The Challenge

[Mathew]

The only problem I have with this debate.... is that you are actually calling the shots and bringing it to your home domain. While IMO you are a much better moderator than 'Justin' in FGI, this is one of his well played cards of home advantage.

Hence what I am saying is this - you need a poll (perhaps you could get some code off snitz). You cannot distribute the points for them to have any bearing, you need an independent analysis - Perhaps as an alternative - you can both select 3 people each (without saying who selected who) and then get them to post the merits and who is the winner. That way you cut the players that don't know squat voting for who sounds the best (according to what they read in the most recent version of haneyville digest) from those that do.....

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

7 irons back in the day are the 8 irons of today...the lofts were much different plus they played with much crappier balls instead of the rocket balls of today.

If ben hogan in his prime was hitting a 7 iron today, i'm sure he wouldn't have any problem hitting it 170 at least

 

[David Alford]

Matthew, I especially appreciate your comments, but realistically that won't work here, because of the exteme bias. You'd need outside judges who are VERY knowledgable about the golf swing and totally neutral toward HK and TGM.

I was warned by a person who shall remain anonymous, no matter how logical or supported by examples my arguments would be, they would be berated and pack attacked if it disagreed with TGM in any manner.

All I can to is stick an examples like Moe Norman, etc, into the debate to show how silly their absolutes are. There are a few other objective debate tactics, but then someone will come along and dismiss it all with something like "you're making all these ridiculous assertions".

That said, I probably will agree with many things the group here believes in. Praise be! or whatever.

Personally, I have one goal and that is accuracy of knowledge. If I'm wrong on a point, I WANT to know. And I don't care who corrects me, HK or Joe Duffer if the new information really is accurate.

Anyway, gotta' go for now.

David Alford

 

[Brian Manzella]

David....as you continue to lose the dabte in the other thread, you spend WAY to much time in these other thread making WRONG comments.

I, Brian Manzella, am-----if I am NOTHING ELSE----an original thinker.

I am not a SHILL for any book.

I AM a GSED of The Golfing Machine BECAUSE the knowledge I have gained (and still gain) of Mr. Kelley's work makes me a BETTER TEACHER...

...but I could TEACH and can teach ANYTHING that I know as well as anyone. The man upstairs gave me that ability.

I was a good teacher pre-TGM and would still be way ahead of guys like Hank Haney if I had never studied Homer's book.

BUT>>>>>>.....

It is THE BOOK that has done BY FAR the best job explaining/catologing/and making the science of the swing easy (yes easy) to A P P L Y (for me) in my everyday golf teaching.

If you spent more time learning more about the book and less time being critical YOU'D be a better teacher.

Now...I am giving you your chance to debate me on the swing in the other thread....

and you aren't a very good debater so far.

Get to work.

 

[holenone]

quote:Originally posted by David Alford

keep it quiet about the shoulder plane matching the swing plane, OK? Holeone is a the world's best guru, and he doesn't agree that's possible. No need to rock the ark.

David Alford

Never said that, SuperDave. The Rotated Shoulder Turn is a defined Stroke Component Variation (10-13-C), and I have written several posts on exactly that subject. However, assuming you are locating a Turned Shoulder Plane, it involves a very precise and exaggerated Waist Bend. [Which, by the way, I am not at all sure Moe is doing, but I'll go back and take a look sometime.] And, because it by definition precludes any axis tilt -- weight shift -- it is restricted to lower Power applications.

 

[David Alford]

Well, you wrote:On the Backstroke, the Shoulders and the Clubhead Rotate in two distinctly different Planes. Always have. Always will.

Well that's false unless you try to save face of having made an obivous error by saying not two planes (like no two snowflakes) are ever the same. But, then, you did say "distinctly different", did you not?

David A.

 

[mcflog]

I could be wrong, but the main idea that seems to being missed by David and others, is that Brian did not ask about the shoulder turn, he asked about the "level" shoulder turn. A lot of teachers teach a big shoulders perpindicular to the spine angle wind up where the left shoulder goes under the chin, right shoulder high. Annika has a level shoulder turn, Phil Ritson in discussion about KJ Choi's swing talks about working the shoulders more level. So while shoulder turn may indeed be overrated, the level turn may be very underrated. Which was the point I think.

 

[Ryan Smither]

Thanks mc....

...whew!

 

[MizunoJoe]

I think the point of the debate is that the downswing shoulder plane should be much STEEPER than the backswing plane.

