But are we just gonna throw out random quotes or are we gonna talk about the whys? Do we understand the whys?
I would say, "bake at 350 degrees for 30 minutes" would be a random quote.
I would also say a quote from an expert with 42 years of experience on the subject matter being discussed would be pertinent.
"We" is rather inclusive, but, yes. "We" meaning "me" understands the whys, as I've read page after page of posts, listened to close to 100 hours of Homer’s teachings, and learned from THE AUTHORITY on the subject, Lynn Blake.
As a minor aside, giving 1300 to 1500 lessons per year gives one some insight into testing theory. Seeing this "theory" in application makes me a believer.
As a minor aside, giving 1300 to 1500 lessons per year gives one some insight into testing theory. Seeing this "theory" in application makes me a believer.
He has earned enough trust and respect through his research to deserve my trust. When I find something that he has suggested that doesn't work, my trust in his words may wane. But, until then...
Originally Posted by birdie_man
There we go. If it works then do it...
Now that's an unreasonable oversimplification, Birdie.
Your final quote as I would restate it:
A brilliant man spends 42 years writing a book on golf.
He uses the laws of physics and geometry to develop a machine concept.
He catalogs the human movements to match the machine, not vice versa.
His research IS NOT based on "if it works", it's based on law.
Therefore, if the laws of physics and geometry work for you, then use them.
__________________
Yoda knows...and he taught me!
For those less fortunate, Swinging is an option.
Last edited by YodasLuke : 11-04-2006 at 06:19 PM.
No I didn't agree. That is beside the point tho IMO. The point that I think is most important is that we should be allowed to question anyone....even Homer.
And no not just for the sake of doing it or for any agenda....you all know I am a TGM guy....
Quote:
He has earned enough trust and respect through his research to deserve my trust. When I find something that he has suggested that doesn't work, my trust in his words may wane. But, until then...
Fair enough.
If it works in your teaching that is the point that I'd respect above the others.
EDIT: I initially read your response too fast and missed part of the point...I edited this part of my post accordingly.
Quote:
Now that's an unreasonable oversimplification, Birdie.
Your final quote as I would restate it:
A brilliant man spends 42 years writing a book on golf.
He uses the laws of physics and geometry to develop a machine concept.
He catalogs the human movements to match the machine, not vice versa.
His research IS NOT based on "if it works", it's based on law.
Therefore, if the laws of physics and geometry work for you, then use them.
I disagree....this is part of science.
I dunno what you'd call it....field testing? Something like that.
If you try everything on every kind of person over a great length of time....and find out what works best consistently for the most people.....how is this unreasonable??
That is science.
Then of course you can assign the "WHY does it work?"....
"What works best" is basically the ultimate benchmark in my view.
....
I know the "brilliant man/42 years of reasearch" stuff holds a good amount of ground (to some people more than others of course)....I mean.....Homer is a guy who's opinion COUNTS.
But....anyone and anything is questionable....no one is perfect.....and Homer wasn't done researching when he died either.
Would he have come to different conclusions if he lived a few more years? Who knows...
Doesn't matter tho cause there's more than one smart person who has studied or does study the golf swing.
....
Another point that I think could be relevant is the amount of time Homer spent on the lesson tee.
I do not know exactly how much but from what I can gather he didn't do a lot of "real world" teaching (relatively speaking)....teaching every different kind of person of every level of play....day in day out in seeing what works most of the time.
I know he taught some...I'm not EXACTLY sure how much...but I know there are people with WAY more experience day in day out every single day trying to get people to play better golf.
We gonna discount that opinion?
...
BTW there is LAW in physics and geometry.....and yes Homer did APPLY those concepts (and very well obviously) to his work....
....but to claim that that then makes Homer's work LAW....I know that is a stretch.
i.e. "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." (or however the heck it goes)....
....LAW. (period)
"keep the head precisely between your feet for all shots"....
....law??
Last edited by birdie_man : 11-04-2006 at 10:23 PM.
A reverse pivot is not so much a spine angle issue, but a malfunctioning hip turn. The weight shift to the rear leg is usually accomplished by the turning of the hips. A faulty hip turn leaves weight, or places or the load on the forward leg and the weight is "reverse" shifted to the back leg on the downstroke.
In most backtrokes the lower spine is closer to the target than the upper spine. But the head can still remain centered between the feet at the top the stroke. The reason it appears to be closer is because the lower spine is already slightly tilted towards the target at address. In a full stroke, the hips must "hula hula", but the head can and should stay centered to avoid the other big pivot malfunction.
Swaying.
__________________
Bagger
1-H "Because of questions of all kinds, reams of additional detail must be made available - but separately, and probably endlessly." Homer Kelly
A reverse pivot is not so much a spine angle issue, but a malfunctioning hip turn. The weight shift to the rear leg is usually accomplished by the turning of the hips. A faulty hip turn leaves weight, or places or the load on the forward leg and the weight is "reverse" shifted to the back leg on the downstroke.
I can agree with that. It is the cause....
(....of a spine that tilts towards the target in the Backstroke...)
Question: are there or have there ever been any GREAT or even VERY GOOD players with a reverse-tilted spine at Impact?
I would crap myself right here right now if there were.
Not to say you can't get to a rearward tilted spine at Impact with a "tripod" type pivot....
If it works better for most people for every club and every shot is the real question I guess.
Believe me I don't like a MASSIVE sway either....you must have A center as Lynn said.
Choose what works best for yourself....
I don't know that anyone has ever HAD a beef (but who would I be talking about...) or could/would ever HAVE a beef with someone doing the "tripod" if it worked better for them.
Really that should go for anything that works for anyone.
Last edited by birdie_man : 11-05-2006 at 01:13 AM.
(....of a spine that tilts towards the target in the Backstroke...)
Question: are there or have there ever been any GREAT or even VERY GOOD players with a reverse-tilted spine at Impact?
I would crap myself right here right now if there were.
Not to say you can't get to a rearward tilted spine at Impact with a "tripod" type pivot....
If it works better for most people for every club and every shot is the real question I guess.
Believe me I don't like a MASSIVE sway either....you must have A center as Lynn said.
Choose what works best for yourself....
I don't know that anyone has ever HAD a beef (but who would I be talking about...) or could/would ever HAVE a beef with someone doing the "tripod" if it worked better for them.
Really that should go for anything that works for anyone.
The real question as you put it is this-how would a machine built like a human do it?
Why consider everyones abilities, habits, limitations? It just leads to band-aids i.e. I can't do X so I'll do Y cause that works better for me. X is the way whether the golfing public can do it or not.
Hybrid Mode
