What Happened to chop? —Now with BLOG by Brian Manzella
- Thread starter Festus
- Start date
- Status
S
SteveT
Guest
.... or was 'chop' a TGM plant ..??!!! 
willgolfer
New
Infected thread.
ffejeff224
New
Infected thread??? Thanks for bringing this up... I was looking for that thread and I could not find it for the life of me. LOL. Now I feel better.
jenhaoyen
New
Ross 750 white on white
danattherock
New
Why was the thread deleted? I told Chop about not using TGM. He didn't know any better than I did last week when I found the forum. He changed it and such. What exactly is allowed to be discussed on this forum? Since my thread was deleted last week, I don't bother posting anything of substance. Are there any rules so to speak? Learning about TGM, Ben Doyle, Bobby Clampett, etc.. is how I found out about Brian. I get here and can't say anything. Very confusing.
-Dan
-Dan
I thought I was the only one that could not find the thread. Good luck with the lesson Chop, I know you will do great.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Here's the deal....
I gave him my phone number and offered to help him anyway I could.
He said he may call for a lesson in December.
It wasn't going anywhere.
Ask ANY question about the golf swing.
It can be about TGM, but we'd rather it be taken out of the TGM wrapper.
Surely, you can understand why.
To get this forum to where it is—3.5 million hits a month—I have had to delete lots of threads, and ban lots of folks.
Every forum on the web that is popular, does the same thing.
Ask ANY golf swing question you wish, and I'll write a 300 word answer tonight.
I gave him my phone number and offered to help him anyway I could.
He said he may call for a lesson in December.
It wasn't going anywhere.
Ask ANY question about the golf swing.
It can be about TGM, but we'd rather it be taken out of the TGM wrapper.
Surely, you can understand why.
To get this forum to where it is—3.5 million hits a month—I have had to delete lots of threads, and ban lots of folks.
Every forum on the web that is popular, does the same thing.
Ask ANY golf swing question you wish, and I'll write a 300 word answer tonight.
willgolfer
New
What is the history of golf?
Remember, 300 words ...
What is the history of the golf swing fits the criteria better.
What is the history of the golf swing fits the criteria better.
Touché.
danattherock
New
Thanks for the offer Brian. If you find time, either here or via PM, answer this...
How does your teaching philosophy vary from others, namely TGM?
Being brand new to so many of these ideas, I find it more than a little confusing. I have not read TGM yet, only Bobby Clampett's TIZ which is responsible for the majority of my improvements this year. I have had two golf lessons in 20 years of golfing (off and on), day long lessons last year with David Orr and Jeff Evans. From my few experiences, books, dvds, etc.. I heard about you and that is what brought me here. Much of what I read here is seemingly familiar to my learnings elsewhere, yet there is some sort of gag order. I bought and saw "Flipper" and heard the references to Ben Doyle and such. But you seem to be on a different path as of late which is fine of course. However, I lack the insight to decipher the difference in teaching styles and philosophy. Like many others (I think), I don't care for the politics and personal stuff that some members here seem so sensitive to. I just want to improve my golf game. Thanks for any energy and thought this message may generate.
-Dan
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Here's the 808 Drum Kit Version....
So "danattherock" has a question.
It took me 808 words.
Here ya go, "dan":
How does your teaching teaching philosophy vary from others, namely those who use TGM as their basis?
BLOG by Brian Manzella
Most teachers have a set way they think a golf swing should look. They favor a certain left arm position at the top, a certain wrist position, a particular plane angle. They want the golfer's weight to move in a prescribed manner. They treat the head as if it were as important as what the club does.
Pop Golf Instruction in 2010 favors a centered pivot, a steepish shoulder turn, a flat arm swing, and getting large portions of the body forward of the ball at impact. Any head movement to the right on the backswing is taboo.
TGM tells the golfer to hit the inside back of the ball, with no instructions on how to adjust for the resultant path. They attempt to tie the mass of the body to the clubhead in an effort to increase the effective mass of the club to reduce impact deceleration. They believe that one end of the club should point to the plane line or the club should be parallel to it the entire swing. Or the mid-grip through the sweetspot version should during the entire downswing.
The more literal of the book's followers, favor the patterns in the 6th edition. They feature a single plane swing—as ye goes up ye shall come down-style, with a head precisely in the middle of their feet from address to the follow-through, with a pivot that only responds to the hands, and a right forearm on the plane at address. They want zero right wrist cocking. They believe that the golfer can influence the ball during impact, after arriving in the same exact impact alignments. They think that the golfer should not push and pull in the same swing. They teach a "Geometry of the Circle" that has a fixed pivot point, and that all swings be taken to the low point that that geometry describes.
I believe that what the club does during the swing to be of paramount importance. I like to construct golf swings that produce these alignments using whatever physicality, and talents that the golfer brings to the table.
