I'm back

[SteveT]

Brian!!! It's been a looooong time since I last dropped in to participate on your fine forum ... ever since you banned me many many years ago ... on your old forum!!!

Remember me?? .... HarryS ...???!!!!!

Hold it!!! Don't ban me again because my first post under my new ID was to support you on your "fictitious" centrifugal force discussion with mandrin, many months ago. I left him a short killer question on that topic thread and I hope he can oblige me. I remember when it was only me and mandrin who dared oppose you on your TGM beliefs ... and now you have seen the light ... congratulations ...!!!!

I was shocked to read this on one of your threads:

I attended the 1st PGA Teaching and Coaching Summit in 1988. I brought Ben Doyle back to his hotel everyday, and we promoted The Golfing Machine to every curious instructor, and defended it to every detractor.

Fast forward to the 2006 MIT Better Golf Through Technology—18 years later.

Dr. Robert Grober and I sat at a small table outside the meeting room after everyone else was gone.

Trying to save me time with the wealth and depth of his real science knowledge, Dr. Grober said this to me in reference to The Golfing Machine:

"Brian, there is a mistake in every paragraph."

I sat there and argued the book's accuracy with a professor of Applied Physics from Yale, and owner of a PHD in the subject.

What a stupid I was.

So, this question needs to be answered, and it needs to be answered right now:

Why did I go from a staunch Golfing Machine supporter to a staunch non-supporter in about 4 and half years?

You gave credit to everybody but ME in your conversion to sanity !!!!

Remember how I beat up on TGM 'science' and even PP#3 in fine detail and you and a couple of trolls attacked me mercilessly? To your credit, you hung in and responded, but you were not at all open to my detailed explanations.

I told you that Homer was not an engineer and all his 'science' in Chapter 2 was rubbish!! All those force vectors on the clubface were idiotic and if he were a graduate engineer he would by stripped of his degree making those ludicrous incompetent drawings and assertions. Remember ...??!!!

If TGM was an instruction manual on flying a Boeing plane (where Homer worked), it would crash before it took off!!! Remember??!!!!

Oh there were so many things I tried to explain to you and you were so .... uncooperative ... until you listened to Dr. Grober, mandrin, others ... but I already told you those things and then you banned me!!!

I forgive you, Brian ... but at least cast your memory back what ... 6 years ... and tell me you remember ..!!!!

 

[JonWil]

Hi Steve,
It's been nice knowing you. I'm going to miss you.........soon I think.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Brian!!! It's been a looooong time since I last dropped in to participate on your fine forum ... ever since you banned me many many years ago ... on your old forum!!!

Remember me?? .... HarryS ...???!!!!!

Hold it!!! Don't ban me again because my first post under my new ID was to support you on your "fictitious" centrifugal force discussion with mandrin, many months ago. I left him a short killer question on that topic thread and I hope he can oblige me. I remember when it was only me and mandrin who dared oppose you on your TGM beliefs ... and now you have seen the light ... congratulations ...!!!!

I was shocked to read this on one of your threads:



You gave credit to everybody but ME in your conversion to sanity !!!!

Remember how I beat up on TGM 'science' and even PP#3 in fine detail and you and a couple of trolls attacked me mercilessly? To your credit, you hung in and responded, but you were not at all open to my detailed explanations.

I told you that Homer was not an engineer and all his 'science' in Chapter 2 was rubbish!! All those force vectors on the clubface were idiotic and if he were a graduate engineer he would by stripped of his degree making those ludicrous incompetent drawings and assertions. Remember ...??!!!

If TGM was an instruction manual on flying a Boeing plane (where Homer worked), it would crash before it took off!!! Remember??!!!!

Oh there were so many things I tried to explain to you and you were so .... uncooperative ... until you listened to Dr. Grober, mandrin, others ... but I already told you those things and then you banned me!!!

I forgive you, Brian ... but at least cast your memory back what ... 6 years ... and tell me you remember ..!!!!

Couldn't find any HarryS....

Was it a different screen name?

