Jump to content

Coach v Instructor ?


Will Poon
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes, definitely the various job descriptions etc can be very specific. Just goog Ins v Coach and pick the explanation one you like, there are some very good ones out there.

But I'm less interested in titles and more impressed by capability, outcomes and what I get. Its a bit like the "best choke" discussion, is choke what is stamped on the box or what it does at the plate and ttarget end?

Its a bit of an Ecclesiastes chap 1 v9-11 job

 

Edit: I'm neither now, just an end user

Edited by seeker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the question should be is the coach / instructor you are considering Accredited or not?

 

webber

BASC Accredited Shotgun Coach.

www.astleygunclub.co.uk

Depends what you want ....

 

to learn to shoot?

 

or to turn 98's into 100's on Skeet or 85's into 95's on Sporting?

 

Not fussed on titles, just be clear what your aims are, and if that's the strength of who you're booked into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Oxford dictionary

 

coach

 

NOUN

 

1An instructor or trainer in sport:

 

Instructor

 

NOUN

 

1A person who teaches something:

 

 

They look very similar to me it's organisations that use theses interchangeable word to distinguish people. IMHO look at what you want to achieve and look for someone who delivers those results then make sure you gel with that coach whilst they instruct you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An Instructor/Trainer and a Coach are different.

Some people can do both, but it's two different skill sets and require different techniques.

 

Simplistic example :

Driving instructor teaches how to drive a car, but doesn't make you a good driver.

 

If you went back to that same instructor to complete you Advanced Driving, he/she would be coaching, assessing you, spending "one to one" time.

 

Even simpler , an instructor talks, a coach listens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can hit 92 you need a coach, if you can hit 70 you need instruction.

 

ps. In my opinion the difference is that the instructor can teach whereas the coach can do. This is not in any shape or form meant to disrespect anybody but if I for instance wanted to receive some coaching I would make sure he/she could regularly outshoot me, it's simple maffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

ps. In my opinion the difference is that the instructor can teach whereas the coach can do. This is not in any shape or form meant to disrespect anybody but if I for instance wanted to receive some coaching I would make sure he/she could regularly outshoot me, it's simple maffs.

 

I have to disagree.

 

Many years ago I practiced archery at Herringthorpe leisure centre. Anyone could attend and there was always a fair mix of beginners and also a lot of experienced archers from Chantry Bowmen. The guy who took the sessions was called Harry. He taught me the basics of shooting a bow. But on the rare occasions I saw him shoot he was obviously competent but also clearly nothing special.

 

Some of the guys from Chantry though were very good. They practised a lot and shot competitions. On the occasions they were having a bad day I would often see them call Harry over to watch them shoot and he would comment and make suggestions about what they were doing wrong. So one day I asked one of them if Harry was a good archer. The reply came back that he was ok, better than average but not outstanding. But, as a coach he was brilliant. He knew correct technique, he could spot what an archer was doing wrong and he was excellent at communicating what the archer needed to do to improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I have to disagree.

 

Many years ago I practiced archery at Herringthorpe leisure centre. Anyone could attend and there was always a fair mix of beginners and also a lot of experienced archers from Chantry Bowmen. The guy who took the sessions was called Harry. He taught me the basics of shooting a bow. But on the rare occasions I saw him shoot he was obviously competent but also clearly nothing special.

 

Some of the guys from Chantry though were very good. They practised a lot and shot competitions. On the occasions they were having a bad day I would often see them call Harry over to watch them shoot and he would comment and make suggestions about what they were doing wrong. So one day I asked one of them if Harry was a good archer. The reply came back that he was ok, better than average but not outstanding. But, as a coach he was brilliant. He knew correct technique, he could spot what an archer was doing wrong and he was excellent at communicating what the archer needed to do to improve.

 

Yeah I hear you but that's like saying that I (meaning me) am actually pretty damn good technically, I dare say I could spot flaws in approach/technique/application of those whom I know to be superior to myself in reality but that still doesn't make ME the right coach for them long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

ps. In my opinion the difference is that the instructor can teach whereas the coach can do. This is not in any shape or form meant to disrespect anybody but if I for instance wanted to receive some coaching I would make sure he/she could regularly outshoot me, it's simple maffs.

Was Linford Christie's or Usain Bolts Coach a better runner than them? Tiger Woods Coach better Golfer?

 

I am not the greatest shot by any stretch of the imagination but I do believe that I can get the best out of my clients and when I feel the time is right to pass them on to someone that can take them to the next level. That person is not always the right person with the patience and empathy to get the client underway in the first place.

Edited by bakerboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the problem with being a coach or instructor is that there is no right or wrong way to shoot, it is all down to what works for you. That's where a good coach can help, he can tweak your own style to find those extra clay's your looking for. My personal theory is a instructor can teach you to mount a gun and shoot it safely. If you want to hit anything, go and see a coach who can shoot, he or she would have the tried and tested methods. It seems these days everyone who holds a shotgun certificate can call themselves a coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was Linford Christie's or Usain Bolts Coach a better runner than them? Tiger Woods Coach better Golfer?