I have very successful students that have flat arm swings like Derek Sanders, and more upright arm swings like Lindsay Gahm and David Toms. I have golfers who move very little away from their address weight distribution, like Derek, and those who move quite a bit like Lindsay. I believe that back positioning trumps head positioning. I accommodate the D-Plane in every lesson, and I want the golfer to hit the back of the ball if they want to make the ball fly straight, but I hardly ever tell them that.
I would never teach anyone a single plane swing, and I basically don't even teach a particular plane angle shift or not. I am very path conscious. I do not want golfer to get their upper bodies forward in the downswing. I believe the golfers hands motion, alignment, and positioning, along with the path of the hands and shoulders to be the key to controlling low point. I don't teach extensor action to anyone. If they have it great. But it isn't adding anything to any swing as far as effective mass goes.
I do not want the golf club to point to the plane line on the backswing or the change of directions unless it does on its own and works better. I never teach tracing with forearms, or fanning forearms, or pointing or anything that golfers can't actually do, verifiable in 3D motion analysis. I allow for right wrist cocking. I don't believe in fairy god-mothers, or in being able to change my clubface rotation during impact. I teach clubface control as a whole body skill. I know that the centers of rotation in the golf swing are moving up and back during the below last parallel phase of the downswing, and therefore I teach much more forward lean than downward angle of attack would suggest. Not the geometry of the cycle version that would produce chocolate layer cake-sized divots—if taken literally. Pun intended.
And even though I rarely talk about pushing and pulling in the golf swing to my students, when I do, I teach both. And I have found the that optimum application is pulling, then pushing, then pulling again, at certain times and in certain ways.
I have found this through research, almost daily research of multiple scientists. We live and breath the search for the truth. I believe to be the best, you need the best information. And we are adding to that information, which we feel is second to none every day.
I also believe I can help any golfer today, not needing weeks or months to make progress.
And as I leave my house to go teach, I plan on it.
And that's all I have to say about that.
So "danattherock" has a question.
It took me 808 words.
Here ya go, "dan":
How does your teaching teaching philosophy vary from others, namely those who use TGM as their basis?
BLOG by Brian Manzella
Most teachers have a set way they think a golf swing should look. They favor a certain left arm position at the top, a certain wrist position, a particular plane angle. They want the golfer's weight to move in a prescribed manner. They treat the head as if it were as important as what the club does.
Pop Golf Instruction in 2010 favors a centered pivot, a steepish shoulder turn, a flat arm swing, and getting large portions of the body forward of the ball at impact. Any head movement to the right on the backswing is taboo.
TGM tells the golfer to hit the inside back of the ball, with no instructions on how to adjust for the resultant path. They attempt to tie the mass of the body to the clubhead in an effort to increase the effective mass of the club to reduce impact deceleration. They believe that one end of the club should point to the plane line or the club should be parallel to it the entire swing. Or the mid-grip through the sweetspot version should during the entire downswing.
The more literal of the book's followers, favor the patterns in the 6th edition. They feature a single plane swing—as ye goes up ye shall come down-style, with a head precisely in the middle of their feet from address to the follow-through, with a pivot that only responds to the hands, and a right forearm on the plane at address. They want zero right wrist cocking. They believe that the golfer can influence the ball during impact, after arriving in the same exact impact alignments. They think that the golfer should not push and pull in the same swing. They teach a "Geometry of the Circle" that has a fixed pivot point, and that all swings be taken to the low point that that geometry describes.
I believe that what the club does during the swing to be of paramount importance. I like to construct golf swings that produce these alignments using whatever physicality, and talents that the golfer brings to the table.
I have very successful students that have flat arm swings like Derek Sanders, and more upright arm swings like Lindsay Gahm and David Toms. I have golfers who move very little away from their address weight distribution, like Derek, and those who move quite a bit like Lindsay. I believe that back positioning trumps head positioning. I accommodate the D-Plane in every lesson, and I want the golfer to hit the back of the ball if they want to make the ball fly straight, but I hardly ever tell them that.
I would never teach anyone a single plane swing, and I basically don't even teach a particular plane angle shift or not. I am very path conscious. I do not want golfer to get their upper bodies forward in the downswing. I believe the golfers hands motion, alignment, and positioning, along with the path of the hands and shoulders to be the key to controlling low point. I don't teach extensor action to anyone. If they have it great. But it isn't adding anything to any swing as far as effective mass goes.
I do not want the golf club to point to the plane line on the backswing or the change of directions unless it does on its own and works better. I never teach tracing with forearms, or fanning forearms, or pointing or anything that golfers can't actually do, verifiable in 3D motion analysis. I allow for right wrist cocking. I don't believe in fairy god-mothers, or in being able to change my clubface rotation during impact. I teach clubface control as a whole body skill. I know that the centers of rotation in the golf swing are moving up and back during the below last parallel phase of the downswing, and therefore I teach much more forward lean than downward angle of attack would suggest. Not the geometry of the cycle version that would produce chocolate layer cake-sized divots—if taken literally. Pun intended.
