The Golfing Machine theory

[KOC]

Would someone please explain the worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in respet of grip, posture, and alignment of a few players like:-

 

Sam Snead, Ben Hogan, Moe Norman, Lee Trevino, Freddy Couple...

 

Thanks!

[hayam]

frozen rope

 

I respectfully dis agree, grip/alignment/posture is all to it . All things have to happen at a proper sequence relative to the particular point of time. Various degrees at a particular part of the plane yield very different results. cause the swing is dynamic and 3 dimensional.

 

See the word "THEORY" It don't mean anything unless its applied.

6-7 edition of the golfing research is merely an evolution, there is still much to be done. Every TGM / OPS/ Morad/ Slicefixer/David leadbetter certified instructors have their very own deal... Every single theory is just as good as a theory....

 

jmo...

[Asleep]

...I've been messing around on Lynn Blakes forum, and man is it great!...

There are few better places to go than "The Swamp" in Marietta to learn about TGM & the golf swing with Lynn Blake and Ted Fort.

 

Lynn is a cool guy, works with a number of PGA pros, and is very generous with his knowledge.

[Asleep]

...Every TGM / OPS/ Morad/ Slicefixer/David leadbetter certified instructors...

Test question: In the list above, which name doesn't "fit"? :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

hint: it's not slice, morad, ops, or tgm ;)

 

 

jk

[hayam]

funny man...

[logan91201]

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

Frozenrope,

 

Our differences aside. I believe that for some, near perfect impact alignments come very natrually and can hit tour pro quality shots without much effort or work towards figuring out those alignments and what they mean. It was just part of their natural move. I also believe many of them are on tour, and for them it is not very complicated.

 

For others, where those alignments are less natural, and they hit some shots thin, and some fat, and some off the toe and elsewhere, learning to hit it with tour pro quality alignments is more complicated. Most teachers won't even try to adress that second players ability to hit it as solid as a touring professional, they will just get them working with what they have, and maybe drop their handicap a few shots and the student (depending on the students drive) might be happy. But to turn that guy into what could honestly be called a good ball striker in a relatively short period of time, is a more complicated manner. One that I have not seen accomplished outside of TGM. I am not saying it does not happen, I just haven't seen it. Check out the before and afters on blakes forum. Some amazing transformations.

 

 

Fred Couples- Aims way left and hits push cuts

 

Tom Lehman- Aims way left and hits push draws

 

Sam Snead- Aimed right and pulled it online

 

Boo Weekly- Very strong grip

 

Lee Trevino- Very strong grip

 

Johnny Miller- Very weak grip

 

Jose Maria Olazabal- Very week grip

 

The list goes on. You go to a PGA tour event and watch, and all the players grip the club differently, align themselves differently, and stand with considerably different postures. There are almost no two alike in that respect.

 

Seems silly to me to that greatest focus of your teaching is to grip it one way, align one way, and stand one way, when the best players in the world all do it considerably different.

[Jeff Evans]

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

Frozenrope,

 

Our differences aside. I believe that for some, near perfect impact alignments come very natrually and can hit tour pro quality shots without much effort or work towards figuring out those alignments and what they mean. It was just part of their natural move. I also believe many of them are on tour, and for them it is not very complicated.

 

For others, where those alignments are less natural, and they hit some shots thin, and some fat, and some off the toe and elsewhere, learning to hit it with tour pro quality alignments is more complicated. Most teachers won't even try to adress that second players ability to hit it as solid as a touring professional, they will just get them working with what they have, and maybe drop their handicap a few shots and the student (depending on the students drive) might be happy. But to turn that guy into what could honestly be called a good ball striker in a relatively short period of time, is a more complicated manner. One that I have not seen accomplished outside of TGM. I am not saying it does not happen, I just haven't seen it. Check out the before and afters on blakes forum. Some amazing transformations.

 

 

Fred Couples- Aims way left and hits push cuts

 

Tom Lehman- Aims way left and hits push draws

 

Sam Snead- Aimed right and pulled it online

 

Boo Weekly- Very strong grip

 

Lee Trevino- Very strong grip

 

Johnny Miller- Very weak grip

 

Jose Maria Olazabal- Very week grip

 

The list goes on. You go to a PGA tour event and watch, and all the players grip the club differently, align themselves differently, and stand with considerably different postures. There are almost no two alike in that respect.

