Question:
"Mike Dalecki" wrote George, I can’t help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it. For the love of God, don’t egg him on to make his answers LONGER. Randy
Aw, c’mon, Randy, you’re just jealous because his posts are longer than yours. ;) I’m not trying to make them LONGER, I’m hoping he’ll make them BETTER. I have a terrible time trying to figure out what he’s saying. I’m not a dope, I’m very motivated to learn, I’m interested in mastering–to the extent possible–the golf swing, I’ve got a PhD for goodness sakes; you’d think I’d be trainable under these circumstances. But I have an awful time following what he says. I think there’s something there, I just can’t ferret it out. George said something a ways back in one of his voluminous posts that actually sparked a glimmer of what seemed to be understanding in me: "too much around, not enough down." (well, that’s a paraphrase, not necessarily a quote). And it struck a responsive chord in me, enough that I really tried to understand what he was saying about it (this in response to an over-the-top question). It was imagery that connected for me, in that my first move usually IS around, not down. I played around with it for a while; I had printed out his post and took it with me to the range. I can’t say I did more than play around with it, the weather hasn’t been conducive to disciplined work. There was just enough introspection from it all, on my part, that I wanted to pursue it, although most of the post just didn’t talk well to me. I don’t necessarily have a problem with it "not talking to me." I’m a teacher myself, and I know that part of communicating is finding a way for two people to connect their ideas. While how he says it may not work for me, I’d never argue it couldn’t work for someone else. The irony of all this is the reference to using ‘pictures’ to show his approach instead of words. I’m quite sure there’s nothing stopping George from posting a few pics on his or anyone else’s web site (heck, I’d volunteer mine, I’m sure you’d volunteer yours, Randy) which he could refer to in his posts. I’m sure he’s aware that can be done–after all, he’s replied to Anika’s threads showing Tiger’s and others swings. So he could use pictures if he wanted to. I wonder why he doesn’t. Mike Mike Dalecki–Charter Member, RSG Clique I do not patronize spammers! Help keep RSG clean. Expect the same etiquette from me on RSG as on the golf course. RSG Roll Call: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/daleckim.htm
Response:
So I asked him if he was aware of how to use his right arm. He replied that no, he didn’t have much of a sense of what to do with it. So I took about 5 minutes to show him the "piston push" technique that was posted here on 11/1/00 at 11:10 am under the name "right hand technique.."
Golfing Machine 1L, The Machine Concept – The right arm is a piston. It is not stated in the video with ALL the stuff that was in the post, but it does continually stress "push the pulling hand" using the butt of the right wristbone on top of the left thumb.
Golfing Machine 6C1, Pressure Points – #1 The heel of the right hand where it touches the left hand thumb. All of my Golfing Machine references will have meaning shortly. David Laville Charter Member, RSG Clique
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Aw, c’mon, Randy, you’re just jealous because his posts are longer than yours. ;) I’m not trying to make them LONGER, I’m hoping he’ll make them BETTER. I have a terrible time trying to figure out what he’s saying. I’m not a dope, I’m very motivated to learn, I’m interested in mastering–to the extent possible–the golf swing, I’ve got a PhD for goodness sakes; you’d think I’d be trainable under these circumstances. But I have an awful time following what he says. I think there’s something there, I just can’t ferret it out. George said something a ways back in one of his voluminous posts that actually sparked a glimmer of what seemed to be understanding in me: "too much around, not enough down." (well, that’s a paraphrase, not necessarily a quote).
<snippage Mike, I’m not going to even get into the SPAM thing. However, that is what I meant by lack of polish. I am by no means knocking George’s knowledge of the swing. His enthusiasm is self-evident in the prolithic postings he does. ;) Perhaps George can explain this to beat all hell one-on-one. The thing I keyed on the most in George’s video was the action of the right hand (more specifically that was in the pamphlet), but all I got was very disconcerting hooks and pushes. 2 balls O.B. on the the first nine of my last round this year. My playing partners were grumbling after I came in with a 44 on an easy course. Did I say grumbling? I should say stunned! My opinion. If you have to time some hand action somewhere on the downswing you are asking for TROUBLE. Scott – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Mike
Response:
snip to:
The thing I keyed on the most in George’s video was the action of the right hand (more specifically that was in the pamphlet), but all I got was very disconcerting hooks and pushes. 2 balls O.B. on the the first nine of my last round this year. My playing partners were grumbling after I came in with a 44 on an easy course. Did I say grumbling? I should say stunned! My opinion. If you have to time some hand action somewhere on the downswing you are asking for TROUBLE. Scott
