Jim,
While I understand your frustration - for those steely eye'd folks - gleams of information is in this thread.

;)

A Look Back
 

For sure, this thread has contained some forks in the road. But the very fact that a number of thoughtful posts have encouraged readers to at least think about a Pivot Center -- whether the Head or 'between the shoulders' -- in my opinion takes it out of the 'dumb' category.

And some of the illustrations have broken new ground. For example, when was the last time you saw the way the spine really worked in the Backstroke? Or saw a Ben Hogan swing sequence from Power Golf sized and superimposed for the very first time? All with graphic representation of the Pivot Swing Center.

Finally, students of The Golfing Machine® who have read this thread now know unequivocably where Homer Kelley stood on this most important subject. That in itself can be an invaluable touchstone on the rather insecure road known as Golf.

We need to be patient. We're building skyscrapers here, one brick at a time. Sometimes the process gets a bit messy, but the end result makes it all worthwhile.

My thanks to Brian for starting this thread and to all who have contributed.

Why Science?
 

The only reason such posts can exist is because of a lack of understanding of what science is all about. Science is an EPISTEMOLOGY - which simply stated is a way of knowing about reality around us.

Some other forms of epistemologies are so prevalent among us and sometimes necessary in our life on this earth. Indeed at least one form of it has reared its (ugly) in our study of a concrete and tangible matter as that of the golf swing.

Notwithstanding, other forms of epistemologies are valid, even necessary in this life. However, epistemologies are like tools in our workshed.

One cannot use a hammer to screw a screw (pardon the pun, it was intended!) and then say it was "useless". The matter of fact is that the tool was not useless, but the workman was erroneous in using that tool. The tool must be matched to the job at hand.

If you are analysing intangible material like human emotions, then a different set of tools must be utilised then if you were analysing HUMAN MOTION which this website it dedicated to.

Below is an excerpt of an article that I have written previously.

What is SCIENCE?
Science is NOT a subject, we have taken science to become the generic name for the study of natural phenomena like physics and biology. That could not be further from the truth.

Science is a Method of Enquiry
Technically, science is a method of enquiry or what researchers will call an epistemology. Other methods of enquiry include superstition, intuition, and finally sources of authority.

A superstition is a belief or fear based on faith in chance, magic or irrational feelings (Funk & Wagnalls 1982). Superstitions ignore the laws of nature and are based on personal subjective feelings as opposed to objective verifiable experience.

Intuition is the direct knowledge or awareness of something that we acquire without conscious attention or reasoning. Like superstitions, it is wholly subjectiveand based totally on personal feelings. This is the gut feeling approach to knowing about things. In golf, gut feelings cannot improve the swing.

Finally, we can learn about golf through sources of authority. We can learn from our professionals, who are supposed to be sources of authority in the game. HOWEVER, if they are improperly trained and do not understand the real science behind the golf swing, then they would become an invalid source of information. Authority does not equate to valid information.

Golfing instruction for the most part has been based on subjective and invalid knowledge and has gotten to the point where these myths are not even challenged and assumed to be the gospel. Faulty information is the reason that with all the advances in technology, physical fitness and so called instructional theory 95% of all golfers still cannot break 90?

Main Characteristics
The main characteristics of a scientific method are:

o Provisional information: Science is not concerned with preserving falsehoods. Any time that a theory is falsified or found untrue, it is simply discarded or modified. A scientist does not let emotions get in the way of rationality and enshrine myths simply because “this is the way we have taught for years", or "because I said so."

o Objectivity: Science is concerned with objective information, not what someone thinks or feels. Subjectivity is “the cat is cute”. Objectivity is “the cat is black”. With a scientific method, we are only concerned with what science says about golf, not what a pro is doing. A pro may find a way to make inferior methods work because of their superb hand to eye coordination and hand manipulation.

o Cause and Effect: Science is concerned about discovering the relationships between variables or what causes what. Traditional golf instruction’s great failing is that sometimes causes and effects are not accurately recognized and substituted for one another. When an instructor does not know the root cause of a student’s faulty swing, a cure can never be prescribed.

o Empiricism: Science is only concerned with empirically observable phenomena. If you say that an angled hinge action produces a certain shot, then it must be unfailingly demonstrated in order to be correct. This takes the “feels as if” and “seems as if” elements out of golf instruction.

o Systematic: Science is based on systematic enquiry and not on haphazard approaches to learning about a golf swing. It is concerned with procedures. Step one and then step two and so on. Only when a systematic approach is adopted in instruction, can the student improve. We teach the swing in stages and troubleshoot and correct the first wobbly point in the swing and from the feet up.

In conclusion, it can be readily seen that only a scientific approach to studying of the golf swing can yield valid information or simply, what the golf swing REALLY is.

Just as water boils at 100Deg C without fail each time, obeying the laws of force and motion in your golf swing will ensure improvement, no matter what level of golf you play to.

I hope this puts to rest all this "My Way" and "Your Way" arguments. We should not be concerned with such things, we must focus on what science has discovered.

Until the Yellow Book has been disproved, I will continue to focus my studies and instruction on it. Thank you Mr. Kelly for codifying ALL there is to know in G.O.L.F

ok...i guess it's not dumb.