And even though I rarely talk about pushing and pulling in the golf swing to my students, when I do, I teach both. And I have found the that optimum application is pulling, then pushing, then pulling again, at certain times and in certain ways.
I have found this through research, almost daily research of multiple scientists. We live and breath the search for the truth. I believe to be the best, you need the best information. And we are adding to that information, which we feel is second to none every day.
I also believe I can help any golfer today, not needing weeks or months to make progress.
And as I leave my house to go teach, I plan on it.
And that's all I have to say about that.
danattherock
New
Brian,
Thanks for sharing some thoughts man. Being new to any type of formal instruction, I was a bit confused to find so much discrepancy among the various teaching philosophies. The more I learn, the more clear it is to me that golf instruction is as unique as golf swings or preferred putting grips. Naively, I presumed that the majority of the fundamentals, geometry, etc.. of a good golf swing would be fairly universal in their application. However, in recent weeks of searching the web, reading books, watching golf instruction dvds, etc.. I find that to be far from the truth. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts here.
Dan
Thanks for sharing some thoughts man. Being new to any type of formal instruction, I was a bit confused to find so much discrepancy among the various teaching philosophies. The more I learn, the more clear it is to me that golf instruction is as unique as golf swings or preferred putting grips. Naively, I presumed that the majority of the fundamentals, geometry, etc.. of a good golf swing would be fairly universal in their application. However, in recent weeks of searching the web, reading books, watching golf instruction dvds, etc.. I find that to be far from the truth. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts here.
Dan
S
SteveT
Guest
Udaman BManz ...!!!!!!!!
BrianM ... I'm impressed with the scope of your teaching philosophy. I must say you have come a long long way from the days on your old forum when I was posting as "Horton" and you were just a total TGM redneck who refused to listen to me or mandrin. How many years ago was that ... 6, 7, 8 ...??!!!!
In order to survive in any technologically-driven occupation, you must learn and evolve ... and that's what you have done to your credit. Meanwhile, I've somewhat regressed with age and have been overtaken by TrackMan and even Jorgensen's D-plane concept.
As you know, I only reappeared on your fine forum recently, after reading some of the mandrin postings. Btw, where is mandrin ... I miss him and still have many of his mathematical analyses bookmarked.
In technical sales, you must know your product and that of your competition ... but you must not spew out all your technical knowledge and risk overwhelming the customer. You just offer enough to get the sale ... and keep the rest in your back pocket. Your approach to teaching golf seems to follow that wise path.
Now if you succeed in reducing your weight, you will be rocking ....
BrianM ... I'm impressed with the scope of your teaching philosophy. I must say you have come a long long way from the days on your old forum when I was posting as "Horton" and you were just a total TGM redneck who refused to listen to me or mandrin. How many years ago was that ... 6, 7, 8 ...??!!!!
In order to survive in any technologically-driven occupation, you must learn and evolve ... and that's what you have done to your credit. Meanwhile, I've somewhat regressed with age and have been overtaken by TrackMan and even Jorgensen's D-plane concept.
As you know, I only reappeared on your fine forum recently, after reading some of the mandrin postings. Btw, where is mandrin ... I miss him and still have many of his mathematical analyses bookmarked.
In technical sales, you must know your product and that of your competition ... but you must not spew out all your technical knowledge and risk overwhelming the customer. You just offer enough to get the sale ... and keep the rest in your back pocket. Your approach to teaching golf seems to follow that wise path.
Now if you succeed in reducing your weight, you will be rocking ....
Tom Losinger
New
Brian, nice "brief" post. I agree wholeheartedly with what you said. It is hard to believe that there are TGM'rs that actually think the way you describe, but as with most "non-thinkers" they don't usually apply "theory" to reality very well. Congratulations on coloring outside The Book... and actually seeking more knowledge and wisdom beyond the yellow land and therefore improving and applying your craft as I believe Homer hoped for all to do. Keep pushing on!!
trickyric67
New
BManz,
as usual your pearls of wisdom are spot on. I have spent 30+ years searching for the answers and I have learned so much from you in the last 2 years it is scary. I am playing my best golf in 20 years and I understand things now in a way i never did.
I save your "musings" in my Manzella file. I hope you don't mind.
Ric
as usual your pearls of wisdom are spot on. I have spent 30+ years searching for the answers and I have learned so much from you in the last 2 years it is scary. I am playing my best golf in 20 years and I understand things now in a way i never did.
I save your "musings" in my Manzella file. I hope you don't mind.
Ric
up and/or back?
Kevin Shields
Super Moderator
Up and back so the club can go down and forward
- Status