To Reference Or Not To Reference

[teach]

As a beginner, I feel *very* strongly that the references should be placed in parentheses *after* plain-English explanations are given. It absolutely kills any chance of a newbie understanding what is being said when numerals are used *instead* of words.

One of the main complaints that non-TGMers have about TGM is that its proponents seem to delight in keeping TGM as an elitist, arcane cult. I know, because that's exactly how I felt until quite recently. I would have turned to TGM two years ago if the TGM posters on another forum had not insisted on using sentences along the lines of: "Well of course in the downswing, one must 6.b.3 before 3.9.2.ing." I'm exaggerating, but not by much.

Even if one does have the book right in front of him, many of us badly need simple explanantions of what the book means. I have a Masters Degree, but, as a golfer, I am in first grade. Of course, the video clips on the site provide the best explanations of all, and I am very grateful for them. Along these lines, I really hope that Yoda's DVD will be understandable for beginners.

teach

[milan]

As a beginner, I feel *very* strongly that the references should be placed in parentheses *after* plain-English explanations are given. It absolutely kills any chance of a newbie understanding what is being said when numerals are used *instead* of words.

I agree wholeheartedly...the book on its own is impossible to truly understand without the help of an AI or theses forums that bring it to life.

I think its important to understand the book ...as that is what gives TGM its structure.

[Rumbler]

I think you need to write a simplified version of the book to reference.
dp

[birdie_man]

As a beginner, I feel *very* strongly that the references should be placed in parentheses *after* plain-English explanations are given. It absolutely kills any chance of a newbie understanding what is being said when numerals are used *instead* of words.

One of the main complaints that non-TGMers have about TGM is that its proponents seem to delight in keeping TGM as an elitist, arcane cult. I know, because that's exactly how I felt until quite recently. I would have turned to TGM two years ago if the TGM posters on another forum had not insisted on using sentences along the lines of: "Well of course in the downswing, one must 6.b.3 before 3.9.2.ing." I'm exaggerating, but not by much.

Even if one does have the book right in front of him, many of us badly need simple explanantions of what the book means. I have a Masters Degree, but, as a golfer, I am in first grade. Of course, the video clips on the site provide the best explanations of all, and I am very grateful for them. Along these lines, I really hope that Yoda's DVD will be understandable for beginners.

teach

Good post teach.

I agree man.

[neil]

References are a must for me.What is scary is you A I's (and others)who obviously are very knowledgable,are still somewhat dependant on Yoda to clarify certain things . My point is that the references (in the book) ARE the book , but the language is Homers and without more insight into what Homer meant ,it can be misinterpreted.So should Yoda be re writing ,not a simplified version, but one which is more explanatory?..You experts teach me every day-keep posting -and referencing!