TGM (And Golf) Lunacy...

[Tball88]

I disagree with the book being nostalga..

Homer was light years ahead of his time, and his ability to discuss things such as lag, pressure points, hinging actions, planes, etc. are still very important today, for those who want to truly understand the golf swing.

He also tried to give us terminology and get away from the "feels like" teaching that was going on at the time, which was another big step forward.

Homers idea of lag, proper hinge action, compression, plane, bent right wrist, alone will help 90% of golfers get better.

His basic concepts took me from a guy who shot in the 90's to a 5 handicap. Luckily, I had Brian to help take those basic concepts into layman's terms.

His books isn't the end all be all, but It seems to me that their are a lot of nitpickers who love to find what is wrong in the book instead of recognizing him for all that is right.

I'm sure the same guys will be saying damn, that Brian Manzella sure got a lot wrong with his ideas, instead of being grateful all he got right.

Progress is nice, but don't step on those who have paved the ground before us..

 

[self-mastery]

TGM is sooo 2004. Can I have those wasted years back?

In my eyes, the absence of all that TGM garbage has made Brian's instruction more accessible to a wider audience. The average weekend golfer with the desire to improve only needs to know a few things to make his swing work. There's another group of golf forum abusers that only come to debate...

 

[birdie_man]

I disagree with the book being nostalga..

Homer was light years ahead of his time, and his ability to discuss things such as lag, pressure points, hinging actions, planes, etc. are still very important today, for those who want to truly understand the golf swing.

He also tried to give us terminology and get away from the "feels like" teaching that was going on at the time, which was another big step forward.

Homers idea of lag, proper hinge action, compression, plane, bent right wrist, alone will help 90% of golfers get better.

His basic concepts took me from a guy who shot in the 90's to a 5 handicap. Luckily, I had Brian to help take those basic concepts into layman's terms.

His books isn't the end all be all, but It seems to me that their are a lot of nitpickers who love to find what is wrong in the book instead of recognizing him for all that is right.

I'm sure the same guys will be saying damn, that Brian Manzella sure got a lot wrong with his ideas, instead of being grateful all he got right.

Progress is nice, but don't step on those who have paved the ground before us..

I can agree with a lot of that.

I also think that it seems like a lot of people are "hating" on the book more than they really do hate it because of how much things have been changing.

It really can't be stated enough how many good things there are with TGM. I think most people who know anything about all this could appreciate that.

 

[birdie_man]

I think this is a crucial point with regard to the site.

I agree there is a lot of information here, but I haven't been here from the start, and like others, probably ask a lot of the same questions that have already been answered.

I'm sure Brian and the other guys get a little tired answering the same things, and whilst the search facility is good, its not perfect.

I heard that Brian is going to relaunch the site soon, is that correct?

Are there plans to re-organise it in a way to save you guys covering the same ground and help us wasting time making you?

Bruce

It's true.

93,283 posts in here including this one man...

To me, I don't think question asking is an issue. Maybe it allows us to bring up things that some people have not seen...or re-introduce old ideas to the same minds. And what's the use of a forum where questions are not allowed. I'm not sure what Brian thinks or how he will organize it in the future.

Ya.....while reading this forum.....I have not really found myself needing Pepto-Bismol in a pretty good while. And whenever I did in the past I don't think it really ever was due to comments from "The Host" either. To me, that's saying a lot because I for sure cannot say the same about some other places. (which is what this thread is about)

There have been some debates. Admirably, Brian many times has admitted he was off-base on some things he had fought hard for.

I of course am only one guy and can only speak for myself. No doubt some would see things differently.

Some might even be suckin some Pepto of their own cause Brian and mandrin (and whoever else needs credit that I don't know about) have pretty solidly debunked some ideas.

(Kool-Aid causes nausea...and maybe also heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, and diarrhea.)

mandrin, as far as I know, isn't even allowed on some other sites...basically due to "information censoring."

Not much Pepto for me though BTW. Sometimes a bit of Grand Marnier...

 

[tongzilla]

TGM is great cuz it teaches you about relationships in the golf swing.

 

[Tom Bartlett]

I've been studying and working on TGM since 1986.

If someone could start me over @ 1986 and I never see TGM but get to take 2009 Brian Manzella with me...They could have all my houses, cars, savings, etc.

 

[ggsjpc]

All books

All books have value for the information they present. They may not present something new but it may present it in different words than I've seen before. TGM is probably the least reader friendly and poorest organized book I've ever encountered. I mean, who starts out a book telling the reader to read it out of order. Does it have good information in it? Obviously. Does it turn people off? Obviously. Does it give people the opportunity to treat it as gospel? Obviously?

