The Golfing Machine

[Mr Titleist]

I own Version 7 of the book which I know is looked at as being inferior to Version 6.

 

What are the thoughts on Version 7.2, is it an improvement or is V6 best?

 

Also are there any active forums that discuss TGM nowadays? I see the ones for Lynn Blake and Brian Manzella are things of the past.

[otto6457]

Complete personal opinion incoming. TGM is pretty much left in the past. Modern diagnostic tools like Trackman, Flightscope, Boditrak, and even HD high speed video has identified many incorrect assumptions of the TGM model. I got my TGM Level 1 way back in 1999 when it was considered the gold standard for understanding the golf swing. Unfortunately, that is no longer the case. The politics in TGM have made it almost impossible for it to evolve with the better understanding that is a result of the newer technology. Does TGM still offer some valuable insight? Absolutely. But let's be honest, it was never user friendly, even for TGM instructors, and the infighting and silly hair splitting found at the conferences was just infuriating. There were all these competing camps of who could produce the most convoluted arguments over the most trivial utterances in Homer Kelley's ramblings that it just became exhausting. It became almost cult-like in many ways, and the students were not being well served by this nonsense.

 

The last time I tried to call the TGM office phone number (which was a few years ago) no one answered or even returned my call. I say let it rest in peace.

 

Let the flaming begin.

[northgolf]

> @otto6457 said:

> Complete personal opinion incoming. TGM is pretty much left in the past. Modern diagnostic tools like Trackman, Flightscope, Boditrak, and even HD high speed video has identified many incorrect assumptions of the TGM model. I got my TGM Level 1 way back in 1999 when it was considered the gold standard for understanding the golf swing. Unfortunately, that is no longer the case. The politics in TGM have made it almost impossible for it to evolve with the better understanding that is a result of the newer technology. Does TGM still offer some valuable insight? Absolutely. But let's be honest, it was never user friendly, even for TGM instructors, and the infighting and silly hair splitting found at the conferences was just infuriating. There were all these competing camps of who could produce the most convoluted arguments over the most trivial utterances in Homer Kelley's ramblings that it just became exhausting. It became almost cult-like in many ways, and the students were not being well served by this nonsense.

>

> The last time I tried to call the TGM office phone number (which was a few years ago) no one answered or even returned my call. I say let it rest in peace.

>

> Let the flaming begin.

 

You are kinder than I. Stake through the heart so it doesn't keep sucking blood.

[oikos1]

> @otto6457 said:

> Complete personal opinion incoming. TGM is pretty much left in the past. Modern diagnostic tools like Trackman, Flightscope, Boditrak, and even HD high speed video has identified many incorrect assumptions of the TGM model. I got my TGM Level 1 way back in 1999 when it was considered the gold standard for understanding the golf swing. Unfortunately, that is no longer the case. The politics in TGM have made it almost impossible for it to evolve with the better understanding that is a result of the newer technology. Does TGM still offer some valuable insight? Absolutely. But let's be honest, it was never user friendly, even for TGM instructors, and the infighting and silly hair splitting found at the conferences was just infuriating. There were all these competing camps of who could produce the most convoluted arguments over the most trivial utterances in Homer Kelley's ramblings that it just became exhausting. It became almost cult-like in many ways, and the students were not being well served by this nonsense.

>

> The last time I tried to call the TGM office phone number (which was a few years ago) no one answered or even returned my call. I say let it rest in peace.

>

> Let the flaming begin.

 

"There were all these competing camps of who could produce the most convoluted arguments over the most trivial utterances"

 

Insert into most any discussion happening on planet earth today. Love it!

[JD3]

> @otto6457 said:

> Complete personal opinion incoming. TGM is pretty much left in the past. Modern diagnostic tools like Trackman, Flightscope, Boditrak, and even HD high speed video has identified many incorrect assumptions of the TGM model. I got my TGM Level 1 way back in 1999 when it was considered the gold standard for understanding the golf swing. Unfortunately, that is no longer the case. The politics in TGM have made it almost impossible for it to evolve with the better understanding that is a result of the newer technology. Does TGM still offer some valuable insight? Absolutely. But let's be honest, it was never user friendly, even for TGM instructors, and the infighting and silly hair splitting found at the conferences was just infuriating. There were all these competing camps of who could produce the most convoluted arguments over the most trivial utterances in Homer Kelley's ramblings that it just became exhausting. It became almost cult-like in many ways, and the students were not being well served by this nonsense.

