Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Calming Down Before You Putt - A Pre-Shot Routine Study for Golfers

2008, SDUIS Archives

Higher level golfers benefit from psychological interventions, and already have a higher sense of ‘self-efficacy’. Their pre-shot routines serve to help focus and mentally visualize their shots. Putting accuracy is easy to describe as it simply refers to how close to the hole a putter can putt the ball. To study the effects of relaxation techniques used as a pre-shot routine for putting, a group of 36 San Diego area golfers were selected and divided into three groups to test out three different interventions. The three interventions used included relaxing the hands before putting, relaxing the face before putting, and doing nothing before putting. The aim of the study is to determine if one of the intervention types had a better outcome on putting accuracy, after each player was able to learn and practice the intervention techniques for a given amount of time. Putting attempts were made and ball distance from hole was recorded for each attempt. A one-way ANOVA was performed to test the statistical significance intervention type (pre-shot routine) on putting accuracy. Results revealed a significant effect for intervention type, with the relaxed hands intervention being the strongest predictor of accuracy. In conclusion, the type of intervention used has a significant effect on how well a player accurately performs on the golf putting green.

Calming Down Before You Putt A Pre-Shot Routine Study for Golfers. Anna Weltman San Diego University of Integrative Studies SPO 651 – Final Paper Professor: Joseph Tedesco November 8, 2009 INTRODUCTION I am interested in the effects of relaxation techniques as a pre-shot routine and their application to the sport of golf, specifically in the area of putting. My study focuses on specific pre-shot routine techniques’ effects on a golfer’s putting accuracy (on a putting green). Golfers of higher levels (lower handicaps) most benefit from additional psychological interventions, which complement their already advanced level of physical and technical training. They tend to have, as do most experienced athletes, higher sense of ‘selfefficacy’ in the experiences that they participate, in this case being the number of golf putts a player has taken. (Bandura, 1977, 1982, 1986, editor Murphy, 1995) In golf, a pre-shot routine serves to help the player focus and mentally visualize the shot in order to block out serious distractions from this delicate and highly skilled task during the golf game. (Anthony, 1998) For the purpose of the analysis portion of this study, I will refer to the pre-shot routine as the “intervention type”. There are many pre-shot routines, and often the golfers already implement their own relaxation techniques before a putt as a pre-shot routine. This can be used as a starting point for an intervention (Sherman and Poczwardowski, editor: Anderson, 2000). The interventions that I will incorporate into my study are visualization techniques revolving around relaxation. Relaxing a certain part of the body can have an effect on how the golfer hits their shot. It can also help focus and concentration and prevent outside distractions, but relaxation techniques may also you if the pre-shot routine is too complex. (Cohn, 1990 and Jackson, 1990) The interventions used in this study involve relaxing hands before putting, and relaxing the face before putting. Both techniques are taught with a teacher, who elicits ‘commands’ to the golfer such as: “relax your fingers….relax your palms….relax your wrists...” to which the golfer responds by focusing hard on doing as she/he is told. The same technique is used for the face relaxation with the teacher/researcher telling the golfer ‘commands’ such as: “relax your temples…relax your mouth….relax your nose…” very slowly, clearly and deliberately. When a golfer has learned a certain technique, they should begin to apply it on their own and incorporate it into their game. (Jackson, 1990) Each time they address a ball to putt, they will repeat the sequence of ‘command’s to themselves quietly, then they will putt. Hypotheses The question I would like to answer with this paper is: does intervention type (pre-shot routine) have an effect on putting accuracy? Before conducting statistical analyses, it is hypothesized that type of pre-shot routine would affect the putting accuracy of the participant. The statistical hypothesis indicated that the intervention type null hypothesis (Ho = hand relaxation = face relaxation) would be rejected and statistical significance would be found with respect to the effect of intervention type on putting accuracy. Sample A sample of 36 San Diego area golfers - 18 males and 18 females – ranging in age from 19 to 68 selected for this study. All of them seasoned golfers with a golf handicap of 10 or lower. (Lower is better in golf). Three groups based on intervention type were created – Group 1 used NO pre-shot routine, Group 2 used a pre-shot routine consisting of a hand-relaxation exercise, and Group 3 used a pre-shot routine consisting of a face-relaxation exercise. Each of the participating men and women were randomly assigned to one of the intervention type groups, ensuring that there were 6 males and 6 females in each of the three groups. It should be noted that I did conduct a study in the past in which I studied gender effects