This is why the protocol is to be used in gradual steps, Scott, where the timing and stuff is incorporated in balance before you either use it for larger swings, or where you unrealistically try to use it playing golf before you have "balanced" out all the factors. The timing becomes as easy as any other thing if you address it face to face and blend it, as the video emphatically says to do, in its directive to work gradually from easy motions on up. Early in the video the point is made that the motion is to be learned first before golf balls are brought into the formula, and then you are to start with easy swings, short shots, and short clubs, short backswings, 50 yard PWs. It says that you get the hang of it with that first, and then VERY gradually progress in your practice at that very moment, and in general with the protocol as the days go along, so that "no viruses get introduced" along the line that change "perfect" into flawed swings and flawed impact. The point being that the golfer can IDENTIFY these WHEN THEY COME UP instead of having to deal with them already embedded at a later time with big swings where many different problems could have introduced themselves which obscure which thing(s) need(s) to be addressed. Nowhere does it say to TWIST or FORCE ROLLOVER with the right hand. It says over and over that the base of the right hand PUSHES the base of the top of the left thumb. Your authority for your action was "from the booklet": I will quote page 7: "Adding the Right Hand. The main function of the right hand is to aSSISt the pulling hand to pull the butt of the clubshaft toward the target line along that target line. ….The right arm adds its force to help the forward motion of the BUTT of the club". then in bold: "Its principal job is to push the pulling hand, and when it rolls over the left hand in the release, to support the clubshaft! ,,,later - "There will be NO FORWARD SLAP of the right PALM during the swing against the shaft to help hit the ball. It will deliver the mass of the right side of your body with a rolling motion of the shaft over the left hand during the release..". – which is then clarified, with words describing how the release creates a crossover of the right arm over the left, and how the club moves about 8 feet while the hands move only a couple feet through the lower half of the swing arc. The video visually lays ample ground for the shape of the swing and the motion through the ball. Any excessive effort of the right arm to overpower good timing is not a matter of poor instruction [though admittedly I would say more now about that than I did in the video on that point]. But the video and book are not in conflict with a more fleshed out explanation of the point. It remains that you took a faulty procedure to the golf course, and one not given to you from the video or booklet. It was your responsibility to get it right before using it. Like, for example, using a telescopic sight on a new gun that has not been adjusted… The simplicity of doing this in a harmonious way was again demonstrated to me yesterday by a gentlement 87 who had no sense of how TO use the right hand to help. I showed him the "push" in about 5 minutes, he did it well on his first "hit" even without a practice swing, and he hooked NONE of his little 7 iron shots. his shots were immediately improved by about 10 yards and solid contact, and his emotional reaction over the help were special. Somehow you got off into an excessive use of right arm. But most alarming is that you took that unfinished business out to a course situation before it had become a balanced and integrated part of your technique. You were, as it were, going to Carnegie Hall with the new concerto before you had learned the notes. [Sat. nite we ARE going to a concert -- Rachmaninoff Concerto; bet HE has his ducks in a row..] You also refer to "hand action". Nothing could be more emphatic than my saying that there was to be NO HAND ACTION WHATSOEVER! Your imputation that Hand action was being taught is about as contrary as can be. The function of the right "hand" was explicit and emphatic and unequivocal: "The ‘business part’ of the right hand is not the palm or even the fingers; it is the BASE OF THE RIGHT WRISTBONE WHERE IT COMES INTO CONTACT AT THE TOP OF THE LEFT THUMB." and as stated in the quote above from the booklet. The video also shows my WRISTbone poised for pushing; never does it show my palm thrusting. It most emphatically isolates and negates ANY right HAND action, and I also repeat many times that there is to be NO "twisting" OF ANY KIND during the delivery of the club to the ball. Rashly applying a misunderstood protocol, or rashly using a protocol you thought you DID understand is not a teacher’s/doctor’s fault. It is failure to follow directions. It is getting ahead of yourself. Page 12 has a section entitled: "How to use this drill to perfect your technique" which lays out the gradual steps necessary to go from fully controlled short shots to longer clubs and longer shots. Did you miss the point of it? Did your disconcerting hooks and pushes just "happen to you"? Did they fall from the sky? The counsel is the premise of the video, of the booklet, and it is repeated in some form at least 4 times in unequivocally clear simple English. No, Scott, the hooks and pushes were there because your own leap from easy perfect to long imperfect was NOT as directed by the instruction. It was because you CHOSE to leap and try it out. But you did so against the instruction. So your final result was not the result of the correct instruction but from ignoring the instruction. Tiger didn’t expect to incorporate what the rest of us think might be "small changes" in his protocol overnight. I don’t expect most will incorporate my protocol overnight either, but I also do not endorse their expectations that without the gradual controlled advancement in proficiency with it that they will use it perfectly every time in playing situations. My guess is that, at least on a subconscious level, you may already have BEEN using a good right arm push technique, because as right handed people, our instincts are "right hand" oriented and natural and deeply subconscious. Like many instinctive athletes, it was a "ain’t broke" part of your already established procedure. If you had called me on the phone [on MY toll free number] for clarification of something that didn’t work, as I asked at the end of the book– third line from the bottom of the last page – that anyone should do, it probably would have taken less than a minute to clear up your confusion and eliminate the embarrassement you suffered. George
