, and irons "fitted".  Safe to say the entire thing was basically a con, as they put me on the machine, used different shafts and club head lofts, etc and talked about how i picked up all this distance (50-60 yards with the driver), and it would be even more on the course as I live in Salt Lake at 4500 feet and the machine was supposedly calibrated to sea level. Safe to say, on the range a week later, it was totally busted.  I maybe picked up 5-6 yards on my longest club....

Perhaps I was naive as I've never done it before or even researched it.  Just figured there would be at lead a tad bit more integrity there.

Kalen,
That had nothing to do with technology.....
despite the fine invisible clothes that they promised you for the parade...

[Kalen Braley]

Erik,

I've seen technology used in dubious fashion too, and i'm pretty sure i'm not the only one.  About 6 years ago, my clubs were stolen out of my car and my insurance gave me a surprising amount of money to replace them.  So instead of just buying replacements, i had the driver, 3 wood, and irons "fitted".  Safe to say the entire thing was basically a con, as they put me on the machine, used different shafts and club head lofts, etc and talked about how i picked up all this distance (50-60 yards with the driver), and it would be even more on the course as I live in Salt Lake at 4500 feet and the machine was supposedly calibrated to sea level. Safe to say, on the range a week later, it was totally busted.  I maybe picked up 5-6 yards on my longest club....

Perhaps I was naive as I've never done it before or even researched it.  Just figured there would be at lead a tad bit more integrity there.

Kalen,
That had nothing to do with technology.....
despite the fine invisible clothes that they promised you for the parade...

Well,

Yes and no.

I had never used one of those setups before, and haven't since.  With the tracker, machine, seemingly objective results with the accompanying charts, data, readouts, etc...I'd like to think I would not have been so easily sucked in to the charade.  But once again, I accept my part of the responsibility in not having done my homework at the time.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Erik, regarding teaching golf, how do instructors (PGA or otherwise) stack up on teaching how to "play the game"?

Carl, I'm not really sure what you're asking. Some are awesome. Some are terrible. Most are somewhere in the middle. You've taken lessons from, what, two people?

But about keeping the game alive for those whose interest makes it possible for the superstars (and teaching and club pros) to make a living.  The enjoyment of match play and other (than medal) forms of competition, etiquette and spirit of the game (both too old fashioned?), pace of play, and just having a good time in competition, or not, with others.  Or, maybe, this aspect of golf is not that important.

I'm not sure why someone would have to teach you that. I don't know what you mean, or why you want someone to "teach" someone "how to enjoy match play." You can teach someone match play strategies. Mental game stuff. Technique. But it's maybe like "teaching" someone to "enjoy" peanut butter. Some do. Some don't, and if they don't, they might change over time. But… huh? I guess I don't really understand your question.

I've seen technology used in dubious fashion too, and i'm pretty sure i'm not the only one.

Of course. You can mis-use a hammer, too. They're tools.

Perhaps I was naive as I've never done it before or even researched it.  Just figured there would be at lead a tad bit more integrity there.

I'm not sure what you want from me on that.I just attended a club fitting with one of my juniors. He swung his driver and got a baseline. Then he tried many combos of driver heads, shafts, etc. The SIM was about the same as his driver, with a slightly better dispersion (and was a few yards slightly shorter, albeit with an adapter that raised the swing weight to D6 versus his D2 driver). In the end, he was encouraged to keep his driver and shaft or, at most (he gets a discount via the AJGA), to get the SIM with one of the stock shafts… because he'd probably hit it about as well as his driver and maybe a bit more accurately, and he could feel good about having a newer head than his M2.

Not all fitters are bad. Not all fitters are good.

[Kalen Braley]

Erik,

I wasn't calling you out here, I was only offering a counter point to the advances in technology and how they can be used nefariously.

