|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 24, 2011 11:23:00 GMT -5
What a joke. He is classifying golfers as 'throwers' or 'draggers.' Sez that 'throwers' have wide takeaway, no wristcock in the takeaway, then they 'throw' the 'lag angle' in transition and then make a 'full arm swing' in the follow thru to finish. Sez 'draggers' set the wrists early and 'hold the wrist angles' in transition and then make a 'body release.' Okay...so what happens if a golfer has a little of both? Claims that Fowler is a 'thrower.' Well, he's not 'throwing the angles', Jim. Claims JB Holmes is a 'dragger.' Then why doesn't he 'set the wrists early?'  Good grief. A few months ago Manzella discussed classifying swings, which I agreed with his general premise....there's no real 'right' or 'wrong' with classifying swings. But I do think there needs to be some consistency and I think if you start using more than 1 component to classify a swing, the classifcation because unclear, ambiguous and contradictory. I know some will point to Homer Kelley's classification of 'hitter' or 'swinger', but one has to remember that Homer Kelley stated that hitters and swingers are defined *solely* by whether they drive load or drag load (gee, I wonder where McLean got the thrower and dragger idea from?) I also think that McLean's M.O. as an instructor is pretty clear. He's into gimmicks. X-Factor, reverse slot, throwers vs. draggers, etc. Gimmicks sell well and I think he's understood this and I believe in a few years he'll come up with another classification that he can make a book and a DVD series from. 3JACK |
|
|
|
Post by pavaveda on May 24, 2011 11:27:20 GMT -5
Richie, you really shouldn't read those articles. It can't be good for your health!
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 24, 2011 11:35:32 GMT -5
Richie, you really shouldn't read those articles. It can't be good for your health! IIRC, the Players had some commercials that were sponsored by some company where a teaching pro gave tips. They had one on how to fade and draw the ball. Typical 'old' ball flight laws taught to us by the PGA (sans Dr. Wiren) type of stuff. To hit a draw, the instructor sez to basically stall our pivot and turn our wrists over.  I just turned to my friend Jeff and said 'no wonder why the average golfer doesn't stand a chance out there.' McLean's stuff has aggravated me for quite some time. First it's the 8-step swing, then it's the X-Factor, then it's the Slot Swing, now it's Throwers and Draggers. I remember the Manzella video I was talking about how he jokingly commented on theoretically you could classify somebody being on the 'earlobe plane or non-earlobe plane.' Don't give McLean any ideas. Anyway, I understand that teachers discover new things and have the right to change their mind when it comes to instruction and philosophies. But, that's not the case with McLean. He's still going to pimp his 8-step swing stuff, pimp his X-Factor stuff, pimp his Slot swing stuff and now pimp his Throwers/Draggers stuff at the consumer to make more money. Just more 'sheering the sheep' stuff. 3JACK 3JACK |
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 25, 2011 13:26:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jerry1967 on May 25, 2011 16:12:43 GMT -5
OK Richie, I take it you do not like Jim McLean but I believe he is rated 3D or 4th best instructor in the Nation.
Could you please tell me some the particulars that he teaches that you are not in agreement with?
I like his teachings because it is kind of simple. Now this latest article you are talking about might not be his best work but you sure did attack him.
You are much more knowledgeable than me about he golf swing so could you tell me what I am missing?
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 25, 2011 17:01:10 GMT -5
I think the X-Factor is hideous. Particularly because it promotes hip restriction in the backswing which saps power. I've also gone over the 'thrower' vs. 'dragger' article.
It's alright to classify swings, but you can't classify swings into 2 groups by using 3 different components. You would more or less need to have 8 groups of golfers based on 3 different components.
McLean's components in 'throwers' vs. 'draggers' are:
Wrist set in the Takeaway
Lag Angle in the start down
type of follow thru (body release vs. arm swing).
