Plummer and Bennett Article

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The Return of NAT

New
TYORKE1 said:
There is alot of talk about the backswing they teach, what about the forward swing, what are some priciples.
Click to expand...


Sustaing the Line of Compression, Face Angles, Plane Shifts, Changing Pulley Sizes, and Delivery Lines....Etc...Basically manipulating the Clubhead Line of Flight for the desired shot at hand
 
B

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Paw Paw Perdu was a Gamblin' Man

The Return of NAT said:
Sustaing the Line of Compression, Face Angles, Plane Shifts, Changing Pulley Sizes, and Delivery Lines....Etc...Basically manipulating the Clubhead Line of Flight for the desired shot at hand
Click to expand...

In other words, they teach what Brian Manzella does, but they do it with a lot less variations and patterns, and a lot less experience.

No disrespect, but I'll bet on the Dago. ;)
 
R

Ryan Smither

Super Moderator
The Return of NAT said:
I spent all day Friday at the Masters with Andy Plummer following Aaron, Dean, and Mike...dressed in his adidas sweatsuit,sneakers, and wrap around sunglasses...He's says kiddingly.."Isn't this great..I work with over 30 of the best players in the world and...nobody knows who I am...I like it that way!!!"
Click to expand...

I was a bigger fan of the Taylor Made Visor, Adidas golf shoes, and TIE on Wednesday at the Masters...

It was the "we're the new guys on the block" look...
 
R

Robbohank

New
birdie_man said:
I guess I meant the new information not being applied properly.

The more I think about it the more I'm unsure if I even entirely know what the hell I meant by "properly".....w/e tho....I was typing faster than usual....my bad.

I guess you can take it however you want at this point.



Alright....

I'm not sure if you're trying to shoot me down or what....

Yes the 3Is are very important (and it's good that you point that out)......I do understand that very very clearly though.................maybe you haven't read many of my posts?.......esp. the last 2 in this thread?

...

Maybe I was a bit harsh with mb.......I did and do think he missed the point tho......you seem to be missing it too.

That being- YES....the 3 Imperatives consistently is basically the end goal (+ power I guess).......that don't mean you can't learn any new stuff beyond that tho......

What about the HOW? (to get people to PERFORM!! the 3 Imperatives)

And......HOW does "such-and-such" WORK? WHY does "such-and-such" happen? WHAT is optimal? WHEN is WHAT optimal?....w/e..........etc. etc. etc. I could go on and on. Read some of mandrin's work.......lots goes into this stuff......

Look at Brian.....he doesn't sit still.......you can't.....

I don't see why Homer wouldn't still be goin today if he was able either.....

I mean, I don't think I should really even have to explain any of this for it to be real obvious to tell you the truth....

"Why are new advances important?" Whaaaaatttt......?

...



You're right....The 3Is are very very very important......achieving them consistently, as an end goal, however you can.

They/results are the main benchmark for everything.........you get the 3Is and you get consistency.

That doesn't mean you don't need to know HOW to make the trip tho.....how to get the 3Is and get people to do the 3Is....howhowhow.....

And BTW....about what you said.....about the Imperatives........in my mind, THIS is exactly what a lot of these, as you say- "by the book" (quotation marks important on that one) "song and verse" guys fail to see............and if they aren't seeing it or they IGNORE IT and push other things (for whatever reason) then they are teaching a method cleverly (or ignorantly) disguised as TGM. And about this kind of thinking- it's not even "by the book" when you get down to it. Homer put right in THE BOOK what he thought about method teaching.

"Hair splitting".........it's all part of the big picture.....so we can talk about it and get to the bottom of it.........or we can live in some kind of a dream world where we ignore differences and problems because we pretend they don't exist.

Screw that.

I dunno if you're one of those "think positive" guys....I'm all for it......but it only works if it doesn't involve putting things off that need to be looked after. (need)
Click to expand...


Not trying to shoot anyone down, I just think this whole idea that the golfing populace isn't getting any better because we're ignoring all this "great new information" that isn't being taught effectively is baloney. The "taught effectively" part has ALWAYS been an issue (thus my assumption in my earlier post that taught effectively means the student "gets it"), and it probably always will be an issue. Maybe for the 1% (probably less) of golf afficianados that visit the golf instruction forums, some of these "new concepts" will yield some breakthrough in their games. For everyone else the 3 imperatives and the 3 essentials (as they stand today with not a single tweak to their interpretation or meaning) may be all that's needed to get them playing MUCH BETTER GOLF. By no means am I proposing we don't continue to learn more about the swing..... and good instructors will do so as part of their job. But at the same time, those who think that golfers haven't gotten better because the basic fundamentals have changed and nobody told anyone about it is living in a dream world.