 

Seems silly to me to that greatest focus of your teaching is to grip it one way, align one way, and stand one way, when the best players in the world all do it considerably different.

 

Correct! Grips, Postures, and Alignments are different for all players.

[DaveLeeNC]

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

This is without a doubt the most astounding statement that I ever recall reading on a golf discussion board. It is conceivably the most astounding statement that has ever been made on a golf discussion board period.

 

dave

[roll - gybe]

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

Ok, FR - you are now teaching me in my former 20 handicap state.

 

That's not gonna get me to 5.

 

How do I swing? Where do I swing? How do I take the club away? How should my release feel? How should my weight feel? How should my hands feel? How should my transition feel? How should my plane feel?

 

Oh, and wait - how does all this fit together? arg!

 

Digging it out of the dirt won't work, because there are too many variables. I think you want 20hdp me to come back for more lessons and have lots of mental haze in the meantime.

 

If you think people can actually become good players with grip, posture, and target alignment you are going to have a self-selected group of golfers who "just get it". The 20hdp me was not looking to become a 19hdp, he was looking to become a 1.

 

TGM is an awesome roadmap that serves to reduce the variables.

[Dariusz J.]

Seems silly to me to that greatest focus of your teaching is to grip it one way, align one way, and stand one way, when the best players in the world all do it considerably different.

 

They can do it considerably different and still be great players, even with biomechanically worse swing patterns, because they have ben given the gift of dealing with timing issues excellently. A biomechanically great pattern does not require that gift to be so huge and they still can be great players. Lastly, players with biomechanically worse patterns that do not have that gift never will be great ballstrikers. Simple as that.

Claiming that all patterns are equally good is a false theory.

 

Cheers

[Swingtheclub]

Claiming that all patterns are equally good is a false theory.

 

If one believes in your magic gift theory you would be correct.

[logan91201]

Seems silly to me to that greatest focus of your teaching is to grip it one way, align one way, and stand one way, when the best players in the world all do it considerably different.

 

They can do it considerably different and still be great players, even with biomechanically worse swing patterns, because they have ben given the gift of dealing with timing issues excellently. A biomechanically great pattern does not require that gift to be so huge and they still can be great players. Lastly, players with biomechanically worse patterns that do not have that gift never will be great ballstrikers. Simple as that.

Claiming that all patterns are equally good is a false theory.

 

Cheers

 

 

Dariusz I hope this post wasn't directed at me. You know I understand that. And would never support all patterns being equal. I was simply stating to frozenrope that there is more to it than grip, alignment, and posture. Obviously I don't advocate gripping it anyway you want, aligning all over the place, and standing with outrageous posture. I know what I consider to be sound positions in all three of those aspects. However, I also know that there is much more too it than that. And if you were truly teaching someone fundamentals, grip, stance, and posture are actually some of the least important to playing good golf.

 

The whole point I've been trying to make is this.

 

I can find you 1,000 golfers that have a "fundamentally sound" grip, stance, and posture...yet can't break 100.

 

How many golfers can you find me that look like Tiger Woods at impact that can't break 80, let alone 100!!!

 

There is obviously more to it than grip, stance, and posture.

[Jeff Evans]

All patterns are not equal but they can be precise.

[Dariusz J.]

Claiming that all patterns are equally good is a false theory.

 

If one believes in your magic gift theory you would be correct.

 

OK, Ken. List the best ballstrikers you have heard of. I believe on such a list those three names will be there for sure as the biggest ones: Hogan, Moe, Trevino. Do you agree ?

Now, tell me is it a pure coincidence that all three of them performed swing motions that I consider as biokinetically soundest and you consider "just flat" ? Why Mahan, Furyk and Campbell are regarded as most accurate ball stikers nowadays ? Why excellent golfers who aren't capable of performing a biokinetically sound pattern can be named for sure as great players, but very rarely great ballstrikers ?

