We've launched the new forums! Read more here

The Practice Manual - Adam Young

ShotScope
courage

courage

New member
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
204
Reaction score
0
Handicap
^^
courage said:
Has anyone here read this book, invested any time with it, or could offer insights? The reviews seem positive, sound theory and basis for practice plan, if wordy and repetitive.

http://www.amazon.com/Practice-Manu...43461411&sr=8-1&keywords=golf+practice+manual
Click to expand...

I'm about 3/4 of the way through it. I'm going to try to finish it in the near future. I think that it is geared towards the highly competitive player or the player that has a lot of time to spend on his game. Also, you will have to read a lot of stuff in there in the first half of the book that talks more about how we learn and adapt to changes on a general level as opposed to golf-specific information. It's later in the book that he starts talking about how to apply it to golf. I realize that I sound like I'm not all that positive on this book, but I've found it to be an interesting read, it's just taken me a while to get through it.

FWIW, you can go to his website and download a free article called "Golf Hacks" or something close to that, it gives you a glimpse into his methods. Might be worthwhile to do that before paying your money to buy the book if you're on the fence about it.
 
He needs a Kindle edition.
 
Thanks for the feedback. I'm not opposed to reading the theory of almost anything, just something I enjoy, but I'll check out his Golf Hacks first.
 
I read alot of his posts on google+, interesting stuff, and sounds like he knows what he's talking about. I may look into this for some winter reading.
 
Just finished the book and was going on to amazon to review it and found this.

It's a great book - I've read hundreds of golf books from Rotella to McClean, but the practice manual is so much more. Yes it has a lot of theory in it, but the practical elements are also great, and the theory just adds oomph to your understanding. I can say that the book has been nothing short of revelationary in my own game. Having been bound up by hundreds of swing thoughts all my life, I have found a much better understanding of cause and effect and how to simplify everything. It's no surprise that I have shot my lowest score in 15 years since reading the book, and I feel a new resurgence in my game coming on.

And I am not the only one. A few of my club member friends have also cottoned on and it's starting to show in their games too. The book is not for everyone for sure - at over 350 pages it is a bit of a beast. But I am sure this piece of work will be around for a long time and be very influential. I hear it is already making traction in golf teaching circles. With winter coming up, I will be reading and re-reading it again and again.
 
Good to hear, Jim!
 
The Practice Manual - Adam Young

I checked out golf hacks. Not a bad quick read. Might get this for a winter read. The stuff he mentions is the same stuff I work in with my pro. The strategy and practice and bringing it to the course info looks solid. I stay away from the stuff that tells me how to swing. This book doesn't do that which is good.
I just wish there was an ebook for this.
 
Literature on how to practice is surprisingly sparse, but I will be looking into this one. The fact that this isn't available on kindle may be a deal breaker though
 
I just ordered this on Amazon today. I'll update after I read it with my initial thoughts. I like to practice so we'll see how it goes although I won't be getting back into the season until March.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Blazer said:
He needs a Kindle edition.
Click to expand...

Yep... I did the Amazon .. Tell the publisher thing...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I just finished "Every Shot Counts" and am interested in this book as well.. Seems like a good combo.. I did implement the ideas from ESC right away for what I have been working on in practice and strategy. This winter will be lots of chipping and putting indoors.. Have started a fitness/strength program very different from what I have done. Sore today. Hopefully we have the light winter predicted. Playing well and do not want the year to end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have read 'Every shot counts too' and there is a chapter in the practice manual which is about strategy and looking at statistics the same away Broadie does. I'll be honest, I haven't really used that bit of the book too much, but I definitely see value in it and may start using those theories next season.

I also downloaded Golf Hacks - the free ebook on his blog. It's surprisingly good for what it is (free), and I'm sure everyone will pick something up from it. But the Real book is in a different league. It is written with a different style and is much more in depth. You can tell from his blog posts that the guy knows his stuff too - his recent article on 'low point control' was extremely enlightening to me, and sparked a few of my playing partners to get the book.

