Looks contrived as heck...(now with a Manzella answer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've never liked that little finish position some people are teaching nowadays...just seems goofy to me. Unless you somehow do it naturally and/or are hitting a punch shot or something...and even then...

To be honest I wonder if this, at least in part, is something that was designed just to look "good"...perhaps to stand out...

Who knows though...someone could play well with it for some reason. Maybe they could even play better. Too "contrived" (as someone said) is what I am weary of though, no doubt.

Tiger's swing still looks good (what I mean is, it's Tiger...how bad can it be) but ya...I wonder if he's going in a good direction for sure.

Wonder why he wants to get ahead of it so bad...and with a driver in hand no less...+ that finish...I don't get it...leave it alone, is what I think...

Pivot is looking more centered.....driver in hand.......ahhhhhh........
 
Last edited:

TaylorMadeAP25

New member
You're right, I'm not there. I wasn't alive during the civil war, I wasn't there when they produced "When Harry met Sally", and I wasn't around Microsoft when Bill Gates developed Vista. So I can't have an opinion about those things either?

I'm not critiquing "their teachings" as a whole. I'm critiquing this position. One of the great things I learned form Manuel de la Torre is that you DON'T have to teach exaggeration. Just teach them what is right. If you teach them to exaggerate, eventually THEY WILL.

Ringer, Ive seen on your facebook calling the pivot motion of S&T incorrect and as I asked before how did you measure that? what S&T players pivot did you measure? and who validated your measurment? You making statements like this and not even spending the day with the boys BLOWS MY MIND. Then you go on saying that what Tiger is doing /working on is wrong because of some practice motion he did when he was mad and obviously was over doing it for sure.
There are three diffrent learning styles,1. Verbal 2. Visual 3.Kinesthetic ....I wonder which one Tiger is?
 
Ringer, Ive seen on your facebook calling the pivot motion of S&T incorrect and as I asked before how did you measure that? what S&T players pivot did you measure? and who validated your measurment? You making statements like this and not even spending the day with the boys BLOWS MY MIND. Then you go on saying that what Tiger is doing /working on is wrong because of some practice motion he did when he was mad and obviously was over doing it for sure.
There are three diffrent learning styles,1. Verbal 2. Visual 3.Kinesthetic ....I wonder which one Tiger is?
We all learn through all three methods, but we do have a primary and secondary then a stress. Based on observation of Tiger I would say his primary learning style is kinesthetic, his secondary is visual, and his stress is auditory.

As for my OPINION regarding the S&T pivot, I don't know what you are expecting. You want me to spend time and money to publish a freaking science article? It's an opinion based upon years of experience. Do I really need to invest years and money on a method I don't believe in just to satisfy your questions? No thank you. Is Jimmy Ballards opinion also invalid if he didn't publish a science article or hang out with students of Plummer and Bennet? He's and right leg pivot guy like me. I'll stick with the instruction that improves a players game because of it, not in spite of it.

Finally, it does not look to me like Tiger is exaggerating out of anger. It looks like he is exaggerating because he doesn't think he leaned forward enough and didn't hold his alignments long enough. Whether he did or not I'll bet he has no clue. He just thinks since thats what he is working on right now thats where his problem is. Thats the same thing EVERYONE does. People tend to think that if they hit a bad shot its because they didn't do "it" enough. In Tigers case "it" is leaning forward and driving his alignments past impact.
 

Jim Kobylinski

Super Moderator
That is soooo funny. Yes everyone, please do look at my swing. Those terrible 315 yard drives that I can turn any direction I want. Those 6 irons that I blast 185 yards and end up within 20 feet of the hole 80% of the time on.

Just terrible.

No offense Ringer but if you were THAT good you wouldn't be here lol; i'm not knocking your swing because i've seen it and know you can play but don't let them rile you up ok? lol
 

Jim Kobylinski

Super Moderator
One of the great things I learned form Manuel de la Torre is that you DON'T have to teach exaggeration. Just teach them what is right. If you teach them to exaggerate, eventually THEY WILL.

While this may be true students will over exaggerate the right thing too because they all think, "well this works so well if i do it this much, what if i do it more?!"
 

spider

New
I must be confused because I thought the whole Manzella type teaching was to get the student to exaggerate a move until they go too far then move them back to the middle of the"matrix."

