johngrahamgolf
'88 Apex Redlines
3Jack Top 20 Short Game/Putting Instructor
Posts: 229
|
Post by johngrahamgolf on Jan 22, 2010 22:16:54 GMT -5
Boy, is this an interesting topic. For those of you that know me, I tend to learn about things by asking questions after I've collected a general "understanding" on my own. Based on the answers I receive, I start then to challenge the information and run it through the ringer.
There are many times I will purposely argue against the point I believe to see how it holds up. I feel that anything I think I know is up for debate and changeable at any time when new facts are presented or acquired.
You can't do any serious investigation into the golf swing without coming across TGM. Up until a few years ago, I had never done any real research into the golf swing online. Especially when you look online, TGM is everywhere.
I've only read the book about 5 times and am not well versed in it. I always have to have my book with me when in a discussion so I can follow but even the first time I read it, I could tell it had some nice nuggets in it.
I think, like doctors, the verse can be very beneficial for teachers talking to teachers(or anyone versed in the lingo). Instead of saying the arm is broke, the doctor would use the correct medical terms to explain it to another doctor. I think for some people, this kind of language can be interpreted as intimidating or condescending. That interpretation is a little unfair but I can understand it. I think it's the same with all vocations that have a jargon very specific to that field and not used in every day conversation.
Like any field, you are going to need information that needs to be presented across a large cross section of people, personalities and learning styles. TGM clearly applies to one of these sections. As a teacher, I want to work through as many sections as I can. That's why I'm here and either listening, learning or challenging.
|
|
|
Post by pavaveda on Jan 22, 2010 22:53:44 GMT -5
I think it's the same with all vocations that have a jargon very specific to that field and not used in every day conversation. I'm trying to think of a field that doesn't have its own specific jargon. Isn't that what separates one field from another anyway? I've collected a few hobbies so far and they've all had their own terminology. Could you practice any of them without learning the terminology? Sure. You could even become an expert in most of them. But if you want help from others or want to offer help to others in that field, it can increase the signal to noise ratio if everyone is speaking the same, precise language.
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jan 22, 2010 23:05:09 GMT -5
Good points, John. That's why I mentioned that I think Homer's verbiage and the way he tried to take the ambiguity out of the English language makes the book more confusing that the actual terminology. Hell, even the biggest hacker has their own golf specific terminology like 'pivot', 'reverse pivot', 'sway', 'over the top', 'flipping', etc. Plus, the order that you're supposed to read the book and the massive cross-referencing is problematic.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by vjsinger on Jan 23, 2010 2:05:08 GMT -5
Boy, is this an interesting topic. For those of you that know me, I tend to learn about things by asking questions after I've collected a general "understanding" on my own. Based on the answers I receive, I start then to challenge the information and run it through the ringer. There are many times I will purposely argue against the point I believe to see how it holds up. I feel that anything I think I know is up for debate and changeable at any time when new facts are presented or acquired. You can't do any serious investigation into the golf swing without coming across TGM. Up until a few years ago, I had never done any real research into the golf swing online. Especially when you look online, TGM is everywhere. I've only read the book about 5 times and am not well versed in it. I always have to have my book with me when in a discussion so I can follow but even the first time I read it, I could tell it had some nice nuggets in it. I think, like doctors, the verse can be very beneficial for teachers talking to teachers(or anyone versed in the lingo). Instead of saying the arm is broke, the doctor would use the correct medical terms to explain it to another doctor. I think for some people, this kind of language can be interpreted as intimidating or condescending. That interpretation is a little unfair but I can understand it. I think it's the same with all vocations that have a jargon very specific to that field and not used in every day conversation. Like any field, you are going to need information that needs to be presented across a large cross section of people, personalities and learning styles. TGM clearly applies to one of these sections. As a teacher, I want to work through as many sections as I can. That's why I'm here and either listening, learning or challenging. These are all very excellent points John. I believe that we have very similar learning styles. I sometimes like BM's site and frequent it quite often, either to be a jerk or to laugh at how many times someone says swing more left or D-plane..anyhoo. I will tell you this, from personal experience..B is not as great as he says he is and I have decided that I won't take anymore lessons with him. I know this isn't a topic on his teachings, but since his teaching has been mentioned, I'll talk a little about it and what I think about the book. I saw Brian this year, as a beginner with a pattern that I sort of came up with myself with some help from Lynn's videos and Brian's videos and a few books. It ended up being a decent swing. I went to him really not having any clue about why I would one time block it and one time hook it, or thin it or fat it. I had no control over where the darn club was bottoming out(flipping) and I was told to steepen my shoulders, move my hands in more and try to swing more left through the ball, starting the ball left. In short, that didn't work and I got pretty upset and I got pretty confused and I didn't improve at all. I spent the next couple of months trying to figure it out on my own. I video taped my swing daily and started to learn what worked and what didn't through experimentation and reading a few very good sites, (Richie's Blog and Jeff's Mann's site) and reading the yellow book. I posted a question on his site once asking him about the book and purchasing the Croker videos. He immediately ripped the post and told me to call him, so that he could tell me why I shouldn't buy the videos. He said that it was a waste of time and that I'm better off buying a Jack Nicklaus instructional book. I eventually bought the Croker stuff and I'm glad I did. I understand the book much better and feel I understand the swing better because of the book. I used to buy into the BS, but I've moved on now and I'm glad I did. I enjoy this site very much already and am glad I don't really have a fear of being told I'm stupid or getting a post taken down. Thanks to you Rich for doing this and thanks to all of you here.
