Sergio Garcia Analysis by Brian Manzella...Golf Magazine Style!

[DOCW3]

Zero Shift

Is there significant emphasis in the AI examinations and do any past or present GSED's encourage its use?

Would the player who moves to the TSP early in the backstroke and remains there, be considered more of a zero shifter than a single shifter?

A book argument could be made that Homer Kelley preferred it. However, when I was studying planes, the one area those who reference the book did not encourage for discussion was zero shift.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Is there significant emphasis in the AI examinations and do any past or present GSED's encourage its use?

The AI exams do not feature it.

And the names will not be mentioned on this site. Book Literalists are the only ones who even dream of it. No one has EVER captured a swing of someone doing it.

Sorta like "right wrist level only." When a huge proponent of this "right wrist level only" theory was captured on a 3D machine, he was found to have 10° of right wrist cock.

The response from the camp: "Homer only said it was a feel."

Would the player who moves to the TSP early in the backstroke and remains there, be considered more of a zero shifter than a single shifter?

By definition, NOPE.

A book argument could be made that Homer Kelley preferred it. However, when I was studying planes, the one area those who reference the book did not encourage for discussion was zero shift.

I let my former post on the former attempt-er of no shift, stand as written.

 

[birdie_man]

Sorta like "right wrist level only." When a huge proponent of this "right wrist level only" theory was captured on a 3D machine, he was found to have 10° of right wrist cock.

You used to recommend this too eh Brian.

I always thought that it probably cocked some.................

 

[Brian Manzella]

My recomendation...

You should TRY to bend your right wrist straight back on itself.

"Others" say that it shouldn't bend a lick past its impact bend, and the bend should be on an almost UNCOCKED plane.

Just admit when you are wrong...I do it all the time.

 

[tongzilla]

Sorta like "right wrist level only." When a huge proponent of this "right wrist level only" theory was captured on a 3D machine, he was found to have 10° of right wrist cock.

Did the head of this "huge proponent" stay absolutely stationary? Did he use Angled Hinging? Did he use Right Arm Thrust only? Did he use the Angle of Approach Procedure?

 

[Jared Willerson]

Did the head of this "huge proponent" stay absolutely stationary? Did he use Angled Hinging? Did he use Right Arm Thrust only? Did he use the Angle of Approach Procedure?

Troublemaker

 

[tongzilla]

Troublemaker

Knowledge seeker

 

[Brian Manzella]

Right Arm Thrust.

I am pretty darn sure there are NO SWINGS on earth, that use right arm thrust as its primary—or even majority—power source.

 

[Steve Khatib]

I second that!

 

[DOCW3]

Right Wrist Bend

You should TRY to bend your right wrist straight back on itself.

"Others" say that it shouldn't bend a lick past its impact bend, and the bend should be on an almost UNCOCKED plane.

Just admit when you are wrong...I do it all the time.

Would you discuss this relative to the illustrations in Five Lessons?

Thanks.

 

[1-b]

matrix ? you are living in it !!!!

Sounds like you buy into the idea that effective mass can be increased if the force vectors are all focused in the same direction, or at the same point. Something like the TOTAL being greater than the SUM.

no, i was just saying that ten ray lewis' would be better than seven or eight,
not that ten ray lewis' would be equivalent to fourteen. sorry about the confusion.

Ahhh, sorry, it really doesn't matter. Only the speed. And I'd bet you a bunch of money, that Sergio would shift MORE trying to win a long drive contest.

we can infer from this that in a major championship, sergio would be more accurate if he shifted less ?
and if he shifted from a squared shoulder plane to a hands plane he could hit it even farther ?

The MANZELLA MATRIX is pretty easy to understand if you'd open up that little yellow tin can of a paradigm you are living in.

the manzella matrix is superior to the golfing machine ? ( i'm setting you up pretty good . can i have a tiny portion of the profits ? )

 

[Brian Manzella]

Manzella Matrix

The Golfing Machine set out to be an explanation of the golf swing, from a physics and geometry perspective. It set out to catalogue all possible swings, at least with the X classification. It is very complex, hard to read, but brilliant in many ways. It dabbled in "how-to" and "recommendations." Homer did very well, despite he was not an instructor, or a math guy.

The Manzella Matrix has been defined on this site a bunch, but in light of the previous paragraph, the "matrix" is a way to SEE swings, LEARN swings, FIX swings, and CATEGORIZE swings. It is designed to be easy enough to understand for a 5-grade class of girls who have never played or even watched golf.

"If you can't explain it in child-like terms, you don't really know it yourself."
—Don Villavaso

 

[1-b]

lies, damn lies and statistics !

After I told him to stay away from you, I'd explain ball-flight to him, and tell him WHY his swing worked, and then we'd go fix his putting.

brian,

staying away from me is always good advice.

but in telling him WHY his swing works would you explain to him why in 2007 he was 184th in driving accuracy and 105th in greens in regulation. i realize these numbers are phenomenal compared to the ordinary human ( i said he is loaded with talent !!!!). but sergio has to know these numbers are important for him in relation, not to the ordinary human, but to everyone else on tour.
and i'm sure he would like to improve these stats.

as far as fixing his putting. he ranked 15th.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Blah, blah, blah.

