Manual de la Torre Method

[birly-shirly]

 

This has nothing to do with MDLT or his method, but the way you are proposing going about doing this isn't how most people improve. Especially the adding of random pieces to a holistic approach like mdlt's seems like a recipe for disaster. I understand if you believe in a method, but it doesn't sound like you have the confidence to trust you can implement it (and most can't just from books). In that case, what good is the method? I think you'd get better much quicker just seeing a good pro.

 

I'm not sure what seems strange about this to you. In my opinion, you could take just about any decent method you happen to like the look of and make it work well, so long as you understand and can mitigate your tendencies and bad shots. Conversely, most people will struggle to make most "methods" work without an intelligent strategy for customising it. Often, that strategy will come via the teaching of a good pro and the student will never even realise what is going on in terms of adjustment. They will just know what they need to do to hit good shots. I think we already agree on the issues of learning a method from a book.

[bph7]

 

This has nothing to do with MDLT or his method, but the way you are proposing going about doing this isn't how most people improve. Especially the adding of random pieces to a holistic approach like mdlt's seems like a recipe for disaster. I understand if you believe in a method, but it doesn't sound like you have the confidence to trust you can implement it (and most can't just from books). In that case, what good is the method? I think you'd get better much quicker just seeing a good pro.

 

I'm not sure what seems strange about this to you. In my opinion, you could take just about any decent method you happen to like the look of and make it work well, so long as you understand and can mitigate your tendencies and bad shots. Conversely, most people will struggle to make most "methods" work without an intelligent strategy for customising it. Often, that strategy will come via the teaching of a good pro and the student will never even realise what is going on in terms of adjustment. They will just know what they need to do to hit good shots. I think we already agree on the issues of learning a method from a book.

 

I get what you are saying, but if you are just going off ball flight and adjusting based on a wholly holistic method, it just seems like tinkering. Not saying it can't work, but just that the tinkering might better be done by a pro, even if the pro doesn't teach mdlt.

[birly-shirly]

That's entirely fair. I'm not claiming my way as being the optimal way to improve, and if I'm honest I'm at that awkward stage of life where my body might just deteriorate faster than I can improve my technique (though I like to remain optimistic). But I like to do my own spannering, have seen some nice progress in the last year or so and have an aesthetic admiration for the elegance and ingenuity of Manuel's thinking - so it's an enjoyable indulgence to try and combine them.

[DOSKI]

http://www.golfwrx.c...ou-think-it-is/

 

This is the reality. We can imagine or conceptualize all sorts of things for a golf swing - or any athletic motion. The reality is our conscious mind is merely "approving" or "re-affirming" what we are thinking. An affirmation loop. We may "feel" like our swing is doing A or L or W. In reality, all we're doing is injecting any concept (aka "swing thought" or "tip") as an overlay of the experience while making our same long term grooved swing.

 

What does this mean? I can make the same swing I've been making for the past five years. I can then add the "feeling" or "idea" to add more hip rotation or zipper away feel to that same old swing. Unless you have a pro watching you, or a video playback; the chances are you are making the same move as you've always made. Only this time, all we do is pay more attention our hip action. And then confirmed, based upon the random strike and shot, that it "works" or "doesn't work" for me! This is the real reason there are so freaking many instruction books for the same athletic action!

 

Much better off working with a pro and some verifiable tech backup to actually change physical movement patterns while observing a new feel - than combining or overlaying ideas, feels, concepts, or swing methods while making the same old swings with different "feels". And wondering why our game never changes.....

 

Now. have you really changed you hip movement during that one experience? Doubt it.

[ball game]

Birly-Shirly,

 

I have been using the MDLT swing for the past year. I have the book, the dvd, and the lessons with manny mini book. I also have read all of the great posts by Just Steve and the Pearl (thank you guys). I am not the expert on his swing they are.

 

I am now playing the best golf of my life and having more fun playing it. I think Mr de la Torre's swing gets a bad rap on being to simplistic in his approach. It does take time to retool your swing but I whole heartedly believe in this approach. It flat out works. Give it time.

 

I do feel that there are a ton of different ways to swing a golf club. They all work. However very few can be mixed and matched. You can't have Monte's set up, with slice fixers release, with Jim's arm non arm swing, and achieve good results (or at least I could not). Pick one and stick to it. I would highly recommend Mr De la Torre's method. But stick to only Manny.