|
|
|
Post by pavaveda on Jan 23, 2010 11:04:04 GMT -5
Good points. Green reading and the mental game are very important parts of the game. I wonder if Homer Kelley may have considered those points as a little outside the scope of the book? Kevin I wouldn't doubt it. There's already so much in there. Plus, if you learn to play well enough via TGM, all your putts should be tap-ins and you'll be hitting it so well you'll never get frustrated. Right? But does the average golfer have terminology for the #3 pressure point? I disagree. It specifically says to ignore the cross-referencing during what equates to the first read though most of the book. After that, the cross-references are there to help.
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Jan 23, 2010 11:19:22 GMT -5
Now that I have an understanding of the book, at least a little bit that is, the cross referencing makes total sense. I agree first read and initial investigation into the book most people are going to be much better off ignoring the cross referencing.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 23, 2010 11:47:33 GMT -5
VJ
You wrote-: " I enjoy this site very much already and am glad I don't really have a fear of being told I'm stupid or getting a post taken down. Thanks to you Rich for doing this and thanks to all of you here."
I sympathize with your being upset by BM's tendency to tell posters in his forum that they are stupid and to then also arbitrarily withdraw their posts. I had many posts withdrawn when I was a forum member there, and I was temporarily banned on two occasions. BM has little tolerance for dissenting opinions, and he primarily runs his forum to promote his personal opinions.
This website's golf forum may eventually turn out to be the best online forum on golf theory/instruction - because 3jack is not an ideologue, who will not tolerate criticism or alternative points of view. He has specifically encouraged vigorous debate, even if a forum member presents an opinion that is totally contrary to his personal opinion. I hope that he has zero tolerance for unnecessary "ad hominem" attacks and immediately bans a forum member who flagrantly indulges in "ad hominem" insults. So far, there has been no unnecessary "ad hominem" attacks by any forum member, despite the fact that different forum members have expressed contrary opinions. I hope that it continues in that way.
Now, I'm off to play golf in Mesquite, Nevada for 6 days, and I will not be able to contribute to this wonderful golf forum during that time period, because I will not have internet access during that time period.
I hope that you enjoy the contributions from other forum members and that you continue to express your own personal opinions.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Jan 23, 2010 11:55:16 GMT -5
Hit em well...great courses in that area!
I just let Brian go off on his site as he pleases and don't engage in any of the bickering.
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jan 23, 2010 15:41:54 GMT -5
I don't think we are hijacking the thread talking about Manzella and his forum here, since much the controversy regarding TGM bashing and praising comes from that forum.
I think Brian's thoughts on TGM are often misunderstood by both his detractors and followers. The detractors tend to think he's on a mission to criticize TGM and his followers tend to think that TGM is some sort of goofy book that doesn't help anybody and everything about it is wrong.
As we've talked about in this thread and other threads, people tend to gravitate towards a personality on message boards when it comes to the swing and take their word as the gospel. Hell, I remember a thread over at GolfWRX where the question was about the greatest golf books ever and *many* posters were putting down SliceFixer's book, even noting how it HAS NOT EVEN BEEN WRITTEN, but they think it's going to be great anyway.
Let me repeat that, people were claiming a book THAT HAS NOT BEEN WRITTEN as one of the best golf books of all time.
I wish I was making this stuff up.
But, I do think BM is a great teacher and much of his work on the site that he's given away for free has helped me understand things better and informed and entertained me. And, it's his site...so while I may not agree with some of his actions and I understand that a post I make disagreeing with him can very well get removed, it's essentially his forum and he can do whatever he deems fit.
I'm not looking for blind loyalists and followers. I'm looking for people who can bring their opinions, theories, philosophies, etc. to whatever part of the game and back then up with facts, logic and solid reasoning and I'd like to think that I can create a board where everybody's voice can be heard if they do that, regardless if they agree with my opinion or the general opinion of the board.
I'm also looking for people who can admit 'my bad' when they understand that they have lost the debate or provide inaccurate facts or faulty reason and logic.
Stooges, trolls, and posters resorting to name calling and condescending tones really need not apply. And if there is a post that you think has broken these rules (so far, not a problem), please bring it to my attention and I will handle it.