And last one - do you really think biokinetics is a junk science ? And even if you answer "YES" - wouldn't it suggest that we should not care about patterns at all since the only one darn thing that really counts is talent (=gift from God=possibly:ability of dealing with timing issues) ?

 

Cheers

 

 

 

Dariusz I hope this post wasn't directed at me. You know I understand that. And would never support all patterns being equal. I was simply stating to frozenrope that there is more to it than grip, alignment, and posture. Obviously I don't advocate gripping it anyway you want, aligning all over the place, and standing with outrageous posture. I know what I consider to be sound positions in all three of those aspects. However, I also know that there is much more too it than that. And if you were truly teaching someone fundamentals, grip, stance, and posture are actually some of the least important to playing good golf.

 

The whole point I've been trying to make is this.

 

I can find you 1,000 golfers that have a "fundamentally sound" grip, stance, and posture...yet can't break 100.

 

How many golfers can you find me that look like Tiger Woods at impact that can't break 80, let alone 100!!!

 

There is obviously more to it than grip, stance, and posture.

 

 

OK, I understand now. Frankly, I was astonished that it was YOU who posted such verses, but my English perception is not that good to read everything even between lines correctly.

Having said that, I would never underestimate the importance of a grip, stance and posture, provided they are biomechanically sound. And I cannot agree that those fundamentals are some of the least importance. There is more to it for sure, however, it is great if this "more" does not contain a lot of compensations for a bad grip, bad stance and bad posture.

 

Cheers

 

 

Cheers

 

All patterns are not equal but they can be precise.

 

Jeff, explain me please how a biomechanically worse pattern can be precise in case its owner is not dealing with timing issues well ?

 

Cheers

[FlyFish]

It was rumored that Leadbetter used to make TGM required reading for his instructors. Can anyone confirm that?

 

It doesn't really matter anyways, though. A lot of modern instruction is borrowed from TGM (as TGM borrowed from others).

[Jeff Evans]

It was rumored that Leadbetter used to make TGM required reading for his instructors. Can anyone confirm that?

 

It doesn't really matter anyways, though. A lot of modern instruction is borrowed from TGM (as TGM borrowed from others).

 

In the early 90's I worked with DL and Homer's work was used! You are correct that does it really matter! I as long as the instructor can help their clients get better the system of choice does not matter.

[Jeff Evans]

Claiming that all patterns are equally good is a false theory.

 

If one believes in your magic gift theory you would be correct.

 

OK, Ken. List the best ballstrikers you have heard of. I believe on such a list those three names will be there for sure as the biggest ones: Hogan, Moe, Trevino. Do you agree ?

Now, tell me is it a pure coincidence that all three of them performed swing motions that I consider as biokinetically soundest and you consider "just flat" ? Why Mahan, Furyk and Campbell are regarded as most accurate ball stikers nowadays ? Why excellent golfers who aren't capable of performing a biokinetically sound pattern can be named for sure as great players, but very rarely great ballstrikers ?

And last one - do you really think biokinetics is a junk science ? And even if you answer "YES" - wouldn't it suggest that we should not care about patterns at all since the only one darn thing that really counts is talent (=gift from God=possibly:ability of dealing with timing issues) ?

 

Cheers

 

 

 

Dariusz I hope this post wasn't directed at me. You know I understand that. And would never support all patterns being equal. I was simply stating to frozenrope that there is more to it than grip, alignment, and posture. Obviously I don't advocate gripping it anyway you want, aligning all over the place, and standing with outrageous posture. I know what I consider to be sound positions in all three of those aspects. However, I also know that there is much more too it than that. And if you were truly teaching someone fundamentals, grip, stance, and posture are actually some of the least important to playing good golf.

 

The whole point I've been trying to make is this.

 

I can find you 1,000 golfers that have a "fundamentally sound" grip, stance, and posture...yet can't break 100.

 

How many golfers can you find me that look like Tiger Woods at impact that can't break 80, let alone 100!!!

 

There is obviously more to it than grip, stance, and posture.

 

 

OK, I understand now. Frankly, I was astonished that it was YOU who posted such verses, but my English perception is not that good to read everything even between lines correctly.

