October 2002

We have taken the liberty to add friends with whom we wanted to share our newsletter. As with all transmissions these days, this one doesn't have to be in your inbox. If you prefer not to have it sent every two months, just let us know and we will send no more. We also had a request from one reader that this be transmitted as a "blind copy" attachment via email, as a deterrant to email addresses being harvested by spammers. We think that is a very good idea. Thanks, CGM

Check the golf boards. Listen to the commentators. Give some thought to your own perception. Do fist pumps and exuberant jumping up and down bother you? How do you feel about celebration? Did you ever dance in your own end zone? Do you wonder why there are protests about such things, or do you just wonder why more people don't complain?

Maybe you are one of those who is more likely to be troubled by a seeming lack of emotion in some players. If you compare Sergio with David Duval or Tiger with Retief Goosen or Davis Love with Scott Hoch, or Stewart Cink with Colin Montgomery, you will see some interesting dynamics. Very different, they are. Are some of them right and the others wrong?

Are you bugged by a "leaping Sergio," a "Tiger fist" or a "stoic" Duval countenance?

It is predictable that if you carry the Driver style, your degree of open appreciation of an Analyzer's temperament, or the tentative putting of some Craftsmen, or the wild exuberance of some Persuaders is apt to be quite a bit "south" of where you are standing. You just wish they'd quit "messing around" or playing "so slow." "Just do it."

If you are a Persuader, you may "hate" the "nit-picking," slow play of the Analyzer, the boring repetition of the Craftsman, or the "macho" arrogance of the Driver. You may even wonder why some of those never smile and most of them rarely do while the game is on. Secretly, however, you may harbor a strong desire to "hit it straight" like some of them seem to do.

If you are a Craftsman, you may not care for the overbearing manner of the Driver (but you wouldn't say "it" if you had a mouthful), the excessive loudness of the Persuader, or the emotional distance of the Analyzer. You may wonder why some of them "hit it all over the lot," others seem to be in too big a hurry and the rest spend way too much time over the ball. And you think they should learn to take it back "low and slow." And above all, they should learn how to "work the ball," while you wish you didn't leave so many putts short.

If you are an Analyzer, there is apt to be only one correct way in your book to do anything, and it better be "right." So all those other folks need to shape up, especially that Driver, who never knows where he's going, and the Persuader, who makes way too much of everything, and the Craftsman, who always seems to be just going along with "whatever." As for you, when you finally get it "all worked out" on the range, then you'll go play.

Without doing profiles on every player out there, but based on a considerable amount of well conditioned observation, it might be important to understand the differences instead of merely landing on a perception that praises some and condemns others. Such perception will generally be found lodged in one's own gut.

To say the least, it is a bit disconcerting to find golfers, who can't possibly be as uninformed as their message board notes suggest, throwing opinions around and calling them "facts." Then they argue with each other about who is "right," and it usually turns out to be neither, both, and/or unresolved.

And it is time for commentators, especially those in golf, to reach a greater understanding and appreciation of golfers' playing/human behavior styles so that the players they are talking about and those to whom they are speaking receive something besides a jaundiced opinion about "what's going on out there on the course." The only things we hear from them are submerged in the mechanics of the golf swing, rarely in the dynamics of playing the game. Of course, they will tell you these days, that it isn't smart to try to swing like anybody else, but they don't have a clue when it comes to playing like someone else. In fact, if you listen closely they encourage modeling after some good player, excepting Tiger, though, since even they recognize that nobody will likely play like him. (Sometimes, even he doesn't).

One assessment that might get general agreement (after much thought from all) is that everyone is always "right" about his/her own opinion, of course. It is always futile to suggest to another person "Your opinion is wrong," yet folks do it all the time. When I look at golf-related boards, and listen to both casual and "paid" observers, I am impressed with the many posters (and other "volunteers") who reject views of others and call them "wrong," just because they don't agree with them.

Once more, we get a lesson in the variable character of perception. What you see and what someone else sees is rarely alike, even when what is under observation is the same.

In its own way, that can be borderline frightening. We wonder if the things we express, teach, write, or otherwise pass on to others, get that same treatment, so that what we intended to carry as a meaning gets lost in another's ears, eyes, nose, throat or some lower portion of the GI system.

At the very least, anything we do to appreciate the way perception works will help to demythologize the reasons a wide range of golfers may not have seen the value of understanding playing styles and clear keys. And that's without mentioning all the other life avenues in which the principles that form their foundations may come into play.

If you think for a moment that playing styles had nothing to do with the Ryder Cup result in 2002, you might want to reconsider. There's a "before, during and after" to all that as well. After all, those were human beings out there, and even heroes are not exempt from their own behavior styles and those of their opponents.

If folks who miss the point are merely misunderstanding, that's probably excusable. But for those who have thought they already knew what someone else meant so that there is really no need for the information, that points to something that is very fragile, indeed.

It can be scary to face something "new," or to have to give up something old, even if it's only an idea or thought. Think about it. How many times do you ignore something just because it doesn't sound like what you have been hearing or isn't something you wanted to hear?

And that's just from the 3% of our conscious attention. Think about how much our systems resist from the 97% unconscious level. No wonder it's so hard to get a golf game in lasting, solid shape - or to maintain relationships with others. And you can bet that if we are "practicing" resistance consciously, our unconscious responses are escalating that with intensity, seemingly capable of unlimited dimension.

The message, then, is this: a formidable way toward easing our learning path for new things and our acceptance of others and their views, is found in having an open mind to all of the perceptions around us and a reliable framework for evaluation (as in wisely regarding behavior styles)- not to mention developing flexibility toward our own viewpoints, as well. Anyone can stick to the same old way of viewing and judging. It's expanding the vision that's tough.

"If you keep on seeing what you always saw, you will keep on doing what you always did, and if you keep on doing what you always did, you'll keep on getting what you always got."

===============================
We have placed past issues in an Archive at http://keygolf.0golf.com . The link is just beneath the American Flag.
Let us know if you have questions or comments.
Email Us