Jim I maybe paraphrasing incorrectly but I seem to remember you and Brian speaking of that in many posts. Perhaps that "method" of teaching has changed. Sorry for the use of the word method which seems now to be a 4 letter word I just couldn't think of another way to write it.
 
I'm constantly overdoing whatever I'm working on.

I guess there could be lots of reasons.

It's an interesting thing in golf. (but not just in golf)

"Golfswings are more like gardens than buildings." -Brian

...

I think Darth caedus is only here for the lightsaber duels.
 
Last edited:
I'm not critiquing "their teachings" as a whole. I'm critiquing this position. One of the great things I learned form Manuel de la Torre is that you DON'T have to teach exaggeration. Just teach them what is right. If you teach them to exaggerate, eventually THEY WILL.

From what I've heard, this might work for Manuel because of the very specific philosophy of his teaching. I'm not sure that you can exaggerate a swing. But I'm sure that lots of people are working with good teachers who want "more of this" or "less of that" - which is where exaggeration comes in. Every change feels exaggerated when you first try something different. The smart guys have a strategy for getting you feedback for when the change has gone too far, or when, in Harvey Penick's words, you've taken too many asprins.

Put it this way. Call me juvenile, but I'd like to be able to wheelie my bike. I know that to do this, I've got to balance my center of gravity over the hub of my rear wheel. I am also convinced that I would learn this balance point a whole lot quicker if now and again I fell off the back.
 

Jim Kobylinski

Super Moderator
I must be confused because I thought the whole Manzella type teaching was to get the student to exaggerate a move until they go too far then move them back to the middle of the"matrix."

Jim I maybe paraphrasing incorrectly but I seem to remember you and Brian speaking of that in many posts. Perhaps that "method" of teaching has changed. Sorry for the use of the word method which seems now to be a 4 letter word I just couldn't think of another way to write it.

Just enough to "blow it up" and only if needed. Case by case basis.
 
Wonder why he wants to get ahead of it so bad...and with a driver in hand no less...+ that finish...I don't get it...leave it alone, is what I think...

Could it be TW sees other guys having success with this move? The guys on the tour watch each other and know who is striking well. Plummer, Foley, etc. would disappear pretty quickly without success no? Haven't seen Leadbetter or Haney on the tour lately??
 
While this may be true students will over exaggerate the right thing too because they all think, "well this works so well if i do it this much, what if i do it more?!"

It entirely depends on what "right" is. If you teach plane and clubface, how is there ever too much "right way"?
 

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Manzella To The Rescue....

What's more alarming.. the faked follow-through / finish position or his idea of the impact position?

I like the new swing a lot better than the Haney swing as a whole.

This is Sean's chance to try to make HIS method work big, big time.

Guess all the athletic swingers around here can go get a tour card and use woods as a whipping boy, point is , the athletic swings exist only in your deluded minds or else you would have got on a tour

Caedus,

Glad to have you around.

One of the best ball-strikers in the last 40 years of golf is a guy from New Orleans named Stan Stopa. I know you probably never heard of him. But Stan, who won the NCAA Division II individual championship, and the United States Public Links, as well as many smaller events, tried more times than Mac O'Grady did to try to qualify for the PGA Tour.

Why didn't he make it?

From 60 yards and in, he is a 5 handicapper.

Sorry to blow up you little theory.

Tom Bartlett hits it to this day better than most of the PGA Tour, but is just not cut out for the travel, and never made enough putts to get out of the second stage of the PGA Tour school.

I could name you 1000 more if I did the research.

Now, if you can not STRIKE the ball properly—something that used to be so esoteric, but can now easily be measured on TrackMan—you can't teach at the highest level.

You might not like my swing's looks, but I can light up TrackMan like a Christmas tree, and NOBODY but you ever said I couldn't bust a grape.

But, you are entitled to your opinion.

C'mon guys - by all means critique the actual swing that he puts on the ball. But the drill's not the swing, it's a means to an end. You know that.

I have NO PROBLEM AT ALL WITH THE DRILL THAT SEAN GAVE TIGER if they work.

So far, his swing looks better by a bunch from the end of the Haney-Tiger era.

On the actual driver swing, that looked to me like a lot more lag on the way down than he had with either Harmon or Haney. Not sure how that's going to benefit his driving - but would be curious to hear people's thoughts.

Tiger was over-tumbling at the end of the Haney-Tiger era.

He has NEVER had anything like a sweep release.

This swing looks like more POP than the Haney version.

But....