So, based on those 3 components, one would actually need to classify golfers as
1. Early Wrist set - hold the hinge - body release
2. Late wrist set - throw the hinge - arm swing
3. Early wrist set - throw the hinge - body release
4. Late wrist set - hold the hinge - arm swing
5. Early Wrist set - hold the hinge - arm swing
6. Late Wrist set - throw the hinge - body release
7. Early Wrist Set - throw the hinge - arm swing
8. Late Wrist Set - hold the hinge - body release
McLean is stating that 'draggers' are #1 and 'throwers' are #2.
But, there are plenty of great golfers that have #2 - #8.
McLean neglects that...or he believes one should be #1 and #2. Which is woefully misinformed.
His classifying of golfers like Graeme McDowell and JB Holmes are inaccurate and that would only serve to confuse the average golfer.
I could go on about the other stuff. He generally teaches mechanics from feel instead of the other way around, ignores geometric alignments and really doesn't explain the biomechanics of the golf swing very well or does it in a way that is not the most efficient way to do it.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by rohlio on May 25, 2011 18:21:38 GMT -5
OK Richie, I take it you do not like Jim McLean but I believe he is rated 3D or 4th best instructor in the Nation. Who does those ratings and what are the criterion? I am certain is has nothing to do with personality, connections, and marketing ;D |
|
|
|
Post by jerry1967 on May 26, 2011 8:20:24 GMT -5
OK Richie, I take it you do not like Jim McLean but I believe he is rated 3D or 4th best instructor in the Nation. Who does those ratings and what are the criterion? I am certain is has nothing to do with personality, connections, and marketing ;D I believe you are right. |
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on May 26, 2011 8:54:21 GMT -5
3JACK -
Logic and reason has won out. McLean isn't improving. I suspect these guys make stuff up for the golf magazines.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 26, 2011 8:56:36 GMT -5
The GD rankings are based off of votes from McLean's peers. I could see where one would think that is a good idea. But it's like the Pro Bowl voting in the NFL (which is 1/3rd dependent upon player votes). Many people don't really investigate and just go with the name that they've heard of.
McLean has a very powerful marketing machine behind him. Also remember that he has, by my count, 10 different schools across the country and overseas. So he has a lot of exposure. And I can rip on McLean because I'm an amateur who has no ties to McLean. Other golf pros I know feel the same way I do because I've talked to many about it. But, because of McLean's wide network of people, they'd rather not take the same stance I do because it may bite them in the ass down the road.
I've really never cared too much about McLean one way or another. I read the 8-step swing when I was 18 and tried to closely read everything I could about him. But his stuff came off as so generic and ambiguous that I never found it very helpful. And like I said with the X-Factor, I found some of his stuff flawed and inapplicable.
But, since he decided to bully the TGM people...most of who do not have 1/100th the exposure or make 1/100th the dough he makes each year...I really object to that.
He's also lifted Brian Manzella's 'Building Blocks' video series for his own 'Building Blocks' DVD and has gone after the S&T people with strawman arguments like the TGM guys. And that's just the stuff I know about.
And with this flawed and ill-conceived 'throwers' vs. 'draggers' article....I know what's coming. A book and DVD series called 'throwers' vs. 'draggers.' While trying to sell more 8-step swing stuff, more X-Factor stuff, more Slot Swing stuff.
