Homer's Master Class w/Gregg, Mike and Lynn

[Brian Manzella]

EXAMPLE:

I have a garden (golf swing).

I want to hire a landscaper (golf teacher) to make it look professional.

The landscaper needs to look at the garden and design a new one in his head (at least).

The landscaper needs to do a lot of transplanting, bring in new elements, trim old ones, mulch, etc.

The garden owner needs to do maintenance, to "keep up" the garden.

When the landscape company comes in to do "upkeep," plants grow, plants die, disease creeps in, and sometime new plants need to be brought in.

 

[tonyCA]

Great Question!

His whole WORLD would come crumbling down if I was even half right.

It would require him learning WHAT EVERYONE IS TEACHING AND WHY (because people come to the table with other teacher's ideas).

It would require him giving 1000's of lessons to learn to adapt to all the different people and all the different kinds of lessons a real teacher has to give.

Who (other than Ben Doyle) have you learned from and what, specifically, have you learned about the swing from them? Directly or indirectly. What doesn't/didn't work or what does/did work.

 

[Mike O]

Credit where credit is due

Equifax, Trans Union, Experian.

One point Bartlett- that was funny!

 

[Brian Manzella]

I could do a legit 40-hour video answering this question.

I have learned form nearly everyone you've heard of.

I learned the most from Ben.

Here is a short list of what doesn't work for everyone:

1. Head Dead Still, Dead middle of the feet (works for about 2-5% of golfers)
2. ANY FORM OF Bent left wrist at the top (works best for <20% of golfers)
3. Level Shoulder turn
4. Impact Hands at address (works best for <20% of golfers)
5. Max Trigger Delay (only 2 or 3 % can do it)
6. Trying to make everyone a double-shifter (<20% of golfers can do it best)
7. Trying to make ANYONE a no shifter (Never seen one)
8. Really low hands at adress (<10%)

Ask me a more direct question, that one was all-inclusive

 

[Brian Manzella]

One point Bartlett- that was funny!

Mike O,

You have worked with Homer directly and know the book very well.

Yet, from those I know that have talked with you, you don't hold the entire book as "set in stone."

Is that an accurate description?

 

[tonyCA]

I could do a legit 40-hour video answering this question.

I have learned form nearly everyone you've heard of.

I learned the most from Ben.

Here is a short list of what doesn't work for everyone:

1. Head Dead Still, Dead middle of the feet (works for about 2-5% of golfers)
2. ANY FORM OF Bent left wrist at the top (works best for <20% of golfers)
3. Level Shoulder turn
4. Impact Hands at address (works best for <20% of golfers)
5. Max Trigger Delay (only 2 or 3 % can do it)
6. Trying to make everyone a double-shifter (<20% of golfers can do it best)
7. Trying to make ANYONE a no shifter (Never seen one)
8. Really low hands at adress (<10%)

Ask me a more direct question, that one was all-inclusive

What have you learned (about what works/doesn't work) from Lynn Blake?

Utley?

"anakin"/"non-authorized tgm"?

Riggs?

Ralph Mann?

David Leadbetter?

Reinmuth?

 

[Brian Manzella]

Not to sound flip, Tony, but this answer could take a while.

 

[Mike O]

Quick Sand

Mike O,

You have worked with Homer directly and know the book very well.

Yet, from those I know that have talked with you, you don't hold the entire book as "set in stone."

Is that an accurate description?

Brian,
Just so I don't leave any false impressions- I talked to Homer once on the phone- and being from Seattle I certainly met, knew and interacted with Sally Kelley and others, but unfortunately I never met Homer Kelley.

In regards to me not holding the book "set in stone"- here's a few thoughts.

1) I think it is an incredible accomplishment- a great piece of work. My approach was always to learn it within the context of it's pages and theory - as well as possible. But then at some point in time- everyone should want to move forward with it- knowledge never stops expanding- hopefully! At some point, I think you need to "move on"- retain what you find useful, expand on what you find is lacking, and correct or discard what you find does not fit. At least in regards if you're in the researcher mode.