Having said that, I would never underestimate the importance of a grip, stance and posture, provided they are biomechanically sound. And I cannot agree that those fundamentals are some of the least importance. There is more to it for sure, however, it is great if this "more" does not contain a lot of compensations for a bad grip, bad stance and bad posture.

 

Cheers

 

 

Cheers

 

All patterns are not equal but they can be precise.

 

Jeff, explain me please how a biomechanically worse pattern can be precise in case its owner is not dealing with timing issues well ?

 

Cheers

 

The correct biomechanics will deal with all timing issues!

I don't look at worst versus the best but what can the individual do to build their most precise stroke pattern and that may very from player to player.

However, there maybe the most precise pattern but I will help my clients build the best stroke pattern for their individual needs.

I am not debating that there is not the best biomechanical stroke pattern I am saying that the stroke pattern must be built to meet that individuals clients needs even if the have mental and physical limitation.

For example, I have many physically and mentally handicap individuals that I have and currently work with and they have improved their handicaps by 5.3 strokes on average and have add 7 to 10 yards throughout the set within 60 days.

Biomechanics is a great way to look at the over all big picture of how the body works under specific conditions. However, many are limited by their abilities and modifications must be made to build their most precise motions weather it is in golf or being able to feed oneself.

BTW my undergraduate studies was in exercise physiology and I graduated from West Virginia Univeristy in 1989 and I am not just posting based on my TGM knowledge alone.

[Dariusz J.]

The correct biomechanics will deal with all timing issues!

I don't look at worst versus the best but what can the individual do to build their most precise stroke pattern and that may very from player to player.

However, there maybe the most precise pattern but I will help my clients build the best stroke pattern for their individual needs.

I am not debating that there is not the best biomechanical stroke pattern I am saying that the stroke pattern must be built to meet that individuals clients needs even if the have mental and physical limitation.

For example, I have many physically and mentally handicap individuals that I have and currently work with and they have improved their handicaps by 5.3 strokes on average and have add 7 to 10 yards throughout the set within 60 days.

Biomechanics is a great way to look at the over all big picture of how the body works under specific conditions. However, many are limited by their abilities and modifications must be made to build their most precise motions weather it is in golf or being able to feed oneself.

BTW my undergraduate studies was in exercise physiology and I graduated from West Virginia Univeristy in 1989 and I am not just posting based on my TGM knowledge alone.

 

Thanks for a sincere and honest answer, Jeff. As I see, this is the issue of a difference in thinking between a golf swing teacher and a golf swing theorist.

As you know, I am looking through the big picture on a human motion and trying to turn one's natural body limitations into the real strenght. Correct me if I am wrong, but I guess you are looking from another end, starting from important details that can help a golfer to play better golf as soon as possible. Quite understandable, since this is your primary goal. What is unclear for me is why and by what means do you decide that a given average golfer is not a good candidate for trying to learn a biokinetically better pattern (I am not talking about e.g. a senior with serious body issues and lack of natural flexibility) - it is you who said above that biomechanics deals with timing issues the best way, which is very true, but rather in a macro- and not microscale. Why do you prefer only to improve a worse pattern (which I have no doubts that you can) instead using your know-how to change the pattern even just a bit ? True, Homer Kelley did not write about using natural human body limitations, if I remember well, but he did think that there are "better" and "worse" patterns before TGM gained its universality. Frankly, that is why, if I become a serious student of TGM someday, I will be examining thoroughfully early editions only. Your post is in this early TGM spirtit, which I do appreciate, because as you confirmed the reality is that there are biomechanically better and worse patterns.

 

Lastly, have you read the Biokinetic Thread ? It's nice to know about your physiology studies - it would be nice if you could add something to improve the theory from yourself. You are very welcomed.

 

You are a good man, Jeff.

 

Cheers

[Yuraway]

Logan,

 

Sure is easier to quote TGM jargon and trot out a bragging handicap then it is to get the ball in the hole. I'll give you that much credit.

 

Ken, I respect your opinion. However I don't think you have any idea about what TGM really is, which is what I am trying to say. It is evidenced by your posts, and by your own admission as to never reading it. You read articles "attributed to it" since before I was born? They haven't taught you much. I've been studying the actual material for less than two years and know a heck of a lot more than you do regarding the subject.