Anyway, please accept my humbled apologies on my temporary resistance to join the 21st century.

 

[cmartingolf]

SteveT,

Does gloating make you feel better? If so, good. I'm glad you feel better.

I've been a fan of TGM for many years. I've never become an AI. Why? I really liked some parts and didn't like others. Simple.

But...it was and still is the best volume of info that ACTUALLY HELPED people get better. Whether the science was rubbish or not, the "feels" gleaned by some the information helped a lot of my students.

With the help of this Forum, Brian and his gang, I've learned a ton more. I will still teach the "feels" off PP3, because it has proven worthwhile and beneficial for my teaching and my students.

I started on this forum in 2006. There were some times that I felt lines were drawn in the sand and you either followed or didn't come back. Basically, I'm glad I stuck around despite the infrequent disagreement. I've expanded by knowledge base a ton.

I hope you stick around and add your knowledge to the site. You might learn something. Or, maybe not. You might know it all.

 

[SteveT]

Memories .....

Couldn't find any HarryS....

Was it a different screen name?

Anyway, please accept my humbled apologies on my temporary resistance to join the 21st century.

I think it was 'HarryS' ... and it was on your old forum many years ago ... anyway ....

Congratulations on your epiphany, and your humility confirms your humanity. You have advanced and become stronger.

Perhaps you don't remember, or want to remember our clashes because it was too traumatic to your ancient beliefs ... but that's all water under the bridge ... you have emerged more knowledgeable and more open-minded making you a superior golf teacher.

TGM was just the obsessive musings of a man who gained notoriety amongst a fringe element in golf ... an unscientific fringe who used TGM to validate their confused subjective feelings. Homer said he based his Star System on his 'scientific' knowledge in Chapter 2 ... but Chapter 2 is nonsense written by somebody who is obviously ignorant about science. Homer was never a college graduate and certainly not an engineer.

Science requires experimental validation, and Homer provides nothing but his ignorant assertions. His mechanical references sound like something he gleaned from his work at Boeing (and certainly not as a graduate engineer), using hydraulic terminology for golfswing dynamics. It's silly .. quite silly.

Glancing through my 1982 edition of TGM, it falls open at pages 64-65 - Lever Assemblies. All of his lever analysis is completely wrong .. and I recall explaining his errors which I will not repeat. Homer did not understand the most basic aspects of levers even though he invoked it in 2-L.

Anybody who invokes science and then displays his utter ignorance of science cannot be given credibility. Oh, the memories of my past posting are overwhelming me, and I won't burden you and the forum with my painful recollections.

Now having said that, I concede that Homer did provide several unique insights into the golfswing with his mass of personal observations. What is pathetic, is that Homer could not apply his own TGM stuff to his own golfswing ... it was just a mind experiment ... and his mind was totally deficient of science too!

Those who espouse Homer, declare that their golfswing improved after reading and digesting TGM ... but that's nothing more than anecdotal experiences which cannot be used as validation of TGM. That's like saying "I read this golf tip in a magazine and my drives went 300 yards!!" Sorry, unbelievable.. sheer delusion...!!!

Another issue I have with TGM and others is with the silly definition of who is a 'swinger' and who is a 'hitter'. I mean, just look at those words ... they are TOTALLY subjective and quite unscientific. Of course that doesn't stop some from scientifically analyzing these golfswing styles and back-calculating some kind of proof.

Brian ... forget about the terms 'swinger' and 'hitter' .. both are nonsense and don't matter ... because there is both swinging and hitting in the golfswing. Everybody is a "swinger-hitter" ... believe it.

Udaman now .....!

 

[Brian Manzella]

Brian ... forget about the terms 'swinger' and 'hitter' .. both are nonsense and don't matter ... because there is both swinging and hitting in the golfswing. Everybody is a "swinger-hitter" ... believe it.

Udaman now .....!

You are very correct.

And, I am the man.


Well, actually, the Manz.