And some good info has come out of it for some people, i just don't have a ton of use for it.

shrug

no fouls
 

Brian,

I'm sorry if that was offensive, but that statement was EXACTLY how I first learned about Yoda. It was "some guy from Atlanta" that was teaching Homer's work, as written. He has become my mentor, friend, and colleague. If my son chooses to be a golfer and reaches a point where dad can’t tell him anything, Yoda will be his teacher. I trust him implicitly.

I would like to place a small amendment to the statement that will be accredited to me.
Ted will say: Homer knew best, and Lynn is his 1st generation, faithful follower. I will always strive to be a 2nd generation, faithful follower.

And, by the way, Manzella does not lose. As I have said in multiple PM's to those concerned:

“If you take a lesson from anyone that uses TGM, INCLUDING Brian Manzella, you will be getting the best golf lesson you've ever had.”

“I don't know why everything has to be a contest. To be honest, Brian is a very likeable guy in person. He's much more tame than his forum persona. He has great stories and great experiences.”

And as I have told you:

“I have respect for you, your site, and your business. I had a great time in Canton, and I was very happy to finally meet Ben. I thought everyone did a great job. There are a couple of points on which I know Lynn and Ben disagree. So what! There are 10,000 on which they do agree.”

These are my words by which I will stand and are not innuendo. And, these words are certainly not as contentious as those directed toward me as previously found on another site. Seemingly, these words would be of poor choice if there was some vendetta or conspiracy brewing.

If there is an area in which you and I differ other than the minute details of Homer’s work, it is this:

I have no appreciation for receiving a lecture and a great appreciation for receiving a lesson. It’s the tone of superiority that I find in your posts in here and on your site that I find (PERSONALLY) unappealing. I understand that it’s your style, and I don’t fault you for being ‘Brian.’ I find Lynn to be a person to which a crowd is drawn and is willing to share his depth of knowledge. His is a position of servanthood, which I find to be very appealing. These are the flavors of TGM. Some like chocolate, some like vanilla, and some like jalapeño.

Your site has been a great service to those that seek, as is this one. We all learn from each other, compare ideas, and passionately defend our beliefs. This is the beauty of the forums.

Don't kill me ...
 

I'm new around these parts, and perhaps this isn't the best place for my first post, but I don't get the whole discussion, although I think it is great for TGM.

Here's an observation: I can move my head, side to side, up and down, without moving my neck. The pivot point of my head is my neck. So, the pivot point of the swing is not the head, because that can move independently. So it must be the neck. Is this what Brian is saying?

However, where the head goes so does the body, as an old wrestling coach of mine used to say. So that means that you must keep the head steady, which makes it the pivot point. Steady head, steady pivot. Is this what Homer and Lynn are saying?

No, Manzella, you haven't lost. This discussion has been great learning experience for many people thanks to you and Lynn. Why do you have to look at everything as winning/losing, being number one, the best in the world, etc...which does sadden me.

This is high minded stuff. You are a true gentleman.

Head or neck hmmm why should it be one of those only? Why must it be in the center part of the body? Cant it be to the left of the head? I dont know, but I shure would like some more answers to my question abt the pivotaxis and I think it is very relevant to this discusion
http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/s...ead.php?t=1721

Weird time to step in...
 

First post too... I saw Vandals. I was drawn to TGM a few months ago, and I have read the book inside and out. I have devoured everything on this site and everything on Brian's site. In 3 months, from this information (and the help of a TGM bachelor/PGA who unfortunately won't be as analytical as I would like)I have started to kill the ball. Sweet. I'm also no schulb when it comes to understanding complicated mechanics. I previously coached highly skilled juniors in another sport (I focused on mechanics), play two of my own at 0 handicap level (not golf), and do something extremely complicated for a living. I don't mean to brag, I'm just a little nervous around you guys. You can be very serious sometimes! :)

I have also waited to post, so that I could understand the etiquette of this site. I appreciate that this is your community, and I have already learned a ton from all of you having not made any contribution of my own.

I find these threads where everyone jumps on Brian to be very distressing. Everyone in here must have had an open mind at some point to have arrived at TGM. Many do not appear to be thinking and challenging their understanding, which is what Brian is asking you to do. Today I hear the phrase "Wealth is the product of man's ability to think" and it made sense to me. You cannot grow grain without knowing how to turn the earth or that seeds will germanate. I have the feeling that Brian's understanding of TGM exceeds that of all but a few in this community. He might be thinking while many of the rest of us are trying to understand.

I agree with Vandal. If you resist with the muscles in the left of your neck, your head will stay centered. My head happens to (I'll see more on video tomorrow - yikes). If you relax those muscles from the same pivot position, the neck is the center. Same pivot, different look. I agree that the head has weight, and I'm not sure how to resolve that just yet. However, I do know that in my other sports I have my own idiosyncratic movements, but they are irrelevant because I have total command of the essential sources of power. I can fill in the extra time with whatever whackiness I please that day. Time is slow.

I am sensative to Brian's point, because I used to have a very nasty reverse pivot which was the result of an attempt to prevent a sway. You all know what I was told that started that ugly action. It took a year to fix it.