 

And Ken I am not trying to be rude when I say this, but golf is pretty complicated, or at least more complicated than you make it. If it is as easy as you say, why are you still a 4 handicap? And if it is as easy as you say, why aren't you teaching people who are excelling on a NOTABLE level. I don't like to hear you say it because you haven't backed up with anything (yet). Although I will give you your chance. You give me a detailed post describing your philosophy on this game, why it is so easy, why you know "most" of the answers, and how you can teach me to be great (i'm +4 and need to get a lot better) and I will concede that you at least have something to back up your statements.

 

Slicefixer and many other teachers here have mapped out exactly what they think can build a great player, and I would like to hear your version.

 

I almost didn't respond to this. But I should let it be known that I have posted my results of this year's US OPEN qualifier and the Nationwide Tour qualifiers I entered on this forum, for everyone to see. Call it bragging if you must, but I don't hide behind my handicap. I stand by my scores. Good or bad.

 

 

Logan, this forum would not be the same without you. Always enjoy your concise and well thought out posts. Love ya man.

[Jeff Evans]

The correct biomechanics will deal with all timing issues!

I don't look at worst versus the best but what can the individual do to build their most precise stroke pattern and that may very from player to player.

However, there maybe the most precise pattern but I will help my clients build the best stroke pattern for their individual needs.

I am not debating that there is not the best biomechanical stroke pattern I am saying that the stroke pattern must be built to meet that individuals clients needs even if the have mental and physical limitation.

For example, I have many physically and mentally handicap individuals that I have and currently work with and they have improved their handicaps by 5.3 strokes on average and have add 7 to 10 yards throughout the set within 60 days.

Biomechanics is a great way to look at the over all big picture of how the body works under specific conditions. However, many are limited by their abilities and modifications must be made to build their most precise motions weather it is in golf or being able to feed oneself.

BTW my undergraduate studies was in exercise physiology and I graduated from West Virginia Univeristy in 1989 and I am not just posting based on my TGM knowledge alone.

 

Thanks for a sincere and honest answer, Jeff. As I see, this is the issue of a difference in thinking between a golf swing teacher and a golf swing theorist.

As you know, I am looking through the big picture on a human motion and trying to turn one's natural body limitations into the real strenght. Correct me if I am wrong, but I guess you are looking from another end, starting from important details that can help a golfer to play better golf as soon as possible. Quite understandable, since this is your primary goal. What is unclear for me is why and by what means do you decide that a given average golfer is not a good candidate for trying to learn a biokinetically better pattern (I am not talking about e.g. a senior with serious body issues and lack of natural flexibility) - it is you who said above that biomechanics deals with timing issues the best way, which is very true, but rather in a macro- and not microscale. Why do you prefer only to improve a worse pattern (which I have no doubts that you can) instead using your know-how to change the pattern even just a bit ? True, Homer Kelley did not write about using natural human body limitations, if I remember well, but he did think that there are "better" and "worse" patterns before TGM gained its universality. Frankly, that is why, if I become a serious student of TGM someday, I will be examining thoroughfully early editions only. Your post is in this early TGM spirtit, which I do appreciate, because as you confirmed the reality is that there are biomechanically better and worse patterns.

 

Lastly, have you read the Biokinetic Thread ? It's nice to know about your physiology studies - it would be nice if you could add something to improve the theory from yourself. You are very welcomed.

 

You are a good man, Jeff.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

My programming is developmental and sequential. I evaluate/assess the clients current point of entry at the time they come for help and develop their program based on that point of reference. I have an over picture of where I want them to go but many can’t handle my expectations of how well they can develop. Many just want a quick fix it is not what I want. However, they are the paying customer and the customer is always correct even if I want more from them. I develop these programs with all hope that they will implement them but it is incumbent upon them to do so.

 

 

As a collegiate golf coach I was able to put the student/athletes under my watchful eye and make sure that they followed the program to the letter. My success was outstanding we nearly won the conference championship in my inaugural season! Conversely, we never won the conference championship in my 4 years as coach but we did improve our over all team scoring average by 15 strokes down from 305 to 290.