P.S.  I still vividly recall being initially skeptical, when it was saying my drives were travelling 270-280, when i'm normally 215-225.  I even called this out explicitly and he assured me it was accurate and if anything was 3-4% short given the machine sea level calibration.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I wasn't calling you out here, I was only offering a counter point to the advances in technology and how they can be used nefariously.

I know. My reply was to point out that anything can be used incorrectly, even a hammer. They're tools - you can use them well, or properly, or not.

P.S.  I still vividly recall being initially skeptical, when it was saying my drives were travelling 270-280, when i'm normally 215-225.  I even called this out explicitly and he assured me it was accurate and if anything was 3-4% short given the machine sea level calibration.

He sounds like a salesman, not a "good club fitter." Good club fitters exist. I spent a few hours with one the other day, as I shared.

[jeffwarne]

Kalen,
Some are salesman, some  just don't have enough experience to question their readings.
I promise you an experienced teacher can tell the difference in sound and look in a ball leaving the club to travel 215-225 vs. 270-280-even into a net. Most could guess the ball speed pretty reasonably-especially if they were frequent users of the technology.
Something as simple as the ball being a different distance from the net than usual or the machine not calibrated for that distance could do it.
An experienced teacher/fitter would spot such a glaring anomaly.
Same with video-a bad (or different) camera angle can really skew comparative data.*for instance Jim McLean Instructors film exactly on the ball line for consistency and ballflight(and all model video is shot the same), and other teachers might film on toe line or hands line-.(no wrong or right way-but consistency is key as well as having comparative data filmed from exact same angle)

[Garland Bayley]

...

P.S.  I still vividly recall being initially skeptical, when it was saying my drives were travelling 270-280, when i'm normally 215-225.  I even called this out explicitly and he assured me it was accurate and if anything was 3-4% short given the machine sea level calibration.

He sounds like a salesman, not a "good club fitter." Good club fitters exist. I spent a few hours with one the other day, as I shared.

And when you write, "We can show all golfers that lessons make you better, faster, than working on your own.", you sound like a salesman, not necessarily a good teacher. Clearly your statement is false, thereby giving the implication that you can't be trusted to teach either.

[Jon Wiggett]

AG,


so what that basically says is any golf instructor who does not use trackman or the like is poor. Ergo, all pre Trackman instructors were poor. I would take issue with that.


Erik,


the use of that saying was meant as joke hence the emoji after it just to make it extra clear. The sentence prior to it which you didn't quote was also meant as a joke but of the ironic type just in case you thought otherwise.


I would however suggest if you are going to start throwing those sort of derogatory remarks about you might have to accept some flack. Like Jeff I too would understand that PGA or USPGA professional would be included within the group you slandered which flies in the face of the code of conduct for members of either association so it is good you have now qualified your statement.

[Brock Lynch]

Anyway, getting back to golf,,,


Completely agree with Erik on what the likes in a golf course. Firmness makes the experience more challenging and more interesting.

[A.G._Crockett]

Erik,

I wasn't calling you out here, I was only offering a counter point to the advances in technology and how they can be used nefariously.

P.S.  I still vividly recall being initially skeptical, when it was saying my drives were travelling 270-280, when i'm normally 215-225.  I even called this out explicitly and he assured me it was accurate and if anything was 3-4% short given the machine sea level calibration.

Kalen,
You're talking about an integrity issue, not a technology issue.  Technology didn't cause you to have a bad experience with clubfitting; the crooks that took advantage of you did that.
I'm the reverse; I've been lucky enough to work with three different clubfitters over the past 20 years, and with Trackman setups since around 2010.  I wouldn't consider buying a golf club at this point without doing that; I can't imagine, really, why anybody does.
And to the original point of this part of the discussion, it's the same with lessons, at least to me.  The rate of progress that is possible with video and Trackman in the hands of a good instructor dwarfs what can be done without those tools.  There is no way around it.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Completely agree with Erik on what the likes in a golf course. Firmness makes the experience more challenging and more interesting.