Wouldn't you LOVE TO SEE the before and after Trackman numbers?

Tiger has a unit, and does NOT use it at all for his swing.

The follow through is a little scary. Too much momentum to tell on the real driver swing, but the practice swings did look very SnT cut off - and it looked like it was creeping into the iron shot for real. I have no idea what that is supposed to do for Tiger - and I've read the book. To me, that follow-through is like a little trophy branding. It says, on live TV, "SnT woz here"

The S&T finish, "Sexy at P10," is the only way yur arms can wind up with that SEVERE leftward hip movement.

I like Hogan's finish better.

Looks like he's focusing on getting his CoG's moving targetward on the downswing and he was doing a drill to exaggerate that. I wouldn't pay attention to the follow thru, just a result of the 'drill' of him trying to exaggerate what he's doing.

It will interesting to talk CofG's at the Manziposium.

The issue is his needing to go thru these contortions to fix a game that was once the best of all time. Six years of parallel lines and over-rotating the left arm and club has really got him messed up. These drills may be necessary to get him back, but you would think that he would watch that 2000 golf swing and simply try to get back to it. Maybe that is what Foley is working towards.

No doubt Sean got damaged goods.

Easier said than done.

I think we've all had those periods of time where we struck the ball really well and our swing looked really good, too. Then over time we 'lose' that swing and you try to get back to it and it's really hard and your friends tell you that 'you just simply need to go back to that old swing.'

If only it was that easy.

It isn't that easy with Video.

But, if you had the TrackMan numbers, the 6° 3-D print out, and the DBS CofG data, it would be very easy, unless the person had a carzy different body.

Tiger does not. And the data doesn't exist.

I will bang on you, I dont think you have any reson to bash on what they are working on, one because you arnt there, two you havent even spent a day with foley or mike and andy to crtique their teachings...

Ah.....

If having to see a teacher teach live, or having to quiz them about their stuff live, was the "Gold Standard" on critiquing golf teachers, I'd pretty much have no critics.

It comes with the business.

If you can't take, go sell AllState.

...they are on tour and your teaching old people...

BTW, it's "you're," not "your."

Anyhoo, you will NEVER be a great teacher if you don't learn to teach great on old, young, lady, man, difficult student, easy student, good player bad swing, bad player good swing.

Never.

You think I'd give more lessons on Tour if I hung out at a half-dozen events next year?

what you do and what it feels like you do are almost always two completely different things... you rehearse to get the feeling, he obviously didn't make that move when he hit the ball.

You are correct sir.

The drills he is doing appears contrived but the swing looks better than the Haney pattern.

Yup.

But, early on, the Haney pattern was good too.

There is nothing wrong with a centered pivot...

I agree.

But....

Is it optimum???

We shall see.

WTF would ringer know, look at his swing , terrrribblle

Caedus, pal o'mine, what do you think of Kevon Shields' swing?

Working with tour pros is an easy job?...

Easier not to look stupid, harder to look brilliant.

I must be confused because I thought the whole Manzella type teaching was to get the student to exaggerate a move until they go too far then move them back to the middle of the"matrix."

Not anymore.

We never stand pat.

What Trackman has allowed us to do, is this:

We can take a student STRAIGHT to the middle, and then move toward the desired ball-flight.

We used to move them PAST the middle, then move them toward.

BIG upgrade.

Sorry for the use of the word method which seems now to be a 4 letter word I just couldn't think of another way to write it.

Only a four letter word to METHOD teachers.

If the shoe fits....it makes you mad.

When I am thin, calling me fat doesn't really move me. Got it?

"Golfswings are more like gardens than buildings." -Brian

What a brilliant quote. :D

I think Darth caedus is only here for the lightsaber duels.

All Star Wars characters can "get a run" anytime they want.

Next!

Just enough to "blow it up" and only if needed. Case by case basis.

I have no problem with some exaggeration.

I'll stand on my head if it will help my students.

And I'll ask them to do it if it will help some more.

Could it be TW sees other guys having success with this move? The guys on the tour watch each other and know who is striking well. Plummer, Foley, etc. would disappear pretty quickly without success no? Haven't seen Leadbetter or Haney on the tour lately??

It is a copycat tour.

I can't wait to make my run at it.

Looks like an orange tree on the Florida Turnpike to me.
 