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t know how to make pictures on the internet, Mike. … I don’t know anything about internet really besides word processing, spreadsheets, and downloading programs, and now posting messages here (because they are like email). Huh? You’ve got your own website with pictures of you there! If you’re saying you don’t know how to do it yourself, I can believe that. Someone put that site together for you, though, and if you really wanted to get more photos on line I’m sure you could talk to them. If you don’t want to do it because it might amount to giving away something you’re trying to sell, that’s fine. It’s also ok if it’s not worth your time and effort. But please, just don’t tell us it can’t be done. // Chris Adamo
Got me there. When responding I actually forgot I had a webmaster put up my site. I was simply thinking about my own ability, of course. You are totally correct, I could if I wanted to. He is not set up TO post movies. But the site is not for the purpose of showing pictures. It is a station that describes two book and some videos. My money back guarantee is how I facilitate anyone wanting to see stuff in its entirety to decide if they want to buy it. I do not steal money sent to me by trickery. Refunds are cheerfully made. Like B&N: if when you see it you don’t want it, you don’t pay for it. If you were here, the same procedure would apply as B&N. There IS a certain appropriate caution anyone would have about sending videos especially: copying videos is routinely done, and fraud is very simple. Sorry, don’t want to give away my life work. Can you name any other video distributors who will refund for a video that is not defective? There may be some; I don’t think Michael Eisner does… George
Response:
Truthfully, I take no exception to the length of George’s posts. What I take issue with is the lack of clarity. For someone who has expressed time and again "the clear use of the English language is essential" to good teaching, he sure makes it a challenge to get through much of his stuff. He’s obviously very much a "train of thought" writer. You almost have to BE George to comprehend what he’s saying. Thankfully, I am not. Randy Charter Member, RSG Clique BRAND NEW WEBSITE: www.YouGoGolf.com My RSG Roll Call profile: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/brownr.htm RSG FAQ: http://ttsoft.com/thor/rsggolf.html Voiceovers/Narration/Production Services: www.randybrownproductions.com
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Looks like you are getting more like him! Takes longer than 5 minutes to read your post! ;^) Rob "Mike Dalecki" wrote George, I can’t help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it. For the love of God, don’t egg him on to make his answers LONGER. Randy Aw, c’mon, Randy, you’re just jealous because his posts are longer than yours. ;) I’m not trying to make them LONGER, I’m hoping he’ll make them BETTER. I have a terrible time trying to figure out what he’s saying. I’m not a dope, I’m very motivated to learn, I’m interested in mastering–to the extent possible–the golf swing, I’ve got a PhD for goodness sakes; you’d think I’d be trainable under these circumstances. But I have an awful time following what he says. I think there’s something there, I just can’t ferret it out. George said something a ways back in one of his voluminous posts that actually sparked a glimmer of what seemed to be understanding in me: "too much around, not enough down." (well, that’s a paraphrase, not necessarily a quote). And it struck a responsive chord in me, enough that I really tried to understand what he was saying about it (this in response to an over-the-top question). It was imagery that connected for me, in that my first move usually IS around, not down. I played around with it for a while; I had printed out his post and took it with me to the range. I can’t say I did more than play around with it, the weather hasn’t been conducive to disciplined work. There was just enough introspection from it all, on my part, that I wanted to pursue it, although most of the post just didn’t talk well to me. I don’t necessarily have a problem with it "not talking to me." I’m a teacher myself, and I know that part of communicating is finding a way for two people to connect their ideas. While how he says it may not work for me, I’d never argue it couldn’t work for someone else. The irony of all this is the reference to using ‘pictures’ to show his approach instead of words. I’m quite sure there’s nothing stopping George from posting a few pics on his or anyone else’s web site (heck, I’d volunteer mine, I’m sure you’d volunteer yours, Randy) which he could refer to in his posts. I’m sure he’s aware that can be done–after all, he’s replied to Anika’s threads showing Tiger’s and others swings. So he could use pictures if he wanted to. I wonder why he doesn’t. Mike Mike Dalecki–Charter Member, RSG Clique I do not patronize spammers! Help keep RSG clean. Expect the same etiquette from me on RSG as on the golf course. RSG Roll Call: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/daleckim.htm