I'm one of the least experienced here at playing courses in Scotland, or the few truly firm courses here in the U.S., but just for the golf aspects of the days, some of those rounds and even some of those shots in Scotland were some of the most fun I've had on a golf course.

I've always enjoyed playing the ball low, using contours, feeding the ball off or around things… and of course you can get your fill of those types of shots given the right conditions. I loved that you had three, four, five different options for any shot, and figuring out that puzzle was the challenge.

I've said here width and angles don't matter unless the ball is rolling, and so at the Old Course and other Scottish courses, or other firm/fast courses… the ball rolls a lot, and they've often got the width to make the angles matter. It takes golf from being an almost two-dimensional game to a three-dimensional game.

[jeffwarne]

Completely agree with Erik on what the likes in a golf course. Firmness makes the experience more challenging and more interesting.

I'm one of the least experienced here at playing courses in Scotland, or the few truly firm courses here in the U.S., but just for the golf aspects of the days, some of those rounds and even some of those shots in Scotland were some of the most fun I've had on a golf course.

I've always enjoyed playing the ball low, using contours, feeding the ball off or around things… and of course you can get your fill of those types of shots given the right conditions. I loved that you had three, four, five different options for any shot, and figuring out that puzzle was the challenge.

I've said here width and angles don't matter unless the ball is rolling, and so at the Old Course and other Scottish courses, or other firm/fast courses… the ball rolls a lot, and they've often got the width to make the angles matter. It takes golf from being an almost two-dimensional game to a three-dimensional game.

Spot on Erik.
We don't agree on equipment but what you just wrote is exactly why I believe we would all get more enjoyment from spectating (and playing-alas that ship has sailed for me) elite evel golf with reduced distance equipment(scaled back to match the modern game). A ball is much more likely to roll/release and be influenced by landforms when struck from a longer distance(due to a shorter drive) with a lower lofted club.
Angles just matter more when a 450 yard hole is driver 5 or 6 iron, than they do when it's driver wedge.
Of course conditioning is a huge part, but all things equal(firm and fast isn't always possible or affordable), we'd see more ground golf (and did) with equipment that goes shorter (regardless of why it goes further)


But back on topic.
great interview/s and keep up the good work.

[A.G._Crockett]

ONLY golfers, among all sports, would engage in an argument about the importance of coaching, as well as staying current with technology.
NBA teams have shooting instructors.  MLB teams have hitting instructors.  MLS teams have a specific assistant for just the keepers.  When you go to a PGA Tour event, if you sit a watch and the range, a large number of the pros are working with an instructor; many of the others regularly send video to their instructor.  Even just using alignment sticks with the caddy behind them is a form of coaching.
And, of course, we know now that many of the Tour pros are spending 5 figures for their own personal, portable Trackman unit.  Almost every MLB team is now using Trackman to assess spin rates of their pitchers because they've learned that a 90 mph fastball that spins more is more effective than a 90 mph fastball that spins less. 

None of this means that teachers and coaches in the past that didn't have these tools were poor teachers.  Red Auerbach didn't use video because the capability didn't exist during his career.  Claude Harmon didn't use Trackman for the same reason.  But I suspect that both of those gentlemen would have stayed on the front of the wave with technology, simply because they valued results.
EVERY professional team in every major sport in this country has a video coordinator, as do almost all major college basketball and football teams.  The video coordinator is going to send the head coach a file of the next opponent on offense, and a separate file of the next opponent on defense, along with the standard on paper scouting report.  It's a better way to do things, or they wouldn't be doing it. 

ONLY golfers would claim otherwise.  ONLY golfers would say that they can progress as quickly without coaching as with it.  ONLY golfers would say that a teacher who has not stayed current with available technology is doing the best job possible for the student. 

If you respond to this by saying that there are incompetent teachers or club fitters who use video and Trackman, you're just knocking down a straw man.  An incompetent teacher or club fitter is a completely separate issue.  The same if you say that ANYBODY is saying that coaching and lessons in the past, without those technologies, were bad lessons; nobody is saying anything of the sort.  That something was the best available at the time doesn't speak to what is the best available thing now.

