A.J. shames Wiren/Martino but

[diggerdog]

doesn't know why: He is more right than they are. A new take on Brian's squirting the blood out of the thumbs.

http://www.golfonline.com/golfonline/instruction/features/article/0,17742,1534401-3,00.html

 

[Ringer]

Wow... I can't wait for all those people who read and believe this nonsense to come to me asking to fix their snap hooks.

 

[golfbulldog]

not all rubbish...

Comparing AJs photos with Hogans images of "supination" in 5 lessons ... AJ is not that far off the mark. He has a clubfacr that is open to target and closes to less open at impact, square at seperation etc....

This is swingers swivel into impact with some hinging.

these facts alone may educate some players.

Where he goes wrong is in "cause and effect". These movements occur naturally with responsive arms reacting to a well educated pivot.

So they are an effect ( just as a flat left wrist is an effect) and should not be consciously forced.

I am starting to think that calling FLW an imperative is mistake. An imperative sounds like something that you must do ,or be comanded to do - not something that "occurs". The left wrist should be allowed "to be flat" rather than " held flat". You can't make yourself truly happy by trying to be happy ( sure you can put a forced smile on but that ain't happy!)... do the right things and happiness creeps up on you... just like a FLW and the release swivel and swingers hinge action.

Happy new year.

Hands-controlled, pivot-propelled pivots all round!

 

[Perfect Impact]

The difference in all golf instruction may well boil down to that one point: differentiating between cause and effect. Presuming, of course, the knowledge of right and wrong.

I love the "can't make yourself happy" analogy; PERfect!

 

[Mr Inconsistent]

Bulldog, could you tell me your thoughts on "allowing" the left wrist to be flat. Are you talking about lighter grip pressure and tension in the forearms/wrists? I'm asking because I'm trying to flatten out my left wrist right now and it feels awkward.

As far as the article goes, I think the dumbest part of it is how AJ suggest it is a power secret. The stuff he's talking about has very little to do with power. I mean, unless your making a putting stroke with absolutely no wrist action. Power comes from a good shifting and turning of the body with good sequencing, not some little hand action move with a dead body.

 

[shootin4par]

Mr. I
In tgm terms, left forearm rotation is a power accumulator
in english, if I stand there and just rotate my left arm the clubhead can get moving fairly fast.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Wow... I can't wait for all those people who read and believe this nonsense to come to me asking to fix their snap hooks.

Well....it is not that bad of advice for a better player, sorta like a Hogan idea, roll it way open and try to hook the heck out of it.

Believe it or not, doing it as prescribed WOULD make the ball go farther than with the face LESS open coming down.

Ah....but DOING IT is another thing.

Personally, I thank the guy for making it easier on me.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Your Host....hosting!

I am starting to think that calling FLW an imperative is mistake. An imperative sounds like something that you must do ,or be comanded to do - not something that "occurs". The left wrist should be allowed "to be flat" rather than " held flat".

Most people MISS READ THE BOOK right here!

The FLAT LEFT WRIST is for clubFACE control.

The LAG PRESSRE POINT is for clubHEAD CONTROL (ANTI-THROWAWAY).

You are correct in this regard:

The left wrist should be MADE flat, not MAKE ITSELF flat!

 

[shefield]

As a relative newcomer to this forum, I see a pattern that is common to many other golf websites. It can be summarized in a few sentences. Expert 1: "I have the secret of golf and if you disagree, you are an idiot or a believer in nonsense." Expert 2: "If you listen to these phonies, your arms will fall off, your hair will fall out and you'll never be any good at this game." Regarding AJ Bonar, Golf magazine did do a test among a few of its staff members and reported some positive results. Please remember that the "little yellow book" is not really a Bible. It is a very technical treatise on the golf swing. I doubt if one in 10 PGA pros have ever read it, let alone studied it. Beware of delving too deep into its mysteries or you could find yourself sitting between the JFK and 9/11 conspiracy groupies at the next Star
Trek convention