 

 

Anyway, it is about time and does the individual have the time to put into the program to get better! All it takes is about 12-20 hours a week to improve and this not counting the playing/competing side of the program which also is equally 12-20 hours a week.

[Dariusz J.]

 

My programming is developmental and sequential. I evaluate/assess the clients current point of entry at the time they come for help and develop their program based on that point of reference. I have an over picture of where I want them to go but many can’t handle my expectations of how well they can develop. Many just want a quick fix it is not what I want. However, they are the paying customer and the customer is always correct even if I want more from them. I develop these programs with all hope that they will implement them but it is incumbent upon them to do so.

 

 

As a collegiate golf coach I was able to put the student/athletes under my watchful eye and make sure that they followed the program to the letter. My success was outstanding we nearly won the conference championship in my inaugural season! Conversely, we never won the conference championship in my 4 years as coach but we did improve our over all team scoring average by 15 strokes down from 305 to 290.

 

 

Anyway, it is about time and does the individual have the time to put into the program to get better! All it takes is about 12-20 hours a week to improve and this not counting the playing/competing side of the program which also is equally 12-20 hours a week.

 

 

Hmmm...this post looks more as a copy from your commercial website than a sincere answer as the last one....but it's informative enough. Glad that we explained something together, at least. :)

 

Cheers

[Jeff Evans]

 

My programming is developmental and sequential. I evaluate/assess the clients current point of entry at the time they come for help and develop their program based on that point of reference. I have an over picture of where I want them to go but many can't handle my expectations of how well they can develop. Many just want a quick fix it is not what I want. However, they are the paying customer and the customer is always correct even if I want more from them. I develop these programs with all hope that they will implement them but it is incumbent upon them to do so.

 

As a collegiate golf coach I was able to put the student/athletes under my watchful eye and make sure that they followed the program to the letter. My success was outstanding we nearly won the conference championship in my inaugural season! Conversely, we never won the conference championship in my 4 years as coach but we did improve our over all team scoring average by 15 strokes down from 305 to 290.

 

 

Anyway, it is about time and does the individual have the time to put into the program to get better! All it takes is about 12-20 hours a week to improve and this not counting the playing/competing side of the program which also is equally 12-20 hours a week.

 

 

Hmmm...this post looks more as a copy from your commercial website than a sincere answer as the last one....but it's informative enough. Glad that we explained something together, at least. :)

 

Cheers

 

No! I just wrote it in a word document and copy and pasted it!

 

As far as my sincerity goes I was just sharing from my heart and now understand!

 

BTW I like to save my information to my PC.

 

Apologizes to any member on this forum if it came across like something from my commercial website it came from my time spent learning and sharing and I don't think I have anything like this on my website but I could have.

[frozen_rope]

You are noting a few players with unorthodox technique. Some guys who grow their own can find a way to make it work, but they are the overwhelming minority. Excellent rhythm is the primary factor which allows off kilter mechanics to produce solid shots, and some players have success relying on rhythm. But why do things the hard way ?

 

A textbook grip , correct posture, and square alignment are the common denominator among the majority of top players because using these address fundamentals are the easiest method to produce sound , effective, repeating swings.

 

In this thread every single reply to my post ignored the important theme. That is the influence address fundamentals have on the subsequent swing. Most amateurs amateurs and unqualified instructors have never even thought about what exactly the grip influences throughout the swing. Or what role posture plays in influencing the swing. Or all the good things square alignment does to help a player.

Anybody with true good golf playing knowledge will appreciate the influence grip, posture, and alignment have on the golf swing. I assure you the majority of Tour players have this appreciation, which is why those players constantly check their grip, rehearse their posture, and make sure their alignment is square to the target line.

What the fraudulent TGM doctrine refers to as "swing components" and "positions" and "lag" are all a byproduct of the players address grip, posture, and alignment. It's shameful that there are "instructors" taking money from naive customers when the instructor doesn't have any understanding of what influences the golf swing.

 

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

Frozenrope,

 

Our differences aside. I believe that for some, near perfect impact alignments come very natrually and can hit tour pro quality shots without much effort or work towards figuring out those alignments and what they mean. It was just part of their natural move. I also believe many of them are on tour, and for them it is not very complicated.