[The Pearl]

If you are not getting the ball flight you want, than you are not moving the club correctly. It is that simple. I think the largest roadblock in embracing Manny's methods is that we tend to misinterpret Manny's message of simplicity. I went through this as well. I had a rush of initial success, leveled off, and began to try to turn over stones, tinker, add my own tweeks, as well as a few other instructor ideas.

 

The light bulb did not click until I realized that Manny has simplified the golf swing, but in simplification, he has not ignored all the vital components. He has simply reversed engineered the process. As we know the bulk of instruction today is trying to get the body in the right position to put the club in the right position. Manny simply believes if you move the club correctly than the body will work correctly. Everything the body focused and/or pivot driven teachers teach is there in Manny's method.

 

I will use myself as an example:

 

When I regress back to my old habits I have all the hallmarks of the usual flaws you see in this forum. I snatch the club inside, roll the forearms, lift late, lose width, over rotate, arm over run and than throw it over the top at the golf ball which usually results in trying to save it with the hands. It is pretty obvious on film. Any decent instructor will no doubt try to solve my issues in all types of the reasonable ways: Early "wrist" set, improve "left arm" rotation, lift "arms" earlier, turn into your right "heel", try to stop "arm" swing parallel to the ground. Once that is accomplished I can than try to work on getting the "right elbow" in front, stay in "spine" angle, move "zipper" away, bump "hips", etc. You get the idea. Again, all completely well reasoned and tried and true methods to get back on track.

 

In terms of Manny's diagnosis, I am simply not using both hands to swing the club "over" the shoulder. Left hand dominance as Manny calls it, simply sets the entire chain of events in motion and I can't stop it. Once my left hand takes over, I can't get possibly get the club over my shoulder.

 

As Manny says, "you must observe yourself." Simple correction. Swing the club with both hands in the direction of the right shoulder so that the club is "over" your shoulder. Simple check is to use the concept and instead of stopping at the top of your backswing, let the club fall so that it rest on top of the right shoulder. You can only do this IF you use both hands as in his concept. Everything else that I mentioned above, is gone.

 

By moving the club correctly, all the desired body positions have been achieved.

 

Sorry for the long winded post, but I think it is important to make the larger point. Simplification does not mean dismissing. Took me a while to embrace this.

[bph7]

If you are not getting the ball flight you want, than you are not moving the club correctly. It is that simple. I think the largest roadblock in embracing Manny's methods is that we tend to misinterpret Manny's message of simplicity. I went through this as well. I had a rush of initial success, leveled off, and began to try to turn over stones, tinker, add my own tweeks, as well as a few other instructor ideas.

 

The light bulb did not click until I realized that Manny has simplified the golf swing, but in simplification, he has not ignored all the vital components. He has simply reversed engineered the process. As we know the bulk of instruction today is trying to get the body in the right position to put the club in the right position. Manny simply believes if you move the club correctly than the body will work correctly. Everything the body focused and/or pivot driven teachers teach is there in Manny's method.

 

I will use myself as an example:

 

When I regress back to my old habits I have all the hallmarks of the usual flaws you see in this forum. I snatch the club inside, roll the forearms, lift late, lose width, over rotate, arm over run and than throw it over the top at the golf ball which usually results in trying to save it with the hands. It is pretty obvious on film. Any decent instructor will no doubt try to solve my issues in all types of the reasonable ways: Early "wrist" set, improve "left arm" rotation, lift "arms" earlier, turn into your right "heel", try to stop "arm" swing parallel to the ground. Once that is accomplished I can than try to work on getting the "right elbow" in front, stay in "spine" angle, move "zipper" away, bump "hips", etc. You get the idea. Again, all completely well reasoned and tried and true methods to get back on track.

 

In terms of Manny's diagnosis, I am simply not using both hands to swing the club "over" the shoulder. Left hand dominance as Manny calls it, simply sets the entire chain of events in motion and I can't stop it. Once my left hand takes over, I can't get possibly get the club over my shoulder.