Getting to winter here so I'll be practicing more often. Already seeing great improvements in strike quality
 
I've read about 100 pages and really am enjoying this book. The ball flight laws were great. Just getting into kinetic sequencing and learning. It seems that his teachings mirror my pros so it should be a good match.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
So far I really like this book. It talks about much more than just swing mechanics which is refreshing. I find it easy to read and understand. in most cases. I look forward to applying some of the principles in the book on the range first. Then trying them out when it counts!

Some things I don't like:
- The editor should be fired. Many spellings errors (I know this was published in the UK, so I know about adding "u" to some of the words, so I'm not talking about that) and the author says "Whilst" waaaaaaay too much. Sometimes four times per page. The editor should have picked up on that and removed many of them. Makes it harder to read and takes away from the message.

- Captions for pictures don't line up with the pictures. "See above" but the caption is on the next page.

- He mentions the science of some of things he talks about but doesn't really refer to it. "Studies show" doesn't fly unless the studies are cited. Way too much of that going around on the internet, so the actual citation to the research would have been cool. I've done medical research and would have liked to look at some of the "studies" and see how they were done.
 
NewGlfr - also thought the same regarding the while and whilst. Even being British, it didn't seem to fit, but I found this
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/while-and-whilst

so I made my peace with it. I also found some spelling errors in the book, but it didn't seem to detract from the main message for me. Considering all the money I have spent on lessons and training aids to no avail, this book has easily been the best golf purchase to date. About 4 of us were talking in the bar yesterday about how easier golf seems to us now in terms of how we are all less concerned with our swings and understanding what really creates a good shot. Such a shame the season is ending here, but can't wait for the next one to come.

I'm not much of a science guy, so the inclusion of a ton of studies didn't bother me. I'm like most people I think - I just want some stuff I can work with without having to know all the data behind it, which the book gave me. But I have noticed a few of his blog posts recently with a few more studies attached to them which back up claims he makes in the book. I haven't been through the studies myself (not my thing), but it might interest you
 
jimgolf123 said:
I'm not much of a science guy, so the inclusion of a ton of studies didn't bother me. I'm like most people I think - I just want some stuff I can work with without having to know all the data behind it, which the book gave me. But I have noticed a few of his blog posts recently with a few more studies attached to them which back up claims he makes in the book. I haven't been through the studies myself (not my thing), but it might interest you
Click to expand...

Cool, thank you! I will check that out.

I'm totally with you. I'm a science geek so I like to look things up, lol. I'm also OCD, so bad combo there!

Have you read "Golf is not a Game of Perfect"?
 
Last edited:
NewGlfr said:
So far I really like this book. It talks about much more than just swing mechanics which is refreshing. I find it easy to read and understand. in most cases. I look forward to applying some of the principles in the book on the range first. Then trying them out when it counts!

Some things I don't like:
- The editor should be fired. Many spellings errors (I know this was published in the UK, so I know about adding "u" to some of the words, so I'm not talking about that) and the author says "Whilst" waaaaaaay too much. Sometimes four times per page. The editor should have picked up on that and removed many of them. Makes it harder to read and takes away from the message.

- Captions for pictures don't line up with the pictures. "See above" but the caption is on the next page.

- He mentions the science of some of things he talks about but doesn't really refer to it. "Studies show" doesn't fly unless the studies are cited. Way too much of that going around on the internet, so the actual citation to the research would have been cool. I've done medical research and would have liked to look at some of the "studies" and see how they were done.
Click to expand...

I'm about 100 pages into this book and agree with much of your assessment. Very much on board with what is apparently thoughtfully presented content and in a particular order. It has brought a different focus to my range sessions, which as a n00b I think has been positive. Editorial skills were definitely needed. If the book had to be pared down to consist of a few episodes of The Golf Fix, it'd probably be gold. But what's more annoying to me is some of the condescending tone and inability to just spit it out. There's a lot of "what I'm about to tell you is incredibly important. It's so important you need to listen up and you probably won't grasp it the first time through." Uh, ok, thanks for the vote of confidence and getting to the point. Still, looking forward to gleaning what it has to offer.
 
courage said:
But what's more annoying to me is some of the condescending tone and inability to just spit it out. There's a lot of "what I'm about to tell you is incredibly important. It's so important you need to listen up and you probably won't grasp it the first time through." Uh, ok, thanks for the vote of confidence and getting to the point. Still, looking forward to gleaning what it has to offer.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. I also find it becoming very long winded. The good info is there, but we don't need to know how a professional dart player throws a dart and how that relates to Golf or how Mr. Olympia got to be the best Bodybuilder in the world. There is too much extraneous info, which I also find dilutes the message.