 

[mb6606]

"Moe Norman hits the ball pretty darn hard with minimal shoulder turn and I believe I can hit even harder than Moe with a swing that also uses minimal shoulder turn "
**************************************************************************
David,
Moe in his younger days took a conventional shoulder turn (and probably hit the ball a lot harder). Age and flexibility factors have caused the swing change.
Check out the younger Moe vs. old Moe pics
http://www.megspace.com/sports/moetown/videos/young_old_moe_back_frames.html

 

[holenone]

quote:Originally posted by David Alford

Well, you wrote:On the Backstroke, the Shoulders and the Clubhead Rotate in two distinctly different Planes. Always have. Always will.

Well that's false unless you try to save face of having made an obivous error by saying not two planes (like no two snowflakes) are ever the same. But, then, you did say "distinctly different", did you not?

David A.

SuperDave, and I am smiling wryly as I write this -- you are simply too much! Our previous discussion related to the 'as Flat as possible' Backstroke Shoulder Turn. Remember? In fact, your pronouncement of Homer's 'error' in the Bobby Clampett Swing Analysis was the whole point of our discussion! My response, which you have accurately quoted and which my post adequately discussed, was that the Right Shoulder's Backstroke Turn to the Plane is totally independent of the Clubhead's constant travel on the Plane. They do, in fact, rotate on two distinctly different Planes. Hence, I stand by my response of 'two different planes' -- both for the Backstroke Shoulder Turn versus the Inclined Plane Angle.

Further, the Flat Backstroke Shoulder Turn is followed by the distinctly different Downstroke On Plane Shoulder Turn. This combination is the highly recommended 'On Plane' Component Variation (10-13-D). However, 10-13-D does not eliminate the choice of the Rotated Shoulder Turn (10-13-C). It only offers mechanical superiority.

You, on the other hand, continue to labor under the false belief that a Backstroke Shoulder Turn made 'as flat as possible' somehow mandates a Flat (and Off Plane) Backstroke and, also, a baseball batter's near horizontal plane through the Ball. Well, all I can say is that you are entitled to your opinion. You're wrong, of course, but you're entitled to that as well.

At least the discussion is offering readers ample opportunity to do their own research and to judge the merits of our respective positions. Most important, it offers them the opportunity to understand and apply sound Golf Stroke Mechanics to their own Game.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Thanks Holenone.

My hope for David is that he becomes someone that posts on my site with his opinions.

Period.

 

[David Alford]

They don't rotate on different planes in some swings, chips, and putting strokes for all practical purposes. Get any of the Natural Golf videos and you can see their graphics superimposed on shoulders and clubhead plane and obviously the planes are the same or at least not distinctly different.

Moe Norman's big thing was to have one plane, which is why his swing was so distinctly different.

And fyi, you might want to see his downswing plane. Very close, again.

Sweeping genralizations like the club head and shoulder plane are never the same (distintly different) are simply false.

HK's analysis was for Golf Digest's general readership, not TGM readers.
The golfing public knows what "flat as possible" means and they know it means horizontal because this is as flat as shoulders turn. This points to another of HK's errors, poor communication. At the very least he should have had an footnot saying "you'll really have to read my book to make any sense of this".

Ludicrous.

David Alford

 

[Brian Manzella]

[:0]
Homer's three essentails INCLUDE a PIVOT CENTER!

Keep IT and turn your shoulders a flat as possible....IF you need to for the right shoulder to "reach" the plane.

 

[David Alford]

Indeed, keep your pivot angle and turn your shoulders flat as possible. Only problem, HK didn't say that in the BC analysis. Did he? His error was the common one of ommission.

He failed to be precise. I criticized HK for what he said in the article, nothing more.

 

[nevermind]

I have no working knowledge of TGM, if no-one pointed it out to me, I would have read "flat as possible" as meaning horizontal.

 

[pixie]

quote:Originally posted by nevermind

I have no working knowledge of TGM, if no-one pointed it out to me, I would have read "flat as possible" as meaning horizontal.

Many Tour pros would agree with you.

 

[pluthb]

Shoulders should turn around a spine that is bent forward 30 degrees and away from the ball 15 degrees at the appropriate pace to create the necessary distance. I agree with Brian that the shoulders are UNDERrated since they act as a dual agent moving the pivot and the arms, clubshaft and the clubhead.

 

[diggerdog]

"mommy, daddy, please quit fighting. You are scaring me....."

 

[David Alford]

nevermind and pixie, you are both exactly right and (toot toot), so was I. Notice, however, how EMOTION took over this argument instead of LOGIC.