Is it enough?

[Brian Manzella]

Is it enough to say your way is the best way because it is in a book—any book?

Is it enough to say your way is the best way because you have gotten results before in this manner?

Heck no.

That's why, I am suggesting to the owners of The Golfing Machine, LLC, that in the future—this summit is set—at least one AI (or anyone of interest) show up at the summit to SUBMIT THEIR TEACHING FOR PEER REVIEW.

I have a LOT TO SAY about this issue, and I will, but for now, the top two questions and the following one stand:

Does what you teach REALLY WORK BETTER, or is it just HYPED BETTER, or is it just BETTER IN YOUR OWN MIND, or because you have a PROPAGANDA MACHINE, or have the MAGS or THE GOLF CHANNEL to say you are "Premier."???

Show up and prove it.

Me included.

 

[birdie_man]

Yeye.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Well....

Someone asked:

"Prove it to who?"

Well.

How about whoever showed up at the Summit.

Or to the Video cameras that would video it.

Or the reporters that would cover it.

Nevermind.

Next thing that will happen is a guy with a made-up screen name will call me a joke for even bringing this up.

EVERYONE in golf LOVES to talk, but when it comes time to SHOW UP and prove it—people run for the hills and do what they do best:

"Obscure, Divert, Change the subject, Attack the messenger, etc"

Anything but show up and maybe lose a debate.

That's why golf is where it is today—hype and "Obscure, Divert, Change the subject, Attack the messenger, etc"

I can tell you what, this goes for the WHOLE Golfing Machine. We ought to inspect every inch and correct it where it needs it.

First place to start: "The Basic Motion Curriculum." Is it the best way to start a new golfer?

I have seen it taught at seminars twice, and all I can say is this—good teachers tried with all their might to make it work, but, by my standards it produced a lesson that would make me want to "go sell Allstate."

So, in my proposal, a teacher or teachers, would teach this "Curriculum" while Ben Doyle did his "Chip, Pitch, Punch" and I would do my thing.

Everyone in attendance would learn, and GOLF and G.O.L.F. would benefit.

 

[Martee]

Interesting...

I always thought that's Ben approach was very sound. Maybe not the fastest way for all golfers to get on the course, but it really hit me that building a small to big stroke was a bit easier to master the imperatives.

When I grew up in golf, it wasn't presented to me that way, but that was over 40 years ago.

I think the Basic Curriculum provides the individual a road map to build a golf stroke. I think it helps the instructor develop their own styles, since it offers some organization, not all instructors have an analytic/process oriented thought process.

Probably over simplified, but I thought Ben's chip, pitch and punch was a pretty good match to the first two stages, though the chip is probably a bit longer than the basic. Does it track 1 for 1, no, but I thought it was one of the best if not the best approaches, I must have watch that segment of the tape dozens of time. I know that when I meant Joe D. he was using the same chip motion as we were working on it after class.

What have you seen in the problems with the Basic Motion? It certainly can be used for putting and the short chip. Not saying it is the only way. Just trying to understand the short coming you have seen. I know of two that I have seen, too long of a stroke and not understanding how to move the club. Reading what I wrote probably sound obvious as potental problems.

So give us some insight of what can go wrong, what can be done better, I am all ear!

 

[Brian Manzella]

Interesting...

I always thought that's Ben approach was very sound. Maybe not the fastest way for all golfers to get on the course, but it really hit me that building a small to big stroke was a bit easier to master the imperatives.

When I grew up in golf, it wasn't presented to me that way, but that was over 40 years ago.

I think the Basic Curriculum provides the individual a road map to build a golf stroke. I think it helps the instructor develop their own styles, since it offers some organization, not all instructors have an analytic/process oriented thought process.

Probably over simplified, but I thought Ben's chip, pitch and punch was a pretty good match to the first two stages, though the chip is probably a bit longer than the basic. Does it track 1 for 1, no, but I thought it was one of the best if not the best approaches, I must have watch that segment of the tape dozens of time. I know that when I meant Joe D. he was using the same chip motion as we were working on it after class.

What have you seen in the problems with the Basic Motion? It certainly can be used for putting and the short chip. Not saying it is the only way. Just trying to understand the short coming you have seen. I know of two that I have seen, too long of a stroke and not understanding how to move the club. Reading what I wrote probably sound obvious as potental problems.

So give us some insight of what can go wrong, what can be done better, I am all ear!

I use a version of Ben's "Chip, Pitch, Punch, Swivel, Swing" in my peerless Begineer classes.

But this is a group.

In a Private lesson, I have found a better, faster way, to get to a greater percentage of golfers, and get them to where they want to be faster and better.

I won't go into it here, but let's say that, like many other projects, it is "in the works."

Basically, it will be the FIRST video ever put on the market, that was shot in REAL time with me and a RAW beginner for one hour.

As far as the "Basic Motion Curriculum," was it ever tested in a study of any kind? Heck no.

That's what I am saying, lets see what REALLY WORKS BETTER.

Lets save golf.

 

[cmartingolf]

The Truth....