 

I am not the greatest shot by any stretch of the imagination but I do believe that I can get the best out of my clients and when I feel the time is right to pass them on to someone that can take them to the next level. That person is not always the right person with the patience and empathy to get the client underway in the first place.

 

Terry, you've said what I was about to.

 

webber

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you can be taught to be an instructor however a coach needs to develop his or her own style based on their experience and ability to compete and communicate.

 

Regarding ability, I think the coach needs to be associated with success, if the coach was a former champion but doesn’t compete so much now or has a plethora of former pupils all residing in AAA class that might sway me as much as one that has a current average in the mid 90’s (sporting). However they need some form of success at a level I want to achieve.

 

With a lot of other sports you can see start to finish what is happening, the arrow leaving the bow to the target, the ball leaving the face of the club and the runner running down the track. It is a lot easier to spot what is wrong with those sports.

 

However, with clay shooting it’s a bit disjointed, you cannot (well I don’t believe you can) see the pattern missing the clay. If as a coach, you cannot hit my bogey target consistently then how can you know for sure that your technique is correct to teach me? Let’s face it there are so many different techniques pull away, swing through, maintained lead, diminishing lead, ambush and hybrid combinations etc.

 

The easiest way I saw a coach teach a doubting student was to take the student’s gun and nail the bogey target 4 times in a row and hand the gun back. The student then had the confidence in the choke, gun, ammo and technique, they just needed to implement it themselves.

 

This game is as much about confidence and confidence in your coach comes from them being able to walk the walk as well IMHO.

Edited by timps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

ps. In my opinion the difference is that the instructor can teach whereas the coach can do. This is not in any shape or form meant to disrespect anybody but if I for instance wanted to receive some coaching I would make sure he/she could regularly outshoot me, it's simple maffs.

 

I really really want to agree with you Hammie but there are quite a few who can shoot massively better than me that I simply would not want to coach me for a variety of reasons! I don't care for titles, I simply couldn't care less how many championships you have won -this in itself does not make you a good teacher. Yes they can do it themselves but doesn't mean they know how to teach well. I have listened to supposedly top end coaches just give a whole load of carp to clients on grounds, and whilst they may technically be better they seem to forget addressing basics that perhaps their clients have lapsed into bad ways. Find the person that fits best, who can work with you and has the knowledge to help you achieve your goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was Linford Christie's or Usain Bolts Coach a better runner than them? Tiger Woods Coach better Golfer?

 

I am not the greatest shot by any stretch of the imagination but I do believe that I can get the best out of my clients and when I feel the time is right to pass them on to someone that can take them to the next level. That person is not always the right person with the patience and empathy to get the client underway in the first place.

 

I think you're confusing sports where actual power matters against ones where clearly it doesn't so sorry but the example is flawed and doesn't alter my opinion with regards to clay shooting. I could also cite plenty of examples where top line sportspeople employ not only regular coaches but also pay hundreds of thousands to past winners who have actual experience of competing at those levels, tennis players for one, snooker for another.

 

Bolt has the physical attributes needed to run sub 9, heavy weight boxers have the pre-requisite physiques needed to enter the ring, of course you can't expect them to be coached by people who are better than them !

 

I really really want to agree with you Hammie but there are quite a few who can shoot massively better than me that I simply would not want to coach me for a variety of reasons! I don't care for titles, I simply couldn't care less how many championships you have won -this in itself does not make you a good teacher. Yes they can do it themselves but doesn't mean they know how to teach well. I have listened to supposedly top end coaches just give a whole load of carp to clients on grounds, and whilst they may technically be better they seem to forget addressing basics that perhaps their clients have lapsed into bad ways. Find the person that fits best, who can work with you and has the knowledge to help you achieve your goals.

 

I agree with you as it happens but that is a different argument in itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As i see it a coach is someone who not only can cover the technical side of shooting but also the mentoring aspect, explaining how to deal with pressure situations, tactics, mental management etc.

 

An instructor I would see as someone more likely to bring newcomers into the sport. This is something I openly admit I don't directly do, I always forward them on to my two local grounds, sporting targets or Kibworth, and tell them to come back in a year if they are still keen.

 

Our hobbie definitely needs both.

 

The old argument of how good you need to be will never get settled I'm afraid. Certainly being a great shot doesn't make you a great coach.

Equally I don't know anyone in the industry who is coaching students to the higher levels (England team, titles etc) that hasn't previously been there themselves.

The best way is always go on results, ignore the self publicity as it is normally just an ego boost, and find out how/what the majority of students are getting on. That is the acid test. If you can't find 20/30/40 guys and girls who are progressing/winning then it probably best to look elsewhere.

Qualifications are relevant for instructors as it shows they have taken time to get insured, go through a process and have a basic grounding of what to do.

I don't know of a single coach that I would use that has a teaching qualification as such, but they do have a long list of successful satisfied clients. Horses for courses.

