He doesn't attack the book and HK's work as far as I can see. He attacks some of those who uses TGM as basis for their teaching.
He may be right that there are TGM-based teachers who are too method oriented and where a "One Right Way" thinking gets in the way of improving the student from time to time. But I you will find that in all camps. The criticism is in any case uncalled for.
Don't you hate it when a level head gets in the way of a good ole witch burning?
Good points BerntR.
Kevin
__________________
I could be wrong. I have been before, and will be again.
We can go ahead with the witch burning, even though he seems to act respectful, he is totally being disrespectful. He is targeting the golfing machine and claiming it does not produce results. After saying that he likes a lot of it, In other words TGM taught him what to teach but it doesn't work??? He very well knows why multiple winners don't have perfect swings, It's called talent and he knows it, same reason tiger can win even when Haney and foley are destroying his swing. If you have enough talent to win multiple majors without working on mechanics by all means, have at it, for the rest of us who haven't gotten there by playing yet...we'll get there another way. By practicing mechanics, a shocking idea never heard of before in the world of sports, practicing technique, who would have thought! He straight away says "people that teach it (meanwhile doing the swirling finger point to the head indicating we are all crazy) get into this religion of a perfect swing" he's clumping all authorized instructors into one boat, and clumping stack n tilt and morad along with It and stating that the golfing machines concept is centered around one, perfect swing, when the complete opposite is true, and he knows it, he knows homer didn't mandate no weight transfer, he's misleading the viewer intentionally. This doesn't jive with me. So he goes to his house to learn from him while he's alive and then when he's dead he claims his teaching system doesn't produce results. He knows it does and he knows there HAVE been incredible ball strikers who use this system but instead just flat out misleads the viewer into thinking that's not the case. Because he knows that his online viewers are also watching videos about the golfing machine and they are checking out this forum and thinking, gee maybe this Jimbo McLame guy doesn't really know what's up with this golf thing. Scary Jim, you might lose a couple students, I'm sure you have enough to eat, as berntR pointed out this was uncalled for.
Unfortunately, the internet is turning golf instruction into a ridiculous world of I am right and you are wrong. Ultimately the best teachers will individually teach golfers. I want a teacher that can improve my swing, based on my personal tendencies and physical ability. I bet two hundred years ago, two Scots got into an argument about whether the hands or the pivot swung the club. They probably resolved the dipute over a bottle of single malt and a fist fight. Now, the internet permits an argument without any consequence. There are websites with forum topics bashing instructors as opposed to learning about the golf swing. I will no longer visit sites that focus only on controversy that exists only in the minds of people who like hearing themselves talk and will not make my game one stroke better. Did the Mclean video do anything for my game? Nope, waste of time. A guy who creates a method and markets the crap out of it makes a video saying methods are bad. Gee I wished you told me that before I bought your book 20 years ago. There is nothing wrong with science on the golf swing. I hold little interest in it because I have only improved when an instructor told me how to play better based on what he saw in my swing. I have no doubt Homer Kelley would have appreciated scientific discovery on the swing and incorporated it into his masterful work. Unfortunately he passed before any of the technological breakthroughs. Criticizing him in any way for being incomplete is like criticizing Pasteur for not recognizing modern refrigeration in his findings. Let's argue golf swing, not who says what and whether it is right. I saw some pics recently of Miller Barber. Watching him swing is proof of the flexibility inherent in playing the game.
this is another video that makes me cringe....really jim?
Hey Jim wasn't Pia Nillson the first lady Authorized Instructor of the golfing machine, ANNIKA SORENSTAM'S Instructor??
This video was posted earlier in the year, but after a brief search, I can't find it (or the post I wrote at that time). Anyway, here's another that addresses the same 'Drone On Syndrome'. See my post #242:
Thanks, Etzwane, I knew it was there but just couldn't find it!
I'm writing this from the Country Inn and Suites near Kannapolis, NC, where we begin tomorrow early at The Club at Irish Creek and our two-day Alignment Golf Workshop . . .
Homer himself in ten BOOK, said not to fuss about perfection as their is too many parts to the swing. It is not a scientific book about playing Golf, it is a book that uses science to explain and help teachers teach a golf stroke, Homer even said that it is up to the instructor to get the information across to their student however they can.
Again Jim, it is about understanding not seeking perfection, BTW, Lynn Blake, Doyle, Elk, O'Grady, Mudd, Gay, etc -all are great ball strikers, maybe not the best golfers but you don't keep score or win matches that way. Golf is the game, the stroke is merely the method to launch the ball.
Jim, what you couldn't rip off Homer and do a cheap show like you did with Hogan, Lee and others, shame on you for trash talk.
we must admit he is a fine teacher and he has a genius as a marketing agent. attack something that is much bigger than he is and some will listen. he says a half dozen things that prove he did not listen to homer kelly or talk to someone like lynn or ben.
Linear Mode