The truth saves golf, but people don't want the truth. They want a quick tip, a filler. Very few people want to tear down and rebuilt their internal wiring. Who wants to go to the Gym when you can buy 8-minute abs on TV or the Hollywood diet?

George Knudson was my mentor from the time I was 9 y/o 'till he passed away in 1988. I got to spend a lot of time with him over 10 years. He had a practice center in Toronto and gave a bunch of 1/2 day seminars to adults. He let me assist him. We talked a great deal about golfers and since I was young, I asked George why so many of them "sucked" so bad at a game that wasn't that hard? He basically told me that adult minds "were made up" and people weren't really going to change. He loved to teach kids with little or no previous golf influences. They were his clean slate.

I'm a club pro and teach a lot of my members and really love to help people enjoy the game. Although I feel as though I'm a passionate coach and well studied in TGM and various other applications, that it is the student that fails the teacher. Maybe I'm a poor teacher, but I can honestly say I have about 1 in 10 people that actually really change their behavior and get better. Most golfers are technically insane as they try and get a different result from doing the same thing, time after time. I wish I had a nickel for everytime a person topped a shot and said they "lifted up on it." Barfff

I don't lie to students. I tell them why their ball doesn't behave and how to improve it. Most students don't take the medicine as I guess it doesn't taste very good. They have great intentions, but no application.

I love the student that comes to me for a "Driver" lesson. After watching a couple of flips, I'll ask them about thier chipping and pitching and they all say that part of their game is "fine." I ask them to demonstrate a chip and pitch to a couple of targets and most of them lay sod or blade the shots.

Where to start? Basic Motion Curriculum? Most people don't find chipping too sexy. The world if full of rotten chippers and pitchers and this is the place to prove to them where the stroke is founded.

I think a simple test would be a place to orient students progress. Tests founded in Basic Motion, if you pass, you move on to acquired, if you pass you move on to Total.....

Just some stuff to throw out there, my fingertips needed some exercise.

Brian, love the site and you passion for the game.

 

[Brian Manzella]

You want a Driver lesson?

No problem.

I can teach them EVRYTHING they need—and ever will need—with a driver.



Want a driver lesson?

Go get your driver.

 

[mandrin]

Ruminations about enough not being enough

Brian,

You mentioned it before about the difficulty for a TGM teacher always being scrutinized for perhaps not quite teaching the true and only gospel.

It appears that in all ways of life there always will be people who are very attached to the comfort and the reassurance of established rules and regulations.

It is as if they draw comfort form things not changing and indeed often very aggressively attack those who have more faith in risks and hence disturb their peace of mind.

Your approach is really refreshing as it is truly scientific. Try for the very best, but test it, try shoot holes in it. Does not resist, falls apart? Start again and do a better job.

But we are all exposed to the same insidious temptations.

If your approach eventually is accepted as the better one and in its turn codified you also will have a hard time to break loose from it. It will not be allowed.

 

[rwh]

Float Loading Can Help A Beginner

Long Island professional Rick Nielsen (I think he is a student of Ben and used to be an assistant to Mike Hebron) has a nice basic video (Mike Jacobs appears on it). The next step after a chip in his "build a swing" progression is the "chip-pitch" -- a chip stroke that utilizes float loading.

In my opinion, learning how to hit a chip with float loading can go a long way toward preventing a beginner from ever turning into a flipper. I wish I would have had someone around to show me that when I got started in golf.

 

[Erik_K]

Feynman once said that you must always ask questions. That's how we learn and make things better.

 

[shootin4par]

nice post cmartin

to say it another way this is how I see it. Look at golf, what gets all the attention, where do most all people look to find their answer on why their golf swing has gone wrong? there is one move more glamourized and misunderstood then possibly all the other moves combined. Why is that
in life apperance of how you live is what gets all the glamour as well, but quality of life is not based on apperance.

Ask a content man why he is content. what will he say? Do you think he will give some very detailed complicated answer? Or will content people give you a basic answer that has you scratching your head and wondering "there has got to be something more to it then that"

My point is life and the golf swing is all about the basics, get the basics right and you should succeed at both, if you dont have the basics in life then you probably will never pay enough attention to the basics in golf, that is why I beilieve the 1/10 student ratio of who you improve is probably a reflection on the students more so then the teacher. Some people are just not ready.

Those people who come to you who say they want to learn golf, want a magic pill. That is the same reason for all the antidepressent, anxiety, hypertension, weight loss, and other drugs that have saturated our society, people want the miracle cure.

ask brian how he lost weight, he changed his eating habits, instead of looking for a miracle cure, and he looks much healthier for it. he went to the basic part of the problem.

so in life a lot of money, great big fancy house, fast cars, etc.. get all the hype while the most important things in life are overlooked, how we breath, what we eat, how honest we are with ourselves, and how we treat others

In golf the transition is probably written about or discusesed then any other move becasue it is so "elusive" but look at bmans perfect pivot article number one and he says, if you get the backswing righ thtne the downswing will come a lot easier. But most golfers dont want to take the time to change their basics like grip, stance, posture, balance, etc... They just want the pill that will cure all.

life and golf go hand in hand, it is all about the basics. when have you seen someone with good basics struggle real bad, not very often

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

Long Island professional Rick Nielsen (I think he is a student of Ben and used to be an assistant to Mike Hebron) has a nice basic video (Mike Jacobs appears on it). The next step after a chip in his "build a swing" progression is the "chip-pitch" -- a chip stroke that utilizes float loading.

