P.S. Martee and Mathew, you guys argued every point against me and The Golfing Machine back in the day, and now ya'll are sold out Homer-ites.
Funny huh?
Funny is that I asked questions and responded to your questions with my observations and limited knowledge and this is the response I get?
You might wish to go back and review my points I argued along with why after the infamous 'Hitting Down' thread on another forum you left and my posting went down to about nil on that forum.
Regarding your latest drawing, I know this may sound picky but and I really have issue with some of these photos being used to be used for technical discussions, but...
1. Maybe it is just me, but the ground seems to slope up from left to right (viewers side), which says that the line going upfrom the ground should be sloped. JMO.
2. Here where I am probably not on the same page with everyone else as I did post a thread (no responses) with questions about this topic in general. This Tripod (really a Bi-pod) concept seems to had to have the head directly in the center of the stance if I understand your drawings and comments? Where does this come from as opposed to have a stationary post between the feet?
3. The other question I had and no answers are is this triangle that is being drawn, is it an isosceles triangle? If the apex is to be between the feet, it can't be a right triangle.
Your yellow line appears closer to the swing center than how the triangle is placed and indicates relatively little movement, whereas the red triangle seems to be floating.
I think we have some communication errors here starting with this triangle/tripod/bipod representation and the apex location to the base.
I am trying to understand your position of the back of the neck vs the base of the skull and what movement of the head is then considered acceptable and what movements of the head then require compensations.
1- This is a good discussion for those that are deep into TGM as long as they can respond to each other without hatefulness and intentional malice. It should come with a disclaimer though that those new to TGM should avoid reading it all costs though because I read the ealier thread similiar to this one and was going to quit TGM altogether and look for another method of improvement until Ted pm'd me with some great encouragement (Thanks again, Ted - you're a super guy).
2- I think it has been thoroughly established at this point that both sides of the argument are going to believe what they are going to believe and no argument, discussion, name calling, pictures and/or illustrations are going to change their mind at this point. So if neither side is going to change their mind - what can the discussion further accomplish except to deteriorate to the point that friendships are damaged. Now come on, you guys know that you get along in real life. You've done seminars together and know each other very well. I've heard several people on various forums talk about how they've met either both or one of you and the discussion is almost always about how nice the meeting was.
3- That being said, I offer my humble opinion even though I hate to further this thread along for my fear that it will take the aforementioned turn for the worst eventually. I am not an AI or an instructor. Heck, I'm not even that great of a player (lack of practice kills me). However for what it's worth, I am of above average intelligence with an IQ 4 points short of being able to be in mensa(dang it!!). I believe that when the head is stationary that a good golf swing can be performed but the head is allowed to swivel (not sway). I believe this is most critical at the top of the backswing and during impact as it looks to me like an awful lot of good tour players may sway ever so slightly on backswing and dip their head slightly on downswing or right after impact but have it very still at top of backswing and during impact. BUT, I also believe that to have the swing thought of having to keep your head stationary will inhibit most if not all sway, bob, swivel or anything else going on with the head while the swing thought of keeping the base of the neck steady will allow for some swivel which is needed by most players to achieve a complete shoulder turn.
Just one ole' po boys opinion,
Rob
P.S. I do believe that Brian is a firm believer that there must be a stationary post and Lynn mentioned on the earlier thread that he believed that a stationary post was required but that he perferred to use the head because it was easier for the player to tell when it moved. So, in this sense, both sides are correct.
Let's assume that we KNOW that there should be no SWAY of the 'pivot center.'
So, you can use the "through the head" center or the "base of the neck" center.
Which one has the BEST stroke pattern performance.
I will define this 'performance' in the following way:
A. Best able to create and sustain lag pressue
B. Best able to 'draw' a straight plane line
C. Best able to control hinge action
Got it?
Ok.
Here is my OPINION:
I think creating and sustaining lag pressue is easier with the base of the neck.
I think staying or getting 'on top' (or behind, if you prefer) of the sweetspot with your #3 pressure point—as in Horizontal Hinging—is easier with the base of the neck.
I think performing ANGLED hinge action or vertical hinge action to be easier with the "through the head" center.
If you bend you plane line too much to the left as a rule, you will find it easier to NOT bend it left with the "base of the neck" center.
If you bend the plane line to the right as a rule, , you will find it easier to NOT bend it right with the "through the head" center.
What do ya'll think?
I actually really like the points you made in this first post Brian.
Especially the bit about Horizontal/Angled Hinging.
...
OK.
I realize Homer is the man and all that.....he uh- KINDA knew his stuff.
But, I must say...
I personally like how Brian is going about all this..... I like a lot of his points and how he is explaining them. I like to hear real "why" answers.
I think anyone can just agree with Homer....and know the book....
...and you know what....for a lot of people, that COULD suffice as the be-all-end-all.....but I like to hear a little "why," personally.
And I really do think Brian is making a good argument.....it's hard to argue against Homer (is it really against him though?), but I think Brian actually has a legit debate here.
I don't really want to take sides and get yelled at over here.....so I hope someone appreciates where I'm going with this.....we can all learn from this whole discussion I think.
Just a reminder to keep this a debate and not a fight.
Last edited by birdie_man : 01-05-2006 at 02:35 PM.
...Lynn mentioned on the earlier thread that he believed that a stationary post was required but that he perferred to use the head...
1. I teach The Golfing Machine® as written and taught by Homer Kelley.
2. Homer Kelley in 1-L #1 defined the Stationary Post as the player's Head.
3. Homer Kelley in 1-L #2 stated that the Stationary Post could turn (Pivot) but that it didn't Sway or Bob.
3. Homer Kelley in 9-1 illustrated that the Head can turn and not violate the concept.
4. Homer Kelley in 2-0 labeled the Stationary Head as the First Essential. He did not label it an Imperative because, as he said, "You can move your Head and still play good golf."
5. Homer Kelley in The Glossary defined the Stationary Head as the deliberate choice for the Pivot Center instead of 'between the shoulders.'
6. Homer Kelley told me personally that he chose the Head because "if you move your Head you can see more under the Ball." He also said there could be problems with using 'between the shoulders' as a center, but he did not elaborate. That discussion was recorded.
Now, the really important thing about the Pivot Center is that you have one. Few golfers do. To that end, Homer Kelley gave us a choice of two, but clearly he preferred the Head. Given everything else he has been right about, I'll go with that for now.
Linear Mode