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "Mike Dalecki" wrote George, I can’t help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it. For the love of God, don’t egg him on to make his answers LONGER. Randy Aw, c’mon, Randy, you’re just jealous because his posts are longer than yours. ;) I’m not trying to make them LONGER, I’m hoping he’ll make them BETTER. I have a terrible time trying to figure out what he’s saying. I’m not a dope, I’m very motivated to learn, I’m interested in mastering–to the extent possible–the golf swing, I’ve got a PhD for goodness sakes; you’d think I’d be trainable under these circumstances. But I have an awful time following what he says. I think there’s something there, I just can’t ferret it out. George said something a ways back in one of his voluminous posts that actually sparked a glimmer of what seemed to be understanding in me: "too much around, not enough down." (well, that’s a paraphrase, not necessarily a quote). And it struck a responsive chord in me, enough that I really tried to understand what he was saying about it (this in response to an over-the-top question). It was imagery that connected for me, in that my first move usually IS around, not down. I played around with it for a while; I had printed out his post and took it with me to the range. I can’t say I did more than play around with it, the weather hasn’t been conducive to disciplined work. There was just enough introspection from it all, on my part, that I wanted to pursue it, although most of the post just didn’t talk well to me. I don’t necessarily have a problem with it "not talking to me." I’m a teacher myself, and I know that part of communicating is finding a way for two people to connect their ideas. While how he says it may not work for me, I’d never argue it couldn’t work for someone else. The irony of all this is the reference to using ‘pictures’ to show his approach instead of words. I’m quite sure there’s nothing stopping George from posting a few pics on his or anyone else’s web site (heck, I’d volunteer mine, I’m sure you’d volunteer yours, Randy) which he could refer to in his posts. I’m sure he’s aware that can be done–after all, he’s replied to Anika’s threads showing Tiger’s and others swings. So he could use pictures if he wanted to. I wonder why he doesn’t. Mike Mike Dalecki–Charter Member, RSG Clique I do not patronize spammers! Help keep RSG clean. Expect the same etiquette from me on RSG as on the golf course. RSG Roll Call: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/daleckim.htm
I don’t know how to make pictures on the internet, Mike. Thanks for insight into who you are. I don’t know anything about internet really besides word processing, spreadsheets, and downloading programs, and now posting messages here (because they are like email). Motion pictures are out of the question. Pics without motion are not enough, largely, because golf magazines publish millions of them a month saying the same things showing the same things and using great swings to illustrate, but the public misses the point –. Tell you what I WILL do. I’ll refer to pictures that are in the public domain. Start with this one: LOOK AT ANY GOLFER at impact. You find the picture. Look at the position of his left upper arm across his chest, how it is NOT straight out in front of him. It is obviously being dragged – supported and pushed as it were, but the turning chest. This supports the concept that the body pulls the arms, not arms swing independently. Or ask the Golf Channel for a copy of the show with Chi Chi last week, where he shows his swing. See how his entire body, hips and shoulders, both move exactly the same amount around to the right in his backswing; and then how he "baseball swings" forward, in which FORward motion his X factor is "created" i.e., that is nothing other than the stretch that occurs because the hips pull the upper body and the two will have an angle between them based on your flexibility. He has zero X in his backswing, as I explained and as I mentioned Daly also speaks to; his X is the result of the FORward exertion. Or the video of Davis Love III, or most ANY pro golfer, whose clubhead is on the ground when his ball is on a tee. The clubhead is further than the ball from his left shoulder at address due TO the tee, so that his "measuring" allows him to hit pure on the way back to the ball. Or Fuzzy at address. same thing. Or pictures of ANY golfer from a down the target line perspective when his hands get to waist level; see how the clubshaft is EXACTLY on a plane running from the ball up through his right shoulder, and how his shoulders HAVE NOT YET TURNED OUT past that plane. They are waiting for the "down" of the hands to accumulate speed before the "around" of the shoulders has been permitted. These pictures which you all have already are my proof. See for yourself. right now. George
Response:
I don’t know how to make pictures on the internet, Mike. … I don’t know anything about internet really besides word processing, spreadsheets, and downloading programs, and now posting messages here (because they are like email).
Huh? You’ve got your own website with pictures of you there! If you’re saying you don’t know how to do it yourself, I can believe that. Someone put that site together for you, though, and if you really wanted to get more photos on line I’m sure you could talk to them. If you don’t want to do it because it might amount to giving away something you’re trying to sell, that’s fine. It’s also ok if it’s not worth your time and effort. But please, just don’t tell us it can’t be done. // Chris Adamo Before you buy.
Response:
This, from Randy, my goodness…. Just kidding. 
