Why people are unable to use old wisdom ?

[Dariusz J.]

The whole mess with "going normal" and "new release" made me think. When I asked a few years ago why straightening the rear wrist/bending the lead one is not regarded as 5th accumulator (using TGM archaic language) - either my question regarded unanswered or ridiculed. Same when I tried to revitalize the importance of the slap-hinge release (that I've heard first on OnePlane fora).
Now, science confirms that old wisdom is right (I believe not only in this case as we all will learn soon which I can suspect now a few of). Kudos for Brian to do it for the golf instruction now - better late than never. It teaches everyone that no concept, no matter how silly it sounds, can be laughed at.

Cheers

 

[wulsy]

Because most people in the golf instruction world are uneducated.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Because most people in the golf instruction world are uneducated.

True. But actually this issue could be solved via common sense. Education is not equal to wisdom. It seems that common wisdom is often ridiculed and it is not good.

Cheers

 

[birly-shirly]

Lots of ideas have been touted as common sense... such as straight left arm, keeping your eye on the ball, parallel alignment and the virtues of a stationary head.

I agree that people should keep an open mind.

 

[SteveT]

It's been determined through marketing research that if a television commercial is not understood by a 12 year old, 95% of the viewing audience will not understand it either.

Draw yer own conclusions .....

 

[ZAP]

Old people talk too much and they smell kind of funny.(just kidding)

Seriously I think people want to believe that what they think is correct. They/we will twist around reality to match or belief system and grasp at any tiny piece of evidence to prove our way of thinking correct. Trust me when I say the first time I watched one of Brian's videos I was a bit more than skeptical. It was tough to accept that a lot of what i thought to be true was absolute garbage.

 

[bendet3]

You reference "common sense", but the problem with golf is that often common sense is wrong, hit down to get the ball up, when you slice, if you swing further left, the ball slices more, swing easy to hit it further. I think that for some, this causes them to question their own common sense. You combine this with so much "old wisdom" that was either just plain wrong, or wrong for that golfer who was trying it, and it can make for a very skeptical, questioning golfer.

 

[Dariusz J.]

You reference "common sense", but the problem with golf is that often common sense is wrong, hit down to get the ball up, when you slice, if you swing further left, the ball slices more, swing easy to hit it further. I think that for some, this causes them to question their own common sense. You combine this with so much "old wisdom" that was either just plain wrong, or wrong for that golfer who was trying it, and it can make for a very skeptical, questioning golfer.

Yes, it may be wrong, however, as often as well-thought ideas are wrong. The only proper way is to analyze everything and not to omit anything because there is nothing about it in a PGA manual or other golf "bibles".
For instance, when I say that OTT will soon be regarded as most desired way of performing downswing you'll call me stupid today. For iinstance when I say that a key to a great ballstriking is to learn how to hit a nasty hook and then to learn how to de-hook it - you'll tell me that no teacher will ever go this route. We shall see tomorrow though who is right. And these were just examples.

Cheers

 

[Dariusz J.]

Trust me when I say the first time I watched one of Brian's videos I was a bit more than skeptical. It was tough to accept that a lot of what i thought to be true was absolute garbage.

Why were you sceptical ? My guess is that because you did not pay any attention to old golf legends and your brain was saturated by TGM and post-TGM sillinesses. You did not want to try to think independently and be a real truthseeker.
Correct me f I am wrong, mate.

Cheers

 

[dbl]

Darius, there is a fine book called The Methods of Golf's Masters by Aultman and Bowden. I've read it at least 25 times. Has chapters on about 20 or so all time greats, many from before I was born. When I first found the book I wondered how they could have swings not as prescribed by modern ideas. I figured either what they were doing was what the modern ideas was saying, but I must not understand the modern ideas, or those old guys just mastered bizarre techniques....which as I became less enchanted with the modern stuff I visited more and more. I just wish the modern teachers stated their ideas less authoritatively than they did, saying in effect that their one way is THE way....

 

[ZAP]

Why were you sceptical ? My guess is that because you did not pay any attention to old golf legends and your brain was saturated by TGM and post-TGM sillinesses. You did not want to try to think independently and be a real truthseeker.
Correct me f I am wrong, mate.

