. . . I've struggled for years and years to get a consistent, powerful swing. I think I have a chance now!
BMont,
You think you have a chance.
I know you do!
The bridge from 'can't to can' is our joint responsibility. My mission is to teach precision Mechanics and support that process with my faith in you. Your mission is to absorb my ideas and translate them into describable Feels. Once done, you will have faith in yourself.
First, in drill.
Then, in practice.
Later, onto the course and in competition.
Walking together across that bridge, the 'other side' comes closer and closer. Soon, you will be there.
And join the happy throng that has arrived before.
The bridge from 'can't to can' is our joint responsibility. My mission is to teach precision Mechanics and support that process with my faith in you. Your mission is to absorb my ideas and translate them into describable Feels. Then, you will have faith in yourself.
First, in drill.
Then, in practice.
Later, onto the course and in competition.
Walking together across that bridge, the 'other side' comes closer and closer. Soon, you will be there.
And join the happy throng that has arrived before.
I know I can do this -- thank you for reminding me.
And thank you for reminding me of the progression. I made great strides this summer, but playing took priority over drill and practice. Winter gives me time (snow since Dec. 1).
I don't know if Bear only had technical talk in mind, but other topics I'd like to talk about involve why TGM never quite "took off" and what we could do to get Alignment Golf into S&T levels of popularity (I've been recommending this site to all my friends).
One thing that occurs to me is that TGM is kind of like a religious conversion -- there is a bit of faith initially to get past everything you thought you knew about golf so you can "see the light" as it were.
I'd also like to see a discussion about how everyone incorporates insights from other "methods" or systems. Do you look at everything from a TGM point of view? Through a TGM filter? As peer level thinking (i.e. each has equal weight)?
One thing that occurs to me is that TGM is kind of like a religious conversion -- there is a bit of faith initially to get past everything you thought you knew about golf so you can "see the light" as it were.
No religious conversion required.
Just big ideas to understand.
In Life, here are at least three material 'biggies':
Lynn's post " Unfortunately, in Five Lessons, that Force (Non-Accelerating Thrust / 6-C-0 #2) was misinterpreted (and illustrated) as a Compression Force -- the exact opposite of a Tension Force -- one created by bringing the elbows 'in' toward each other. This action results in a horizontal, squeezed condition of the arms and not an in-line stretched condition. Both actions create upper arm tension and upper body adherence, but whereas the Tension Force creates Power Package Alignment and Structure, the Compression Force destroys it. So, if you want to feel what Hogan felt, do what he did, not what he said he did.
So as I understand it. EA is very important. It is mentioned frequently in the "checklist of all strojkes" The compression force is destructive and should be avoided. EA is a tension force that does compress the arms to the chest and that is all the compression that is needed. No separate compression or banding force!. Another A Ha moment for me. Even after hearing you talk of Hogan's banding picture at Cuscowilla I didn't connect the feeling of EA vs Hogan's banding feeling. So extensor action is all that is needed!
It would be helpful for me to tie MacDonald's exercises to extensor action. MacDonalds seem so relaxed and free flowing. Putting together the power package with EA seems to add some tensions. So should you add tricep extension to MacDonald's? I know for me doing EA often seems to lead to some interference with folding and unfolding of the right arm. If you are doing LFT the muscles fire to do the pickup and they need to relax is swingers to allow for "throw out" Of course hitters don't have to worry about that cause they are firing them. Lynn can you elaborate this
If you are doing LFT the muscles fire to do the pickup and they need to relax is swingers to allow for "throw out" Of course hitters don't have to worry about that cause they are firing them. Lynn can you elaborate this
I don't understand your sentence, David. Please rephrase, and I'll do my best. Thanks!
For me the "conversion" was more one of accepting the TGM components (and the big three) and abandoning "position" golf -- very freeing to know there is no one "right" way to swing a club but many variations on a theme.
I say "religion" but maybe a better term would be "belief system" or even just "system" -- a way to understand and explain the world around us from more easily seen/understood (address, alignment) to the more mysterious (impact, compression).
For me, TGM provides a system that I can learn and apply. I'll interpret everything else through that view. That's why Trackman and D-plane are important elements to incorporate and explain in TGM terms. If we have real data (Trackman interpolations aside), then we must be able to explain it by TGM or change TGM to improve it or ultimately we should abandon TGM in favor of a superior system
So far, it looks to me like TGM as a system explains or includes all the popular "methods" or applications (S&T, Hogan, etc.) at least as well as any other system can explain all of them. That's why I find it interesting -- a Unified Field Theory for golf! Learning it should de-mystify the swing and only leave execution as the final frontier to ball striking (and then the final, final frontier of "scoring" -- but that's bordering on voodoo and witchcraft there... ).
If you are doing LFT the muscles fire to do the pickup and they need to relax is swingers to allow for "throw out" Of course hitters don't have to worry about that cause they are firing them. Lynn can you elaborate this
I'm incubating that sentence and my chicken may hatch(a Ben Doyleism) without you sittin on it.
For me the "conversion" was more one of accepting the TGM components (and the big three) and abandoning "position" golf -- very freeing to know there is no one "right" way to swing a club but many variations on a theme.
I say "religion" but maybe a better term would be "belief system" or even just "system" -- a way to understand and explain the world around us from more easily seen/understood (address, alignment) to the more mysterious (impact, compression).
For me, TGM provides a system that I can learn and apply. I'll interpret everything else through that view. That's why Trackman and D-plane are important elements to incorporate and explain in TGM terms. If we have real data (Trackman interpolations aside), then we must be able to explain it by TGM or change TGM to improve it or ultimately we should abandon TGM in favor of a superior system
So far, it looks to me like TGM as a system explains or includes all the popular "methods" or applications (S&T, Hogan, etc.) at least as well as any other system can explain all of them. That's why I find it interesting -- a Unified Field Theory for golf! Learning it should de-mystify the swing and only leave execution as the final frontier to ball striking (and then the final, final frontier of "scoring" -- but that's bordering on voodoo and witchcraft there... ).
Because TGM is based on a solid bio-mechanical foundation, almost all swings can be described and worked with, imho.
ICT
__________________
HP, grant me the serenity to accept what I cannot change, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. Progress and not perfection is the goal every day!
).
Hybrid Mode