Dave – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "Mike Dalecki" wrote George, I can’t help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it. For the love of God, don’t egg him on to make his answers LONGER. Randy Charter Member, RSG Clique BRAND NEW WEBSITE: www.YouGoGolf.com My RSG Roll Call profile: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/brownr.htm RSG FAQ: http://ttsoft.com/thor/rsggolf.html Voiceovers/Narration/Production Services: www.randybrownproductions.com
Response:
Mike, you know I was kidding. :-) FWIW, for ME to be indicting someone else for their lengthy posts, that really says something. Randy Charter Member, RSG Clique BRAND NEW WEBSITE: www.YouGoGolf.com My RSG Roll Call profile: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/brownr.htm RSG FAQ: http://ttsoft.com/thor/rsggolf.html Voiceovers/Narration/Production Services: www.randybrownproductions.com
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "Mike Dalecki" wrote George, I can’t help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it. For the love of God, don’t egg him on to make his answers LONGER. Randy Aw, c’mon, Randy, you’re just jealous because his posts are longer than yours. ;) I’m not trying to make them LONGER, I’m hoping he’ll make them BETTER. I have a terrible time trying to figure out what he’s saying. I’m not a dope, I’m very motivated to learn, I’m interested in mastering–to the extent possible–the golf swing, I’ve got a PhD for goodness sakes; you’d think I’d be trainable under these circumstances. But I have an awful time following what he says. I think there’s something there, I just can’t ferret it out. George said something a ways back in one of his voluminous posts that actually sparked a glimmer of what seemed to be understanding in me: "too much around, not enough down." (well, that’s a paraphrase, not necessarily a quote). And it struck a responsive chord in me, enough that I really tried to understand what he was saying about it (this in response to an over-the-top question). It was imagery that connected for me, in that my first move usually IS around, not down. I played around with it for a while; I had printed out his post and took it with me to the range. I can’t say I did more than play around with it, the weather hasn’t been conducive to disciplined work. There was just enough introspection from it all, on my part, that I wanted to pursue it, although most of the post just didn’t talk well to me. I don’t necessarily have a problem with it "not talking to me." I’m a teacher myself, and I know that part of communicating is finding a way for two people to connect their ideas. While how he says it may not work for me, I’d never argue it couldn’t work for someone else. The irony of all this is the reference to using ‘pictures’ to show his approach instead of words. I’m quite sure there’s nothing stopping George from posting a few pics on his or anyone else’s web site (heck, I’d volunteer mine, I’m sure you’d volunteer yours, Randy) which he could refer to in his posts. I’m sure he’s aware that can be done–after all, he’s replied to Anika’s threads showing Tiger’s and others swings. So he could use pictures if he wanted to. I wonder why he doesn’t. Mike Mike Dalecki–Charter Member, RSG Clique I do not patronize spammers! Help keep RSG clean. Expect the same etiquette from me on RSG as on the golf course. RSG Roll Call: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/daleckim.htm
Response:
Anecdote from this morning. All golf problems or things are NOT "it takes a lot of practice" things. I had a new pupil this morning. Man 87 years old. When he first started and I saw his swing, he had a beautiful small motion IDENTICAL to my video model, and I thought he must have seen the video. Sweet man indeed, but no, didn’t know I had a video. He made short but easy swings, obviously much less amplitude than if you replaced his the 8 in his age with a 1, but a nice correct motion. Not a lot of body turn, nor was he interested in apprenticing for any of the tours. His complaint was "no distance." So I asked him if he was aware of how to use his right arm. He replied that no, he didn’t have much of a sense of what to do with it. So I took about 5 minutes to show him the "piston push" technique that was posted here on 11/1/00 at 11:10 am under the name "right hand technique.." That feature — right hand pushing the left – is also described in the video and companion booklet that Scott reported on here a couple of days ago. It is not stated in the video with ALL the stuff that was in the post, but it does continually stress "push the pulling hand" using the butt of the right wristbone on top of the left thumb. The video clearly shows the right hand pushing the left hand procedure, and the instruction about it lasts for about 5 minutes starting 15 minutes into the video. The posting here referred to has additional comments about the "piston/pushup" use of the right arm, but the golfer following it will accomplish much the same effect on his club when he does push the left hand as it says to in the video. Incidentally, as I was reviewing the video, I noticed the extremely explicit and repeated use of the words "allow the rollover of the club through impact" "allow the momentum of the clubhead to pull you around and through" and such things, several times and with emphasis where appropriate, so that any possible misconception that caused Scott to "wince" when the rollover was shown ‘left hand alone’ would have been cleared up right there. A golfer following that part of the video would have been totally disabused of any excess he may have acquired in the hand-alone demo. Anyway; the result of this instruction with my pupil: IMMEDIATELY he applied this push thingee to his next shot. His immediate words "Wow, that’s further than I was hitting it!" And on the second, etc. and the 5th shot. Same words, same reaction, same surprise! Then he asked me: "will it work with my driver too?" Of course… (driver was left in car). Now some critics might say that "bandaids, tips" etc. won’t last. Please try to tell the man. He hit the ball further and purer. Does this mean he will have to go practice it for months? Does it mean he has been harmed because "swing changes take time and you need a lot of lessons." Does it mean that hitting the ball ten or fifteen yards farther is a swing change that has a correlative effect on some other part of his swing (yeah, he’ll hit the ball too far and be over the green.)? Folks, correct information is oftentimes immediately enabling. Do not be conned into thinking 1) you are too old; 2) it takes a lot of lessons; 3) swing changes are gradual and need tons of practice; 4) everything has a reaction that will show up as an error in some other part of your swing; or 5) if it ain’t expensive, it ain’t no good. 6) I am too frail; 7) I am too fat; 8) I am a klutz. NO NO NO NO NO. (Incidentally, if you buy a golf lesson for $50 and go home, the money’s gone. Maybe the lesson was good. Maybe not. But it evaporates. BUT– if you buy a good instruction that embraces all of the essentials for $25, $50 or $100 that lasts forever, you can have your golf lesson, or lessons, over and over and over and over, in slo mo, in stop action [I am taking dance instruction and the written take-home by the teacher is FABULOUS -- I practice it "by the numbers" and I'm getting it; I also have it on video. Do you imagine I'd rather go once a week for $30 until I got it? That's a minimum of 10 lessons for me, folks. Not too slick as a dancer...!] So when you make decisions about getting instruction, do the numbers. [The $30 I paid to get "Search for the Perfect..." was MOST worthwhile! real value -- probably $1000 worth of happy] So assume, or keep, the faith, folks. Good golf is not THAT hard, if you know what to do. — When you like a post, save/print it. Saves reposting. — — — George Hibbard Pendulum Press (800) 226-9326 www.perfectimpact.com begin 666 George Hibbard.vcf M0D5′24XZ5D-!4D0-"E9%4E-)3TXZ,BXQ#0I..DAI8F)A<F0[1V5O<F=E#0I& M="YC;VT-"D5-04E,.U!2148[24Y415).150Z9VA <&5R9F5C=&EM<&%C="YC ` end
Response:
My answers inserted below, Mike.