as well, but for this paper, I am only concentrating on intervention type effects. METHOD In order to test the hypothesis, a putting accuracy attempt was conducted with a tape measure to record the distance from the hole the putt landed. The participants were placed in front of a ball which was lined up a pre-determined distance from the hole on a putting green. Each participant was instructed on a specific intervention type and explained how to use it. The individual completed the intervention (pre-shot routine), took three practice putts, and then attempted the measured putt. Prior to each practice putt and to the measured putt, the participant was instructed to undertake the pre-shot routine that was assigned and explained. The measurement was recorded to the nearest inch using a tape measure to establish how far from the hole the putt had gone. If the putt went into the hole, the measurement allocated was 1 inch. Each participant was tested individually, one-on-one with the researcher, and physically separated from all other participants and other golfers. All participants completed the test and were dismissed. A one-way ANOVA was performed to test the statistical significance intervention type (pre-shot routine) on putting accuracy. Alpha was 0.05. All assumptions (random sample, normality, independence, homogeneity of variance) were met. No outliers were found. STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE To be statistically significant, p-values (using SPSS) should be less than the set alpha level (≤ .05). There was a significant main effect of intervention type on putting accuracy (p < .040). PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE To examine practical significance look at the Partial Eta Squared column on the table of “Between Subjects Effects” (Table 4). Intervention type explains 17.5% of the effect on putting accuracy. These are very low numbers although they do show statistical significance. FORMAL RESULTS Results of a one-way ANOVA examining the effects of intervention type on putting accuracy revealed a significant effect for intervention type, with the hands-relaxation type showing better results than using no intervention at all, while hands relaxation being even more effective than facial relaxation. All of my statistics are recorded in my earlier project and omitted here as to discuss them would be outside of the scope of this paper. CONCLUSION From the data collected, it can be concluded that the type of intervention that a player uses will have a significant effect on how well the player accurately putts the ball on the putting green. The null hypothesis related to the effect of pre-shot routine (intervention type) can be rejected and the alternative can be accepted (Ho ≠ none ≠ hands ≠ face). Using the hands relaxation technique will result in better putting accuracy than the facial relaxation technique and both will produce better results than not using any technique. Limitations of the study and Future Instances of the study There are very different conditions that could influence a golfer’s putting accuracy, from the equipment used, to the condition of the putting green, to any of the myriad of factors that could interfere with a proper putt. There is a lot of stress involved in putting so testing golfers on their putts probably adds to that anxiety and causes inaccuracies in putting and therefore, in scores reported. Also, a design flaw with this study was that any putt which was sunk was measured as one inch away from the hole, so this has definitely influenced the final results. There is no way to define and report the differences between golfers who sunk their putts and those who putt them to one inch away from the hole. It is not clear if the players actually learned the techniques properly and felt comfortable with them so perhaps a repeated measures study should have been used. This way we could assess whether the golfers were actually learning and using the interventions or if there were other factors that attributed to their success or lack thereof in sinking putts. Another limitation of the study to have different persons use different pre-shot routines, because that did not really test the persons’ ability to make best use of the learned technique. Each person should have been tested on all three interventions, comparing them and removing the variance that arises between groups of people. Practical Applications It would be useful and interesting to conduct further studies on the different pre-shot routines on putting accuracy. This might spark some interest in researching different techniques which might better assist people with putting (rather than pre-shot routines). If this was concluded with significant results, teachers and coaches can take note of this when planning their training programs. References 1. Anderson, M (2000). Doing Sport Psychology. Ch.4, “Relax!...It Ain’t Easy (Or Is it?)” pp 47-60. 2. Anthony N (1998). Attentional interference as motor program retrieval or as available resources and the effects on putting performance. Science and Golf lll, Ch.22, pp 174180. 3. Cohn PJ, Rotella RJ, & Lloyd JW (1990). Effects of a cognitive-behavioral intervention on the pre-shot routine and performance in golf. The Sport Psychologist, 4, 33-47. 4. Murphy, S (1995). Sport Psychology Interventions. Ch.10, “Consultations with Sport Organizations: A Cognitive-Behavioural Model” pp 235-252. 5. Jackson RC, Wilson RJ (1998). Using “Swing Thoughts” to prevent paradoxical performance effects in golf putting. Science and Golf lll, Ch.22, pp 166-173. 6. Taylor, J & Wilson, G (2005). Routines. Applying Sport Psychology – Four Perspectives, Ch.9 pp 137-149. Appendix: Data Collected Gender: 1=Male, 2= Female Intervention Type: 1=None, 2=Hands, 3=Face Gender Intervention_Type Putting_Distance 1 1 5 1 1 2 1 1 5 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 5 1 2 5 1 2 5 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 2 1 2 5 1 3 2 1 3 5 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 5 1 3 4 2 1 4 2 1 4 2 1 2 2 1 6 2 1 5 2 1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 4 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 1