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

As a relative newcomer to this forum, I see a pattern that is common to many other golf websites. It can be summarized in a few sentences. Expert 1: "I have the secret of golf and if you disagree, you are an idiot or a believer in nonsense." Expert 2: "If you listen to these phonies, your arms will fall off, your hair will fall out and you'll never be any good at this game." Regarding AJ Bonar, Golf magazine did do a test among a few of its staff members and reported some positive results. Please remember that the "little yellow book" is not really a Bible. It is a very technical treatise on the golf swing. I doubt if one in 10 PGA pros have ever read it, let alone studied it. Beware of delving too deep into its mysteries or you could find yourself sitting between the JFK and 9/11 conspiracy groupies at the next Star
Trek convention

As a newcomer it's fairly obvious that you haven't tried have of what is on this site. You're right, most PGA pros have never even looked at the little yellow book, and that could be part of the problem. It's not an end all be all of golf, but there are a lot of great things in the book that if learned correctly makes golf much easier.

 

[Ringer]

Well....it is not that bad of advice for a better player, sorta like a Hogan idea, roll it way open and try to hook the heck out of it.

Believe it or not, doing it as prescribed WOULD make the ball go farther than with the face LESS open coming down.

Ah....but DOING IT is another thing.

Personally, I thank the guy for making it easier on me.

Did you ever find out what the FIRST move is? Look into HOW he wants people to create that open clubface on the backswing. You'll be changing your mind.

 

[birdie_man]

As a relative newcomer to this forum, I see a pattern that is common to many other golf websites. It can be summarized in a few sentences. Expert 1: "I have the secret of golf and if you disagree, you are an idiot or a believer in nonsense." Expert 2: "If you listen to these phonies, your arms will fall off, your hair will fall out and you'll never be any good at this game." Regarding AJ Bonar, Golf magazine did do a test among a few of its staff members and reported some positive results. Please remember that the "little yellow book" is not really a Bible. It is a very technical treatise on the golf swing. I doubt if one in 10 PGA pros have ever read it, let alone studied it. Beware of delving too deep into its mysteries or you could find yourself sitting between the JFK and 9/11 conspiracy groupies at the next Star
Trek convention

Ya....

Well Jim's post was a good one.

These PGA instructors prolly should know this stuff.

...

The real problem with all that (above quote) is you have to ACTUALLY know who's the expert.

Do you not realize how BAD a lot of instruction really is?

There is a lot of stuff that is plain bad.....and a lot of stuff that is incomplete, conflicting, confusing, etc.

You'd think people would catch onto this. (that's not to say tho that the golfers of the world are really to BLAME)

I mean....and yes this is just one example....AJ Bonar.

And there are good things.

But shoot........if there's something missing or wrong with it then there's something missing or wrong with it- and people are gonna say things. Big deal.

I wish golf instruction wasn't so screwed up too but stuff like all THIS has a place in making it better.

You have to realize that to realize WHY people like Brian and others have a place in this whole mess.

There's a difference between these (below) 2 things:

-grandstanding and just knocking down the competition because they are the competition

-questioning things or telling it like it is because you know better or think you know better

...

BTW this is very obviously not a "TGM bible" type of site.

 

[shootin4par]

The real problem with all that is you have to ACTUALLY know who's the expert.

Do you not realize how BAD a lot of instruction really is?

There is a lot of stuff that is plain bad.....and a lot of stuff that is incomplete, conflicting, confusing, etc.

You'd think people would catch onto this. (that's not to say tho that the golfers of the world are really to BLAME)

I mean....and yes this is just one example....AJ Bonar.

And there are good things.

But shoot........if there's something missing or wrong with it then there's something missing or wrong with it- and people are gonna say things. Big deal.

I wish golf instruction wasn't so screwed up too but stuff like all THIS has a place in making it better.

That is why I think the first thing we should look to is how the human body works and what are the most efficient movements of it to make the club work well. The more I look into this the less I find. I got the CHEKK institutes book on biomechanics in regards to golf, but that is more about exercises and you have to search to find the information in there, there is quite a bit but you have to do a lot of sifting. I also am looking into Austin and his methods because he studied the human body, but the problem there is you have a lot of people who try and teach it, think they have it better, but only give half information. Funny thing about watching austin is he seems very Homer Kelly like, in regards to his findings, he shaped the ball by just changing his hinge action. Austin hit it the longest, Hogan hit is the best, both studied the body. Seems like golfing machine is going down the biomechanics road according to brian at one of his manzeposiums. Now that more people are going down that road it will be a short time before the info is available. WHen the end of that road comes we will see more standardized instruction and the ones that dont follow will be left behind. It will be interesting to see who of yesterday had it the closest.