You know, George, what you've written below is indicative of why you get heat from people on RSG. It's a combination of two things: SPiced hAM meat product, and a lack of real evidence. First the lack of evidence:
George: The post was not for the purpose of proving the existence of anything. It was anecdotal. You note that your pupil was hitting the ball, as he said it, "further than I was hitting it!" Of course, George, that makes me sit up and take notice. I ask myself, well, how MUCH FURTHER was he hitting it? 2 yards? 20 yards? What? And how far was he hitting it before you gave him this swing change? George: after posting it I realized I had omitted that; about 10 to 15
yards with his 7 iron. His shots before the tip were less than 100 yards. After the tip, his first shot went farther, my guess is about 110 to115. He is 87, slight of build, thin, and his total backswing was club to sky, left hand to right hip or maybe a hair more. I didn't fix what was not broke, nor did I begin to ask him to swing bigger, harder, longer, or anything; the entire tip was "I can show you something about your right arm that you may not realize." I had him experience the struggle of pushing his right arm to the left, as compared with the ease of the pushup piston action of that technique. He caught on immediately he did it immediately with a golf ball even without a practice swing first, and the difference in his distance was 10 to 15 yards right off the bat. We didn't measure it with a yardage walkoff. HE measured it with his emotional response. I measured it by eye. That was My proof. Good enough. There isn't any question of the reality of what occurred. And there's no such indication in your post. Just a murky reference to "further" that could be anything from 3 yards to 50 yards. Or more. When you give us anecdotal evidence like this which lacks at least a reasonable attempt to quantify the improvement, it makes some people--like me--a bit suspect about the claim.
No "claim" intended. Just a comment to friends who don't feel threatened to hear stuff about golf. You see, George, I was trained as a scientist. I tend to want to see evidence, empirical evidence, that something works. When someone leaves out such evidence, it makes me wonder if the effect was so puny as to be irrelevant. That's especially the case when reporting the numbers would, presumably, bolster the case.
George: most people who do not use the right arm well might well experience their own results. I believe many will try. If that helps, great. If not, that's ok. We furnish each other stuff from our own experience. I am not trying to convert anyone. I'm sharing. If you don't want, ok. I would appreciate it if you don't come back with a "you're shooting the messenger" type of response. George, you do exactly the kinds of things I would flunk my students for doing, i.e., trying to make a claim without supporting it.
Anecdotal, Mike; not trying to prove. Further, the blatant attempt to promote your materials again smacks of hucksterism and personal aggrandizement. George, you're nothing but a Processed Meat promoter, and until and unless you stop selling, and start explaining, that's all you're going to be.
I make points, Mike, for what I believe to be the good of the golfer. I went back and read your post from 11/1; there may be things in there of merit, it's hard for me to tell. But when I see things like "the base of the wristbone" I have to wonder what the heck is going on. The base? Where's the base of the wristbone, for goodness sakes? Is it the outside of the wrist? The inside? The top or bottom? Is there even such a thing AS a wristbone? Darned if I know. I looked up some sites; apparently there are EIGHT wrist bones. So I'm confused to say the least.
Words aren't pictures, and I can't say it with words like I can when I can use pictures to be precise. I don't know how otherwise to refer to that point on my right arm where the center of the base of my palm intersects with the wrist. When I flex the hand backwards at the wrist, there is a place there that I could use to deliver a powerful smack. Not out in the palm, but back at where the palm meets the horizontal cross lines below my wristwatch. Sorry for the inability to say it more precisely. You advocate a motion similar to "trying to push a stake straight down into some soft ground in front of your right foot by pushing down on the top of the stake with the base of your right wristbone." I don't know if that's pushing on the stake with the underside of the wrist--reasonable to assume so since in your "push the wall" illustration you're placing your right hand on the wall, presumably palm facing the wall--or whether it's the outside of the wrist such as the part that faces right when you hold your hand out in front of you palm down. You got it there, Mike in the first part. The palm side of the hand
{"base" of the palm}. Not the back of the palm., i.e., of the hand. George, I can't help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it. It seems like the only way to get the whole story is to buy your stuff.