From what I've heard, this might work for Manuel because of the very specific philosophy of his teaching. I'm not sure that you can exaggerate a swing. But I'm sure that lots of people are working with good teachers who want "more of this" or "less of that" - which is where exaggeration comes in. Every change feels exaggerated when you first try something different. The smart guys have a strategy for getting you feedback for when the change has gone too far, or when, in Harvey Penick's words, you've taken too many asprins.

Put it this way. Call me juvenile, but I'd like to be able to wheelie my bike. I know that to do this, I've got to balance my center of gravity over the hub of my rear wheel. I am also convinced that I would learn this balance point a whole lot quicker if now and again I fell off the back.

If what he "felt" was exaggerated but what he was DOING was right, I've got no problem. That's not the case.

I fully understand the argument. Exaggerate the move to bring you back to the center. The problem is, how does he know he's going too far? A bad shot will just reinforce the idea that he's still not doing it enough. Then he's just going to learn to do it too much. We see it ALL THE TIME with every amateur stuck on the range. Over doing something and hitting horrible shots, then thinking they need to do it more to fix it.

Regarding your bike analogy, if you fell off would you think the answer was to lean back even more? Without the knowledge that if you fall off you've gone too far, you might. Look at the result of the shot Tiger made, and what he THINKS the fix is.

He THINKS the fix to a pop up is to lean MORE forward.
 
If what he "felt" was exaggerated but what he was DOING was right, I've got no problem. That's not the case.

I fully understand the argument. Exaggerate the move to bring you back to the center. The problem is, how does he know he's going too far? A bad shot will just reinforce the idea that he's still not doing it enough. Then he's just going to learn to do it too much. We see it ALL THE TIME with every amateur stuck on the range. Over doing something and hitting horrible shots, then thinking they need to do it more to fix it.

That's the whole point of having a swing coach right? He's supposed to catch those things before they get out of hand. That's also a big difference between an amateur and a tour player most amateurs will go and get that one or two lessons until they start hitting the ball solidly then they think they don't have to go back. Of course we all know it doesn't take very long to end up with another bad habit if your not practicing the right things. With TW though, of course this isn't going to be a problem he'll have more coaching than he can stand I'd suspect... especially going into the off season. When a swing goes bad, you can only try and fix one or two things at a time. Even TW is still only human.
 
If what he "felt" was exaggerated but what he was DOING was right, I've got no problem. That's not the case.

I fully understand the argument. Exaggerate the move to bring you back to the center. The problem is, how does he know he's going too far? A bad shot will just reinforce the idea that he's still not doing it enough. Then he's just going to learn to do it too much. We see it ALL THE TIME with every amateur stuck on the range. Over doing something and hitting horrible shots, then thinking they need to do it more to fix it.

Regarding your bike analogy, if you fell off would you think the answer was to lean back even more? Without the knowledge that if you fall off you've gone too far, you might. Look at the result of the shot Tiger made, and what he THINKS the fix is.

He THINKS the fix to a pop up is to lean MORE forward.

We already agreed on the first part. That's why I said that smart teaching has a strategy that anticipates what happens when you overdo the fix. Maybe that comes from the teacher watching the student. Better still would be the student understanding how the fix, and underdoing it, and overdoing it, all affect their ballflight, or contact, or follow through.

But apart from balance, I would say that there is very little in the golf swing that the golfer can intuitively recognise as being "right". I don't believe that you teach most golfers to square the face. I think you teach slicers to get the face "more closed" and hookers to close it less. Sorry if this sounds like semantics.

What was the result of Tiger's drive - I couldn't tell from the video. Are you saying he actually hit a pop up? Or are you inferring from his practice swings after the ball had gone that he must have hit a pop up? What do you not like about his actual swing?
 

Kevin Shields

Super Moderator
Not literally, but from the sound, look, and the way he banged that tee into the ground it appears he caught it pretty high on the face. Would love to see the Trackman numbers just for learning purposes.
 
Not literally, but from the sound, look, and the way he banged that tee into the ground it appears he caught it pretty high on the face. Would love to see the Trackman numbers just for learning purposes.

As would I.
I see he caught it high on the face but why did he catch it high on the face? To me it already looked like he was pretty far ahead of it in his real swing. His hands looked a little late and with an open club face we all know that ball would have went right. He got it closed, and hit down on that driver because his hands never caught up to him until well after he hit the ball. This "centered pivot" thing doesn't look like it works quite right for TW at least when there's a driver in his hands. Idk, maybe I'm completely wrong...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top