 

As Manny says, "you must observe yourself." Simple correction. Swing the club with both hands in the direction of the right shoulder so that the club is "over" your shoulder. Simple check is to use the concept and instead of stopping at the top of your backswing, let the club fall so that it rest on top of the right shoulder. You can only do this IF you use both hands as in his concept. Everything else that I mentioned above, is gone.

 

By moving the club correctly, all the desired body positions have been achieved.

 

Sorry for the long winded post, but I think it is important to make the larger point. Simplification does not mean dismissing. Took me a while to embrace this.

 

This is pretty much exactly what I was trying to say (although not nearly as eloquently). If you want to use a holistic approach, and you are adding elements not part of the approach, you've strayed from the very premise of the approach. You may have success in doing so, you may not, but this kinda thing I really think you have to be all in in to get the benefits.

[slantsflood]

Playing the best golf of my life right now thanks to Manny. I've tried every swing there is, and always noticed Steve had different "target" advice compared to everyone else's swing comments. I realized I don't want to play golf unless it is like this. It's to exhausting financially and emotionally. To put so much time and effort into something to where I haven't really made much progress the last 5 years. I was obsessed with swinging inside, and was a nightmare journey.

[wmblake2000]

http://www.golfwrx.c...ou-think-it-is/

 

This is the reality. We can imagine or conceptualize all sorts of things for a golf swing - or any athletic motion. The reality is our conscious mind is merely "approving" or "re-affirming" what we are thinking. An affirmation loop. We may "feel" like our swing is doing A or L or W. In reality, all we're doing is injecting any concept (aka "swing thought" or "tip") as an overlay of the experience while making our same long term grooved swing.

 

What does this mean? I can make the same swing I've been making for the past five years. I can then add the "feeling" or "idea" to add more hip rotation or zipper away feel to that same old swing. Unless you have a pro watching you, or a video playback; the chances are you are making the same move as you've always made. Only this time, all we do is pay more attention our hip action. And then confirmed, based upon the random strike and shot, that it "works" or "doesn't work" for me! This is the real reason there are so freaking many instruction books for the same athletic action!

 

Much better off working with a pro and some verifiable tech backup to actually change physical movement patterns while observing a new feel - than combining or overlaying ideas, feels, concepts, or swing methods while making the same old swings with different "feels". And wondering why our game never changes.....

 

Now. have you really changed you hip movement during that one experience? Doubt it.

 

I think this hits the real issue squarely.

[lsh]

A quick question on addressing the ball and focus when swinging through the ball.

When addressing the ball with the club do you find better center club contact by addressing the ball more towards the toe of the club?

When swinging through the ball do you what is your focus? A specific point on the ball, the top of the ball, the ball as an out of focus object in the swing path, or something else?

Thanks

[birly-shirly]

http://www.golfwrx.c...ou-think-it-is/

 

This is the reality. We can imagine or conceptualize all sorts of things for a golf swing - or any athletic motion. The reality is our conscious mind is merely "approving" or "re-affirming" what we are thinking. An affirmation loop. We may "feel" like our swing is doing A or L or W. In reality, all we're doing is injecting any concept (aka "swing thought" or "tip") as an overlay of the experience while making our same long term grooved swing.

 

What does this mean? I can make the same swing I've been making for the past five years. I can then add the "feeling" or "idea" to add more hip rotation or zipper away feel to that same old swing. Unless you have a pro watching you, or a video playback; the chances are you are making the same move as you've always made. Only this time, all we do is pay more attention our hip action. And then confirmed, based upon the random strike and shot, that it "works" or "doesn't work" for me! This is the real reason there are so freaking many instruction books for the same athletic action!

 

Much better off working with a pro and some verifiable tech backup to actually change physical movement patterns while observing a new feel - than combining or overlaying ideas, feels, concepts, or swing methods while making the same old swings with different "feels". And wondering why our game never changes.....

 

Now. have you really changed you hip movement during that one experience? Doubt it.

 

Fair comment if you're talking about 1 isolated good shot. But if you change your ballflight with any consistency I'd think you've changed your swing, although the change might be barely perceptible on video.

 

Pearl - I get what you're saying. No-one can argue that if you move the club correctly you'll not hit good shots. That much is common to Manuel and (at the very least) John Jacobs, Hank Haney and Jim Hardy. The question for me is what do you have to do to make the club move effectively.

