[Daryl]

Its completely lost on you ain't it Daryl. Personally I think golf is as simple or as complicated as each individual chooses it to be.

I think that someone like Lynn Blake chooses to present it in as uncomplicated light as possible. He actually makes golfers better golfers.

I think you misunderstand me. Simple or complex doesn't enter into it for me. It is what it is, no matter how simple or complex it sounds. It is simple or complex for the one learning, not for the one teaching. Simplifying the subject matter doesn't make it simple. Simplifying makes it palatable. Don't you find it interesting that when simplifying there always seems to be something missing? Breaking something down into detail promotes understanding which leads to knowledge. No one is doing you a favor by simplifying. They're buying you time until you can understand better.

Your methodology seems to be to take the simple and make it as complicated as possible. Jeffman used a similar approach and eventually was persuaded that his methodology was unwelcome. Perhaps history can teach you a lesson there.

I was only here for a few weeks before Jeff went to greener pastures so I'm unfamiliar with his "Methodology" as you put it. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel. There is no "Daryl Way". I'm not introducing new terminology or redefining TGM terms. Everything I say is open to critical review and personal attacks for those that find such things beneficial. I am wrong much of the time.

I witnessed your meltdown on John Erickson's site, it was a shame you chose not to continue sharing information there. I guess the questions you were being asked made you uncomfortable.

There wasn't a meltdown and the questions didn't make me uncomfortable but the answers certainly made some of them uncomfortable. It was a pointless discussion. Johns method won't work just because he trashes other methods. He has to prove it works. I asked john at the very beginning not to be drawn into a TGM bash and defend contest. I'm not the one that got kicked out of ISG.com because of abuse. I don't abuse. But abuse by others will make me leave and not post or visit a site anymore. John Erickson and Jim Waldron do abuse. But this isn't the place to discuss this. And anyone that knows them also knows this. And anyone that knows me knows that I'm fair and I have no hidden agenda.

Anyway, continue your quest to make the simple complicated and the easy to understand incomprehensible. I'm sure there is an audience for you somewhere. Me, I'll just gloss over anything you post now

Judging from your posts, it appears you have already glossed over most everything.

It's easy for you to sling mud, yet you refuse to say how I complicate things. My purpose is to understand. This thread is a good example. Some say that the right arm bends and unbends throughout the swing. I disagree with that procedure for a swingers Basic Pattern . I presented arguments and followed with illustrations to support my point of view trying to reconcile it with the concepts of the Golfing Machine. Why is that the wrong approach?? I have only been met with "because I said so" arguments. Have I complained? No. I have worked very hard for many years to earn the knowledge that I've gained and I'm willing to share it with anyone. No one gave it to me the easy way but many have helped me along the way.

What other purpose is there for a Forum than to discuss a subject to better understand it? That includes differing points of view. This Website has TGM Forums. We analyze, take apart TGM in minute detail to better understand the Golf Swing. Members may not get "A tip a Day".

Perhaps you would prefer this to be a BLOG. Then Lynn can write and publish and you can read and learn.

It's a simple fact that Homer Kelley spent 40 years of research and condensed his findings into a 240 page manual that could be carried to a golf lesson. If you looked at his files and sketches they must be more than 10,000 pages. A lot of discussion on this website is devoted to backing out of that 240 page manual and trying to understand what went into it. Never has there been a website devoted to talking so much about such a small book. Remember, his first AI class lasted 12 hours per day for 11 classroom days. Homer thought that this amount of time was needed to give them a good foundation. If he thought reading the book would have done the job, he would have made the print larger.

This website started as a single effort but rapidly grew into a cooperative learning experience. That means that you must study too. You must contribute by thinking and applying and reporting. Certainly I learn by answering your questions, but I want you to be able to answer mine too. I don't want my learning to be limited to your mistakes.

So far you have complained about Brian Gays spitting on the Golf Course and accuse me of making things complicated. You've asked numerous basic questions over a long period of time that simply shows your lack of willingness to pick up the book, learn, experiment and contribute. You want everyone on this site to sift TGM information through a simplification procedure which suits your appetite for learning. Well, that doesn't suit mine. How a'bout meeting a little in the middle.

My purpose isn't teaching or getting enough out of this site to improve my swing. My goal has always been investigating TGM.