 

For others, where those alignments are less natural, and they hit some shots thin, and some fat, and some off the toe and elsewhere, learning to hit it with tour pro quality alignments is more complicated. Most teachers won't even try to adress that second players ability to hit it as solid as a touring professional, they will just get them working with what they have, and maybe drop their handicap a few shots and the student (depending on the students drive) might be happy. But to turn that guy into what could honestly be called a good ball striker in a relatively short period of time, is a more complicated manner. One that I have not seen accomplished outside of TGM. I am not saying it does not happen, I just haven't seen it. Check out the before and afters on blakes forum. Some amazing transformations.

 

 

Fred Couples- Aims way left and hits push cuts

 

Tom Lehman- Aims way left and hits push draws

 

Sam Snead- Aimed right and pulled it online

 

Boo Weekly- Very strong grip

 

Lee Trevino- Very strong grip

 

Johnny Miller- Very weak grip

 

Jose Maria Olazabal- Very week grip

 

The list goes on. You go to a PGA tour event and watch, and all the players grip the club differently, align themselves differently, and stand with considerably different postures. There are almost no two alike in that respect.

 

Seems silly to me to that greatest focus of your teaching is to grip it one way, align one way, and stand one way, when the best players in the world all do it considerably different.

[logan91201]

Logan,

 

Sure is easier to quote TGM jargon and trot out a bragging handicap then it is to get the ball in the hole. I'll give you that much credit.

 

Ken, I respect your opinion. However I don't think you have any idea about what TGM really is, which is what I am trying to say. It is evidenced by your posts, and by your own admission as to never reading it. You read articles "attributed to it" since before I was born? They haven't taught you much. I've been studying the actual material for less than two years and know a heck of a lot more than you do regarding the subject.

 

And Ken I am not trying to be rude when I say this, but golf is pretty complicated, or at least more complicated than you make it. If it is as easy as you say, why are you still a 4 handicap? And if it is as easy as you say, why aren't you teaching people who are excelling on a NOTABLE level. I don't like to hear you say it because you haven't backed up with anything (yet). Although I will give you your chance. You give me a detailed post describing your philosophy on this game, why it is so easy, why you know "most" of the answers, and how you can teach me to be great (i'm +4 and need to get a lot better) and I will concede that you at least have something to back up your statements.

 

Slicefixer and many other teachers here have mapped out exactly what they think can build a great player, and I would like to hear your version.

 

I almost didn't respond to this. But I should let it be known that I have posted my results of this year's US OPEN qualifier and the Nationwide Tour qualifiers I entered on this forum, for everyone to see. Call it bragging if you must, but I don't hide behind my handicap. I stand by my scores. Good or bad.

 

 

Logan, this forum would not be the same without you. Always enjoy your concise and well thought out posts. Love ya man.

 

 

Those are some awfully nice things to say, and I very much appreciate it! Thank you so much. It means a lot to hear that coming from fellow members. I look forward to future discussions with you!

[Kerry_Bunker]

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

 

Digging it out of the dirt won't work, because there are too many variables.

 

Perfectly stated Steve Stevens !!!

 

 

TGM is an awesome roadmap that serves to reduce the variables.

 

Not always reduce, for some it will add, but always will serve to SPECIFY, CLARIFY and, for many, DEMYSTIFY the variables.

 

[Jeff Evans]

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

 

Digging it out of the dirt won't work, because there are too many variables.

 

Perfectly stated Steve Stevens !!!

 

 

TGM is an awesome roadmap that serves to reduce the variables.

 

Not always reduce, for some it will add, but always will serve to SPECIFY, CLARIFY and, for many, DEMYSTIFY the variables.

 

Very Well Put!

[roll - gybe]

thanks Jeff - I should know. I am the one in the learning process!

Why do people surmise about what they should teach a student? Why not just ask one?

[eightiron]

love your stuff frozen rope..keep it coming

[12 piece bucket]

You are noting a few players with unorthodox technique. Some guys who grow their own can find a way to make it work, but they are the overwhelming minority. Excellent rhythm is the primary factor which allows off kilter mechanics to produce solid shots, and some players have success relying on rhythm. But why do things the hard way ?

