I've had lessons from Led, Ballard, Gary Smith, Paul Moran, Sorrell, Robert Baker to name a few popular ones ...To me Ballard, Sorrell, "SliceFixer", and TGM are all different methods to get the job done...One method says your head moves 18 inches to left and is a fault if your head fixates at any point..And another says your head must remain fixed throughout most of the swing...I see a style difference as hitting versus swinging in TGM...Whether hitting or swinging is your style, you must keep your head fixed/FLV or the machine won't work too well..
I've had lessons from Led, Ballard, Gary Smith, Paul Moran, Sorrell, Robert Baker to name a few popular ones ...To me Ballard, Sorrell, "SliceFixer", and TGM are all different methods to get the job done...One method says your head moves 18 inches to left and is a fault if your head fixates at any point..And another says your head must remain fixed throughout most of the swing...I see a style difference as hitting versus swinging in TGM...Whether hitting or swinging is your style, you must keep your head fixed/FLV or the machine won't work too well..
I understand that Homer wrote, "stationary" but Homer himself did not have a stationary head in his swing ttp://www.lynnblakegolf.com/gallery/images/mm-ms.gif. Why?
I understand that Homer wrote, "stationary" but Homer himself did not have a stationary head in his swing ttp://www.lynnblakegolf.com/gallery/images/mm-ms.gif. Why?
Bad camara work, lack of flexibility, emphasing a point, using 10-13-A Standard Shoulder Turn without adaquate Waist Bend from the hips sockets.
Take that! Is is possible to keep the head perfectly stationary? I think not, but that is the ideal, and I do not believe you have to have zero deviation...but less is best. The steadier my head is the better I strike it. It is a testment to innate balance of tour players whose heads resemble bouyeys on a choppy sea! I not this particular topic is well worn but...no but...just wanted to post!
Take that! Is is possible to keep the head perfectly stationary? I think not, but that is the ideal, and I do not believe you have to have zero deviation...but less is best. The steadier my head is the better I strike it. It is a testment to innate balance of tour players whose heads resemble bouyeys on a choppy sea! I not this particular topic is well worn but...no but...just wanted to post!
I understand that Homer wrote, "stationary" but Homer himself did not have a stationary head in his swing ttp://www.lynnblakegolf.com/gallery/images/mm-ms.gif. Why?
One additional comment regarding Mr. Kelley. He always view himself as a "researcher" and not a "performer". So like the pictures in the book, if he was trying to get "a" point accross, his actions were not intended as a reference to any other aspect which his demonstration may include incidentally.
I've had lessons from Led, Ballard, Gary Smith, Paul Moran, Sorrell, Robert Baker to name a few popular ones ...To me Ballard, Sorrell, "SliceFixer", and TGM are all different methods to get the job done...One method says your head moves 18 inches to left and is a fault if your head fixates at any point..And another says your head must remain fixed throughout most of the swing...I see a style difference as hitting versus swinging in TGM...Whether hitting or swinging is your style, you must keep your head fixed/FLV or the machine won't work too well..
I am surprised that nobody responded to your analysis mashie72. Permit me. TGM is not a method, but does indeed support all workable methods. It is the physics of rotation and the gemoteric apodictic certainties that govern ALL golf strokes, seeings they are all subject to the laws of force and motion. 24 components, 144 variations = a verititble buffet of golf stroke options. It is a systematic approach that supports MY WAY, but never THE WAY. It is a teacher's perogative to teach a favored stroke pattern (Homer expressed preferences) but their preference is not THE law, but to be worth anything it must be based on law. Outside of TGM the tendency is towards positions, whereas TGM is rooted in alignments. People think they understand that distinction, but I have expereince serendipitous wonder on that idea more than once!
Listening to Led and his protege Baker they are describing fleeting feelings with little mechanical substance. Mechanics produces the feel (if you are look...look...looking!) And then feel reproduces the mechanics with scientific precision. Automation is the utilization of the precision of science...concerning the golf stroke anyway. Some are automatically bad, others are learning to harness the forces of nature.
TGM is a philosophy that is driven by the true order of things. I believe it is unsurpassed in its ability to describe what is actually taking place. The ignorant and the arrogant suggest it is a cult. That is of course simply non-conformity to the true nature of things (that is for Bucket!) I think the golf puzzle was solved. Understanding the proof HK provided is the only quest that still remains. Endless info is still being provided...people have still gotta eat.
I'm interested in your experiences with such luminaries as long as we acknowledge that there is little or no parity with TGM!
Thanks for your input..No, I wasn't aware about the steeper plane angle and ball placement relationship...However it makes sense to me that the more tilted the tire is on the the ground, the more of the tire's circumference touches the ground..Now this brings up a question for Okie to see if his driver's low point is much further up plane than his 6" for his wedge...As I think I understand Okie, a 10" Air divot is probably not the case...
Tell me how you really feel... ...No problem I think understand where you're coming from..No doubt about for me too about HK's book in it's efforts to describe and explain the golf swing..I believe it's second to none as far as consistent in depth details of the mechanics of the swing based on an inclined plane..
However, for me, it's still a method which "refers to the plans or procedures followed to accomplish a task or obtain a goal"...If you use the Ballard method, you hardly follow any of the plans or procedures to accomplish the same task..
Then you might retort, "Well, Ballard is in there with PP#4 etc" or you might say Ballard method is inferior and fleeting...I'd reply the Rocco did OK this year for 5 days in the Open, Calvin Peete, Hal & Curtis all hit it pretty darn straight..
Anyway, I'm here to learn from you folkes and maybe you can learn from me and not fight over semantics... Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree
Feel free to ask me anything you want to know about the other high priests
...To me Ballard, Sorrell, "SliceFixer", and TGM are all different methods to get the job done...One method says your head moves 18 inches to left and is a fault if your head fixates at any point..And another says your head must remain fixed throughout most of the swing...I see a style difference as hitting versus swinging in TGM...Whether hitting or swinging is your style, you must keep your head fixed/FLV or the machine won't work too well..
...No problem I think understand where you're coming from..No doubt about for me too about HK's book in it's efforts to describe and explain the golf swing..I believe it's second to none as far as consistent in depth details of the mechanics of the swing based on an inclined plane..
Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree
Hybrid Mode
