jimmy mclean on perfection

[johnnymarlboro]

I am not sure Bennett and Plummer have ever been TGM AI's?

From Andy Plummer and Mike Bennett....

"Out of necessity they began organizing the swing based on advice received from noted teacher Mac O’grady, and based on principles laid out in Homer Kelley’s book “The Golfing Machine”.

Maybe not TGM AI's but then we're just getting into semantics.

 

[gmbtempe]

"Out of necessity they began organizing the swing based on advice received from noted teacher Mac O’grady, and based on principles laid out in Homer Kelley’s book “The Golfing Machine”.

Maybe not TGM AI's but then we're just getting into semantics.

Thats one, can you suggest a few more method TGM guys? Guys who say this is THE way you have to do it if you want to work with me?

I just don't think there are many, maybe less then 5% of the hundreds or so AI's or former AI's or people with extensive TGM knowledge as you cite.

 

[ScottRob]

Ah The Yellow Brick Road! Homer made a critical error. I am not referring to the debunking of his science etc. but rather an answer he gave to a question that he usually side-stepped. Homer's usual response to folks trying to winkle what he thought was optimal out of him was "Do what you like." Then he slipped and said if he could start anew with his vast knwledge what would he do? "Take the #3 pressure point (FLW/BRW) and up the turned shoulder plane and down that same plane to low point with his head centered between his feet...or something to that effect. Tadah a method was born! Not only a method, but a method with the greatest mechanical advantage!

There are probably only a handful of teachers that can actually teach using a compatible component approach. The depth of knowledge needed is mind boggling. Without a Trackman the powers of observation would have to be mutant level. I cannot be too critical of methodists. It takes a good long while and a lot of effort just to understand one pattern.

I worked a lot on the right forearm takeway, when a straigher right arm (NHA) helped me zero stuff out. It is tough to take seriously any method (that can be pulled out of TGM) that does not have basic scientific reality as a base.

If a pro cannot explain how to hit a ball straight (d-plane) then move on down the road. The idea that hitting down with a face square to the target at separation will make the ball go straight was a major obstacle for former TGM devotees, like myself.

 

[dbl]

GMB I'm not going to be drawn into an argument with you, but 4 of the top 5 tgm guys the world has heard of are 1 pattern guys, not counting Brian. Forgive my suspicions, but I would bet you know all this and are waiting to deny and obfuscate why those guys are not really "1 pattern" like they "seem."

Since Brian isn't tgm any more and it's not all that pertinent to the board here, maybe a huge listing of all teachers and methods could be done at some general site.

As to leeway, I will clarify and say this that the standard tgm mantra is that there is hitting and swinging procedures "allowed"/advocated by the book, so then a lot of tgm guys wound up with 1 pattern of each. Should we call those 1 hitting 1/ swinging teachers 1 method....imo, sure! Especially since they would concentrate on one, and only occasionally trot out the other.

As it turns out, science has revealed the folly of "pure" swinging or hitting, so...as to methods like that...who cares?

 

[carland]

It's hard to have faith in TGM's "compatible component idea" because the book doesn't do a good job explaining which components must be matched together to make a reliable pattern and why. I've read TGM cover to cover a couple of times. Apart from improving my TGM vocabulary and teaching me about the four power accumulators (which was helpful), the book didn't help me understand the golf swing any better.

 

[gmbtempe]

It's hard to have faith in TGM's "compatible component idea" because the book doesn't do a good job explaining which components must be matched together to make a reliable pattern and why. I've read TGM cover to cover a couple of times. Apart from improving my TGM vocabulary and teaching me about the four power accumulators (which was helpful), the book didn't help me understand the golf swing any better.

agree that I don't think it does, especially with the cross referencing.

 

[gmbtempe]

GMB I'm not going to be drawn into an argument with you, but 4 of the top 5 tgm guys the world has heard of are 1 pattern guys, not counting Brian. Forgive my suspicions, but I would bet you know all this and are waiting to deny and obfuscate why those guys are not really "1 pattern" like they "seem."

I really don't know who you are talking about beyond the MORAD/SnT pattern, you can PM because I am interested.

 

[natep]

I'm not sure how TGM can claim to be all inclusive when it claims that a stationary head is essential/imperative. Just that alone excludes a ton of great golf swings.

 

[Lindsey Newman]

The reality of it all is that it will always circle back to Mac. He is the model that everyone secretly wants to "look" like. He became the "golfing machine model". Everything everyone has tried to do has been based on how Mac interpreted the information and built/altered his swing. This may not be novel, but not really up for conjecture either.