The golf swing is a lot like running, do it natural and it flows, but imagine running and taking a step where the base of the pinky toe hits the ground first, THE MOMENT that happes the REST of the motion is COMPLETELY changed, it is a chain reaction that the first kink throws everything off.

So what current biomechanical information is closest

 

[shefield]

I have all of Brian's videos. He is a genius, but he doesn't seem to live by rigid rules. If you look at Never Slice Again 2.0!, his twistaway move doesn't seem to fit between the covers of any golf book, especially The Golfing Machine, but it works. My main point (That I didn't make very well in my previous post. I tried humor and it came out as sarcasm.) was that holding any one method up as "the answer" and simply attacking another teacher or method as nonsense can be a rush to judgment. Regarding AJ Bonar, Brian's description of a "normal" backswing (not anti-slice) includes an opening of the clubface. And the downswing has the clubface approaching the ball open and leaving it closed. Perhaps AJ's "artificial" opening of the club on the backswing is merely his way of getting people into a position they may not normally be in, just as Brian's Twistaway is only for those who have trouble slicing. AJ's method seems to work for for certain golfers and that's what matters in the long run.
Happy New Year

 

[Perfect Impact]

Biomechanics is not all that obscure or technical: most of it is simple common sense, in that you want power to be positioned and aligned to deliver arms and hands, hence club, in a way in which there is the most efficiency, the least leakage, and ease of feeling for the anatomical restrictions or limitations OF THE GOLFER DOING THE SWINGING.

A person with a large chest and short legs will swing with exactly the same principles of applying leverage THAT FITS HIM as Michelle Wie does to fit HER flexible, thin, [gorgeous] physique.

So the teacher, and the golfer himself, for best results, does well to know what those principles are - how TO align limbs and hands etc. for best results.

It involves common sense geometrical relationships and relating what is done to the realistic use of the body doing the swinging.

It will not be necessary to write a Gray's Anatomy detailed kinesiological text for a golfer to "get it" for himself. Nor anything approaching the complicated and infinite "variations" put out in something similar to TGM.

I do not believe there are more than a few people in the world who have ever worried about the kinesiology of how to walk - except perhaps some track coaches or runners who would like to shave .001 off of the sprint records... And even if they DO, they would have to have some pretty advanced technological tools to analyze the muscles and bones of THE RUNNER himself - not a model -- but THAT runner.

No, the engineering for a perfect swing simply does not require microscopes or advanced degrees. Just appropriate instruction/understanding, and then, the part that most people resist, "getting on the bike" instead of reading about it.

 

[Brian Manzella]

The Shef for helping me clear some things up...

Expert 1: "I have the secret of golf and if you disagree, you are an idiot or a believer in nonsense." Expert 2: "If you listen to these phonies, your arms will fall off, your hair will fall out and you'll never be any good at this game."

Well, since this is my site, I must be expert #1.

So here goes: "Folks if you want to listen to Flick, Toski, Ballard, Smith, Haney, Leadbetter, etc go right ahead. They all have a lot of good things in their methods. There is at least a shread of truth in all of them.

But, ever been to a driving range lately? People really stink at golf. Ever ask them what they are working on? I have. They are working on the stuff that these guys say in the mags and on the Golf Channel.

I have taught golf for 25 years. At Driving Ranges where the 'real golfers' are. For about 20 of those years, I had at least one—and at some points a couple dozen—other independent teachers at those ranges trying to cut my throat.

In the process of out lasting, out learning, out trying, and especially OUT TEACHING ALL OF THEM, I have figured out a whole bunch of stuff out, and also figured out how to explain it in a way that almost anyone can learn it in a few lessons—or in a video.

In other words, I learned to CURE THE SLICE, and the HOOK and the SHANK and without being a "Band-Aid" teacher. How do I know I am not a "Band-Aid" teacher? Every look at one of my student's swings? Like David Toms, MIke Finney, Tom Bartlett? Not impressed because these guys who where "players since birth" so-to-speak? How about Nakia Davis? She came to me with her right forearm LEVEL WITH THE GROUND AT IMPACT, and after she had just shot 99 in an AJGA event. How did she do? She shot 71 in that event two years later, won three state junior championships, became the first African-Ameircan to get an SEC golf scholarship and—oh yeah—swings at it soooo pretty they put her in one of Tiger's video games. What about Jim Kobylinski? He came to me a few short years ago a 90 shooting hacker. He is a teaching pro now who hits it like a playing pro.

