CGTF vs. CPGA

[hogannut]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Ummmm .........

Oh, never mind. I give up.

lol.......see previous pages of this thread right?

[hogannut]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

By King Snake, I was reffering to the knock off clubs available in the late 90's that looked identical to King Cobra's. CGTF may want to be considered in the same sentence as the CPGA but they really do not belong.

As someone who was in the CPGA years ago (I wish I had stuck it out) , and has also taken the CGTF course (I am not currently an active teacher) I must say your statements are based on little fact. Just like comparing a college and university degree/diploma the person who utilizes their peice of paper to the best of their ability is the one who should achieve the most success, regardless if it is college or university.

[goshawk]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

lol.......see previous pages of this thread right?

Pretty much.........all 3 pages, and other threads as well. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and there's very little that can be said to change that opinion. It's really pointless trying to defend one opinion over another one because everyone has a reason for forming that opinion.

My last comment on the subject: who really cares what "initials" are connected with the instructor as long as that instructor is effective?

[JSGolf]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Well the initials matter if you're only a CGTF. It does say alot about the commitment to the game that said instructor has made and what the qualifications are. One week and a sorta, kinda well not really PAT speaks volumes.

[goshawk]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Well the initials matter if you're only a CGTF. It does say alot about the commitment to the game that said instructor has made and what the qualifications are. One week and a sorta, kinda well not really PAT speaks volumes.

So what you're saying is instructors like Butch Harmon and Stan Utley (both played on tour but never was "trained" by the PGA) are pretty worthless since they're not "affiliated" with either PGA or USGTF? Neither of them, in their biography or books, have any affiliation listed but they do "train" Tour players. So I suppose they're not even as good as CGTF instructors since they don't list them.
Look, all I'm saying is that, it doesn't matter whether you have "initials" after your name or not, it's the individual instructor not the school they attended that makes them competent or not.

[JSGolf]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Ok so Harmon comes from one of the greatest families of club pros ever. And Stan Utley spent how many years inside the ropes after he had slowed down his schedule. Great examples there. What about Billy Bob who scratches out his check for the one week course that is what is at issue here as the comparison was to be between the CPGA and the CGTF.

[goshawk]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Ok so Harmon comes from one of the greatest families of club pros ever. And Stan Utley spent how many years inside the ropes after he had slowed down his schedule. Great examples there. What about Billy Bob who scratches out his check for the one week course that is what is at issue here as the comparison was to be between the CPGA and the CGTF.

All I'm doing is responding to your implication that unless you're PGA (or CPGA) certified, you're not worth the time of day. Neither of those two "world class" instructors is "affiliated" with the PGA as far as I know, although both were successful on the Tour. The Golf Channel used to think the same way, but changed their tune and also has ads for USGFT (another branch of the WGTF). So by extrapolation, are you saying that unless you're PGA trained or at least "played" on the big Tour, you can't possibly be a good instructor?
By the way, I am very proud of my CGTF certification and have been pretty successful, not through sheer numbers of students, but satisfied students. Yes, I have had a few who only had one lesson and moved on to a different instructor. But EVERY instructor has that....students, for whatever reason, with whom they were not compatible.
The CGTF gives potential instructors some of the tools they need to get started in the profession. It's up to them to expand on their 1 week learning process and LEARN how to teach. There are hundreds of "natural" instructors, people who can easily see what may be causing swing faults or what have you, that don't need to go through that 3 year process just to teach. They are not interested in running a pro shop or managing a golf course. All they want to do is teach golf.
It's not the certification process, it's the person.

[JSGolf]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Sorry but I am struggling to see your points. I think you would agree though that one week is not enough for anyone to be taken seriously no? And just to teach? Please do not trivialize what the CPGA does to train its members to even think that a one week course is the same.

[goshawk]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Sorry but I am struggling to see your points. I think you would agree though that one week is not enough for anyone to be taken seriously no? And just to teach? Please do not trivialize what the CPGA does to train its members to even think that a one week course is the same.