 

[gmbtempe]

The reality of it all is that it will always circle back to Mac. He is the model that everyone secretly wants to "look" like. He became the "golfing machine model". Everything everyone has tried to do has been based on how Mac interpreted the information and built/altered his swing. This may not be novel, but not really up for conjecture either.

Thats an interesting take....

I assumed Mac was more renown on the net and maybe with swing junkies and more less 95% of golf had never really heard of him.

 

[carland]

The reality of it all is that it will always circle back to Mac. He is the model that everyone secretly wants to "look" like. He became the "golfing machine model". Everything everyone has tried to do has been based on how Mac interpreted the information and built/altered his swing. This may not be novel, but not really up for conjecture either.

Not trying to be a contrarian, just trying to understand. I thought that Bobby Clampett was the original poster boy for TGM due to his connection to Ben Doyle and after his early success on the PGA Tour. In his book "The Impact Zone," Clampett claimed that he lost his swing when he abandoned TGM principles and got caught up following the gurus of the day.

So is Clampett's early TGM swing a mix of different components than Mac O'Grady's swing? Was one a TGM hitter and the other a TGM swinger?

 

[gmbtempe]

Mac took TGM and added layers and layers to his model. He certainly supported Homer's work but found much of it was unfinished and some of it was plain out wrong.

 

[G.O.L.F.]

McLean makes a great point. It's not about the swing, it's about your swing, and can you repeat it.

 

[MikeD2]

...4 of the top 5 tgm guys the world has heard of are 1 pattern guys, not counting Brian.

Interesting post dbl. Who would these 5 guys be, in your opinion?

 

[Lindsey Newman]

Not trying to be a contrarian, just trying to understand. I thought that Bobby Clampett was the original poster boy for TGM due to his connection to Ben Doyle and after his early success on the PGA Tour. In his book "The Impact Zone," Clampett claimed that he lost his swing when he abandoned TGM principles and got caught up following the gurus of the day.

So is Clampett's early TGM swing a mix of different components than Mac O'Grady's swing? Was one a TGM hitter and the other a TGM swinger?

That is my point. Bobby Clampett was there all along, but who does everyone really look like?- Mac

 

[dbl]

Mike I don't think it would be all that helpful to lay out the details, but I did go through and made a more formalized list, and I would now say 5 of the top 8...or...7 of the top 10 known tgm instrucors are 1 method guys. Of course that is solely my opinion, and I can understand any consternation over not giving up the list.

I was trying to be supportive and answer a query of disbelief of another's poster's comment. People who objected to the claim about tgm teachers often being 1-method guys could make their own list of whomever they consider the top 10 widely know tgm instructors and it would be interesting to see if they say..."no only 3 of the 10 are 1 method teachers." (or whatever)

 

[Michael Finney]

One of the best threads on this site in a long time.......I enjoyed reading it

 

[Robbohank]

How is 8 step swing a method? Better question have you read it?

Book talks about the swing in terms of parameters of where the club can be, no exact positions.

I might need to back off my initial post a bit. Although I've read 8-Steps it has been awhile and my failing memory had it as more of a "method" with "death-moves" for certain positions included. Upon pulling it back out of the golf library I have to agree with 47range that it is more about parameters and upper-lower limits. He even talks about "swinging left" to hit it straight among other concepts that make a lot of sense and this was 1994.

Now why he decided on a photo of him working with Brad Faxon for the cover is another discussion.

 

[footwedge]

I might need to back off my initial post a bit. Although I've read 8-Steps it has been awhile and my failing memory had it as more of a "method" with "death-moves" for certain positions included. Upon pulling it back out of the golf library I have to agree with 47range that it is more about parameters and upper-lower limits. He even talks about "swinging left" to hit it straight among other concepts that make a lot of sense and this was 1994.

Now why he decided on a photo of him working with Brad Faxon for the cover is another discussion.

Maybe Faxon had something on him...lol.

 

[birdie_man]

Can't watch the Jimmy Mac vid on my celly now, unfortunately.

TGM..

Flawed science, contradicts itself, is unclear, confusing. Unfortunately people bend it out of shape even more.

I think Homer really was trying to make it inclusive. It gets lost in the mumbo jumbo, gumbo. (not a knock on N.O. )

Flawed science + unclarity of writing + contradictions + general complexity + arguing over meaning + trying to argue over & assign preferences (& attach them to TGM) + ... + ... = uh-oh. (Mess)

It's too bad HK wasn't still around. I'd just about bet my life he'd be right with the times.

The catalogue, terminology, philosophy, & effort are mostly what will last, it seems. There are some gems too. & different stuff I've come to appreciate, like r shoulder motion, isolated wrist motions/power accumulators.

RIP.