Calming Down Before You Putt A Pre-Shot Routine Study for Golfers. Anna Weltman San Diego University of Integrative Studies SPO 651 – Final Paper Professor: Joseph Tedesco November 8, 2009 INTRODUCTION I am interested in the effects of relaxation techniques as a pre-shot routine and their application to the sport of golf, specifically in the area of putting. My study focuses on specific pre-shot routine techniques’ effects on a golfer’s putting accuracy (on a putting green). Golfers of higher levels (lower handicaps) most benefit from additional psychological interventions, which complement their already advanced level of physical and technical training. They tend to have, as do most experienced athletes, higher sense of ‘selfefficacy’ in the experiences that they participate, in this case being the number of golf putts a player has taken. (Bandura, 1977, 1982, 1986, editor Murphy, 1995) In golf, a pre-shot routine serves to help the player focus and mentally visualize the shot in order to block out serious distractions from this delicate and highly skilled task during the golf game. (Anthony, 1998) For the purpose of the analysis portion of this study, I will refer to the pre-shot routine as the “intervention type”. There are many pre-shot routines, and often the golfers already implement their own relaxation techniques before a putt as a pre-shot routine. This can be used as a starting point for an intervention (Sherman and Poczwardowski, editor: Anderson, 2000). The interventions that I will incorporate into my study are visualization techniques revolving around relaxation. Relaxing a certain part of the body can have an effect on how the golfer hits their shot. It can also help focus and concentration and prevent outside distractions, but relaxation techniques may also you if the pre-shot routine is too complex. (Cohn, 1990 and Jackson, 1990) The interventions used in this study involve relaxing hands before putting, and relaxing the face before putting. Both techniques are taught with a teacher, who elicits ‘commands’ to the golfer such as: “relax your fingers….relax your palms….relax your wrists...” to which the golfer responds by focusing hard on doing as she/he is told. The same technique is used for the face relaxation with the teacher/researcher telling the golfer ‘commands’ such as: “relax your temples…relax your mouth….relax your nose…” very slowly, clearly and deliberately. When a golfer has learned a certain technique, they should begin to apply it on their own and incorporate it into their game. (Jackson, 1990) Each time they address a ball to putt, they will repeat the sequence of ‘command’s to themselves quietly, then they will putt. Hypotheses The question I would like to answer with this paper is: does intervention type (pre-shot routine) have an effect on putting accuracy? Before conducting statistical analyses, it is hypothesized that type of pre-shot routine would affect the putting accuracy of the participant. The statistical hypothesis indicated that the intervention type null hypothesis (Ho = hand relaxation = face relaxation) would be rejected and statistical significance would be found with respect to the effect of intervention type on putting accuracy. Sample A sample of 36 San Diego area golfers - 18 males and 18 females – ranging in age from 19 to 68 selected for this study. All of them seasoned golfers with a golf handicap of 10 or lower. (Lower is better in golf). Three groups based on intervention type were created – Group 1 used NO pre-shot routine, Group 2 used a pre-shot routine consisting of a hand-relaxation exercise, and Group 3 used a pre-shot routine consisting of a face-relaxation exercise. Each of the participating men and women were randomly assigned to one of the intervention type groups, ensuring that there were 6 males and 6 females in each of the three groups. It should be noted that I did conduct a study in the past in which I studied gender effects as well, but for this paper, I am only concentrating on intervention type effects. METHOD In order to test the hypothesis, a putting accuracy attempt was conducted with a tape measure to record the distance from the hole the putt landed. The participants were placed in front of a ball which was lined up a pre-determined distance from the hole on a putting green. Each participant was instructed on a specific intervention type and explained how to use it. The individual completed the intervention (pre-shot routine), took three practice putts, and then attempted the measured putt. Prior to each practice putt and to the measured putt, the participant was instructed to undertake the pre-shot routine that was assigned and explained. The measurement