 

Just to be clear, I am not trying to incorporate some pet idiosyncratic move from another method. The last thing I am worrying about when I play is whether my right leg is flexed, or straightened, or the angle in the back of my left wrist, arm rotation or lift or anything like that. Pretty much the level of detail that I get into is whether I feel I need to turn harder in the downswing, or not - or whether I need to feel a more out-to-in club path - or whether I need to get my weight forward more aggressively. I don't think I've really thought about anything else in the last year, and this has been enough to keep my chronic hook sufficiently within bounds to score.

 

At least 2 of those thoughts are indirect routes to tweaking the clubpath towards neutral. Would I do better to think only of swinging the club directly towards the target? All I can say is that I've had more immediate success in changing my ballflight with those "extraneous" thoughts.

 

If, by paying close attention to your swing, you can FEEL that you are actually swinging the club in the wrong direction then I don't think you need any of my band aids. My problem is that I FEEL a slight OTT move and still hit a push draw.

 

In the "as simple as possible but no simpler" spirit, I believe that what I'm doing is the simplest method of accomplishing Manuel's goal - to have the club swinging in the direction of the target.

 

It is possible that part of my issue is the nature of my faults. I think an accent on swinging the club with the arms is more likely to help someone whose prevailing fault is an OTT steep move than it would someone who already swings the club too much from the inside.

[BeTheBall_]

When swinging through the ball do you what is your focus? A specific point on the ball, the top of the ball, the ball as an out of focus object in the swing path, or something else?

Thanks

 

The club (and the target)

[nlk10010]

IMO, the problem with trying to learn any method from books/DVD is that we can't see the "whole picture". For example, in the MDLT method, you can say to yourself: "Self, I'm going to concentrate on swinging with the arms". You then try it and, if you're me, you hit behind the ball and send it off to the right. The tendency is to then say: "Well, then, I must not have swung with my arms". But the problem is that you may in fact have done that perfectly, but there was ANOTHER aspect of the swing that was off. For example, maybe you fanned the club on the backswing and the clubface didn't come down square, or you neglected to lift the club head with your hands. So you erroneously conclude you haven't gotten the "swing forward with the arms" part right and keep adjusting, when in fact that was perfect and you should be concentrating on something else.

 

Another issue I have in particular is with weight transfer. Just swinging the arms and "letting the body respond" doesn't do it for me, Using that approach I end up not shifting the low-point of the arc ahead of the ball. My instructor (who is familiar with the MDLT technique, not saying he's an expert, just that he has read the book) told me explicitly to "modify" the technique to slightly shift my weight forward before the downswing to insure that I'm on my left (lead foot). I actually have the MDLT DVD and when you see Erin (who demonstrates the technique) swing, it appears to me that her weight DOES settle on her left foot slightly before the downswing starts. Maybe yes, maybe no, but I have to do this or I'm dead. To be fair, my instructor pointed out that one of Manny's tenets is, paraphrasing, "the entire band moves forward at one time". That MIGHT be inconsistent with saying first swing the arms and let the body respond.

 

I guess my point in all this is to say that trying to learn any technique yourself, without competent feedback from an instructor, can be problematic and actually end up in a process that converges to a point AWAY from the desired result (if you know what I mean).

[juststeve]

Ish:

 

When making the forward swing my intention is to swing the whole club in the direction of the target. Hitting the ball is a consequence of swinging the club in the direction of the target.

 

Sometimes, when I feel it necessary, I will focus on swinging the whole club in the direction of the target while brushing the turf on the target side of the ball. Something Manny asked me to do when I was hitting a series of thin shots. Still though the focus remains on what the club is doing.

 

Steve

[wmblake2000]

 

Another issue I have in particular is with weight transfer. Just swinging the arms and "letting the body respond" doesn't do it for me, Using that approach I end up not shifting the low-point of the arc ahead of the ball. My instructor (who is familiar with the MDLT technique, not saying he's an expert, just that he has read the book) told me explicitly to "modify" the technique to slightly shift my weight forward before the downswing to insure that I'm on my left (lead foot). I actually have the MDLT DVD and when you see Erin (who demonstrates the technique) swing, it appears to me that her weight DOES settle on her left foot slightly before the downswing starts. Maybe yes, maybe no, but I have to do this or I'm dead. To be fair, my instructor pointed out that one of Manny's tenets is, paraphrasing, "the entire band moves forward at one time". That MIGHT be inconsistent with saying first swing the arms and let the body respond.