That post was entitled: "5 minutes" and its subject was summed up at the end: golfer, believe in yourself, trust that all progress is not a long haul, knowing things is often the way to progress rather than instinctive repetitous practice, and look into other ways to learn in addition to instruction where you can get a big bang for your buck (as I did with the book I quoted). Teaching lessons are expensive. Good books etc. cost a lot less. "Do the arithmetic" because there have been posts here from people taking up the game, and part of the answer is precisely that; a lot of good stuff is in books etc. Several of you have suggested others. Absolutely. But new golfers are maybe not aware of that reality. Is it requisite that I "turn my portfolio over to a blind trust" to remove any conflicts of interest? And if that's the case, George, you're just spamming us. Darned if I can see any other purpose for what you wrote with a subject line the same as the stuff you sell... Mike
Chose that subject line without thinking of negative takes on it. There was no reference to that title in the post. I am just used to the concept and shame on me, I said those words. As for not seeing the purpose of the post, try rereading ALL I said, Mike. I will give you that part of it was for an agenda; that was to point out a couple of mis-statements that Scott made about the video -- the reference to his "wincing" which left the impression that the error he perceived was not addressed and corrected in regard to pronation action; the other in claiming that my video was in conflict with my postings here, which it was not. That is only fair. Why, incidentally, do you presume that I am trying to prove, scientifically yet, anything with an anecdote. I am reminded of a similar type of thinking mentioned here: "Mommy, I just saw a Jaguar go by as we went around that corner; that's your favorite car." Daddy responds: "Son, can you prove it?" - Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - Mike Dalecki--Charter Member, RSG Clique I do not patronize spammers! Help keep RSG clean. Expect the same etiquette from me on RSG as on the golf course. RSG Roll Call: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/daleckim.htm Anecdote from this morning. All golf problems or things are NOT "it takes a lot of practice" things. I had a new pupil this morning. Man 87 years old. When he first started and I saw his swing, he had a beautiful small motion IDENTICAL to my video model, and I thought he must have seen the video. Sweet man indeed, but no, didn't know I had a video. He made short but easy swings, obviously much less amplitude than if you replaced his the 8 in his age with a 1, but a nice correct motion. Not a lot of body turn, nor was he interested in apprenticing for any of the tours. His complaint was "no distance." So I asked him if he was aware of how to use his right arm. He replied that no, he didn't have much of a sense of what to do with it. So I took about 5 minutes to show him the "piston push" technique that was posted here on 11/1/00 at 11:10 am under the name "right hand technique.." That feature -- right hand pushing the left - is also described in the video and companion booklet that Scott reported on here a couple of days ago. It is not stated in the video with ALL the stuff that was in the post, but it does continually stress "push the pulling hand" using the butt of the right wristbone on top of the left thumb. The video clearly shows the right hand pushing the left hand procedure, and the instruction about it lasts for about 5 minutes starting 15 minutes into the video. The posting here referred to has additional comments about the "piston/pushup" use of the right arm, but the golfer following it will accomplish much the same effect on his club when he does push the left hand as it says to in the video. Incidentally, as I was reviewing the video, I noticed the extremely explicit and repeated use of the words "allow the rollover of the club through impact" "allow the momentum of the clubhead to pull you around and through" and such things, several times and with emphasis where appropriate, so that any possible misconception that caused Scott to "wince" when the rollover was shown 'left hand
... read more »
Response:
"Mike Dalecki" wrote George, I can't help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it.
For the love of God, don't egg him on to make his answers LONGER. Randy Charter Member, RSG Clique BRAND NEW WEBSITE: www.YouGoGolf.com My RSG Roll Call profile: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/brownr.htm RSG FAQ: http://ttsoft.com/thor/rsggolf.html Voiceovers/Narration/Production Services: www.randybrownproductions.com
Response:
You know, George, what you've written below is indicative of why you get heat from people on RSG. It's a combination of two things: SPiced hAM meat product, and a lack of real evidence. First the lack of evidence: You note that your pupil was hitting the ball, as he said it, "further than I was hitting it!" Of course, George, that makes me sit up and take notice. I ask myself, well, how MUCH FURTHER was he hitting it? 2 yards? 20 yards? What? And how far was he hitting it before you gave him this swing change? And there's no such indication in your post. Just a murky reference to "further" that could be anything from 3 yards to 50 yards. Or more. When you give us anecdotal evidence like this which lacks at least a reasonable attempt to quantify the improvement, it makes some people--like me--a bit suspect about the claim. You see, George, I was trained as a scientist. I tend to want to see evidence, empirical evidence, that something works. When someone leaves out such evidence, it makes me wonder if the effect was so puny as to be irrelevant. That's especially the case when reporting the numbers would, presumably, bolster the case. I would appreciate it if you don't come back with a "you're shooting the messenger" type of response. George, you do exactly the kinds of things I would flunk my students for doing, i.e., trying to make a claim without supporting it. Further, the blatant attempt to promote your materials again smacks of hucksterism and personal aggrandizement. George, you're nothing but a Processed Meat promoter, and