I think just about anyone who knows a little bit about it can agree that unless your first name is Eldrick wanting to make a lot of money by becoming a golf pro is a bad idea. I played so many rinky-dink tournaments that even if I won I lost money getting back and forth I don’t want to think about it. I had to read that 3 times before I believed it. I hope he is able to find some real happiness, money don’t do it on its own. I appreciate the insights sincerely. There are so many guys (and women) out there with so much game that nobody has ever heard of that it’s unreal. For instance Mike Layne and Dave Hill (not the one who used to play the Sr Tour) not being multiple Tour winners just blows my mind. And why? Dumb luck, not having financing or someone who could keep them on the straight and narrow. Everybody knows guys like this. Then there’s a few like me. Honestly, if my pediatrician hadn’t have been a hippie and talked my folks into not putting my legs in braces when I was four (I was born knock-kneed and duck-footed and right at the end of 'Nam, he wanted me to be ineligable for the army) I wouldn’t have bled nearly as many shots right from getting stuck on the downswing and I would have made it to the show. And then after a few years I would have gone the way of Michael Hutchence because I was miserable and had too much money, nobody to keep my ass in check and no justification for the artificial success. So many issues that I had to get out of my comfort zone in order to confront and nothing that meant anything because my only identity was my ability to play a game. That’s why I piss and moan about guys like Maves who pop up with no qualifications to try to make a quick buck and about doing modules to become Players without doing the nasty work down in the mines. The swing is easy, the rest of it is what’s hard.
I agree with LCDV especially when he talks about the hard work at the coal face and how it is the ‘x’ factor that wins tournaments.
To give you an example of how some people are just winners despite how appearances suggest they shouldn’t be, I ask you to consider Jeev Milka Singh. Ranked 59th in the world and with 15 tournament wins to his name which include 3 on the European tour, he has won $5,581,831 in career earnings.
Yet if you’d never heard of him and seen him warming up on the first tee, you’d be thinking, ‘you are mine!’.
There is very little classical about him at all, but he clearly doing something right!
Yeah, I totally agree with that analysis, but that’s veering off into another subject, that being what other people think about you. It seemed to me that the point being made was what you could learn from yourself for yourself. I’m 100% certain that Jeev Milka had all the evidence he needed for himself to continue and pursue his aims. A problem occurs when you have all the evidence in the world that says you might not be on the right track yet you persist with the belief that ‘the hard work will pay off’. Again, I’m not talking about giving up, just being honest with yourself. There seems to be a very subtle point of difference between the two, but there is a difference and it’s very important and it gets lost in our culture of ‘positivity at all costs’. Look at George Bush for example, no amount of positive spin was going to make that mess any rosier.
Your thread on ISG Styles, it’s fantastic and the journey and the ambition is what the game is all about. You’re working towards your goals and aims within a functional life context, and your dreams can and should be unlimited. But you’re not quitting your job and neglecting your family based on that dream because on some level you’ve assessed that that’s not the best way to go. You could call that not following your dreams fully or you could call it excellent life management- I would say the latter. That’s not about you being negative or anything of the sorts. It’s neither positive or negative. We live in a dualistic world where it’s either this or that, right or wrong, left or right, life or death, god or the devil. In reality, if you turn left and keep going you’ll eventually end up to your right. Two choices is a false concept. Most of human experience and understanding can’t be fulfilled with an either or mentality. From my honest on open experience there simply has to be something, many things, in between positive and negative.
LCDV, I admire your openness and honesty and I appreciate you sharing those parts of your struggle. I found them very enlightening. Cheers.
JMSingh seems to have it pretty good in the slot. Once you are there there is very litlle you can do wrong; pretty deep 430 line and the right foot firmly planted meaning he has saved a lot of ammunition.
This is one of the better golf swings I have seen in a long time. I’m probably looking at different things than most people, but my bet would be on this guy any day any time.
Various critics whose negative view of this golf swing reminds me of myself when I was a young pro, holding on for dear life to TGM ideals. “How can this be? How can such an awful swing play such good golf?”
I was quite naive. Simply a lack of understanding.
What I learned later is that these guys such as Peter Senior and other unruly moves actually had superior golf swings to all the pretty stuff you would see that where packing their suitcases on Friday afternoon.
there are no mysteries.
Agreed with that. I see this guy and think Miller Barber or Billy Casper. Looks at first glance like there’s not enough speed and a lot of ‘little old man stuff’ going on but the money shot is there (p3 to p4 for here). I wouldn’t really want that aesthetic move but I wouldn’t get in line to play this guy for my lunch money either. Besides he’s got God’s Touch with the putter too. Like it’s got eyes. And that is not a knock.