In my opinion, learning how to hit a chip with float loading can go a long way toward preventing a beginner from ever turning into a flipper. I wish I would have had someone around to show me that when I got started in golf.

Funny, certain people would neeeeeeeeeeeeeever teach float loading to anyone even though it's a valid option.

Even though it works for a lot of beginners as you said.

 

[tourdeep]

shoot...totally agree.

"do the basics magnificently"

 

[c21heel]

CMartin

You say that "but I can honestly say I have about 1 in 10 people that actually really change their behavior and get better."

Well, I would say that "1 in 10 Golf Instructors know how to change a students behavior and/or help them get better."

I'm glad I finally met one (Brian Manzella) of those 1 in 10 Golf Instructors!

 

[bts]

Prove it to god?

I'm the one who asked "prove it to who?" and "prove it to god?" and the post got deleted. Come on...., you know "god" knows it.

The host knows a lot of things, but not everything, at least in his current lift. He may know it all someday, but does not seems to be gonna happen in his current lift. It may takes a couple more.

At his level, he may be the best. Anything beyond, he is not even close.

Delete this one here if you may, but you can't shot my mouth elsewhere.

 

[Brian Manzella]

I'm the one who asked "prove it to who?" and "prove it to god?" and the post got deleted. Come on...., you know "god" knows it.

The host knows a lot of things, but not everything, at least in his current lift. He may know it all someday, but does not seems to be gonna happen in his current lift. It may takes a couple more.

At his level, he may be the best. Anything beyond, he is not even close.

Delete this one here if you may, but you can't shot my mouth elsewhere.

References to the Man upstairs is usually not a good idea on forums.

But, if you must...

The POINT of this thesis/thread is that the only way we will ever know if anything is BEST, is to have a summit where we can "compare it" in the flesh.

Some teachers hide behind books, and some hide behind magazines, some hide behind MULTIPLE SCREENNAMES, and even more hide behind the golf channel, but me, I don't even make a swing change without worring about what LEO TONGZILLA will think!

I have no place to hide, my teaching has been "in the public domain" for 25 years.

You are VERY CORRECT, The Man upstairs knows. He knows all.

He knows I am way better than I am given credit for, and ya know, sometimes that is enough for me.

Thanks, for the post,

Brian

 

[Martee]

This concept of who the best is for sometime has had me wondering how you can really measure it.

Cleraly a popular opinion poll seems to be the current method couple with who often charges the most/have some big names associated with them.

I really never gave that process much credit, but it did give you a list of what you could look at if you were interest in the latest golf fashon.

I would submit that to effectively measure who is the best would be to evaluate those who have been taught and how well they are doing after a period of time, say 1 year, 2 year, etc later. That would weed out the quick fix that really didn't fix the actual fault.

But then I woke up, we are talking about golfers here and they are rarely ever satisified with what they have, always seeking for something better which would invalidate the above idea unless they went back to the same instructor.

For all the ideas I have read, I am not sure there is away to get a real answer to that question, who is the best. I think the best you can do is say who was the best for a given moment. Seems like a golf instructor will have to get up every morining and start all over to prove the he/she is the best. An endless cycle till history finally weights in and identifies one.

 

[shootin4par]

one way to do it.
take a crowd of golfers and ask for four to six volunteers, watch all six hit with two instructors. Then have each instructor pick a team, alternating. Let the intstuctors go off with them and a camera, tape their bad swings then the instrucotrs work with them and after that tape their swing again and see who cleaned up more garbage, I honestly beleive the ball stiking at that point in time is not the best judge allways because if they focused solely on ballstriking then the instructors may quck fix just to win. the students who are swinging better will be the ones with the best mental pictue of the swing in their minds

 

[Brian Manzella]

The Thesis, The Thesis!!!

This thread is NOT about which TEACHER is best, or any contest to prove it.

It is what WHAT STUFF is the best.

ie The Curriculum in the back of TGM, Ben Doyle's Chip, Pitch, Punch, or Manzella's Method.

Or some of the COUNTLESS other ways to do what these three THEORIES profess to do.

Not counting all the other WAYS to do all the other THINGS a teacher has to do.

 

[Amen Corner]

Clarification please.

This thread is NOT about which TEACHER is best, or any contest to prove it.

It is what WHAT STUFF is the best.

ie The Curriculum in the back of TGM, Ben Doyle's Chip, Pitch, Punch, or Manzella's Method.

Or some of the COUNTLESS other ways to do what these three THEORIES profess to do.

Not counting all the other WAYS to do all the other THINGS a teacher has to do.

Are you talking about teaching individual or groups?
Have they any knowledge about golf or not?
For how long? 1 hour, halfday?
How would you pick the winner? By how far they hit the ball or how good technique they have?