K.J. Choi Revealed
 

Study here http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/s...oi#post5047 9. Especially Posts #12, #16, #18 and #20.

For what it's worth, nobody in golf has ever had this information or made use of such comparisons. Save the file . . .

It is important stuff.

:)

Feels of the pro's
 

Talking about the top players and their strange feels what do you make of Paddy's

http://www.golf.com/golf/gallery/art...8457-3,00.html

Although not complete or totally clear, I was more excited than frustrated by Azingers comments. He tells us how to or what might perform an action ("pound the ball"), and, in the process, he leaves no room for an active left arm.
That is, if anyone's telling you to pull with your left, in order to "pound the ball", they're telling you wrong.

Pull with your left to start the gyroscope (if swinging), but don't activate the left to "pound the ball." Left should be inert. Through impact left hand doesn't perform, but only is maintained in certain postions (left does not perform or cause hinge action).

Being a golfer that focuses on pure right sided thoughts (just like my tennis swing and just like my baseball swing) I found Azingers comments quite refreshing.

But let's keep a few things in mind. This wasn't a few mindless wannabes like Kostis making these comments, these are two legends of the game making these comments. They both made millions from this game before you could be a player in the bottom third of the world rankings and make a million dollars a year. They both have probably dug more balls out of the dirt than any of us could ever hope to. They both have probably run every swing theory up and down the flag pole based on their association with the rest of the games greats..yet we have the nerve to rely on quoting the book by verse when we have two CHAMPIONS giving us their views based on real world experience?!

If this is making lesson books overflow with gold...then more power to ya. It just seems like sometimes people act like Homer is the only person in the world who can describe anything related to the golfswing.

E.

Major Disconnect
 

So . . .

The Right Hand does it all.

:rolleyes:

In piano music, there is treble cleft (right hand) and bass cleft (left hand). Each hand plays their respective parts, and the result is MUSIC. You would have us believe that, in golf, the left hand plays the part of the deaf mute.

I strongly disagree.

Buh Bye
 

My post stands on its own merit.

Regarding your personal attack, your name says it all.

Fall in behind 'Deadly Scope' elsewhere, and . . .

Get off my site.

Buh bye
 

Mr. Blake,

Please ban me too.

Although I have found TGM invaluable in my continuing study of the game of golf, and I believe it is an important piece in the overall picture, I also believe it is only a piece.

I think there are many ways to make a golf stroke. I think there are many ways to describe these strokes and teach them. While I may disagree with many teachers, methods and theories, and I may be partial to others, I do acknowledge that some people have gotten extraordinary results with methods or theories that I find lacking. I think there is always something new to learn about the game of golf, and sometimes ideas different from our own can be the most illuminating.

I also think this is an exciting time for the study of the golf swing, as technological advances are allowing insights into golf swing mechanics like never before and many bright minds are doggedly studying these mechanics with real world data in hand.

I have learned a lot from you and this site's members, and for that I thank you. However, I find this site's intolerance to any ideas other than it's own particular TGM interpretation to be limiting.

I don't think I am the type of disruptive element you want for your little Yellow colored world, where there is a hitter lurking under ever rock. To be safe, you had better ban me as well.

Hit 'em long and straight,

Clay

Clay...Clay...Clay
 

Clay,


Jim flick (in GD article, I think) mentioned that the great Jack Nicklaus maintained that he (Nicklaus) had never observed a good player address the ball with a closed clubface (what most people think is square.) Nicklaus angled the clubface open himself (although he advocates in his instructional volumes that we the golfing public keep it square - but in reality closed etc. Obviously he (JN) is referring to what HK articulated in 2-J-1 when discussing Impact Alignments. My point? As great as Jack Nicklaus is he failed "us" in his explanation. Paul Azinger and Tom Watson were discussing the use of the "right side" in a very generalized, and perhaps personal way. Some can derive benefit from it, most will misinterpret because it was not well articulated in the first place. The teacher by definition has the gift of communication, with a vernacular that comes as close as possible in describing reality. Zinger was dealing in "seems as if", a very subjective approach. If you do not understand that then you are not seeking the truth as it relates to golf. TGM does not support The Way, but it does teach you to correctly identify, quantify and communicate with undeniable precision My Way. In my estimation nobody did a better job at describing "what is" as it relates to the golf stroke. It seems as if some people bristle at the hint of objectivity and absolutes. In reality, most people are just too bone idle lazy to learn the vocab, and just think Homer used an english dictionary.

I for one am very happy that Yoda stays true to Homer's intention. If you really want to "understand" and appreciate snow...speak to an eskimo! If you want to understand the golf stroke...listen to Lynn. :salut:

Mr Blake i think the point was that the left hand is a "holding" hand and controlling the clubface at impact whilst the right hand releases hard against it so no matter it has a huge part to play
As to hinging action this is only a reaction in a golf swing and can also be controlled by how the upper body is rotated or by how a player wishes to release the right hand/arm
For that matter so is a finish swivel just a reaction

As for Homer Kelley i believe he got a lot correct particularly geometry part but as technology advances you can bet that sections will be disproven
His physics was so so and lets face it he was not much of an athlete nor was he an expert on human biokenitics and there are lots of unexplored areas in this department

Point is I never close my mind of to any theory since I have the capacity to implement them and discard them if they don't work for me
I hope i don't get Banned for stating this Mr Blake

Wow! Lost all my respect for you with that one. Enjoy YOUR site.

E.