 

A textbook grip , correct posture, and square alignment are the common denominator among the majority of top players because using these address fundamentals are the easiest method to produce sound , effective, repeating swings.

 

In this thread every single reply to my post ignored the important theme. That is the influence address fundamentals have on the subsequent swing. Most amateurs amateurs and unqualified instructors have never even thought about what exactly the grip influences throughout the swing. Or what role posture plays in influencing the swing. Or all the good things square alignment does to help a player.

Anybody with true good golf playing knowledge will appreciate the influence grip, posture, and alignment have on the golf swing. I assure you the majority of Tour players have this appreciation, which is why those players constantly check their grip, rehearse their posture, and make sure their alignment is square to the target line.

What the fraudulent TGM doctrine refers to as "swing components" and "positions" and "lag" are all a byproduct of the players address grip, posture, and alignment. It's shameful that there are "instructors" taking money from naive customers when the instructor doesn't have any understanding of what influences the golf swing.

 

Logan,

 

The only worthwhile knowledge of the golf swing is in understanding how grip, posture, and alignment influence it.

 

Frozenrope,

 

Our differences aside. I believe that for some, near perfect impact alignments come very natrually and can hit tour pro quality shots without much effort or work towards figuring out those alignments and what they mean. It was just part of their natural move. I also believe many of them are on tour, and for them it is not very complicated.

 

For others, where those alignments are less natural, and they hit some shots thin, and some fat, and some off the toe and elsewhere, learning to hit it with tour pro quality alignments is more complicated. Most teachers won't even try to adress that second players ability to hit it as solid as a touring professional, they will just get them working with what they have, and maybe drop their handicap a few shots and the student (depending on the students drive) might be happy. But to turn that guy into what could honestly be called a good ball striker in a relatively short period of time, is a more complicated manner. One that I have not seen accomplished outside of TGM. I am not saying it does not happen, I just haven't seen it. Check out the before and afters on blakes forum. Some amazing transformations.

 

 

Fred Couples- Aims way left and hits push cuts

 

Tom Lehman- Aims way left and hits push draws

 

Sam Snead- Aimed right and pulled it online

 

Boo Weekly- Very strong grip

 

Lee Trevino- Very strong grip

 

Johnny Miller- Very weak grip

 

Jose Maria Olazabal- Very week grip

 

The list goes on. You go to a PGA tour event and watch, and all the players grip the club differently, align themselves differently, and stand with considerably different postures. There are almost no two alike in that respect.

 

Seems silly to me to that greatest focus of your teaching is to grip it one way, align one way, and stand one way, when the best players in the world all do it considerably different.

 

 

Maybe . . . . it's more than just grip . . . . you can have a weak grip and a shut face . . . . a strong grip and an open face . . . many combinations . . . . the motions that must occur to produce the intended shot must comply the face and its relationship to the path. Example . . . there are differences between Couples' push cut and Trevino's push cut . . . has a lot to do with the face, shaft lean and the differences in how they pivot and release the golf club . . . but probably most to do with the face and shaft lean. The ball don't know about your grip . . . it knows about face, lean, path, angle of attack, and speed.

[scores]

Ok Buddy --> Logan

 

GOOD LUCK ... If you make it ... I will come and watch YOU!! If you come through New England..

 

I took a lesson tonight from an old Friend who has won about 30 tournaments .. And he is taking lessons from a TGM instuctor .. What he told me was very close to what SliceFixer said... Kept real simple hopefully I can turn it around .. and I truely mean IT.. Fold my right arm (against my side) strech my left arm<- (on the back swing) on the down swing fold left arm(against my left side)

 

The driver was going straight thats it that was my lesson .. I was not doing that..???? I am a two handicap.. that was heading in the wrong direction if I hand in my last five scores and I hit it like this they will hang me!!! I really mean it..I am going to hand them in .. because i did shoot those high scores..

 

Anyway hit lots of fairways... and make lots of putts and make lots of birdies and you will get there..

 

Anyway the Bottom line is he works with a TGM instructor and Geoff sent me email after looking at my swing that is really close to the above...