It's not about improving golfers. It's not about out-performing your competition. It's about money and market share...and McLean doing whatever he can to obtain those...cutting down his competitors instead of out-performing them and 'sheering the sheep' tactics with the average golfer.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by dodger on May 26, 2011 15:45:13 GMT -5
I did not get my golf digest this month and almost bought it since the June issue is usually pretty good. I read that article and put it back on the stand. I have at least three Mclean books. I liked his teaching in the beginning and understand he is a great hands on teacher. Apparently he has worked a ton on studying the swing with Venturi, Dickinson, Harmon and others. He is supposedly a good player as well. However he now epitomizes what is wrong with the golf instruction business. He needs a gimmick to sell books and dvd's because he has a brand to support. His staff is loaded with instructors you see because you think you will learn Mclean's "way". Like going to Wolfgang Puck's in Chicago and eating his recipes cooked by another chef. As an instructor he can make $3500 a day with a calender full of lessons. With a brand, he can make $25,000 a day but has to pay salaries for a lot of instructors and admin. I played with a guy years ago that really was one of the worst iron players you ever saw. He went to Mclean, that had him swing as though the clubface was shut thru the swing. This guy could hit bullets, 240 yard 3 irons. His turn around was incredible. You would never read Mclean advocating what he taught this guy because it was too unique for his swing. Everything Mclean does is to promote the brand. I bet if you got a lesson from him, you would improve. However, if you can improve from this article you are a much better golfer than I. I thought at some point this emphasis on instructors would fade. With the internet it gets even worse and has made these magazines close to worthless. Lousy issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 26, 2011 16:03:14 GMT -5
I know that McLean could play. You don't go to the U. of Houston without being a stick. I've met a few people who have worked with him. I will say to his credit, I don't think he made any of them worse. I'd say most of them were basically the same player. I remember one of them showing improvement...nothing earth shattering though. One guy had been with him for awhile and was a really good player, but not a world beater. I can give credit for that, although I would imagine he has more talent going thru his school than your average instructor.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on May 26, 2011 16:08:58 GMT -5
I really like his swing, and he definitely can play.
I don't have any real issue with him, I have gleaned some information from him over the years, I have issue with the strawman argument he set up in this case.
I think his video today was completely intentional as the way it was done was very TGM like thinking.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerry1967 on May 28, 2011 7:16:23 GMT -5
It's not about improving golfers. It's not about out-performing your competition. It's about money and market share...and McLean doing whatever he can to obtain those...cutting down his competitors instead of out-performing them and 'sheering the sheep' tactics with the average golfer.
I seems to me that all instructors cut down other instructors. That must be the thing to do to improve the publics opinions of their own "method".
Every instructor out there is in it for the money, no one volunteers their information. Why can't they just try and out perform other instructors and let their record speck for itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamandi on May 28, 2011 8:07:21 GMT -5
I haven't read the article, but it sure sounds like the distinction here is about how a golfer brings the clubface into impact position. A thrower is likely a TGM hitter, using the aim point concept, and using power point #1 (the palm pad below the right thumb). Doing so would have the feel of throwing the clubhead at the ball, or a point in front of it. A dragger sounds like a TGM swinger, either using pressure point #2 (the bottom 2 fingers of the left hand), or pressure point #3 (the hooked right index finger), in essence to put force across the shaft, and the sensation of dragging a lagging clubhead behind, as the body pivots through. One is like a hammer, the other is like a flail. I like Jim McLean's teachings; it's usually brought about through study of the best golfers in history. His x-factor concept was tackled way before by Hogan, in his 5 Lessons book. His classification of golfers by how they slot their swing is a solid observation. I've read in a post that he talked about swinging left way before it became popular ... I think in the 90s. The 8 step swing are just positions he's noticed that majority of the best golfers hit in their golf swings, and what are major things to avoid. Now, throwing and dragging .... those just sound like the TGM concepts. He has spent an amount of time with Homer, so it shouldn't be surprising if his teachings have some obvious influence from him. Some instructors like to discredit what he says, like his x-factor concept. Why is it, then, that one of the greatest golfers ever, Hogan, had the concept clearly written in his book? Why is it that most modern golfers, like Fowler, do have a lot of x-factor in their swing? Why does a world long drive champion, Sadlowski, say that it's one of the keys to his power? Brian Manzella and his team have been working with scientists on learning about the swing, so he must know some things. When a poster, this year, asked if it was rubbish, this was his reply ...... www.brianmanzella.com/golfing-discussions/15269-x-factor.html#post192676"Here is what I think: I think an average golfer trying to restrict their hips on the backswing is a good idea very, very rarely. Anything I ever said about the x factor in the past was based on that. The x factor stretch is a very desirable motion." My take .... Just becase the average golfer cannot properly execute a swing concept as well as the pros can, doesn't mean it isn't a good concept. It just isn't a good concept for everyone. |
|