until and unless you stop selling, and start explaining, that's all you're going to be. I went back and read your post from 11/1; there may be things in there of merit, it's hard for me to tell. But when I see things like "the base of the wristbone" I have to wonder what the heck is going on. The base? Where's the base of the wristbone, for goodness sakes? Is it the outside of the wrist? The inside? The top or bottom? Is there even such a thing AS a wristbone? Darned if I know. I looked up some sites; apparently there are EIGHT wrist bones. So I'm confused to say the least. You advocate a motion similar to "trying to push a stake straight down into some soft ground in front of your right foot by pushing down on the top of the stake with the base of your right wristbone." I don't know if that's pushing on the stake with the underside of the wrist--reasonable to assume so since in your "push the wall" illustration you're placing your right hand on the wall, presumably palm facing the wall--or whether it's the outside of the wrist such as the part that faces right when you hold your hand out in front of you palm down. George, I can't help but get the sense you tell us just enough to tantalize, but not enough to do it. It seems like the only way to get the whole story is to buy your stuff. And if that's the case, George, you're just spamming us. Darned if I can see any other purpose for what you wrote with a subject line the same as the stuff you sell... Mike Mike Dalecki--Charter Member, RSG Clique I do not patronize spammers! Help keep RSG clean. Expect the same etiquette from me on RSG as on the golf course. RSG Roll Call: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/daleckim.htm - Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - Anecdote from this morning. All golf problems or things are NOT "it takes a lot of practice" things. I had a new pupil this morning. Man 87 years old. When he first started and I saw his swing, he had a beautiful small motion IDENTICAL to my video model, and I thought he must have seen the video. Sweet man indeed, but no, didn't know I had a video. He made short but easy swings, obviously much less amplitude than if you replaced his the 8 in his age with a 1, but a nice correct motion. Not a lot of body turn, nor was he interested in apprenticing for any of the tours. His complaint was "no distance." So I asked him if he was aware of how to use his right arm. He replied that no, he didn't have much of a sense of what to do with it. So I took about 5 minutes to show him the "piston push" technique that was posted here on 11/1/00 at 11:10 am under the name "right hand technique.." That feature -- right hand pushing the left - is also described in the video and companion booklet that Scott reported on here a couple of days ago. It is not stated in the video with ALL the stuff that was in the post, but it does continually stress "push the pulling hand" using the butt of the right wristbone on top of the left thumb. The video clearly shows the right hand pushing the left hand procedure, and the instruction about it lasts for about 5 minutes starting 15 minutes into the video. The posting here referred to has additional comments about the "piston/pushup" use of the right arm, but the golfer following it will accomplish much the same effect on his club when he does push the left hand as it says to in the video. Incidentally, as I was reviewing the video, I noticed the extremely explicit and repeated use of the words "allow the rollover of the club through impact" "allow the momentum of the clubhead to pull you around and through" and such things, several times and with emphasis where appropriate, so that any possible misconception that caused Scott to "wince" when the rollover was shown 'left hand alone' would have been cleared up right there. A golfer following that part of the video would have been totally disabused of any excess he may have acquired in the hand-alone demo. Anyway; the result of this instruction with my pupil: IMMEDIATELY he applied this push thingee to his next shot. His immediate words "Wow, that's further than I was hitting it!" And on the second, etc. and the 5th shot. Same words, same reaction, same surprise! Then he asked me: "will it work with my driver too?" Of course... (driver was left in car). Now some critics might say that "bandaids, tips" etc. won't last. Please try to tell the man. He hit the ball further and purer. Does this mean he will have to go practice it for months? Does it mean he has been harmed because "swing changes take time and you need a lot of lessons." Does it mean that hitting the ball ten or fifteen yards farther is a swing change that has a correlative effect on some other part of his swing (yeah, he'll hit the ball too far and be over the green.)? Folks, correct information is oftentimes immediately enabling. Do not be conned into thinking 1) you are too old; 2) it takes a lot of lessons; 3) swing changes are gradual and need tons of practice; 4) everything has a reaction that will show up as an error in some other part of your swing; or 5) if it ain't expensive, it ain't no good. 6) I am too frail; 7) I am too fat; 8) I am a klutz. NO NO NO NO NO. (Incidentally, if you buy a golf lesson for $50 and go home, the money's gone. Maybe the lesson was good. Maybe not. But it evaporates. BUT-- if you buy a good instruction that embraces all of the essentials for $25, $50 or $100 that lasts forever, you can have your golf lesson, or lessons, over and over and over and over, in slo mo, in stop action [I am taking dance instruction and the written take-home by the teacher is FABULOUS -- I practice it "by the numbers" and I'm getting it; I also have it on video. Do you imagine I'd rather go once a week for $30 until I got it? That's a minimum of 10 lessons for me, folks. Not too slick as a dancer...!] So when you make decisions about getting instruction, do the numbers. [The $30 I paid to get "Search for the Perfect..." was MOST worthwhile! real value -- probably $1000 worth of happy] So assume, or keep, the faith, folks. Good golf is not THAT hard, if you know what to do. — When you like a post, save/print it. Saves reposting. — — — George Hibbard Pendulum Press (800) 226-9326 www.perfectimpact.com
–