Brian Manzella for Golf Magazine, Golf.com & Front9 - Play Bubba Golf with more speed

[SteveT]

I agree with your assessment of the average golfer, but if Brian went to alpha and beta torque, etc, he would lose 90% of the audience. If a golfer is not willing to at least google Brian Manzella and find this site, he/she will certainly not put the time, effort, and intellectual curiousity needed to grasp the comprehend the scientific stuff.

But what if Brian said something like this in a Golf Mag video about golfswing torques?:

"A renowned scientific study identifies three basic torques in the golfswing.... Alpha torque which is the torque generated by the body and is found at the shoulders.... Beta torque which is the pitch motion between the hands and clubhead from the top of the swing to impact where the hands and clubhead follow different paths to create variable planes.... and Gamma torque which is the axial torque along the club shaft to square the clubface......... shoulders, hands to clubhead, clubshaft torques which are scientifically defined and measured. From that, we can better understand what happens in a golfswing and relate it to golfswing "feeel"."

Do you think that would fly or flop?

 

[66er]

Man Im finding the handle-rotation difficult, Im so use to abit of drag then some flextion and extension of the wrists.

 

[mjstrong]

Do you think that would fly or flop?

Words alone - probably not. Those words with any video/visual elaboration - a fair amount of people could understand that.

 

[finncox]

Words alone - probably not. Those words with any video/visual elaboration - a fair amount of people could understand that.

I tend to agree with you. However, too much "scientific speak" in these shorter videos will likely overwhelm a certain cross-section of potential students/customers. I think Brian has struck an appropriate balance between his highly technical videos, such as those he posts on Vimeo or this site, and the more "mass appeal, consumer" videos, like those he does for SI, Golf.com, etc. In that way, he's attracting new students who don't care as much about the technical details, while still appealing to the membership of this site, which often desire a more in-depth explanation.

Also, I think Brian has a keen understanding of what terms to use with what students, and which students would appreciate or desire a more in-depth explanation of what he's showing them. As long as he's teaching the same concepts, what does it matter if he tells one student about "gamma, alpha, and beta torques, rotation about the coupling point, and hand paths" while he simply tells the other guy to "flick the clubhead at the ball" for more speed. If they both get it after their personalized explanations, he's still an amazing teacher that has them both hitting the ball better.

 

[leon]

More solid gold. Especially when read in conjunction with the recent out-toss article.

 

[leon]

But what if Brian said something like this in a Golf Mag video about golfswing torques?:

"A renowned scientific study identifies three basic torques in the golfswing.... Alpha torque which is the torque generated by the body and is found at the shoulders.... Beta torque which is the pitch motion between the hands and clubhead from the top of the swing to impact where the hands and clubhead follow different paths to create variable planes.... and Gamma torque which is the axial torque along the club shaft to square the clubface......... shoulders, hands to clubhead, clubshaft torques which are scientifically defined and measured. From that, we can better understand what happens in a golfswing and relate it to golfswing "feeel"."

Do you think that would fly or flop?

Depends if you're trying to teach swing theory, or 'just' how to hit the ball better.

Do you really think the majority of golfers need to know all of the science? Teachers, yes. But golfers, I don't think so.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

Depends if you're trying to teach swing theory, or 'just' how to hit the ball better.

Do you really think the majority of golfers need to know all of the science? Teachers, yes. But golfers, I don't think so.

I would say well over the majority of the golfers i teach want to know the why, few i teach are feel guys. Naturally as adults it's just how our brain learns, we want to know the why and then apply. Kids are the exact opposite, they'll just imitate or do what you tell them thats why you have to start them young.

 

[TROYNYGOLFER]

But what if Brian said something like this in a Golf Mag video about golfswing torques?:

"A renowned scientific study identifies three basic torques in the golfswing.... Alpha torque which is the torque generated by the body and is found at the shoulders.... Beta torque which is the pitch motion between the hands and clubhead from the top of the swing to impact where the hands and clubhead follow different paths to create variable planes.... and Gamma torque which is the axial torque along the club shaft to square the clubface......... shoulders, hands to clubhead, clubshaft torques which are scientifically defined and measured. From that, we can better understand what happens in a golfswing and relate it to golfswing "feeel"."

Do you think that would fly or flop?

It might get him a guest star role on an episode of The Big Bang Theory, but I suspect the editorial offices of Golf Magazine might have a slight problem.

 

[leon]

I would say well over the majority of the golfers i teach want to know the why, few i teach are feel guys. Naturally as adults it's just how our brain learns, we want to know the why and then apply. Kids are the exact opposite, they'll just imitate or do what you tell them thats why you have to start them young.

Jim, how many of the ones who want to know would you say really need to know?

Of course you're right, and the adult vs kids learning has been done here before. But I still think you'd be mad to come straight out the blocks with a load of whys, at least before you do the hows. Seems to me that was what Steve was advocating.

 

[Kevin Shields]

I think he's doing it perfectly. If he wanted to lose people, he would talk like a scientist. If he didn't want to be taken seriously, he would tell us the same old shit you've been seeing for years. There has to be some articles or videos that bridge some gaps. There are some out there that read like medical journals or scientific papers, and the other side that read like bad golf 101.

 

[Kevin Shields]

Depends if you're trying to teach swing theory, or 'just' how to hit the ball better.

Do you really think the majority of golfers need to know all of the science? Teachers, yes. But golfers, I don't think so.

Compared to how many golfers there are, relatively few take lessons. The rest read or watch hoping to get a quick piece of gold to help them out. That's why lesson takers generally want to know more. It's pretty easy to pick out the ones who want just a fix or feel in a lesson.

 

[finncox]

I think he's doing it perfectly. If he wanted to lose people, he would talk like a scientist. If he didn't want to be taken seriously, he would tell us the same old shit you've been seeing for years. There has to be some articles or videos that bridge some gaps. There are some out there that read like medical journals or scientific papers, and the other side that read like bad golf 101.

What he said.......