I start this thread with the admission that I havent read the “Yellow Book” as a matter of choice and my knowledge is heresay.
The one thing which seems very good to me coming out of Homer’s work is the description of the third accumulator as “the transfer Power Accumulator” ( was he really the first to describe it??). He calls it that because in M1 you try to release wrist cock in the form of rotatory movement and not slapping them. The more pressure you apply the less the slap component will be meaing baconstrip divots.
I am not big on constantly sensing the #3 PP because that invariabl leads to a throw.
I did discuss this with Lag back when I was on M#1 and he approved of it.
I think a good thing is an attempt to standardize terminology…
I think Chapter two in TGM is Homer’s epic… and there is a lot of good stuff in chapter 6.
Homer understanding that ball speed and compression is dependent upon both pre and post impact clubhead speeds is obvious to a good striker… but a mystery to a hacker…
All I hear double digit handicappers talking about mph on the radar tester at the range… but none of those machines ask you to weigh the mass of the clubhead before you swing.
There is a lot of great stuff in TGM no doubt. Perfect? no… but very good? I think so…
macs,
All I know is some of the very best advice I’ve read or received has come from people with a rich background in Golfing Machine. That alone makes it pretty unique.
Oddly enough it was someone outside of ABS that described to me exactly why over-acceleration, or pre-acceleration (can’t take pills for that ailment!) actually meant or did to your swing. His descriptions helped me understand a small piece of the swing I was having trouble conceptualizing. His background was TGM hitting.
I know locally there are 2 guys who don’t know TGM extremely well. One of them is a Canadian tour player and he was a high ranked U.S. college player so was whisked off to this TGM guy. He said the experience and level of technicality blew him away. The other guy I know had a similar experience. When I want to bounce info off of someone locally, it’s only these two guys. EVERYONE else here wants to throw clubs down hallways.
I have found most of the people who ‘make sense’ in this industry have knowledge in TGM.
I think that many of Homer’s TGM concepts are useful.
My favorites:
-
The concept of power accumulators, their loading and release patterns.
-
The concept of a clubshaft being “on-plane” - which allows a golfer to generate an in-to-square-to-in clubhead arc that is perfectly symmetrical to the ball-target line.
-
The differences between swinging and hitting.
-
The concept of the left arm flying wedge and the right forearm flying wedge, and their inter-relationship.
-
The idea of controlling the clubface through impact with the left hand - producing different hinging actions.
In contrast to John, I think that Homer was wrong about the idea of a 'heavy hit" - sustaining compression at impact. I believe that there is no scientific evidence to support that belief.
Jeff.
[size=150]What’s good in Homer’s Golfing Machine?[/size]…The last page of the book because it is finally OVER !! 
TOO much information
There’s a lot of good things about TGM. The issue Homer had was he tried to standardize terminology and then tried to take the vagueness out of the English language. I certainly applaud him for standardizing the terminology, but the normal person doesn’t understand that the terms he came up with where for things that had never been discussed or defined before, so Homer had to give it some type of name. Instead they think it’s goofy and unnecessary when it couldn’t be further from the truth. Try to make the English language less vague seems unnecessary to me though and what happens is that much of Homer’s writing comes off as very odd, almost like reading an entire book of haikus. But in some ways that’s why it’s so brilliant because once you understand that odd writing the light bulb in your head goes on and you start to say to yourself ‘this guy really knew what he was talking about.’
I got into TGM back in 1996 playing college golf as I went to see a Tom Tomasello protege who was a GSED. Despite getting up to playing D-1 golf and being one of the better NY State juniors, I had no never even heard about a FLW at impact, elbow plane, or hinge action and I read instruction books all of the time. From 2000-2008 I quit the game and then this year I got back into the game and forced myself to understand TGM and my impact alignment are better than they have ever been. I could go into the mechanics of the book, but here are the key things I learned from TGM that usually go unmentioned:
- Learning that there is no one way to swing the club and that everybody needs to find their best way to swing the club.
- Learning how to practice to ‘build your stroke.’ Basic-Acquired-Total Motion curriculum are still ignored way too often by TGM’ers and is a fantastic way to immediately improve your swing.
- Learning how to feel properly and learning feel from mechanics.
- Learning the importance of other body parts like the right elbow, right shoulder, the axis (spine), etc.
3JACK
Ball speed is dependent both upon pre and post impact clubhead velocity…
2 E: “Zero Deceleration gives maximum ball speed for all approach speeds.”
(6-C-2-A) “The Secret”. Homer states “The shaft is stressed by the weight of the clubhead resisting at first a change in direction, and then a change in velocity ( which is acceleration).” “Acceleration bends the clubshaft. If the pressure points that created the initial clubshaft flex is maintained, it will maintain shaft flex also”
Same thing Hogan said but in far less words…
This is what every serious golfer should strive for. Understanding it is wonderful… executing these principles takes a lot of hard work and training.
Ironically, I have met TGM instructors that say this is not possible… (holding shaft flex). It is possible…
Secondly, Homer doesn’t really tell you “how” to do this… nor do many instructors.
It’s much better to do it, and not understand it… than to understand it and not have a clue how to do it.
John - you wrote-:
"Ball speed is dependent both upon pre and post impact clubhead velocity…
2 E: “Zero Deceleration gives maximum ball speed for all approach speeds.”
I guess we all can quote Homer Kelley when it suits us.
I would like to see you (or any TGM literalist) actually provide scientific proof for this “belief”.
Jeff.
Jeffman…
We already had this discussion on iseek last year… it went on for days… and with all the questions, examples and so forth… we are still in the same place… you asking for proof…
How would you prove to me the world is round?
even if you chartered a high speed plane and we flew around the earth… I would question if we really did… what about while I was sleeping? and when we were flying over oceans with no land in sight? how do I know you didn’t take some kind of short cut…
Maybe the world actually really is flat? I mean for real…
It could be that is just appears to be round because what is really happening is that the earth is flat but appears curved because it is simply occupying it’s natural position in curved space. Einstein believed that it is space itself that is warped or curved, not the things that occupy it… where are the formulas to prove or disprove this? Where is the proof…
I like those 16 century Spanish globes… the ones that sit flat on the kings breakfast bar.
John,
You wrote-: “How would you prove to me the world is round?”
Answer-: infamousqbert.files.wordpress.co … th-day.jpg
Merry Christmas,
I am outta here!
Jeff.
I am pretty convinced about post impact speed affecting ball speed/control and this is my explanation. Post impact acceleration insured proper impact alligments. Seen the other way round, if you reach proper imapact allignment, and I mean just not the club face but proper pivot allignment there is a lot of force still left that needs to go somewhere causing post impact acceleration. Jeff is thinking impact between two flat surface bodies which is not the case here. The club face has loft.
The other isue is the approach angle or arc. Jeff do you think the contact time in arc of approach will be somewhat longer?? than an angle of approach???.