Without wanting to drag things too far off-topic, why?
You don't have to worry Toolish, this thread has never been on topic since the second response. A very simple question was asked and it has never been answered in this whole thread. Instead it was easier to trash another instructor. I understand not using names, but when quoting it is responsible to name the source. 8cork asked a very simple question. He is trying to perform a move that he believes will improve his golf motion that will improve his golf game that will improve his enjoyment of this game. He never asked what others thought or had written concerning the RFT.
You don't have to worry Toolish, this thread has never been on topic since the second response. A very simple question was asked and it has never been answered in this whole thread. Instead it was easier to trash another instructor. I understand not using names, but when quoting it is responsible to name the source. 8cork asked a very simple question. He is trying to perform a move that he believes will improve his golf motion that will improve his golf game that will improve his enjoyment of this game. He never asked what others thought or had written concerning the RFT.
Shame, shame and grow up.
Jim S.
I look forward to similar preachings from you on other sites.
Mathew is not an Authorized Instructor of The Golfing Machine quoting chapter and verse. Instead, his authority comes through extensive 3-D modeling of the Golf Stroke, some of which is copyrighted and appears in the LBG Gallery. He learned quickly that computer models respond only to geometrical precision, not to vaulted opinion.
It is this geometrical precision that Homer Kelley referenced in 2-F (Plane of Motion):
"But precision is lost unless Start Up is a Three Dimensional parallel to the Three Dimensional Impact, i.e., the Clubhead moves Backward, Upward and Inward -- On Plane -- INSTANTLY AND SIMULTANEOUSLY." [Capitalization emphasis by Kelley.]
And it is this geometrical precision (and its resultant Compression) that led Homer to the Right Forearm Takeaway.
He didn't just 'make it up.'
AND . . . the only change of change of significance from the "dubious" notes to 7-3 . . . the Right Forearm Takeaway was made MANDATORY. But those were just notes . . .he'd been watching Fred Couples alot . . . so there really is too much emphasis on the Right Forearm Takeaway . . .
Mmmm hmmm . . . sure.
If people want to poo poo the Right Forearm Takeway because they don't like it . . . fine. But we don't need them speaking for Homer Kelley . . . he did fine on his own.
You don't have to worry Toolish, this thread has never been on topic since the second response.
I don't disagree, Jim. But sometimes threads take on a life of their own. This was one of those times.
In hindsight, the appropriate administrative response would have been to delete 12 Piece's post (#2). We've taken such action many times and hence enjoy a well-deserved reputation for post deletion and editing.
In this instance, rather than censure, I chose to let the post stand, but to clarify its intent (Post #4). Then, spurred by glcoach's lament that "neither side appreciates the other" (#6), off we went.
That kind of thing seems to work well on some sites where people are bashed, professionals are 'graded' and sound (but misrepresented) ideas "die horrible deaths" in closed chambers. All in the name of "fair game reporting." But, as you point out, it doesn't work too well around here.
Linear Mode