The other teachers say they have similar resumes. But do they?

Nope.

1. There stuff is already "out there." If it was the "cure" to anything, handicaps would be lower and guys selling stuff like Hardy wouldn't get a foothold.

2. Except for Ballard, they were all "saved" from the real-world of driving range teaching so early in their careers (if they ever did it), they didn't get to learn all the good stuff I have about fixing real golfers.

They are all very good "at what they do." But what "they do" and what "I do" are sooooo different that if I ever get to give a live lesson at the PGA Teaching Summit, they might arrest me—or just walk me over to that Hall-of-Fame and reserve me a spot—on the spot.

Shef, I have traveled 'ROUND-and-AROUND this country and spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to learn from the "experts."

Flick?

Seen him over a dozen times. Seen him lecture and teach live.

Toski?

Several times.

Ballard?

Ditto

Smith?

Yup.

Haney?

Yes, plus PLUS.

Leadbetter?

Yes. Yes.

So, folks, I don't know what to say except this:

"I can out teach all of these guys in my sleep."

So, does this make them all phonies?

Heck no.

These guys are at the "top of the profession," and they ALL have contributed to golf and golf instruction.

Sorta like asking Tiger about Jones, Hogan, Snead, Nelson, Player, Palmer and Jack.

But, just like Tiger, I have had Flick, Toski, Ballard, Smith, Haney, Leadbetter & Hardy's "picture on my wall" since I was a very young man...

...and I want to beat ALL OF THEIR RECORDS and be the best ever.

In the process, golfers can get info from me, my teachers and the smart members of this site FOR FREE, or a couple dollars for a video.

Call me anytime at 502.417.4653, I am sure the "other guys" wil take your call as well.

 

[Brian Manzella]

I have all of Brian's videos. He is a genius, but he doesn't seem to live by rigid rules.

Thank you.

I am, and I don't.

If you look at Never Slice Again 2.0!, his twistaway move doesn't seem to fit between the covers of any golf book, especially The Golfing Machine, but it works.

You are right per se, but really, it iS in there.

My main point...was that holding any one method up as "the answer" and simply attacking another teacher or method as nonsense can be a rush to judgment.

That's the difference between me and my "competition."

I am not a "One Hit Wonder."

Never Slice Again 2.0 is so differnet than "Flipper" and so differnt from "Never Hook Again." it is silly.

Once you get past what most teachers would sell if they had an hour an and a captive audience, "that's all folks."

With me, that's just the beginning.

Regarding AJ Bonar, Brian's description of a "normal" backswing (not anti-slice) includes an opening of the clubface. And the downswing has the clubface approaching the ball open and leaving it closed. Perhaps AJ's "artificial" opening of the club on the backswing is merely his way of getting people into a position they may not normally be in, just as Brian's Twistaway is only for those who have trouble slicing. AJ's method seems to work for for certain golfers and that's what matters in the long run.

I have TAUGHT SOME golfers since my first day on the job to open the clubface at address or sloce it at address for effect.

I don't do it as much andy more becuase I learned how to not have to use it.

AJ will after he gives about 10,000 more lessons.

(Maybe not. I meant 10,000 lesson TRYING.)

 

[golfer24]

Great answer Brian. Why is it that you don't feature amongst these quoted teachers. I have my suspicions but what is your understanding of it.

 

[shootin4par]

Great answer Brian. Why is it that you don't feature amongst these quoted teachers. I have my suspicions but what is your understanding of it.

I can probably answer that for him, the old saying of not what you know but who you know. Also, we live in a society where for most people style is more attractive then substance

 

[tbarbertab]

I can probably answer that for him, the old saying of not what you know but who you know. Also, we live in a society where for most people style is more attractive then substance

I will say one thing, one on one Brian is the most entertaining teacher I've ever been to. Oh, he can teach a little too....

Brian, I like your style