your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

[golfinguy28]

post removed

[LowPost42]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

This is not conventional teaching, no.

This is also not to say that unconventional teaching is wrong - I just went through a 3 day clinic that used 'unconventional teaching' and I think my swing is about to be absolutely super by the time I'm done ingraining the proper movements. This unconventional teaching isn't about hitting static positions, it's about which muscles to move and when to achieve the golf swing. Ironically, the positions just 'happen' when the movements are executed correctly.

[BrianW]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

I could not get the Manzela link to work.

I looked at the other video and my genuine opinion is that this type of instruction worries me! It worries me that if people find this method of teaching golf (or anything else for that matter) good then there must be something fundamentally wrong with my comprehension as it sounds a lot of unnecessary and over complicated detail that can only IMO confuse people. If I paid a coach for a lesson and he started giving me that lecture I would have walked out in 5 minutes.

Most of this detail relates to body movements that happen without thinking as the brain is quite capable of dealing with them subconsciously. Good instruction uses simple building blocks that relate to a persons current knowledge and adapts and builds on that using practical drills to elighten and progress the student (See videos of Shawn Clements or David Leadbetter).

TGM is a very technical book and I believe Homer Kelly was a Scientist who studied the golf swing and created his book as a detailed breakdown of it's components. Now there is a place for such a book and some people will find the subject data and system suitable and interesting. I would say that for most people it is not a good approach and the instructional techniques will be too complicated to help them.

Anyway, that's my take on it.

[BrianW]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

I know this is more elementary but the way this guy puts over the lesson is spot on for me. (Mind the presenter is a bit cheesy )

And here is another more advanced but put over in a nice clear format:

[BrianW]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

I don't like that 1st video at all. Its too simple for my taste. I liked the technicality and detail of the TGM videos a lot, I just didn't like the technique at all. In my swing hourney I have learned in detail what the right arm and hand does, the left arm and hand, and the pivot, that is how I broke it down.

I like that 2nd video a bit better, its much more deatiled, I would still prefer more detail/lenght, but its pretty good. Though I disagree with his adding hands mulitply body quote. When he throws that club, I bet he could throw it twice as far as I would, but I bet would have about twice the revolutions (club head speed) as he did because I throw it from the top. He has rigid slownes as he pulls the club with his body and I have supply quickness as I allow my weight shift to advance the club that is being released.

I like about 0:55 where he pronates and deviates and shows how much speed is involed in
that motion.

And about 2:15 where he casts, though I don't recommend casting in that way (as it appears he is exagrating to proove a point), had he shifted his weight when he casted, the results would have been different.

But this left arm pushing he talks about or the #3 accumulator (or whatever # the left arm chest one is) is something before yesterday and today have never heard about. Is that common teachings? That is something I don't agree with at all, but using this teaching would be a reason women that use this technique (or can't use it), and haven't adopted another method so they end up with an absence of any other technique relating to the left arm) don't hit as long...


Perhapse I wasn't clear in my OP. I didn't mean if this is common teaching or way to teach it, but I was asking if this is really where people think pro's and such get there club speed from? these angle retentions and pressure points?

I made it clear that the first video was a simple example (did you not read that?) and the second more advanced. My point is not in the detail (The devil is in the detail) it was in the instructional technique.

I do not wish to get into a discussion with you on the detail of the golf swing as we have already ascertained that we have differing opinions there.

Regarding Women: You should see my wife drive the ball, she is 5' 2" tall and can hit a longer drive than most beefy men, she does it with impeccable tempo and ball striking. Pros get their clubhead speed from good connection and release, it's not complicated. Your fascination with hitting from the top or casting leaves me confuesed but again that's detail.

[LowPost42]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

He has rigid slowness as he pulls the club with his body and I have supply quickness as I allow my weight shift to advance the club that is being released.

I've done some trials that indicate that using the body is what creates speed - not arms and hands. The swing speed radar doesn't lie.

That's not to say that you can't add some hand and arm motion to create additional speed - but if I could only use one for the rest of my life, it'd be body, hands down.

[rotator]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

This is not conventional teaching, no.

This is also not to say that unconventional teaching is wrong - I just went through a 3 day clinic that used 'unconventional teaching' and I think my swing is about to be absolutely super by the time I'm done ingraining the proper movements. This unconventional teaching isn't about hitting static positions, it's about which muscles to move and when to achieve the golf swing. Ironically, the positions just 'happen' when the movements are executed correctly.

Hi LowPost42,

I've been meaning to ask you before. Is that the rotary swing method you are into presently? I remember you made a quick reference to that before, but I was not sure if you were kidding.

Is the premise of the swing that the body rotation generates the speed, with the arms and hands being like flexible ropes, and propelled by centrifugal force by the rotation of the body? Probably not as simple as that.

Ted

[LowPost42]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

Hi LowPost42,

I've been meaning to ask you before. Is that the rotary swing method you are into presently? I remember you made a quick reference to that before, but I was not sure if you were kidding.

Is the premise of the swing that the body rotation generates the speed, with the arms and hands being like flexible ropes, and propelled by centrifugal force by the rotation of the body? Probably not as simple as that.

