What should I do with people who try to disrupt...

[TGManMachine]

quote:Originally posted by Iowagolfpr
No one owns The Golfing Machine body of knowledge, and I will always try to make it stronger by suggesting areas that need to be reviewed in light of modern science.

I hear what you are saying about TGM, and I would like to hear what parts of TGM you currently think should be reviewed and possibly revised.

You as an instructor may be more knowledgeable on TGM than me, and you may have other areas you find out of date with current technological knowledge.

The only change I would like to see is the notion that:

"2-J-2 -- The ball should always be struck prior to the low point of the Down-stroke, even when using a Driver ...... Hitting "up" produces Duffers, And almost all Topped Shots."

I wonder if Kelley may have come to this conclusion based on his own golf swing which may have been well below 100mph at his age and level of play. His conclusions may only confirm his subjective anecdotal experience since he offers no outside examples to validate this theoretical geometric concept. Neither does he show us a full diagramatic geometric proof of the full golf swing which would include the entire body and club at impact. The photographs in TGM seem somewhat inadequate in this case.

Those that refuse to admit that TGM may be scientifically flawed, are stuck in the 1970s as far as the golf swing is concerned. These unfortunates cannot stand the thought that what Kelley wrote in the 1970s might be remotely wrong. I think Kelley would not have taken such a neanderthal attitude, and he would have revised TGM continuously to take advantage of new and obvious scientific knowledge.

It is unfortunate that TGM has been left to languish since the mid 1980s with the passing of Kelley. It does not say much for the scientific intellect of those who own and promote TGM, letting it become a cult phenomenon rather than a progressive scientific golf swing resource. I fear that Kelley's treasure is being neglected by lesser minds who prefer the lazy course of declaring TGM gospel to be followed to the letter and sold as golf swing nirvana. That is a fatal course to follow because science moves on and leaves those who are stuck in the past in their own divot.

Pragmatically effective teachers of the golf swing, like brianman, are left to apply TGM with caution so as not to confuse the student with unecessary knowledge that will only further confabulate. Meanwhile on this forum it is evident that critical analysis of TGM may not be welcome and only produces conflict and rude behavior by those who are the wrong side of a one track mind. Oh well, it takes all kinds.

 

[Brian Manzella]

You are a real pain in the rear, TG....really.

I have gone over my comments about the book many times before.

I am my own man and I am not a straight out of ANY BOOK teacher.

The Golfing Machine is my roadmap.

The noted Homer Kelley disciple, Lynn Blake, has come out saying he has no problem with hitting up on a driver. Mr. Kelly is not here to speak for himself, but Lynn would NEVER say ANYTHING he felt like Homer wouldn't say.

There are a group of Book Literal-ist in Golfing Machine land, but you are at the wrong website to pick "out-of-the-book" fights.

Please, please, go argue the BOOK with Lynn and argue GOLF with me.

 

[TGManMachine]

I hear ya brianman. I'm going to bed now because you and I are the only ones on the forum now. Your wife must be waiting for you.

94 posts on the same topic. I gotta be nuts by now. Ciao, paisan.

 

[densikat]

Brian,

I guess it depends what you want your site to represent. Do you want it to be a site of massive threads that are just schematic circular arguments that go on and on, that confuse people who are really here to learn and frustrate those who already know there stuff well?

Or we could have solid constructive posts in which new users can learn and the knowledgeable people here can share there information.

No matter how adverse you are to banning, I think there comes a point when people need to step into line or leave, and to those who this is directed at, NO I do not mean you have to agree with everything Homer says, rather drop the nit picking annoying useless threads that waste peoples time.

I know for myself, when you go through times of having these troublemakers running rampant in each thread, I usually flick over the threads in about 2 minutes, compared to the time I would normally spend here learning.

Still it is your time and your forum, I just hope we can get back to some more constructive times!

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

keep him around and just start closing threads that stop becoming meaningful or insightful. If you get a reputation as being a forum nazi, so be it. At leat there will be some order.

 

[Erik_K]

quote:Originally posted by densikat

Brian,

I guess it depends what you want your site to represent. Do you want it to be a site of massive threads that are just schematic circular arguments that go on and on, that confuse people who are really here to learn and frustrate those who already know there stuff well?

Or we could have solid constructive posts in which new users can learn and the knowledgeable people here can share there information.

No matter how adverse you are to banning, I think there comes a point when people need to step into line or leave, and to those who this is directed at, NO I do not mean you have to agree with everything Homer says, rather drop the nit picking annoying useless threads that waste peoples time.

I know for myself, when you go through times of having these troublemakers running rampant in each thread, I usually flick over the threads in about 2 minutes, compared to the time I would normally spend here learning.

Still it is your time and your forum, I just hope we can get back to some more constructive times!

this is dead on. What you should do, Brian, is when people want to engage in some really big debate or argument about a specific component with the swing-I think they should email you directly instead of sucking up bandwith with 8 zillion posts.

There's nothing wrong with a debate about xyz component of the swing. But when someone is going to spend oodles of posts and time debating on some really tiny thing-then I think they should take it up with you directly.

This forum, in my opinion, is here so we can learn about the swing and ask each other questions.

 

[Martee]

quote:In this section forum members can discuss and debate the mechanics of the golf stroke and how best to teach, learn and implement them.
Brian Manzella, PGA, G.S.E.D., will moderate the disscussion, as well as discribe and debate his personal opinions on the topics.
Lively debate is very welcome. Happy Posting!

Tough call...

Is it the Manzella Way, Someone else Way???

Flat troublemakers do cause a great deal of problems with older members who have become accustom to a certain give and take and level of discussion and what it is based on...

You yourself are probably best suited to answer your question base on the history you have had with other forums.

At a minimum some of your topics or articles should have limited posts to them. Some of those get off topic and some real questions get lost by those just trying to understand you information.