2) In regards to teaching it- I know Homer wanted to give the AI's "full reign"- he always said that "you guys- would be much more creative than me in regards to getting the ideas across" - at least something to that affect. So he would have loved all of the different personalities promoting "The Golfing Machine" in their own unique way.

So if I had to say if I hold the book "set in stone" or "not set in stone" - whatever that might infer- then Yes, for me - the book is "not set in stone"- mostly in this regard to the theory- many of it's ideas need to be made clearer, many of the ideas need to be expanded on, many new ideas and information could be brought to the table that would allow it to grow,etc.,

And likewise, it's not set in stone on how one would teach it- that's up to the teacher- and although I'm not really a fan of your "in your face" - "I'm the greatest" forum approach- I'd guess that Homer would have loved having teachers like you- A) who acknowledge and use the ideas to some extent but feel as if they have free reign and creativity to get those ideas across to their students based on their years of teaching experience- in any manor that would help the student and B) who would use any, all or their own method of salesmanship to get their name out there- he always thought that some background in sales was a tremendous skill to develop and learn.

Finally, he said "don't sell the system!"- "let the system sell or standby itself"- I think he knew what he was up against- and if you sold the system on someone else's turf- they could slaughter you! You really need to let them come to you- and not you to them- in that regard. It's a long slow process on the bigger picture- and the primary cog that moves that machine is the AI's like yourself- in the trenches everyday! One student at a time.

 

[birdie_man]

"More like a garden".....how true.

...

Amazing thread...

 

[Brian Manzella]

Mike,

Thanks for the very thoughtful response.

As to the "in your face" style that you refer to, you will never find a STUDENT of mine that gets that impression face-to-face.

In the 25 years I have been in this game (teaching golf and trying to be #1 at it), I have seen it all. I STARTED in the teaching business at a range with 25 OTHER INDEPENDENT INSTRUCTORS all trying to cut each others' throats, while they ALL ganged up on me. I learned to teach really well, really fast and also stand up for myself.

For years...and years....I tried the "They will come to you" approach. I learned, studied, researched, and improved and thought "THEY" would come and "Find" me.

They aren't looking for me or anyone like me.

So, I tried moving to another city, which helped, but, as not so long ago as January of 2000, I was still not "getting there."

I tried to do it the "PGA way." I got STUFFED. There are guys who play that game WAY BETTER than I, who can't teach a lick.

This internet thing is great, sure you have a few wackos, but for the first time in my teaching life, "My Daddy owned the Driving Range."

You know what's funny Mike? I really am a good guy and I really can teach EVERY BIT as good as I say.

I am 44 years old and Golf Digest and Golf Magazine STILL haven't put me on their list yet...

With all due respect for the "gentlemen professional" style that you are probably more accustomed to, let me say this:

The ones that are threatened by me ALL talk bad about me BEHIND my back, while they "act the part" for the world to see.

Just like an old friend and really high-ranking pro told me once:

"You know that guy (well respected pro) who everyone thinks is a choir boy? (He is the) First guy at the strip bar."

I am ANYTHING but phony. I play hard, but fair. I have tried it all and MANZELLA STYLE works best for me.

 

[dbl]

I was one that characterized part of Brian's style as "in your face" and that obviously has some connotations which aren't totally correct. If a guy stands up for his ways, that's one thing, and I find that respectable. In person lesson demeanor? Well that remains to be seen, personally. I think Brian's video segments show a pretty complex grasp by which he is able to clarify, instruct, and in the process debunk some commonly held or taught views.

 

[bts]

How good are you?

Brian, just curious how long will it take for you to teach a 5-ft-4 ~105 lb. mother (of a four-month-old baby girl), who never pick up a golf club before, to hit it with her husband's driver about 160 carry dead straight?

 

[kimhhans]

Level Shoulder turn

Hi!

I focused on level shoulder turn (+rfp) yesterday on the range and it worked very well, could You/anyone please elaborate on why this doesn't work for many ?

Thank You

Kim

I could do a legit 40-hour video answering this question.

I have learned form nearly everyone you've heard of.

I learned the most from Ben.