[Kalen Braley]

AG,

Last post is full of great points, with one big exception.

There aren't millions and millions of adults, most of whom are clearly past thier prime, still trying to play organized football, baseball, hockey, etc and actively trying to get better thru coaching or otherwise.  They just playing backyard and schoolyard games, trying to avoid an ER visit.

The concept of a massive army of Teaching Pros and otherwise...for grown ass non-pro adults.... is exclusive to golf and perhaps tennis....and trying to also make a living off it.  So there will naturally be a lot more variability in quality as opposed to other sports where only the best of the best will remain employed very long.

[jeffwarne]

AG,

Last post is full of great points, with one big exception.

There aren't millions and millions of adults, most of whom are clearly past thier prime, still trying to play organized football, baseball, hockey, etc and actively trying to get better thru coaching or otherwise.  They just playing backyard and schoolyard games, trying to avoid an ER visit.

The concept of a massive army of Teaching Pros and otherwise...for grown ass non-pro adults.... is exclusive to golf and perhaps tennis....and trying to also make a living off it.  So there will naturally be a lot more variability in quality as opposed to other sports where only the best of the best will remain employed very long.

I've seen high school basketball(pick your sport) coaches who make the worst, trackman and video deprived golf pro look like a genius.
Golf doesn't have a monopoly on shitty coaches, and there's no such thing as tenure for golf pros.
Shitty golf pros eventually fail to make a living and their students voluntarily can opt out for another if they don't improve.

Sure parents or kids can be a problem as well, but neither of them has a teacher's union shielding them from at best poor performance and at worst abuse.

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

Very true, and I'm not trying to call anyone out here.  Lord knows this is true for any profession, Lawyers, Doctors, accountants, politicians, etc., and even the lowest of low of us who work in Tech.

Just a matter of how quickly the herd is getting thinned out based on the number of opportunities...

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,

Last post is full of great points, with one big exception.

There aren't millions and millions of adults, most of whom are clearly past thier prime, still trying to play organized football, baseball, hockey, etc and actively trying to get better thru coaching or otherwise.  They just playing backyard and schoolyard games, trying to avoid an ER visit.

The concept of a massive army of Teaching Pros and otherwise...for grown ass non-pro adults.... is exclusive to golf and perhaps tennis....and trying to also make a living off it.  So there will naturally be a lot more variability in quality as opposed to other sports where only the best of the best will remain employed very long.

Kalen,

I take your point, but the the number of people playing and the number of teachers isn't really in question, is it?  And it doesn't speak to the original point from Eric's interview about the quality of golf instruction as a whole, nor to the posts I was responding to that claimed the ANYONE had said the lessons before video and Trackman were bad, and that contested the idea that a golfer on their own would progress as fast as a golfer with quality instruction.  The former is absurdly illogical, and the latter is just play silly.  (NOTE: Neither of those contentions were yours.)

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,

Last post is full of great points, with one big exception.

There aren't millions and millions of adults, most of whom are clearly past thier prime, still trying to play organized football, baseball, hockey, etc and actively trying to get better thru coaching or otherwise.  They just playing backyard and schoolyard games, trying to avoid an ER visit.

The concept of a massive army of Teaching Pros and otherwise...for grown ass non-pro adults.... is exclusive to golf and perhaps tennis....and trying to also make a living off it.  So there will naturally be a lot more variability in quality as opposed to other sports where only the best of the best will remain employed very long.

I've seen high school basketball coaches who make the worst, trackman and video deprived golf pro look like a genius.
Golf doesn't have a monopoly on shitty coaches, and there's no such thing as tenure for golf pros.
Shitty golf pros eventually fail to make a living and their students voluntarily can opt out for another if they don't improve.
Shitty basketball(pick your sport) coaches at the high school level inflict their tenure enabled nonsense for years, on kids who have no choice short of quitting a sport they love.(rarely an option).
Sure parents or kids can be a problem as well, but neither of them has tenure shielding them from at best poor performance and at worst abuse.