Ted

I've been a rotary swing student for 3 years - but just in the last 3 months there's been "an exciting discovery". I can't go into a ton of detail yet (as if I did, they wouldn't teach me anymore) but I'm moving like I've never moved before, and my ballstriking is already improving - even with partially improved mechanics. The body rotation generates the true power in all swings. Your idea of speed and centrifugal/centripetal forces is actually pretty close.

But, what do you mean by the body? The body itself only rotates 30* I think. The rest of rotation is from the hips and a huge power source is the back. The shoulderblades adducting and abducting aconts form 40* of rotation (20* per blade). I don't think that 30* of rotation (is waht you are talking about) is what gives you your speed (though I could be wrong since I never saw your swing) But if you are referring to the shoulder blades, one could consider that an arm compenent. That is why I don't like to assign body parts % or speed creation, its too complicated to break it down and you have arms and hands, so why not use them.

I don't have a radar, but I can atribute ball distance to show that postions (dynamic, not static) is what creats speed (and acuracy), not muscle, through my various trials.

I mean there's more speed generated with arms glued to my chest than there is keeping my shoulders square and flailing my arms.

I see what you mean about assigning components, but I'd call 'body' anything that would be left if I was the Black Knight in Monty Python's the search for the Holy Grail. I'd seperate the arms at the deltoids - not the trapezius', and remove the legs at the quads and hams, not the glutes or hip flexors.

Like I said - the arms and hands aren't useless; they can be used to generate power; but not big power like rotating your shoulders and hips through 180 degrees.

As for TGN, I'm with Brian in that it's a very scientific approach; great for understanding how the 'power chain' can develop, but I'm still skeptical at it's potential for usable swing instruction.

I know it's a tease to say "I can't fully say", but knowing what to move when means the power chain gets automated, not manipulated.

[BrianW]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

". I can't go into a ton of detail yet (as if I did, they wouldn't teach me anymore)

LOL, I guess you would have to kill us if you told us Ben

[LowPost42]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

LOL, I guess you would have to kill us if you told us Ben

The flights, the firearms permits, the time shift,... ... ... you're likely safe.

[jbrunk]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

TGM is a very technical book and probably too hard for me to understand.

That being said, most golfers in my opinion, would do very well to look at some 'unconventional' teaching than most of the junk that comes out of golf digest and magazine.

[Jeff Mann]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

I am now a big TGM fan, and I now believe that it is the most rational way to think about the golf swing from a mechanical and geometrical perspective.

I have written two review papers on TGM topics, and hopefully they will make the TGM book more understandable.

http://perfectgolfswingreview.net/power.htm

http://perfectgolfswingreview.net/arm.htm

Jeff.

[BrianW]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

I am now a big TGM fan, and I now believe that it is the most rational way to think about the golf swing from a mechanical and geometrical perspective.

I have written two review papers on TGM topics, and hopefully they will make the TGM book more understandable.

http://perfectgolfswingreview.net/power.htm

http://perfectgolfswingreview.net/arm.htm

Jeff.

Hi Jeff,

That's some very detailed information but I am not sure if I agree with all of it. I would suggest that the best type of golf swing lies not in the classification of "Hitter" or "Swinger" , it is something between both. I prefer the concept of using both arms to move the club through impact, the left as the steering arm and the right as the power source.

I also think that your swing analysis tends to consider the 'release' as too much of a two dimensional movement when you refer to the lever system. The swing is rotary and the release is not a simple unhinging of the wrist cock. The wrist cock and unhinging only takes place through around 45 deg as the club is already set at around a 45 deg angle at address. The power and speed does not come solely from the unhinging action, most of it is produced as the clubface is rotated from an open position to a closed one. In an effective swing the wrists and forearms will have opened in the back swing so that at the halfway down position the wrists are still rotated open, in the follow through where the club is pointing towards the target the wrists and forearms will have rotated to an extent that they have turned over around 90 deg. It is this rotation of the clubface from open to closed through impact along with a body turn that creates the desired clubhead speed.

These videos by David Blair are very good and show how the club should be effectively released with the arms and wrists using a body turn.

http://www.todaysgolfer.co.uk/Golf/v...lding-A-Swing/

http://www.todaysgolfer.co.uk/Golf/v...ing-A-Swing-2/

http://www.todaysgolfer.co.uk/Golf/v...ir-Full-Swing/

[bill reed]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

hi
what i noticed was that top golfers have there right elbow still bent and there right wrist still cupped at impact. it not till about 6 inches past where the ball was that both arms extend and the right wrist uncups.
i have alway took the point of true impact to be past the ball and the point where the right arm is like the left and fully extended. it the point with maximum extension and leverage.
the true impact point is 2 to 3 inches in front of the ball if playing a driver and the ball just gets in the way of your club going to its true impact point.
some of this does come over in Homer's book but he does not go into it as much as he does with some things that seem less important.
cheers
Bill

[BrianW]

Re: your thoughts on TGM i.e homer keller, acumulators ect.

Trevor Immelman says that the bottom picture is an unathletic way to hold onto the club through impact and is a power sap. He prefers the action in the top two pictures.

See this link: http://www.golf.com/golf/gallery/art...271-10,00.html