Rob Neal and JAGR article

Status
Not open for further replies.
drewyallop

drewyallop

New
I could be wrong but it seems to me that Dr Neal's description of optimum muscle output in the golf swing involves sequencing "from the ground up". Do Mike's and Brian's findings on the release contradict some or all of this?

Drew
 
Last edited:
drewyallop

drewyallop

New
How about starting the swing from the ground up? But I suspect Dr. Neal has never claimed that the swing should start there. So I think I understand the no. In Mike's words let the swing recruit the body but that probably means that the body is recruited from the bottom up.

Drew
 
Last edited:
Dariusz J.

Dariusz J.

New member
Thanks, mate. Some good read there on Dr.Neal's site although not each article can be opened. The importance of sequentiality of the motion is rather convincingly argumented there, yet what lacks is a trial of explanation how to achieve this using biophysics. It's rather confirming that something great is just something great. Anyway, it is important that scentific authorities at least confirm what should be known, so that sceptics could easily adapt the truth.

Cheers
 
W

wulsy

New
What amazes me is the belief in the infallability of these scientists. If there's one group who got it wrong BIG time in history it was the scientists. And one group who got it right? The pragamtists. Do what works and if it don't work don't do it. They're just describing what Bubba & Co do and know. Of course they have a role to play and their modeling is very important. But if you don't know that the golf swing begins from the ground then you've never hit a decent shot in yer puff.

I hope Brian doesn't become simply the mouthpiece of the scientists. It ain't cool. Gurus know more than scientists.
 
mgranato

mgranato

New
wulsy said:
What amazes me is the belief in the infallability of these scientists. If there's one group who got it wrong BIG time in history it was the scientists. And one group who got it right? The pragamtists. Do what works and if it don't work don't do it. They're just describing what Bubba & Co do and know. Of course they have a role to play and their modeling is very important. But if you don't know that the golf swing begins from the ground then you've never hit a decent shot in yer puff.

I hope Brian doesn't become simply the mouthpiece of the scientists. It ain't cool. Gurus know more than scientists.
Click to expand...

Do you go to a doctor when you get sick?
 
W

wulsy

New
BTW, mgran I once spoke with a world renowned ENT specialist/surgeon (Prof Prof Dr Dr) who told me that there are healing processes which clearly work, but no-one knows why or how. He accepts them and recommends them in addition to more "conventional" treatments, for the simple reason that they work. He doesn't need the science. He also told me that the explanation as to why conventional treatments work is invariably flawed. Now that's a doctor you can go to: a pragmatist.

Those who thought in the past that this kind of release would result in the ball going LEFT (eg TGM cultists), although it never actually did (well not by reason of this release anyway) were NON-PRAGMATISTS/blind believers in "their" science.

Next!
 
Steve Greffen

Steve Greffen

New
Steve T resurrection? ...nahhh. I acknowledge the need to second guess and question etc but can't we get some real background as to the posters background and qualifications?

Thanks
 
Frans@France

Frans@France

New
Bolt said:
I acknowledge the need to second guess and question etc but can't we get some real background as to the posters background and qualifications? Thanks
Click to expand...

Why? Is it only allowed to second guess and question with proper background and qualifications? Who determins the "proper"? The guys that are being questioned? :p

Wulsy makes are very valid point (as he did in that long thread as well) and I fully agree with him!
 
mgranato

mgranato

New
wulsy said:
BTW, mgran I once spoke with a world renowned ENT specialist/surgeon (Prof Prof Dr Dr) who told me that there are healing processes which clearly work, but no-one knows why or how. He accepts them and recommends them in addition to more "conventional" treatments, for the simple reason that they work. He doesn't need the science. He also told me that the explanation as to why conventional treatments work is invariably flawed. Now that's a doctor you can go to: a pragmatist.

Those who thought in the past that this kind of release would result in the ball going LEFT (eg TGM cultists), although it never actually did (well not by reason of this release anyway) were NON-PRAGMATISTS/blind believers in "their" science.

Next!
Click to expand...

Nice story, But you still haven't answered the question.

You also seem to conveniently mixing theorists with scientists to support this latest Chicken Little monologue. "The golfing sky is falling!":rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
W

wulsy

New
What question stiggy? If I go to a doctor when I'm sick? Of course I do. What's that go to do with anything though? Please let us in on your little monologue with yourself about doctors.

Mixing theorists with scientists? Eh? Again you've lost me on that one. But it doesn't really matter, cos I've got the golf swing sussed;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top