Any teacher worth his weight in gold knows that it all must be challenged at all times. Information must be pursued and sometimes your gut flies in the face of tradition. But you know what, whoever said trust your gut knew what they were talking about.

I remember the night I first read Physics of Golf and I was so pissed when I read about the D-plane. The PGA says "9 Ball Flight Laws" and I could clearly see that they didn't jive. I remember reading "Putt Like the Pro's" and wondering why if 90% of the face error showed up in the direction of the ball, why wasn't it the same with full shots. This basically is the same as D-plane but it didn't match the PGA's "Laws". I had to justify it to people by saying if they could see it in slow mo it would have started a little left before it started toward people on the right of the range.

I didn't trust my gut and stick my head out there. So when I read "POG" I thought back to all those times I had wanted to say something different than what I had been taught. I've only read the "TGM" four or five times but I'm sure many people had the same feeling when their gut told them soemthing didn't jive.

 

[Kevin Shields]

Kinda like my "warped plane" theory........dont ask

 

[birdie_man]

Tball you're right............

I feel like I owe something to Homer Kelly now.............I have praised his work many times in the past and still stand by much of what I have said. Most of that NOT even dealing with specific swing mechanics, but with his classification system and his "philosophies"...

One of my favourite quotes:

"Demanding that golf instruction be kept simple does not make it simple - only incomplete and ineffective." - Homer Kelley​

...

I will say though...that doesn't mean it can't be simplified...

Brian is one of the most technically advanced teachers in the world.....just not when he's giving daily lessons.

 

[Tball88]

Tom, your comments about bypassing to 2009 Brian Manzella from 1986 really doesn't make a lot of sense.

Brian Manzella of 2009 had better be better and have newer and fresher ideas. He has improved video, improved science, etc. etc.

That's the problem, you have to put things in perspective as they relate to their time period. TGM was as good as it got for when it came out and much of the material in there has stood the test of time.

Yes, some of it has been proven wrong, but that happens to everything with advancements in science and technology.

I just think some people bash the book on here, because all of it's not 100% correct as opposed to recognizing so much of the good that came out of it.

Hell, in ten years somebody will probably prove that the D-Plane is wrong, who knows.. it's always changing, and there will always be something bigger and better.

 

[Tom Bartlett]

Tom, your comments about bypassing to 2009 Brian Manzella from 1986 really doesn't make a lot of sense.

Brian Manzella of 2009 had better be better and have newer and fresher ideas. He has improved video, improved science, etc. etc.

Are you serious, it doesn't make a lot of sense? "If I could have then what I have now", doesn't make sense???

Just because time has gone by doesn't mean someone HAS to improve. there are quite a few teachers who sell the fact that they haven't changed their teaching in 20+ years. Brian on the other hand HAS.

But back to your first comment. My One and Only goal was and is to play professionally, Not teach, Not work at a course, Not caddie, etc.

Why on Earth would I Not want to go back to when I was just starting out and skip all the crap and misinformation and just focus on what works. Like I said, I would give anything for that opportunity.

I am not sure what you read into my post, but I was not bashing TGM. If your plans are to do anything other than play on tour, then by all means learn the book it will help. But, I believe as a player it can only hurt you.

I can only speak from years of experience.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

Are you serious, it doesn't make a lot of sense? "If I could have then what I have now", doesn't make sense???

Just because time has gone by doesn't mean someone HAS to improve. there are quite a few teachers who sell the fact that they haven't changed their teaching in 20+ years. Brian on the other hand HAS.

But back to your first comment. My One and Only goal was and is to play professionally, Not teach, Not work at a course, Not caddie, etc.

Why on Earth would I Not want to go back to when I was just starting out and skip all the crap and misinformation and just focus on what works. Like I said, I would give anything for that opportunity.

I am not sure what you read into my post, but I was not bashing TGM. If your plans are to do anything other than play on tour, then by all means learn the book it will help. But, I believe as a player it can only hurt you.

I can only speak from years of experience.

Much agreed, and i also in my few years of teaching see where i have gone wrong in the past and have adjusted going forward (a lot thanks to Bmanz and just realizing i know more now that i did then) i think that is progress

 

[Tball88]

What I'm saying is that with science and technology things are always advancing.

In ten years there might be something new that disproves all of today's current theories. Then are you going to be saying, wow, I wish I wouldn't have spent all my time on that crap they were teaching in the 2000's, I sure would have saved a lot of time. No, I hope you would look back and go, man, I learned a lot from the Manzella's teachings and he got me to improve dramatically, as opposed to considering it a waste of time.