 

[SteveT]

Brian .. udamanza ... and I like your byline:

Use your Pivot, Arms, and Hands to apply force to the club in the proper amounts and at the proper time, positioning the golfer and the club to create the proper "D" Plane for the selected shot.

Everything else is show biz!

Yes, the 'pivot' provides the shoulder torque to whip the arms and hands around the body, but 'applying force to the club' is debatable. I'm sure you have developed your concepts through a lot of experimenting and experience teaching.

The D-plane is confusing and I have to reread Jorgensen every time to refresh my memory ... too scientific ... I'll stick to showbiz ....

 

[spktho]

Brian .. udamanza ... and I like your byline:

Use your Pivot, Arms, and Hands to apply force to the club in the proper amounts and at the proper time, positioning the golfer and the club to create the proper "D" Plane for the selected shot.

Everything else is show biz!

Yes, the 'pivot' provides the shoulder torque to whip the arms and hands around the body, but 'applying force to the club' is debatable. I'm sure you have developed your concepts through a lot of experimenting and experience teaching.

The D-plane is confusing and I have to reread Jorgensen every time to refresh my memory ... too scientific ... I'll stick to showbiz ....

Isn't a force needed to change the motion of anything?

 

[savydan]

Not in yellow land, there you can put force soley along the shaft and the club will magically move in other directions as well.

 

[SteveT]

SteveT,

I've been a fan of TGM for many years. I've never become an AI. Why? I really liked some parts and didn't like others. Simple.

But...it was and still is the best volume of info that ACTUALLY HELPED people get better. Whether the science was rubbish or not, the "feels" gleaned by some the information helped a lot of my students.

With the help of this Forum, Brian and his gang, I've learned a ton more. I will still teach the "feels" off PP3, because it has proven worthwhile and beneficial for my teaching and my students.

I hope you stick around and add your knowledge to the site. You might learn something. Or, maybe not. You might know it all.

I know more than you can imagine, mostly theoretical whereas you are most likely practical. I respect your teaching credentials, as I do BrianM's .. now that he has seen the past errors of his ways!!!

I have studied, discussed and debated TGM and concluded that it's a mess .. with a few pearls ... like PP#3.

Since you say I 'might learn something', let me ask you this: How do you teach the application of PP#3 .. is it a constant pressure or a variable pressure, and if variable, where and why does it vary in the downswing? Also, is PP#3 an applied pressure or is it a reactive resistance against the club handle? I invite you to fill your explanation with references to TGM.

Thanks in advance ...

 

[SteveT]

Isn't a force needed to change the motion of anything?

Yes ... circular motion requires a centripetal force.

I was just inviting BrianM to define what "force" he was thinking about and if he was thinking about some whacky handjob forces on the handle during release.

There are 'forces' and there are 'forces' .....!


Hey, savydan ...did you know that Homer believed in "non-linear (angular) force" and a "rotating force" ... per 2.C.0. pg. 15, 1982 edition? I bet Homer and Newton would have had an energetic discussion, and Newton might have revised his Laws to match Homer's thinking ...

 

[Brian Manzella]

Yes ... circular motion requires a centripetal force.

I was just inviting BrianM to define what "force" he was thinking about and if he was thinking about some whacky handjob forces on the handle during release.

According to Dr. Aaron Zick, there are two things you can accelerate on the downswing—the left arm, and the club.

You can "recruit" any part of your body that can speed up the left arm, including the left arm, torso, right arm, etc.

Then, just before the club is vertical to the ground for the last time, you can put force into the club. And to that end, you can uncock your left wrist, your right wrist, straighten you right arm, etc.

That would give you max power.

How does that sound?

 

[SteveT]

According to Dr. Aaron Zick, there are two things you can accelerate on the downswing—the left arm, and the club.

You can "recruit" any part of your body that can speed up the left arm, including the left arm, torso, right arm, etc.

Then, just before the club is vertical to the ground for the last time, you can put force into the club. And to that end, you can uncock your left wrist, your right wrist, straighten you right arm, etc.

That would give you max power.

How does that sound?