was recorded to the nearest inch using a tape measure to establish how far from the hole the putt had gone. If the putt went into the hole, the measurement allocated was 1 inch. Each participant was tested individually, one-on-one with the researcher, and physically separated from all other participants and other golfers. All participants completed the test and were dismissed. A one-way ANOVA was performed to test the statistical significance intervention type (pre-shot routine) on putting accuracy. Alpha was 0.05. All assumptions (random sample, normality, independence, homogeneity of variance) were met. No outliers were found. STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE To be statistically significant, p-values (using SPSS) should be less than the set alpha level (≤ .05). There was a significant main effect of intervention type on putting accuracy (p < .040). PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE To examine practical significance look at the Partial Eta Squared column on the table of “Between Subjects Effects” (Table 4). Intervention type explains 17.5% of the effect on putting accuracy. These are very low numbers although they do show statistical significance. FORMAL RESULTS Results of a one-way ANOVA examining the effects of intervention type on putting accuracy revealed a significant effect for intervention type, with the hands-relaxation type showing better results than using no intervention at all, while hands relaxation being even more effective than facial relaxation. All of my statistics are recorded in my earlier project and omitted here as to discuss them would be outside of the scope of this paper. CONCLUSION From the data collected, it can be concluded that the type of intervention that a player uses will have a significant effect on how well the player accurately putts the ball on the putting green. The null hypothesis related to the effect of pre-shot routine (intervention type) can be rejected and the alternative can be accepted (Ho ≠ none ≠ hands ≠ face). Using the hands relaxation technique will result in better putting accuracy than the facial relaxation technique and both will produce better results than not using any technique. Limitations of the study and Future Instances of the study There are very different conditions that could influence a golfer’s putting accuracy, from the equipment used, to the condition of the putting green, to any of the myriad of factors that could interfere with a proper putt. There is a lot of stress involved in putting so testing golfers on their putts probably adds to that anxiety and causes inaccuracies in putting and therefore, in scores reported. Also, a design flaw with this study was that any putt which was sunk was measured as one inch away from the hole, so this has definitely influenced the final results. There is no way to define and report the differences between golfers who sunk their putts and those who putt them to one inch away from the hole. It is not clear if the players actually learned the techniques properly and felt comfortable with them so perhaps a repeated measures study should have been used. This way we could assess whether the golfers were actually learning and using the interventions or if there were other factors that attributed to their success or lack thereof in sinking putts. Another limitation of the study to have different persons use different pre-shot routines, because that did not really test the persons’ ability to make best use of the learned technique. Each person should have been tested on all three interventions, comparing them and removing the variance that arises between groups of people. Practical Applications It would be useful and interesting to conduct further studies on the different pre-shot routines on putting accuracy. This might spark some interest in researching different techniques which might better assist people with putting (rather than pre-shot routines). If this was concluded with significant results, teachers and coaches can take note of this when planning their training programs. References 1. Anderson, M (2000). Doing Sport Psychology. Ch.4, “Relax!...It Ain’t Easy (Or Is it?)” pp 47-60. 2. Anthony N (1998). Attentional interference as motor program retrieval or as available resources and the effects on putting performance. Science and Golf lll, Ch.22, pp 174180. 3. Cohn PJ, Rotella RJ, & Lloyd JW (1990). Effects of a cognitive-behavioral intervention on the pre-shot routine and performance in golf. The Sport Psychologist, 4, 33-47. 4. Murphy, S (1995). Sport Psychology Interventions. Ch.10, “Consultations with Sport Organizations: A Cognitive-Behavioural Model” pp 235-252. 5. Jackson RC, Wilson RJ (1998). Using “Swing Thoughts” to prevent paradoxical performance effects in golf putting. Science and Golf lll, Ch.22, pp 166-173. 6. Taylor, J & Wilson, G (2005). Routines. Applying Sport Psychology – Four Perspectives, Ch.9 pp 137-149. Appendix: Data Collected Gender: 1=Male, 2= Female Intervention Type: 1=None, 2=Hands, 3=Face Gender Intervention_Type Putting_Distance 1 1 5 1 1 2 1 1 5 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 5 1 2 5 1 2 5 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 2 1 2 5 1 3 2 1 3 5 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 5 1 3 4 2 1 4 2 1 4 2 1 2 2 1 6 2 1 5 2 1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 4 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 1