3JACK
|
|
antti
Beat up Radials
Posts: 9
|
Post by antti on Jan 23, 2010 21:01:56 GMT -5
I love the yellow book. And sometimes I hate it. And I used to be afraid of it.
It wasn't love at first sight. I had the 6th edition ''incubating'' in my book shelf for some 15 years. Every few years I would take it out determined to study it, but I could never sustain the effort for more than a few minutes.
Then, in the last 6 months, I ran into some of the sites mentioned in this thread and into Richie's blog. Suddenly I had the needed help to read the book a little more. Its still difficult. But I don't give up as easy anymore because now I know I have chance to eventually understand. In fact, I got so excited about the whole thing that last fall I attended level 1 of GSEB. Yes, as someone said before, it was one of those deals where you learn a lot but mostly realize how much more there is to learn.
Some posters in the aforementioned forums really amaze me with their ability quote verse and with how well they at least seem to understand the book.
The funny thing is, I knew many of the concepts and had been using them a long time (I've been teaching golf for nearly twenty years). I had learned them from Mike Hebron in the early 90's, from reading and re-reading his books and from taking some lessons from him. Mike presents many of the TGM concepts in a simple way, I just never realized that they were TGM concepts even though he says it in his books.
One such concept that I learned while watching Mike teach was the ''3D downswing''. His student had jerky, over-accelerating movements. Mike was telling him to go down and out, and the forward will happen by itself. And just like that the student had a new, smooth swing. To me it was a revelation, it was so simple yet profound. By profound I mean that most teachers would just have told the student to swing slower and smoother. And that tip might have worked, but probably at most for only a few days. But instead of a tip, Mike had given his student a concept to understand. Naturally I've used that 3D concept in countless lessons ever since.
I also applaud the book's effort to give all actions exact definitions. As John Graham said earlier, all doctors around the whole world have the same language for a broken arm. That helps their communication. With golf teachers, at least TGM ones will instantly be on the same page when one says turn, or roll, or swivel.
I had first heard of the book when Bobby Clampett had his Open in run, was that 1978? As a junior back then, I listened to the people, who really had no idea what they were talking about, telling me to stay away from all technical stuff and pointing to Clampett as a cautionary example. Thus, for a long time I was fascinated by something titled The Golfing Machine but also afraid of it.
And when do I hate the book? Usually whenever I actually read it. The language is so difficult that I have to read most sentences over and over many times. The cross-referencing has not helped me yet. I also get frustrated when I try to re-find something I've read before. Its difficult although the book calls itself a Catalog in the preface.
I also doubt how well it serves as a ''Duffer's Bible''. But as an Instructor's Textbook, absolutely. The instructor just needs to be able to present the technical information in way that gets his student to swing free and relaxed.
|
|
|
Post by TeddyIrons on Jan 24, 2010 10:22:24 GMT -5
Teddy, Thats a pretty good compilation of what others who haven't really studied the work would and have posted... Kevin Thanks. I think it's also a pretty good compilation of what some TGM experts have written too... i.e. that it's very useful, but it's not the be all and end all of golf.
|
|
antti
Beat up Radials
Posts: 9
|
Post by antti on Jan 24, 2010 12:38:44 GMT -5
Great post antti. Nice to meet you! Kevin Thanks Kevin. I'm here to learn and to enjoy some camaraderie.
|
|
|
Post by TeddyIrons on Jan 25, 2010 2:33:37 GMT -5
I'm trying to find where anyone said that TGM is "the be all and end all of golf". Can you point me in the right direction? Thanks, Kevin Nope I can't point you in the right direction! ;D I didn't say TGM experts had said that, actually, it's more an attitude that comes across on some forums, in the posts of some TGM literalists, that's all. I could of course be reading them wrong - it's just my perception.
|
|
|
Post by TeddyIrons on Jan 25, 2010 8:03:29 GMT -5
Yeah, I see your point their Kev - I hope I don't come across as one of that crowd, because over at BM they are rather fanatical on another level. With a Trackman they are now able to demonstrate what the optimal angle of attack is, the amount of shaft lean, etc, etc, and prove that the ball behaves in a certain way. The thing is, I don't think this is anything new - the great ballstrikers of yesterday didn't need a Trackman to know all that stuff.
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Jan 25, 2010 10:38:33 GMT -5
Yeah, I see your point their Kev - I hope I don't come across as one of that crowd, because over at BM they are rather fanatical on another level. With a Trackman they are now able to demonstrate what the optimal angle of attack is, the amount of shaft lean, etc, etc, and prove that the ball behaves in a certain way. The thing is, I don't think this is anything new - the great ballstrikers of yesterday didn't need a Trackman to know all that stuff. you mean like Hogan and his stance diagram. I would be interested to see a bunch of people on his board at the range trying to swing left, I don't think people understand what he means because its not being explained with any clarity. I bet we would be seeing a bunch of OTT moves.
|
|