You guys beat to the punch on that one. He does a lot of great things, but two in particular that I love: he makes fantastic use of his arms starting down while maintaining a quiet sort of braced pivot. And secondly he utilizes, in my opinion, one of the most unheralded power moves going, that being the bent left elbow right around the point of maximum acceleration- I love that move! He’s also got great upper body rotation through the ball etc etc…
And just as a general observation, he looks to me like a guy who has complete confidence in his hands- a rarity in modern tour players. I put in the same sort of category as Pavin- similar style player…
I wasted half my life on mechanics hitting…swinging etc I realised I was barking up the wrong tree… I began to ask questions what sperated the best from the average …why were people like Greg Norman etc a cut above the rest… I began my journey to find out why…
What in common did Greg Norman in golf or Peter Sampras in tennis or the best Batter or pitcher in baseball all have in common…
They had the best Kinetic Link in their sport… They produced the best power production process in their sport and produce the same power production process repeatably evertime… Everytime you tested them they produce the same Kinetic Link everytime they were tested…
There body moved the same way everytime and produce power the same way everytime …what they all had in common is the same sequence of creating the power production process or the kinetic link …
People can argue the theory to the cows come home… Although research has proven in theory and practice the kinetic link is the power production process in a long list of sports…
So how do you identify if people are producing a kinetic link… Can you tell by eye ? No …Can you tell by video ? No
Why can’t you tell by video or eye? because video or eye can’t measure body segment speeds and if the body is moving in the right sequence or not … or measure ground forces… Nor can it measure muscular activity to identify if the muscles in each body segment are loading and firing in the right sequence…
The only way you can measure someone’s kinetic link or power production process and all the above is using biomechanics…
If some has a poor kinetic link… how do you train their body to produce a kinetic link ?
wouldn’t people all have different movement pattern issues?..
Wouldn’t you have to create individual exercises and training prorgams to adress each athletes movement patterns isses or power production process issues?
how do you know what exercies to give to an athlete …
You have to research and test exercises … using EMG data (measure muscular activity) Force data and motion data…
The journey never ends researching new exercises and programs to train individual athletes movement patterns to produce the power production process…
How do you know the exercsies work??? by re- testing athletes biomechanics…
The missing link in golf is biomechanics and I hope oneday that people start to realise that maybe there issues aren’t mechanical issues maybe it’s biomechanical issues i.e a power production process issue… and start to accept and incorporate biomechanics into the PGA teaching cirriculum…
Then why isn’t Pete Sampras as good a golfer as Greg Norman?
Started reading this thread and got a headache by page 6. COAM is just not really that important for most people and I am a TGMer and a Hoganista, with a touch of Norwood when I need a challenge. Only second day on the thread, and not familiar with all the controversy, about the subject. The subject does exist in this world, we can all find it somewhere, but if had my choice between knowing when or if COAM occurs during a swing motion or being able to get out of my own way to execute the motion I choose- give me the latter.
biomechanic,
I am not quite sure to understand correctly…do you feel that COAM is effective during the vertical jump ? Could you elaborate a bit.
Mandrin, stop it. Stop it now. There’s debating, even being abrasive (yours truly) as a means for exchanging ideas and opinions, and then there’s being a TOOL. Stop it now. No one cares and it’s stupid.
Simmer down Leco! If Mandrin and Bio want to talk COAM till the cow jumps over the moon (COAM or non COAM assisted), its no problem, its a COAM thread. I don’t care and most likely most others don’t either but they can go at it if they want. No harm, no foul in its own thread. I can’t do soothing music but here is a picture intended to help… 
COAM = Cows over a moon?
Easy with the leco porn Arnie.
OOOOOOOHHHHHHHHH pretty pretty balls mmmmm gimme gimme
BTW if y’all think this is bad don’t ever let your children enroll in my classes. I did a 4 hour lecture last semester on Hannibal and Caesar in a first year intro to world history class. By the end of the night every single one of them was DONE. Educational overload is so cool.
Mandrin to be honest this is what gets me is … COAM everyone refers to jumping… although to create motion they are creating an external force using the ground… Peak speed of the knee joints and hips joints reach maximum speed before you leave the ground… So why is this classed as COAM …
Although the body hasn’t reached peak speed in height … until peak height is reached…
This is what baffles me any jumping uses ground forces to create motion so how is this idnetified as COAM…
There is an external force applied to the system… like golf at first there is an external force to the system… Ground … although after this it becomes a closed system… Conservation of momentum… not COAM…
Do you think maybe they are using the COAM for jumping like conservation or momentum for golf… After the initial external force is apllied… it becomes a closed system…
it’s interesting topic what are your thoughts…
Punic Wars…I’m not a history buff, but there is some fascinating there. I won a bet with a golfing buddy (who is very good at geography, btw) that Hannibal and Carthage were from North Africa, not in the region of the Persian Empire as he asserted. I’ve got that on him, plus I have a hole-in-one. He does drive the ball farther than me though.
Cheers,
Captain Chaos
lecoeurdevie, Steb,
Intriguing posts…very revealing.
love the Roman History stuff.
Just finished “Lustrum” by Robert Harris. Plenty of liberties taken with the actual history but still a great read.