The One-Handed Golf Instructor

[lia41985]

For those of you familiar with economics or with President Harry Truman, you may remember this quote:

“GIVE me a one-handed economist,” demanded a frustrated American president. “All my economists say, ‘on the one hand...on the other'”.

Source: Face value: The one-handed economist | The Economist
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While it may be a easier sell for a methodology that purports to give us everything we want, the truth is that golf, like economics, is complex and we need to understand the notion of trade-offs and embrace complexity. My feeling is that while a method can give you some short-term comfort, you're bound to be frustrated in the long-term. That said, most of here in the States acknowledge that we have an immediate gratification culture, and so most American golfers will gravitate towards alleged cure-all methods.

 

[SteveT]

Just like the Sith ... you would need a pair of one-handed instructors ... one using the left arm and the other using the right arm ... ya think ..??!!!!

 

[lia41985]

Here's a beautiful example from SteveT. These kind of insights are frequently featured on this forum:

The shoulders provide the torque from all that KE, so it would seem that a tighter arm swing radius would be flung faster than extending the arms away from the swing center and creating more inertia working against the shoulder torque.

However this assumes there is no 'leverage' provided by the lead arm or 'thrust' from the rear arm .. which may require or create a larger swing radius for clearances to effectively execute.

Perhaps there is a happy medium for optimal effect where the arms can stay close, but move out far enough to allow arm actions.

This is the kind of scientific problem that BManz can resolve in Project 1.68 within their scientific group.

 

[Richie3Jack]

I'd say 90% of the amateurs I've met in my life gravitate towards 'tips.' I find that Hogan's 'Secret' is probably the gran puba of all tips, and people are still extensively trying to figure out what that secret was. My personal belief is he probably did have a secret that worked for him, but he wasn't going to give it away and even if he did, I don't think it would've worked for a lot of the golfing population. It was probably more or less a feel that he had that allowed him to control the face, path, and low point time after time.

But that's teaching mechanics from feel instead of the more effective way of teaching feel from mechanics.

So from my experience, it's 'tips' that are the most sought after and then 'methods.'







3JACK

 

[SteveT]

Here's a beautiful example from SteveT. These kind of insights are frequently featured on this forum:

Thank you .. and luddites can get a rescue lesson from BManz or just leave if they find the coming Project 1.68 forum too disturbing.

There are lots of silly show and tell golf forums salving the stupidity of those who think the design of the back of their irons are more important than what the front of the clubface is doing ... like with the D-plane.

I hope to help with the transition ... as you should, counsellor ...

 

[SteveT]

I'd say 90% of the amateurs I've met in my life gravitate towards 'tips.' I find that Hogan's 'Secret' is probably the gran puba of all tips, and people are still extensively trying to figure out what that secret was. My personal belief is he probably did have a secret that worked for him, but he wasn't going to give it away and even if he did, I don't think it would've worked for a lot of the golfing population. It was probably more or less a feel that he had that allowed him to control the face, path, and low point time after time.

But that's teaching mechanics from feel instead of the more effective way of teaching feel from mechanics.

So from my experience, it's 'tips' that are the most sought after and then 'methods.'

That's because all the ancient golf books, golf mags and TGC all offer magical 'tips' for the gullible golffing masses. They've been brainwashed into believing that all they need is the lastest model golf clubs and a bunch of 'tips' to make them great ... effortlessly.

I think BManz's Project 1.68 should circumcise all those 'tips' ... and convince serious golfers that a scientific-practical solution to their golfswing woes is best. It's gonna be a big job to swim against that stream of sh!t (pardonez le french) .. but I believe BManz has the chops to git 'er done ...!!!!!

Btw ... Hogan was a mug who couldn't write grammatically .. and it was Herbert Warren Wind who wrote up 5 Lessons and was the brains behind Hogan's ball-beating in the dirt because without Wind, there would be no 5 Lessons ..

 

[lia41985]

Yup, tips can be in a similar vein. A lot of tips don't promise to be a cure all, just a cure for something specific.

 

[ScottRob]

[Btw ... Hogan was a mug who couldn't write grammatically .. and it was Herbert Warren Wind who wrote up 5 Lessons and was the brains behind Hogan's ball-beating in the dirt because without Wind, there would be no 5 Lessons ..[/QUOTE]

What is the scientific definition of a "mug." I want to make sure I am up on the latest science-infused definition?

 

[lia41985]

Explains the behavior of methodologists:

Classic research has suggested that the more people doubt their own beliefs the more, paradoxically, they are inclined to proselytize in favor of them. David Gal and Derek Rucker published a study in Psychological Science in which they presented some research subjects with evidence that undermined their core convictions. The subjects who were forced to confront the counterevidence went on to more forcefully advocate their original beliefs, thus confirming the earlier findings.

From: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/opinion/07brooks.html?ref=davidbrooks