I have no wish to trivialize what someone goes through with PGA certification. It's a big sacrifice of 3 years, working for a "Class A" professional. When they complete the process, they are well trained to run a golf course pro shop as well as teach.
By the same token, don't trivialize CGTF instructors who have spent years training themselves to teach. No, I wouldn't put a lot of stock in someone who have not played golf, not taught anyone, have not put forth the effort to improve themselves, but just took the certification course and immediately decided to start a school. But what about the person who has achieved these things: 1-10 hdcp golfer, years of teaching experience outside of golf, an extended period of time gathering and learning teaching techniques specific to golf, and continually learning new/different techniques? Are they still not worth the effort, simply because they don't have CPGA or PGA professional in their signature? My example of Stan Utley fits into this scenario. He was successful on Tour, but had little to no teaching experience. He sought out his old instructor from his young days (Stan's father's instructor) in Memphis, who is also not affiliated with PGA. Stan developed his techniques from working with Mr. Akins. But, from your definition, because he's not PGA trained he's probably not worth the effort. I don't think so.
Summerizing, I have nothing against your argument that PGA Teaching Professionals are very well trained, and CGTF certification is an "introduction" to teaching. But both certification methods have their shortcomings as well IMO. If all I want to do is teach the game and not run a pro shop or a golf course, I felt like I would have wasted 3 years learning a lot about things which I had no interest in pursuing. All I felt was that I needed was the "tools" to get me started and I'd run with it, doing my own intensive training and studying prior to trying to find students. I am so grateful for my friends and relatives on whom I "practiced". Don't disregard a teaching professional just because he has one set of "initials" in his signature or another. There are a very large number of very good instructors who have no "initials". There are probably a lot of instructors in the CGTF who are every bit as good as those in the PGA or CPGA. It's that instructor, not the certification process, that's going to help with the student's game.
My apologies for my long-winded response.

[dekker]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

accept that certification is a fairly recent development dating back to the guilds and is only an advertisement for the fact you have spent time acquiring said knowledge.
It does not state your particular competence other than you passed the requirement.
Call me strange,but I'd rather pick a player's brains any day.

[hogannut]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

Sorry but I am struggling to see your points. I think you would agree though that one week is not enough for anyone to be taken seriously no? And just to teach? Please do not trivialize what the CPGA does to train its members to even think that a one week course is the same.

So you base your choice of teachers entirely based on what affiliation they belong to?

Would you buy a car based entirely on what reviews it got from Consumer Guide, or would you drive one first?

My point is do you think you are going to get a more qualified opinion from someone who belongs to the CPGA, but never practices their own game, and never teaches or reads any of the teaching journals, or by someone with CGTF who plays and practices constantly, reads any and all teaching material.

Also......your points on the PAT test are not really that valid. First of all the PAT is at Cambridge......an extremely straight forward golf course, and you get 2 shots at your PAT and even if you don't make it over those 2 chances you still have 4 more years to play in.

There are a bunch of CPGA guys who are playing on Great Lakes who can't break 75. So if you are basing your opinions on the PAT, the CGTF isn't that far behind the CPGA.

[northernpro]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

people argue from 'their side of the fence'..I'm a old school CPGA pro..
their are qualified people on both sides..but generally there are not
a lot of good golf instructors..JMO

[JSGolf]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

You know I think I have been even further convinced here. With many CPGA pros not being able to break 75 on courses that get setup stupid for events on the great lakes vs. guys from the cgtf whom I have never met one who could break 85 let alone 75 anywhere.

[houdini]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

You know I think I have been even further convinced here. With many CPGA pros not being able to break 75 on courses that get setup stupid for events on the great lakes vs. guys from the cgtf whom I have never met one who could break 85 let alone 75 anywhere.

http://www.cgtf.com/2009-tournament-results.htm

Check out the scores. 71 - 65 - I played with Chris the first round when he shot 1 under. He is new to the CGTF and still plays a lot so his game is still in tact, however if he builds his Teaching Career it will more than likely soften.

Personally I think your attacks against the CGTF are getting to the point of ridiculous. I cannot believe a guy can have one agenda to bash an organization and add nothing. You have had 7 post all bad mouthing the CGTF backed with nothing. It is getting old.

I will not bash the CPGA however they are looking at how to modernize their program and they will become closer to what the CGTF has done and is doing.

The largest group of Golf Professional world wide is not the PGA but the World Golf Teachers Federation.

Have some facts next time you respond.

[dekker]

Re: CGTF vs. CPGA

I hope those who read this and are trying to make the right choice as to what camp will satisfy their need won't be discouraged by the disparity of consensus.

The only thing that matters is that you find someone who communicates the lessons in the clearest most effective way for your learning style. Whether that be through imagery,concise hands on instruction or simple demonstration if you are visually inclined.