Do you own the Yellow Book?

[Black Label AI]

Another thought hit me guys, Remember at the 06 TGM summit, when Dr. Zick and the group were discussing some potential flaws in the book and it occured to me that "The Golfing Machine is as much - if not more - a work of philosophy as it is a work of science." It has always struck me as that... I did not sense much affirmation in the room at the time of that statement, perhaps that felling might resonate a bit more now?

 

[lesliecain]

I own 3 copies one is signed by Bobby Clampet when he was leading at the British Open in Royal Troon

 

[twitch127]

Editions; 6 and 7

Twitch

 

[Steve Khatib]

Another thought hit me guys, Remember at the 06 TGM summit, when Dr. Zick and the group were discussing some potential flaws in the book and it occured to me that "The Golfing Machine is as much - if not more - a work of philosophy as it is a work of science." It has always struck me as that... I did not sense much affirmation in the room at the time of that statement, perhaps that felling might resonate a bit more now?

Very insightful Doug, I remember that now. Dr. Zick was at least 4 years ahead of his time.

 

[psteiner]

Own 6th edition. Last day I read it, was during a Manzella tour stop on Long Island where I got Brian, Michael Jacobs, and Ben Doyle to sign it. Sustain the Lag!

 

[ReefBoy]

I own it.

Maybe there should have been another catorgory in the poll, "I own it and got more confused reading it."

Christopher

 

[Black Label AI]

Thanks Steve,

I think the science of TGM is simply suggestive that there actually is a science. I personally have not found the ultimate value of it to be the actual scientific assertions, especially given the measuring tools the author had at his disposal. It does remain well ahead of its time by my estimation. But the philosphy that a person must embark on a discovery of the science of it in order to truly improve from a total perspective - that is sheer genius in my view.

I am totally sold on TGM Philosphy, and am totally unthreatened by the efforts you all are making to push the discussion, with the latest measuring tools.

I have no understanding of why anyone who abides by TGM PHILOSOPHY would feel defensive about the efforts you all are making to stay ahead and on the cutting edge. Indeed a truly TGM Philosophy would suggest the exact opposite.

From what I can glean about the man, I think Homer would be shocked that his work had not been more actively challenged/revised/updated. The fact it hasn't speaks to the lack of advancement as well as the opportunities that still remain in the golf instruction industry.

We haven't even scratched the surface gentlemen!

I know for a fact that this is a shared sentiment by many.

Keep up the good work!

 

[dannyc]

^^^^^

nice post black label ai!

 

[billmckinneygolf]

I own a case of 'em. However much flawed science is found in them still pales in comparison to the insights, in my opinion.

 

[Brian Manzella]

One day, in the not so distant future, the golf world will thank Homer Kelley for his great observations, his attempt at a classification system, and his attempt at uncovering science as is relates to the swing.

And that's that.

 

[Kevin Shields]

Thanks Steve,

I think the science of TGM is simply suggestive that there actually is a science. I personally have not found the ultimate value of it to be the actual scientific assertions, especially given the measuring tools the author had at his disposal. It does remain well ahead of its time by my estimation. But the philosphy that a person must embark on a discovery of the science of it in order to truly improve from a total perspective - that is sheer genius in my view.

I am totally sold on TGM Philosphy, and am totally unthreatened by the efforts you all are making to push the discussion, with the latest measuring tools.

I have no understanding of why anyone who abides by TGM PHILOSOPHY would feel defensive about the efforts you all are making to stay ahead and on the cutting edge. Indeed a truly TGM Philosophy would suggest the exact opposite.

From what I can glean about the man, I think Homer would be shocked that his work had not been more actively challenged/revised/updated. The fact it hasn't speaks to the lack of advancement as well as the opportunities that still remain in the golf instruction industry.

We haven't even scratched the surface gentlemen!

I know for a fact that this is a shared sentiment by many.

Keep up the good work!

That was a really good post. Restored some of my faith that everyone isnt here to argue. Thanks.

 

[dbl]

Welll I'm satisfied. In just a few days, we've gotten to that "75" number. Nothing special at all about that number by the way.

I would say many forum members definitely have/had a TGM resource in their library.

For me personally, it was a book that did not make it easy to dig out what components might be compatible and in many cases my understanding of just what some components or variations were took more learned instructors to reveal. On the other hand, it was apparent to me that many variations of grips and other components actually in use by golfers were not represented in the book. I also found that when Kelly limited what he considered, then his framework of accumulators (etc) could be "simplified." Instead of 50x10E20 he only had 4 quadrillion combinations. I do wish the "theoretically nice sounding" Sequenced Release had not been pushed by tgm teachers as it was a waste of time and energy.

 

[Tom Losinger]

I own 2 through 6.