BrianM ... I hear you, but if your understanding of Dr. Zink is as you put it, then he may be wrong. Has Dr. Zink published any of his golfswing concepts so that I can better examine them first hand?

When you say "uncock the left wrist", is this something done consciously or is it a consequence of the "freewheeling" nature of the left wrist .. as per SPS ? Do you believe in 'applied' supination ??

As for the action of the right arm in the final release, you must understand the sharing of forces between the left and right hand in the downswing. There are scientific studies on this topic.

As for 'max power' ... that's the sum of all the moving body parts generating kinetic energy and transmitting it to the clubhead through the arms and hands. Since you mostly feel the 'energy' of the arms and hands, and cannot sense the angular momentum of the legs, hips, torso and subsequent kinetic energy ... you attribute 'max power' to the arms and hands. By the time you get to the arms and hands, you are left with little to generate 'power'.

Just think of the golfswing as flinging the arms around the body, without attempting to manipulate the arms to eke out 'max power'. Think of that one-armed left-handed golfer who can pound the ball over 250 yards ... how can he do it without a right arm ...??!!!!

 

[Brian Manzella]

Math Model....

BrianM ... I hear you, but if your understanding of Dr. Zink is as you put it, then he may be wrong. Has Dr. Zink published any of his golfswing concepts so that I can better examine them first hand?

Dr. Aaron Zick is his name.

He spoke at length at my recent ANTI-SUMMIT Symposium. The Video will be available.

When you say "uncock the left wrist", is this something done consciously or is it a consequence of the "freewheeling" nature of the left wrist .. as per SPS ? Do you believe in 'applied' supination ??

The Math Model that Dr. Zick developed, has no idea WHERE the force comes from, just where and when it is going to.

I was using examples...

As for the action of the right arm in the final release, you must understand the sharing of forces between the left and right hand in the downswing. There are scientific studies on this topic.

Surely you realize I am quite a bit more educated on real science than I used to be.

OBVIOUSLY there is much shared forces in this regard.

As for 'max power' ... that's the sum of all the moving body parts generating kinetic energy and transmitting it to the clubhead through the arms and hands. Since you mostly feel the 'energy' of the arms and hands, and cannot sense the angular momentum of the legs, hips, torso and subsequent kinetic energy ... you attribute 'max power' to the arms and hands. By the time you get to the arms and hands, you are left with little to generate 'power'.

Math Model....no arms and hands in it.

 

[spktho]

Just think of the golfswing as flinging the arms around the body, without attempting to manipulate the arms to eke out 'max power'. Think of that one-armed left-handed golfer who can pound the ball over 250 yards ... how can he do it without a right arm ...??!!!!

I'm sorry to interrupt your interrogation of Brian, but I can't resist.

With the right arm he would probably pound it another 30 yards.

 

[ggsjpc]

Glancing through my 1982 edition of TGM, it falls open at pages 64-65 - Lever Assemblies. All of his lever analysis is completely wrong .. and I recall explaining his errors which I will not repeat. Homer did not understand the most basic aspects of levers even though he invoked it in 2-L.

Surely, I can't be the only one on this forum curious to hear some of the discussions from years gone by.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Chapter 2 and your other issues with the science in TGM.

 

[Dan44GT]

John, you're not the only one. I'd like to hear more.

I'd also like to know why there are so many "phantom" posters.

 

[Kevin Shields]

John, you're not the only one. I'd like to hear more.

I'd also like to know why there are so many "phantom" posters.

The phantom poster screename thing is so weak. Say who you are for cryin out loud. Its so chicken s**t.

 

[Brian Manzella]

The phantom poster screename thing is so weak. Say who you are for cryin out loud. Its so chicken s**t.

And the stupidity of these guys not not realize we can track the ip addresses.

It is just the last swings of a puncher heading for the canvas.

 

[SteveT]

With the right arm he would probably pound it another 30 yards.

... and most use the right arm incorrectly and that reduces their distance by 30 yard ... but they also gain distance to the right or left by 30 yards ...