I've increased my understanding of TGM (and my swing) greatly over the last 3 years or so thanks to Brian's forum and Lynn's. Both have what I think are very effective approaches to teaching what's important.
 
birdie_man

birdie_man

New
Robbohank said:
I just think this whole idea that the golfing populace isn't getting any better because we're ignoring all this "great new information" that isn't being taught effectively is baloney.
Click to expand...

K that's not bad of a statement............I dunno if anyone ever said otherwise tho.

And you can't ignore the new info or pretend that it doesn't help or that there's not room for new advances. (beyond TGM)

That was I thought was being put across and that was my beef.

Everything helps you gotta keep on learning.

Maybe for the 1% (probably less) of golf afficianados that visit the golf instruction forums, some of these "new concepts" will yield some breakthrough in their games. For everyone else the 3 imperatives and the 3 essentials (as they stand today with not a single tweak to their interpretation or meaning) may be all that's needed to get them playing MUCH BETTER GOLF.
I have been thinking more in line with TEACHERS keeping up with this stuff and using it.

Again tho that above is not a bad statement and the 3I's are gold as an end goal. (you still need to know or be shown HOW tho)

By no means am I proposing we don't continue to learn more about the swing..... and good instructors will do so as part of their job. But at the same time, those who think that golfers haven't gotten better because the basic fundamentals have changed and nobody told anyone about it is living in a dream world.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But did anyone say or imply otherwise?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
N

neil

New
Bigwill said:
Not physics themselves, but his IDEAS pertaining to physics. Think about it. Science is always discovering new things, the key word being discovering. What changes isn't what's out there; what changes is our knowledge, understanding, or perception of what's out there. I'm sure that, if he'd lived until today, there would have been many more changes to TGM, as he made more and more discoveries during his research. Remember, Homer did what he did without the benefits of modern technology to aid him. Imagine how much more he may have learned in the last 2 decades?
Click to expand...

Science has discovered nothing new in physics,so far as the physics in the book,since Isaac newton. I AGREE THAT NEW TECHNOLOGY would have helped but only in perhaps measuring forces and speeds,launch angles etc.But...Homer did say that the measurements given were for the golf course not the laboratory.
 
B

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Great Guys....

...but that's another thread.

This one is about Mike and Andy.

I'll review:

They teach a lot of Tour Players. They teach a top of the backswing position that they think is very similar to some greats of the past. I think they teach a similar UPPPER BODY, but have the lower body too far forward. NAT is a friend defending their and his own ability and mentor's info, Ryan likes the garb, and Neil wants to talk about Austin.

Let's wait for the Golf Digest Article when THEY talk about what they teach, and we'll—and I'll—comment.

For now...next.
 
KappaRaider

KappaRaider

New
I have worked with Andy and Brian Manzella (perks of living in Kentucky). They are both excellent teachers. I learned more in 10 minutes with these guys than i did in 5 years with pop instruction. Andy and his guys used alot of familiar TGM terms and anyone here who assumes they know what he teaches from one article in a magazine is totally mistaken. Iam a pretty flexible guy and we pretty much molded my swing to look like Hogan.
 
S

shootin4par

New
3 birds with one stone
by note bying those mags I

dont fill my mind with useless thoughts that for the most part are different ways of saying something I have heard

I save money

and the best of all, I dont waste that paper, which helps to save trees and slow global warming
 
GeG

GeG

New
"You have to tilt about 30 degrees left (below) to get your spine vertical at the top. This tilting creates tremendous torque in the body."
 
K

kshoren05

New
Apparently Mac is not too pleased about the 2 articles being published. A friend of mine who is a former PGA Tour winner and known Mac for 30 years spent part of last weekend with him in Palm Springs. He told me that Mac was livid and threatening litigation. Perhaps Bennett and Plummer have put enough pressure on Mac that he might in fact publish something himself instead of talking about it.
 
shortgamer

shortgamer

New
kshoren05 said:
Apparently Mac is not too pleased about the 2 articles being published. A friend of mine who is a former PGA Tour winner and known Mac for 30 years spent part of last weekend with him in Palm Springs. He told me that Mac was livid and threatening litigation. Perhaps Bennett and Plummer have put enough pressure on Mac that he might in fact publish something himself instead of talking about it.
Click to expand...

Is it Mac's stuff? I mean I know they worked with him but are the just selling the stuff he taught them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top