Cheers

Thing is my brain was not really full of any other ideas other than the ones I had figured out on my own. The first golf lesson I ever took was from Brian. I was self taught through hitting a lot of golf balls and from reading various golf instructional books. Trevino was one of my early golf heroes. I thought you had to swing straight down the line and on plane to hit the ball straight. Never really gave much thought to why really. I am sure Brian Lindsey and Kevin will attest that I am/was basically playing athletically with little thought about why things happened.

When I watched Brian explain stuff in such a confidant and simple manner I was skeptical. It all seemed too contrived to a "see ball hit ball" player. I still play pretty quickly but at least now I practice much more with purpose and I know what causes certain things for me.

Again I cannot really say my head was full of TGM or anything like that because the first time I heard of TGM was here on this site.
I bet I watched the D plane video about four times before I felt the physics were right. The tilt of the spin axis really was a mind blower for me personally. really helped me understand my ball flight and impact physics.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Darius, there is a fine book called The Methods of Golf's Masters by Aultman and Bowden. I've read it at least 25 times. Has chapters on about 20 or so all time greats, many from before I was born. When I first found the book I wondered how they could have swings not as prescribed by modern ideas. I figured either what they were doing was what the modern ideas was saying, but I must not understand the modern ideas, or those old guys just mastered bizarre techniques....which as I became less enchanted with the modern stuff I visited more and more. I just wish the modern teachers stated their ideas less authoritatively than they did, saying in effect that their one way is THE way....

I'd love to read this book, Dbl. What is funny, today's golf instruction is full of silly don'ts without examining the validity of some concepts. Swings of today's tour players (the vast majority of them) look like they could be shag caddies of such Joneses, Hogans, Sneads or Nicklauses.

Thing is my brain was not really full of any other ideas other than the ones I had figured out on my own. The first golf lesson I ever took was from Brian. I was self taught through hitting a lot of golf balls and from reading various golf instructional books. Trevino was one of my early golf heroes. I thought you had to swing straight down the line and on plane to hit the ball straight. Never really gave much thought to why really. I am sure Brian Lindsey and Kevin will attest that I am/was basically playing athletically with little thought about why things happened.

When I watched Brian explain stuff in such a confidant and simple manner I was skeptical. It all seemed too contrived to a "see ball hit ball" player. I still play pretty quickly but at least now I practice much more with purpose and I know what causes certain things for me.

Again I cannot really say my head was full of TGM or anything like that because the first time I heard of TGM was here on this site.
I bet I watched the D plane video about four times before I felt the physics were right. The tilt of the spin axis really was a mind blower for me personally. really helped me understand my ball flight and impact physics.

OK, but I bet you knew that "flipping" is bad, losing "lag" is bad, OTT is bad - don't do it, don't do that, don't do this, etc. yes ?

Cheers

 

[ScottRob]

[ Swings of today's tour players (the vast majority of them) look like they could be shag caddies of such Joneses, Hogans, Sneads or Nicklauses.


The opposite is true if you know anything about "caddy swings." If anything, the one methods fits all mindset seems to be the order of the day, not the "it ain't pretty, but it works" approach. I think the cats that figured it out in the raw manner of trial and error (which ultimately we are all must do) were the educated sort. By educated, I mean they trusted their own powers of observation and experiment and therefore were learning CONSTANTLY; as opposed to modern players that are more of the schooled sort. Schooling is not always educational!

 

[BerntR]

Dariusz,

What do you mean by OTT when you say it's a good thing?

Was Hogan OTT?

 

[Martee]

All this cutting edge technology and science is really shinning a new light on the golf physics.

To date, I haven’t read anything that has counter a long standing fundamental in the golf swing for normal shots; the club head should contact the golf ball before the big ball. In addition the contact point on the club face in relation to its orientation and path define the golf ball’s flight.

Technology such as Trackman offers a lot of what I would classify as raw data. In my limited experience and educated opinion I don’t see significant value of this technology for the average golfer in of itself, by itself. I do recognize that this can be an extremely power tool in the hands of an experienced and educated golf instructor. Removing bias and perception, translating the raw data back to the golf club, the golfer’s motion, the golfer provides the golf instructors the capabilities for ACCUATE high quality instruction.