TGM at the time it came out was probably one if not the most advanced books of it's era, and you probably got some things out of it that significantly improved your game.

Now Brian has a lot of stuff that is cutting edge and will help players advance even more.

It's stepping stones, and I would say that "most" people generally got better from the teachings of Homer, Ben Doyle, Tom Tomasello, etc.

Jim, talks about how because of bmanz, he's seen where's he's gone wrong and adjusted, and I agree with that. But just think of all the people who were wayoff base and TGM got them to be just a little bit better and demonstrated some facts that they had no idea were wrong. Now people like Brian advance it just a step further.

Gee, just the idea of a flat left wrist, got me hitting the ball better than I ever have. Then I overdid the flat wrist and tried to hold it to long, and had to adjust that, but that's another story.

It's a process and everyone should enjoy the ride.

It's not you or Jim that I have an issue with. The issue I have is with those who want to bash Homer and take shots at him, because time and science have proven him wrong on some items.

 

[Tom Bartlett]

I'll try this one more time then I give up. I was always a good player and ball striker, even before I knew who Homer was. Everything Brian has learned over his teaching career is invaluable to him as a TEACHER. He would not be where He is today without it.

I, as a PLAYER spent way too much of my valuable time studying and trying to understand TGM. I would get great results doing things that I wasn't 'supposed' to be doing, or it wasn't ideal and therefore wouldn't do them.

I would have been a far better TOUR PLAYER had I not known or worried about what was 'right'. It is better that the TEACHER know the 'stuff' and the PLAYER plays.

As far as science advancing. Brian probably would have been a better teacher sooner if he had taught 60 years ago. Now, after years of studying he knows why what he was instinctively teaching 26 years ago worked.

I am talking about TOUR caliber golf (everything else is fine for Joe golfer) and those that haven't taken the journey find it very difficult to understand. I apologize if I offended you for wishing that I had done things differently in MY golfing career.

 

[Bomber]

Tom have your dreams of playing the tour again, be it regular tour or seniors tour, finished ?
And has your playing improved in light of all the new and better information we are getting via this forum?

 

[Brian Manzella]

BLOG: Tommy B & Johnny U

When Tom Bartlett was 15 years old, I had been giving his good pal Daniel Carr lessons for about a year. When Daniel started with me, Tom could give him 6 shots a side. During the summer of 1986 Daniel finished within a couple of shots of Tom in a big 36-hole junior tournament.

Tom started working with me, and I made some changes in his setup that helped right away. I saw my Dad the next day and told him I wished I had never gotten to teach Tom.

"Why," asked my Dad.

"Because, If this kid doesn't make it, It'll be because of me!"

So, pre-TGM, pre-Ben Doyle, I Manzella-ized Tom Bartlett to the point that was leading with 9-holes to play, and very nearly won, the State High School golf tournament as a Sophomore. It against a stellar field that included a few upperclassmen who were future PGA Tour players.

One month later, I went to see Ben.

Lord only knows how much that "Golfing Machine" and Ben Doyle information helped Tom, a freak-of-nature talent that could have learned to do anything I asked.

We just overdid a lot of stuff, and Tom spent way too much time learning the book, and that led to him trying for perfect.

He didn't need perfect.

For the most part, my not knowing the D-Plane, and not understanding who should and shouldn't try to be on the elbow plane, not to mention the Kinetic Chain, probably did the most harm.

As it was, Tom nearly got to the Finals of the PGA Tour School, was a very good mini-tour player, and maybe the best driver of the ball this side of Greg Norman and Arnold Palmer.

Would Tom have "made it" if I knew what I now?

Would he still regret in 2019, that I didn't know the next ten years worth of info in 1986 as well?

In 1968 the Baltimore Colts went 15-1 and were a 17-point favorite over the Joe Namath led New York Jets.

The Colts got that far with their best player, all-time great Johnny Unitas, injured most of the season.

During the now famous Super Bowl III, the Colts lost to the upstart Jets of the AFL 16-7.

Earl Morrall, the very capable backup—who also QBed most of the 17 & Oh '72 Miami Dolphins games, when their quarterback Bob Griese was injured—played a horrible first half against the Jets.

Everyone on earth figured that Johnny U would start the second half and lead the Colts back from behind.

Inexplicably, Colts Hall-of-Fame Coach Don Shula sent Morrall back in to start the third quarter, and Johnny Unitas didn't get in until only 19 minutes were left in the game.