Jeff,

Just for clarification: There is NO tenure for high school coaches.  In fact, in many, if not most, school districts coaching is not even contractual; the coach is hired and fired by the principal or superintendent or school board at their pleasure, and NO reason need be given for termination.  I coached high school basketball for 39 years at four different schools, and never once had a contract for it; I received a stipend separate from my contract each year. 

I won't get into what tenure for public school teachers does (and does not) mean vs. tenure for college professors, except to say that they are totally different, and I won't defend tenure at either level.  But if tenure for high school coaching exists anywhere, I'm not aware of it; high school coaches are fired all the time, most often for losing, but also for some form of malfeasance, or just because they got sideways with an administrator or a board member.  In that regard, a high school coach has a lot more in common with a club golf pro than you might imagine.

[jeffwarne]

AG,

Last post is full of great points, with one big exception.

There aren't millions and millions of adults, most of whom are clearly past thier prime, still trying to play organized football, baseball, hockey, etc and actively trying to get better thru coaching or otherwise.  They just playing backyard and schoolyard games, trying to avoid an ER visit.

The concept of a massive army of Teaching Pros and otherwise...for grown ass non-pro adults.... is exclusive to golf and perhaps tennis....and trying to also make a living off it.  So there will naturally be a lot more variability in quality as opposed to other sports where only the best of the best will remain employed very long.

I've seen high school basketball coaches who make the worst, trackman and video deprived golf pro look like a genius.
Golf doesn't have a monopoly on shitty coaches, and there's no such thing as tenure for golf pros.
Shitty golf pros eventually fail to make a living and their students voluntarily can opt out for another if they don't improve.
Shitty basketball(pick your sport) coaches at the high school level inflict their tenure enabled nonsense for years, on kids who have no choice short of quitting a sport they love.(rarely an option).
Sure parents or kids can be a problem as well, but neither of them has tenure shielding them from at best poor performance and at worst abuse.

Jeff,

Just for clarification: There is NO tenure for high school coaches.  In fact, in many, if not most, school districts coaching is not even contractual; the coach is hired and fired by the principal or superintendent or school board at their pleasure, and NO reason need be given for termination.  I coached high school basketball for 39 years at four different schools, and never once had a contract for it; I received a stipend separate from my contract each year. 

I won't get into what tenure for public school teachers does (and does not) mean vs. tenure for college professors, except to say that they are totally different, and I won't defend tenure at either level.  But if tenure for high school coaching exists anywhere, I'm not aware of it; high school coaches are fired all the time, most often for losing, but also for some form of malfeasance, or just because they got sideways with an administrator or a board member.  In that regard, a high school coach has a lot more in common with a club golf pro than you might imagine.

You've obviously not familiar with the strength of a New York Teacher's Union...
The School Board, Principal, Superintendant and AD certainly are.

[Garland Bayley]

... and that contested the idea that a golfer on their own would progress as fast as a golfer with quality instruction.  ... and the latter is just play silly.
...

And when you write, "We can show all golfers that lessons make you better, faster, than working on your own.", you sound like a salesman, not necessarily a good teacher. Clearly your statement is false, thereby giving the implication that you can't be trusted to teach either.

The thing to notice is that Erik wrote "all". Had he written "We can show many golfers that lessons make you better, faster, than working on your own", then I would have no objection.

When he writes all, he includes Bubba Watson, for whom I would argue Erik could do nothing for.

When he writes all, he includes highly talented golfers that need nothing from Erik, but rather need practice. Two obvious example are guys that after laying off their practice routines have trouble breaking 100.


Billy Casper
Jack Fleck


Those are obvious cases, but I would argue there are many golfers that know how to play the game just fine simply need to have the time to get their games in shape, and would easily progress faster practicing what they already know very well than going to Erik, and his associates.