The science today in golf offers explanations for what was guessed, corrects misunderstanding and offers a gateway into a new level of golf instruction. IMO: The bulk of the physics appears to be more related to the club head, club face and the ball. The science as related to the body’s role and more important the body’s capability in golf seems to be less researched or maybe less validate to science of the club head, club face and ball.

For me at least, I shall read and evaluate, but I will either need to seek out the professional with the knowledge and tools or wait till the technology and science can be packaged for a Do It Yourself who has limited resources.

For me I can not discern visually a 1 or 2 degree difference in my AoA, out to in, etc.; I must rely on ball flight and divots to evaluate what I guess you would I am perceiving my golf swing, golf club is doing. Monitoring my body is about the only way I can tell what my body sequence and balance is doing. Basically I rely on common golf wisdom which I am constantly re-evaluating, keep it simple.

I anxiously await the technology and science to convert into common golf wisdom for the masses, granted it may not be a path to scratch golf, but breaking 80 floats my boat. (HINT HINT Brian!!!)

My position has evolved over the years, many have tried on their own, claimed success, yet at the end I have seen few demonstrate long term success.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz,
What do you mean by OTT when you say it's a good thing?
Was Hogan OTT?

Yes, OTT is a very good thing, one of the most subconscious-friendly ones for a human attempting to hit an object lying on the ground - and one of the orientations of the motion is downward (except outward and forward). But I don't think current golf instruction is ready for this biokinetic truth now. As we can see how difficult is to overcome a relatively very simple casus of what some erroneously call "flipping" - or better said, even not overcome per se but simply return to the wisdom of earlier great theorists.
When real science will dominate in golf - and I do not mean only various Nesbit's or McKenzie's profession, i.e. physics - people will slowly adapt it no matter how it is against what they were taught. At least, I believe in such scenario because otherwise we will still be in middleages.

All great ballstrikers (except those who used very high backswing plane) were OTT in the downswing, Hogan of course included (albeit his OTT is cerainly less visible than e.g. Jones's, Knudson's or Sneads). His downswing plane was slightly, but visibly over his backswing plane.

I anxiously await the technology and science to convert into common golf wisdom for the masses, granted it may not be a path to scratch golf, but breaking 80 floats my boat.

It was Mr.Hogan's dream, it is also the goal of my studies on biokinetics.

Cheers

 

[ZAP]

OK, but I bet you knew that "flipping" is bad, losing "lag" is bad, OTT is bad - don't do it, don't do that, don't do


As much as I hate to admit it now I really had no idea what I was doing at all. Flipping I had never heard of till I came here.
I knew what kind of swings made a slice but did not really have any idea why. My major problem was that I had won two city match play championships just hitting the ball in the hole. What makes me a little sad is wondering how many I might have won with even a hint of a clue. I knew how to hit a pretty big hook with what I now know as dragging the handle and pivoting like crazy. When my timing was good I could play some really good golf.

 

[Dariusz J.]

OK, but I bet you knew that "flipping" is bad, losing "lag" is bad, OTT is bad - don't do it, don't do that, don't do


As much as I hate to admit it now I really had no idea what I was doing at all. Flipping I had never heard of till I came here.
I knew what kind of swings made a slice but did not really have any idea why. My major problem was that I had won two city match play championships just hitting the ball in the hole. What makes me a little sad is wondering how many I might have won with even a hint of a clue. I knew how to hit a pretty big hook with what I now know as dragging the handle and pivoting like crazy. When my timing was good I could play some really good golf.

So...the only think remaining for me is to congratulate you to be a natural born talent. I think it's great, but the vast majority of mortals must fight against various multiple demons

Cheers

 

[ZAP]

So...the only think remaining for me is to congratulate you to be a natural born talent. I think it's great, but the vast majority of mortals must fight against various multiple demons

Cheers

Not natural born at all. I hit a LOT of golf balls. Looking back now I wish I knew about half of this stuff. Nothing special about me. In fact in terms of athletics I would be what most would call a late bloomer. In some ways though my lack of knowledge may have saved me from some of the demons you speak of.