>

> The last time I tried to call the TGM office phone number (which was a few years ago) no one answered or even returned my call. I say let it rest in peace.

>

> Let the flaming begin.

 

Sounds like what happens to any evolving scientific approach when the leader prematurely departs, like Bitcoin when Satoshi left

[MountainGoat]

Like some religious books, "The Golfing Machine" sits on everyone's bookshelf, but few people have actually read it, much less understood it. How it got turned into a marketable swing philosophy, I'll never understand. It's not a swing; it's a list the components just like an electronics or auto part catalog. The goal is to put components together in a way that results in a functional swing. There are a lot of different solutions to the puzzle. What you're trying to do is to put components together that are compatible with one another. In this way, the swing becomes an efficient "machine". But, the jargon that gets employed and the way the book internally cross-references various sections is spectacularly confusing.

[Dan Drake]

I also have a copy, that I came across last week. It had been left on another teacher's bookshelf, and that teacher had departed long ago, presumably taking all of his or her important books along with them. I will work my way through it, because I like a challenge, but already it is far to circular and confusing to be useful for anything other than what @MountainGoat said above me. It is a very good attempt, for it's time, to catalog the components of the swing.

 

I would love to see a group of teachers attempt to do the same thing with today's tech, as I don't think it would be anywhere near as difficult.

[glk]

> @"Dan Drake" said:

> I also have a copy, that I came across last week. It had been left on another teacher's bookshelf, and that teacher had departed long ago, presumably taking all of his or her important books along with them. I will work my way through it, because I like a challenge, but already it is far to circular and confusing to be useful for anything other than what @MountainGoat said above me. It is a very good attempt, for it's time, to catalog the components of the swing.

>

> I would love to see a group of teachers attempt to do the same thing with today's tech, as I don't think it would be anywhere near as difficult.

 

Get Tyler Ferrell’s stock tour swing book.

[Dan Drake]

> @glk said:

> > @"Dan Drake" said:

> > I also have a copy, that I came across last week. It had been left on another teacher's bookshelf, and that teacher had departed long ago, presumably taking all of his or her important books along with them. I will work my way through it, because I like a challenge, but already it is far to circular and confusing to be useful for anything other than what @MountainGoat said above me. It is a very good attempt, for it's time, to catalog the components of the swing.

> >

> > I would love to see a group of teachers attempt to do the same thing with today's tech, as I don't think it would be anywhere near as difficult.

>

> Get Tyler Ferrell’s stock tour swing book.

 

I have heard really good things about this book. I'll add it to my reading list, thank you @glk !

[gsea33]

Read it and I guess I'm just not bright enough to put it all together. If you read it and actually figured out a swing from it you're a better man then me lol

[MountainGoat]

> @gsea33 said:

> Read it and I guess I'm just not bright enough to put it all together. If you read it and actually figured out a swing from it you're a better man then me lol

If you're talking about "The Golfing Machine" and not Tyler Ferrell's book, then yours is the appropriate reaction. Assembling a swing from TGM is like assembling a car from an auto parts catalog.

 

 

[northgolf]

More like assembling a car from a steam engine auto parts catalog with no index, no alphabetical order, and part assemblies distributed in different sections of the catalog. I've read the thing three times in both recommended order and book order: at the thought of reading it again I grab a two by four and knock some sense back in my head

[JD3]

I think it's meant to be more of a reference manual for instructors. Which of course dont read like novels. The intro I thought though had one of the most compelling arguments for science I've seen anywhere

[Etzwane]

I spent quite a bit of time reading and re-reading the book, spent time on Lynn Blake's forum, even one of his schools. The book is confusing, the language unnecessarily obscure, maybe a bias toward the swing style of the time (more arm action) but there a concepts that I still find useful: the catalog of component, the naming scheme, the discussion around the power package (conveyor belt, pullies, aiming the machine, release triggers,...), hinge actions (never saw that explained again), basic curriculum....

 

[Hawkeye77]

Someone on here was looking for a copy a year or two ago so I got his address and gave him mine - happy to have it gone, gave me a headache just trying to read it (in any order, lol).

 

Obviously speaks to some people, enjoy it if it's your thing, but I found it just plain weird.

 

This will be anathema to some, but Tyler Ferrell's didn't really speak to me either but I can see it making a heck of a lot more sense for most than Homer.

[QuigleyDU]

Bryson seems to think it is important.