Here is a short list of what doesn't work for everyone:

1. Head Dead Still, Dead middle of the feet (works for about 2-5% of golfers)
2. ANY FORM OF Bent left wrist at the top (works best for <20% of golfers)
3. Level Shoulder turn
4. Impact Hands at address (works best for <20% of golfers)
5. Max Trigger Delay (only 2 or 3 % can do it)
6. Trying to make everyone a double-shifter (<20% of golfers can do it best)
7. Trying to make ANYONE a no shifter (Never seen one)
8. Really low hands at adress (<10%)

Ask me a more direct question, that one was all-inclusive

 

[Brian Manzella]

I should have been more specific.

When I said level shoulder turn, I meant THROUGH THE BALL, you are refering to a FLAT shoulder turn on the backswing which is a something nearly any golfers (there always is exceptions) will play better with.

Right Forearm Pickup (takeaway) as a concept is also an good thing, as most golfers who aren't in DIRE NEED of a "deeper" right shoulder on the backswing, would be better off with RFT or my version, Let the hands pull the pivot.

 

[TheHeat]

Brian, you got something against strip bars?

Jerry

 

[scandres]

The internet Manzella and the real world Manzella are two different guys. Both make my top 10 list and both need to read some more Fred Shoemaker real fast.

 

[Daryl]

Bloodlines

Brian,

You were 18 years old when I first bought and tried to read the little yellow book, so I’ve been at it a long time. I don’t consider myself a smart person and it’s taken this long to get many (not all) of the concepts clear in my mind. I’ve tried to understand and apply what I’ve read for nearly 26 years without success. Sadly, I’ve gone back to beginner golf many, many times. I have misinterpreted and misapplied more than you want to know, but I still want to understand how the machine works as only Homer Kelly had first envisioned.

From what I’ve seen, teaching the golf swing is a very difficult way to earn a living. To my standards, it’s low pay, long hours on your feet, and always teaching new students because for some reason or another all of the old ones don’t always come back. Your only competition is all of the other teachers within one-hundred miles from you. Where I come from, word gets around fast, and if there were ten AI’s in Chicago, they would have their dance cards full sixty weeks a year. Most of the Golfers around me want only to play better golf, they don’t need to know why and they don’t necessarily want to either. And, there are one-hundred-thousand of them.

But, I’m a purist. You, Lynn, Greg, Bobbie, and Ben and many others have had the good fortune to learn from the Master himself, or the next closest to him. I want that chance too. From my point of view, I want to focus on TGM terminology, TGM components, theory and the ever present Imperatives. I want to learn only TGM, the machine approach, and if, after I’m done, I want to travel a separate path, then so be it. As you may have. Homer has said, get there any way you want, as long as you have a flat left wrist, and trace a straight plane line with a club head lag pressure point. (I think I got that right)

But for now, as you have said, I need that Bloodline.

 

[Leroy]

measuring success

Hi Brian, long time lurker of your board, I think this is my first post.

You have an interesting post here regarding teaching styles, and who is the "best". In the real world I dont know how you could really measure who the "best" is in golf instruction. I dont think Golf Digest and there list of the TOP 100 do a good job of ranking instructors. However Im interested in your comments on this thought of mine:

Assume you did a 5 day "school", that involved everything (putting, wedge play, chipping, pitching, short irons, driver, ect.) with a class size of 5 people. These 5 people are all "average" shooting mid 90's. Lets say you did 10 of these schools so you've reached 50 people.

In your opinion what would the "average" score be 1 week after your school, and then 3 months after your school with the majority of the participants continuing to practice what you've taught them? Remember this is 50 "average" people that attended, not future tour pro's or college players.

How do you feel your results would compare to (with the exact same criteria) of the golf schools of Yoda, Ben, and Gregg, and then how would it compare to the "top teachers" such as Leadbetter, Harmon. In your opinion how would all of these rank versus say the "average golf range teacher".

 

[EdZ]

Ed, I know you are a LYNN-ite, that's cool, but if you spent a few days watching and learning from the Stallion, you'd sing a far different tune.

I learn something from everyone Brian. Every perspective can 'teach' someone who has an open mind.

Borders are an illusion that often cause more harm than good.

Peace - EdZ