One thing I also hate reading is "simply" this or that. Just like "Whilst", there are ways to construct a sentence without using those words at all. The editor could have cut out many pages of fluff if he or she had done that. Maybe they'll do a 2nd edition which will be much more concise.

I can say that I've been using his ideas on the range and they really work. Particularly about closing and opening the face of the club and how that affects the ball path more than a change in your swing path. As I said, the good info is there, I wish it would be presented in a better way. Cut the crap and get to the point!!
 
I just finished the book and started reading it again. I must say I really liked it. It just really seemed to make sense. Not a golf swing book but how to learn, practice and develop. The laws he talks about are what my coach has been working on with me so this is not going to be starting for scratch but a real plan to get over this lull I've been in. The best part is I think it's going to be a lot of fun.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
You guys should follow him on google+, as he always has lots of tips, and articles there. And he answers all questions.
 
On page 109, he says, " I have identified five main types of attentional loci", which is 100% false. Without a scientific citation to his study (which he does not have), he didn't identify this at all. He may have read some studies and done research into this, but he didn't develop these theories. He got them somewhere else and didn't cite them appropriately. This is a major editorial gaff.

He should have written that he read about them and these are his findings from what he read written more concisely, but to say that he identified them means he was the one to discover them, which he didn't.

Sorry to pick this apart, but when relaying information that you assume the audience will consider factual, you have to cite the source and can't just say you found them out or "identified" them. Someone else identified these things and you are writing about them. Big difference!

My point is that he has great things to say about learning and the game of golf for sure. I'm OCD about this kind of stuff though and find it irritating that an author can blurt that out and doesn't/can't back up what he writes with actual data. If you're going to talk science, you have to have the scientific data or it's meaningless.
 
NewGlfr said:
On page 109, he says, " I have identified five main types of attentional loci", which is 100% false. Without a scientific citation to his study (which he does not have), he didn't identify this at all. He may have read some studies and done research into this, but he didn't develop these theories. He got them somewhere else and didn't cite them appropriately. This is a major editorial gaff.

He should have written that he read about them and these are his findings from what he read written more concisely, but to say that he identified them means he was the one to discover them, which he didn't.

Sorry to pick this apart, but when relaying information that you assume the audience will consider factual, you have to cite the source and can't just say you found them out or "identified" them. Someone else identified these things and you are writing about them. Big difference!

My point is that he has great things to say about learning and the game of golf for sure. I'm OCD about this kind of stuff though and find it irritating that an author can blurt that out and doesn't/can't back up what he writes with actual data. If you're going to talk science, you have to have the scientific data or it's meaningless.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, there are some parts that he cites the scientific reference with no actual data. Personally, I don't need to read the data if what he's trying to educate me on works. Also, just because he's identified them does not mean he's the one that discovered them. It's through his teachings that he's identified the attention loci.

Apples to oranges but....
I fly airplanes for a living. We go into about 50 different airports of which 7-10 I've identified as a constant challenge to taxi to and from the gate. If I was to write a book for pilots about these challenges, I would identify these problem airports and offer solutions. I wouldn't have discovered these problems but would have identified them through my thousands of hours of flight time. I think that's what Adam is getting at. Through his thousands of hours of teaching, he's identified these loci and how to work with them to achieve the desired result.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Rusty Casino said:
Fair enough, there are some parts that he cites the scientific reference with no actual data. Personally, I don't need to read the data if what he's trying to educate me on works. Also, just because he's identified them does not mean he's the one that discovered them. It's through his teachings that he's identified the attention loci.
Click to expand...

I would agree with you, but he specifically describes each attention loci. There is no way he did this through his teaching as if you look at the science online, it has been described by many others, scientifically, in research. He is just applying it within his teachings which many other professions have as well. He would have to say, "This is what I read, and this is how I'm applying it" vs. "I identified this..."

His editor should have caught this right away, and suggested a more global way of pointing this out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top