What about Ben Hogan?

Does his Double-shift do it for you?

What about Byron Nelson's?

Mike Finney?

?

????

 

[lia41985]

brian,

staying away from me is always good advice.

but in telling him WHY his swing works would you explain to him why in 2007 he was 184th in driving accuracy and 105th in greens in regulation. i realize these numbers are phenomenal compared to the ordinary human ( i said he is loaded with talent !!!!). but sergio has to know these numbers are important for him in relation, not to the ordinary human, but to everyone else on tour.
and i'm sure he would like to improve these stats.

as far as fixing his putting. he ranked 15th.

I need to think about the driving and GIR stats some more, but the putting stats, I'm assuming you're referring to putting average, are lying to you. Sure, his putting average may be low, but that's because of his lower GIR. If you can't figure that out, you're just not thinking.

 

[1-b]

i'm closer to you than you think

What about Ben Hogan?

Does his Double-shift do it for you?

What about Byron Nelson's?

Mike Finney?

?

????

brian,

i'm not against the double-shift necessarily (there will be variations of variations ), but does hogan double-shift like sergio double-shifts in his swing.

" precision is recognizing and reconciling minute differentiations ... blah, blah , blah."

 

[1-b]

i'm not certain but..

I need to think about the driving and GIR stats some more, but the putting stats, I'm assuming you're referring to putting average, are lying to you. Sure, his putting average may be low, but that's because of his lower GIR. If you can't figure that out, you're just not thinking.

lia41985,

i might be missing something. but this is from the pga tour website.

"The average number of putts per green in regulation. By using greens hit in regulation, we are able to eliminate the effects of chipping close and one-putting in the computation. "

 

[1-b]

dilettante ?

The Golfing Machine set out to be an explanation of the golf swing, from a physics and geometry perspective. It set out to catalogue all possible swings, at least with the X classification. It is very complex, hard to read, but brilliant in many ways. It dabbled in "how-to" and "recommendations." Homer did very well, despite he was not an instructor, or a math guy.

The Manzella Matrix has been defined on this site a bunch, but in light of the previous paragraph, the "matrix" is a way to SEE swings, LEARN swings, FIX swings, and CATEGORIZE swings. It is designed to be easy enough to understand for a 5-grade class of girls who have never played or even watched golf.

"If you can't explain it in child-like terms, you don't really know it yourself."
—Don Villavaso

the golfing machine" is based on three-all encompassing Primary Concepts on which all details can be easily attached as they surface-they are the Hinge Action (2-G) of an Angular Motion (2-K) on an Inclined Plane (2-F)."
if that ain't simplicity.....

as far as dabbling goes sixteen more years (?) and you'll catch up to homer.

 

[Damon Lucas]

lia41985,

i might be missing something. but this is from the pga tour website.

"The average number of putts per green in regulation. By using greens hit in regulation, we are able to eliminate the effects of chipping close and one-putting in the computation. "

I think the putting stats are WAAAAAYYYYY overrated!

Putts per round is goiing to be led by the guys with low GIRs,
Putts per GIR are also a weak indicator. Low GIR numbers mean people are probably only hitting the greens with their shorter irons and therefore probably hitting those clus closer to the pin,
We are in an age where every putt length is measured, and sinks from each distance is attainable. Also proximity from the hole from longer ranges is attainable.

So the important stats are probably:-
1. Inside 6-8 feet - ability to hit the putt on the intended line very important
- mental abilities tested
- speed control important, but not as much 2,3,
2. 8-20 feet - speed very important
- reading and visualisation become more important
- line and aim control slightly less important,
3. 21 feet and up - speed huge
- reading and visualisation secondary

 

[Brian Manzella]

Three kinds of nuts.

According to the noted philosopher Donald Paul Villavaso, there are three kinds of looney people.

Koo-Koo • Ka-Koo • kook-a-loo

1. Koo-koo : Like the ones in "One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest," these folks are the kind you put in the white coats. Certifiable.

2. Ka-Koo : A little goofy. Silly rabbit, twix are for kids.

3. Kook-a-loo : Weirdo, wacko, out there.​

Anyone who thinks that Sergio needs to switch—mid-career—to a single-shift is definitely one of the three. Ever heard of Marty Fleckman?

Anyone that thinks Homer Kelley was infallible, and "The Golfing Machine" is a perfect piece of work that can withstand 3-D machines, real math guys like Zick and Grober, trackman, and real-world teaching is ABSOLUTELY looney-tunes.

My suggestion, 1-b, Homerisgod or whatever, is that you stick around these parts for a year, and soak up the best information and explanations in the whole biz.

Arguing with a total zealot is a waste of my time, which is a waste of the many folks who are here to learn from me.