Erik has a habit of exaggeration.

When arguing on his own website about how spin is imparted to a golf ball, he claimed a college degree he didn't have.

So Kalen pointing out a club fitters exaggeration is a bit apropos here IMO.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

The thing to notice is that Erik wrote "all". Had he written "We can show many golfers that lessons make you better, faster, than working on your own", then I would have no objection.

And I stand by "all." Bubba has had slumps. If you don't think that having another mind thinking about or another eye watching Bubba during those down times could have gotten him out of the slump and back to playing better golf faster than him working on his own… then we just disagree. Until we invent nearly infinite parallel universes or something, neither of us can "prove" anything, so…

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,

Last post is full of great points, with one big exception.

There aren't millions and millions of adults, most of whom are clearly past thier prime, still trying to play organized football, baseball, hockey, etc and actively trying to get better thru coaching or otherwise.  They just playing backyard and schoolyard games, trying to avoid an ER visit.

The concept of a massive army of Teaching Pros and otherwise...for grown ass non-pro adults.... is exclusive to golf and perhaps tennis....and trying to also make a living off it.  So there will naturally be a lot more variability in quality as opposed to other sports where only the best of the best will remain employed very long.

I've seen high school basketball coaches who make the worst, trackman and video deprived golf pro look like a genius.
Golf doesn't have a monopoly on shitty coaches, and there's no such thing as tenure for golf pros.
Shitty golf pros eventually fail to make a living and their students voluntarily can opt out for another if they don't improve.
Shitty basketball(pick your sport) coaches at the high school level inflict their tenure enabled nonsense for years, on kids who have no choice short of quitting a sport they love.(rarely an option).
Sure parents or kids can be a problem as well, but neither of them has tenure shielding them from at best poor performance and at worst abuse.

Jeff,

Just for clarification: There is NO tenure for high school coaches.  In fact, in many, if not most, school districts coaching is not even contractual; the coach is hired and fired by the principal or superintendent or school board at their pleasure, and NO reason need be given for termination.  I coached high school basketball for 39 years at four different schools, and never once had a contract for it; I received a stipend separate from my contract each year. 

I won't get into what tenure for public school teachers does (and does not) mean vs. tenure for college professors, except to say that they are totally different, and I won't defend tenure at either level.  But if tenure for high school coaching exists anywhere, I'm not aware of it; high school coaches are fired all the time, most often for losing, but also for some form of malfeasance, or just because they got sideways with an administrator or a board member.  In that regard, a high school coach has a lot more in common with a club golf pro than you might imagine.

You've obviously not familiar with the strength of a New York Teacher's Union...
The School Board, Principal, Superintendant and AD certainly are.

Jeff,
Though I taught and coached only in NC and GA, neither of which allow collective bargaining by teachers organizations, union or otherwise, and both of which making striking by teachers an illegal, fireable offense, I'm reasonably familiar with both tenure and the power of teachers' unions in states that DO allow collective bargaining and the power to strike.  A debate over either of those isn't necessary or appropriate here.

But I'll say it again; high school coaches do NOT have tenure FOR THEIR COACHING POSITION, even in states with strong unions like New York or Illiinois.  They may be fired for any (or no) reason at any time, though if they are tenured teachers, they retain that position.  High school coaches in New York are fired all the time; a quick google search will confirm that.

[Rob Marshall]

At the school district I'm at in upstate NY coaches get a 1 year contract. It gets renewed each year.

[Garland Bayley]

The thing to notice is that Erik wrote "all". Had he written "We can show many golfers that lessons make you better, faster, than working on your own", then I would have no objection.

And I stand by "all." Bubba has had slumps. If you don't think that having another mind thinking about or another eye watching Bubba during those down times could have gotten him out of the slump and back to playing better golf faster than him working on his own… then we just disagree. Until we invent nearly infinite parallel universes or something, neither of us can "prove" anything, so…

Like I said, Erik tends to exaggerate.