And re the old tiger woods analogy- his coach may never have won a major but I'd bet a fair chunk he was a scratch golfer and didn't spend much time in the sand pit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, with clay shooting it’s a bit disjointed, you cannot (well I don’t believe you can) see the pattern missing the clay. If as a coach, you cannot hit my bogey target consistently then how can you know for sure that your technique is correct to teach me? Let’s face it there are so many different techniques pull away, swing through, maintained lead, diminishing lead, ambush and hybrid combinations etc.

 

The easiest way I saw a coach teach a doubting student was to take the student’s gun and nail the bogey target 4 times in a row and hand the gun back. The student then had the confidence in the choke, gun, ammo and technique, they just needed to implement it themselves.

 

This game is as much about confidence and confidence in your coach comes from them being able to walk the walk as well IMHO.

 

That's about it, (it's also why I maintain fit is not as critical as some want to believe) with clays it isn't enough to know where the client is missing or indeed even why, you have to have the experience to demonstrate certain things and thus erase the doubt from the clients mindset. That's why I was careful to mention scores as important in themselves. A 92+ chappy is looking for a different set of cures than a 70 chappy.

 

Trust me if the "coach" knew how to hit and win the mostest of the big comps he'd be doing it himself, it's simple maffs again.

 

ps. You very much CAN see where the pattern is missing sometimes but more often than not it's the body/barrel language which will tell you the cause of misses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can take an individual and turn them in to shooter, score irrespective then you would be an instructor.

If you can take a shooter and bring them to all they can be,scores paramount, a competitor,finesse all areas,competition readiness,building a score, hone them till you are out of a job, then i would call you a coach.This usually comes with competition experience at the highest level and a track record of high achievement.

 

For either of these accreditation is not a prerequisite in my book, many are fine shots and seasoned competitors but have not skills to successfully pass on those skills and some are just badge collectors.

 

I believe it to be a relationship, like a marriage, not everybody will be compatible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As i see it a coach is someone who not only can cover the technical side of shooting but also the mentoring aspect, explaining how to deal with pressure situations, tactics, mental management etc.

 

An instructor I would see as someone more likely to bring newcomers into the sport. This is something I openly admit I don't directly do, I always forward them on to my two local grounds, sporting targets or Kibworth, and tell them to come back in a year if they are still keen.

 

Our hobbie definitely needs both.

 

The old argument of how good you need to be will never get settled I'm afraid. Certainly being a great shot doesn't make you a great coach.

Equally I don't know anyone in the industry who is coaching students to the higher levels (England team, titles etc) that hasn't previously been there themselves.

The best way is always go on results, ignore the self publicity as it is normally just an ego boost, and find out how/what the majority of students are getting on. That is the acid test. If you can't find 20/30/40 guys and girls who are progressing/winning then it probably best to look elsewhere.

Qualifications are relevant for instructors as it shows they have taken time to get insured, go through a process and have a basic grounding of what to do.

I don't know of a single coach that I would use that has a teaching qualification as such, but they do have a long list of successful satisfied clients. Horses for courses.

And re the old tiger woods analogy- his coach may never have won a major but I'd bet a fair chunk he was a scratch golfer and didn't spend much time in the sand pit!

 

:good: Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yeah I hear you but that's like saying that I (meaning me) am actually pretty damn good technically, I dare say I could spot flaws in approach/technique/application of those whom I know to be superior to myself in reality but that still doesn't make ME the right coach for them long term.

 

I agree. But the reasons for you not being a good coach for someone might not be down to your ability. It could be that you don't get on with them. It could be that how the two of you communicate doesn't work. It could be that he has some quirk in his style of shooting that is unorthodox but works that your own style just doesn't compliment. There are loads of reasons why a coach who is great for one shooter is terrible for another. But the coaches own ability to shoot doesn't necessarily mean he will be a good or a bad coach.

 

 

I really really want to agree with you Hammie but there are quite a few who can shoot massively better than me that I simply would not want to coach me for a variety of reasons! I don't care for titles, I simply couldn't care less how many championships you have won -this in itself does not make you a good teacher. Yes they can do it themselves but doesn't mean they know how to teach well. I have listened to supposedly top end coaches just give a whole load of carp to clients on grounds, and whilst they may technically be better they seem to forget addressing basics that perhaps their clients have lapsed into bad ways. Find the person that fits best, who can work with you and has the knowledge to help you achieve your goals.

 

Agreed Sian. Again, going back to an old hobby I had, judo. My instructor was Keith "Tiger" Brown. A legend in British judo circles. Personally instructed by one of the great Japanese judo masters. Highest ranked black belt in the UK. But to my mind not the greatest instructor. He knew just about everything there was to know about judo but imo wasn't that great at explaining or showing a new student how to do things. Compared to my jujitsu instructor who in terms of recognition for his art was a nobody, a humble 1st Dan. But who was brilliant at explaining techniques and passing on his knowledge, a truly great teacher/coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...