He led the Colts to a quick score, and almost two others, but came up short, as the Colts lost.

Years later, Unitas was asked if the Colts would have won if he started the game instead of Morrall.

"I didn't need that long," was his famous reply.

Trust me, I didn't need to know know EVERYTHING I know now for Tom to make it, or what I'll know in 2019.

"I didn't need that much more."

 

[mandrin]

Brian, your posts and Tom’s post triggered some thoughts.

Concepts, science, technology, are they perhaps getting too dominant ? Is it reasonable to think that the lure of perfection with all our modern stuff has gone too far and one starts to neglect the contributions of common sense and hard earned experience.

Just a real anecdote to illustrate the point made above.

Many moons ago when computers just making it into schools, at a parents day, young kids, at one stand, proudly asked the parents to ask any mathematical questions.

One question asked, 2 + 2 ?

Introducing it diligently into their computer the answer came back as 3.9999999.

Being told it to be actually 4, the kids protested and showed the answer as being really 3.9999999.

 

[Tball88]

Tom, trust me no offense taken from your post. You're point about searching for the "ideal" swing is well taken and something most of us probably do struggle with. That endless pursuit of perfection may be a dead end street.

It's interesting that people like Bruce Leitzke, Lee Trevino, etc. probably didn't study and overanalyze and played great golf with what many would say are not technically perfect swings.

However, that being said there is a gentlemen who posts on another site who played on both the Australian and US tours, and states that he never could play consistently well until he learned to hit with an angled hinge action. Basically he learned through TGM how to take the left side out of play. So for him, TGM was a god send.

TGM is probably good for some people, and for others it's just not a good fit.

I'm sure the same can be said about golf instructors as well. I've worked with Brian twice and a lot of his stuff clicked with me. He solved my slice with twistaway, until I started hooking off the planet and had to find a middle ground, and he actually turned me onto TGM back when he posted on FGI.

But I've worked with other instructors who were supposedly great, in fact one teaches the number one player in the world, and it was a complete disaster for me.

 

[vjsinger]

Brian, your posts and Tom’s post triggered some thoughts.

Concepts, science, technology, are they perhaps getting too dominant ? Is it reasonable to think that the lure of perfection with all our modern stuff has gone too far and one starts to neglect the contributions of common sense and hard earned experience.

Just a real anecdote to illustrate the point made above.

Many moons ago when computers just making it into schools, at a parents day, young kids, at one stand, proudly asked the parents to ask any mathematical questions.

One question asked, 2 + 2 ?

Introducing it diligently into their computer the answer came back as 3.9999999.

Being told it to be actually 4, the kids protested and showed the answer as being really 3.9999999.

Great post Mandrin,

I am not a golfer...at least yet But, I do have an analogy to your query. I am a professional musician and have been playing the French Horn for quite a while and am quite proficient. For those of you that don't know what the Horn is ...It is the little circular ornament you put on your christmas trees..not to scale. I have been teaching younger students for quite a while now and occasionally I get lots of goofy questions, usually from older students, about how to form the embouchure,how does the diaphragm work, etc.,etc.,etc. Oh...I guess I should tell you a little how the instrument makes sound. You take in a breath,you blow air across your lips whilst pursing them together making the lips vibrate making a "buzzing" sound. You do that into the mouthpiece while the mouthpiece is in the instrument... bam a sound. okay..my point, I have lots of older kids coming to me that know the body,instrument,and lots of other "technical" things about what to do,but can't do. So, How do I get them to play??? K.I.S.S. Blow air across the lips, pursing them together making a buzzing sound into the mouthpiece into the horn...sound. Now, There has not been significant scientific research into the the field of how to make a sound on a brass instrument, but still musicians of today are much better than, say 30 years ago. Besides,who wants to study and spend money on that There has been significant research into how to make a golfer and a golf club perform...yet handicaps still remain the same. Don't misinterperut what I am saying, I know that this site is by far the best out there and that Brian and his instructors work very hard and are the best...which is why I have decided to ask Brian for his help So, I pose this...What is the problem?? Are there really that many ignorant people out there in the golf world?? What is the motivation for these people?? The information is out there..Why can't they see it? Why is Brian one of the very few?? So, is Golf too technical? I think no. Because information IS power,but the information I guess must be in the right hands...Thank God we have Brian and guys like Brian that know how to disseminate that powerful information. Thanks Guys


VJ

 

[birdie_man]

I'm sure there is still plenty of admiration towards Homer and TGM amongst the members in here who know his work.....

I think there has been so much change lately that there is a perception that Homer and TGM are not appreciated.