).

 

Nlk I agree with your premise that it's hard to learn from a book, video etc for a lot of reasons. No clear diagnosis and treatment plan mainly.

 

But in specific I share your question about weight transfer. Here's what I think. One of MDLT basics is we swing around a center. For me I see that as base of neck . For me to solve the problem of getting through the shot as I swing the arms forward I have to really let this rotation of my shoulders around this center happen simultaneously. For me my shoulders are a major player in the swing dynamics and much more important than lower body action.

 

This swing around the center helps me get all this to coordinate. I let the backswing pull my r hip deep and keep it deep and swing arms and everything around the center to the target.

 

This seems to be in the right direction although like Steve I might need to brush the grass - which amplifies your point - this is hard to really do without some way to fill in the blanks!

 

 

[juststeve]

wmblake2000:

 

Your next step on the road is to give full responsibility for the forward swing to your arms. Your shoulders will turn in response to the motion of the club but should not be a major player in your swing dynamics. They are responders and will respond in a manner correct for your body if you remain relaxed and you move the club correctly.

 

Steve

[dlygrisse]

Ish:

 

When making the forward swing my intention is to swing the whole club in the direction of the target. Hitting the ball is a consequence of swinging the club in the direction of the target.

 

Sometimes, when I feel it necessary, I will focus on swinging the whole club in the direction of the target while brushing the turf on the target side of the ball. Something Manny asked me to do when I was hitting a series of thin shots. Still though the focus remains on what the club is doing.

 

Steve

 

To me I swing best when I focus on what the club is doing. If I think about what any body part is doing then I get all out of sync. Even the thought of swinging the arms doesnt work for me, even though that is probably what I am doing.

 

Think about it, when you brush your teeth in the morning do you think about how your hand or arm is moving the tooth brush? You just move the tooth brush to your teeth.

 

So for me it's all about the correct grip, stance and alignment, then visualizing how the club should move.

 

YMMV.

[DOSKI]

.... Fair comment if you're talking about 1 isolated good shot. But if you change your ball flight with any consistency I'd think you've changed your swing, although the change might be barely perceptible on video....

 

Yeah. The "consistency" part is the catch. Reading and re-reading Dennis Clark's article makes pretty clear that our swings don't change because of what we are THINKING", while playing with the latest and greatest swing intent. Even WHEN it is an accurate and profitable intent. All we do is overlay that thought on top of what we regularly do.

 

Athletic motion does not reside in conscious thought. It is created in real time ("during the performance") by a part of the brain designed to create movement. Motions are reactions to requests.

 

Therefore, real change requires a neutral observer. Make use of what the 21st century offers: real-time insight into athletic learning. Real-time neutral observation. Real- time affirmation of actual movements. The 21st century works. Take advantage of it. Why use a 19th century learning method (aka "digging it out of the dirt") in the 21st century? OTOH, there's obviously nothing wrong with overlaying different swing thoughts, tips, etc over your personal swing fallacy [YPSF * (all rights reserved)] over and over until cows return to the fairways. Might lead to some long term frustration, though.

[Jasonic]

.... Fair comment if you're talking about 1 isolated good shot. But if you change your ball flight with any consistency I'd think you've changed your swing, although the change might be barely perceptible on video....

 

Yeah. The "consistency" part is the catch. Reading and re-reading Dennis Clark's article makes pretty clear that our swings don't change because of what we are THINKING", while playing with the latest and greatest swing intent. Even WHEN it is an accurate and profitable intent. All we do is overlay that thought on top of what we regularly do.

 

Athletic motion does not reside in conscious thought. It is created in real time ("during the performance") by a part of the brain designed to create movement. Motions are reactions to requests.

 

Therefore, real change requires a neutral observer. Make use of what the 21st century offers: real-time insight into athletic learning. Real-time neutral observation. Real- time affirmation of actual movements. The 21st century works. Take advantage of it. Why use a 19th century learning method (aka "digging it out of the dirt") in the 21st century? OTOH, there's obviously nothing wrong with overlaying different swing thoughts, tips, etc over your personal swing fallacy [YPSF * (all rights reserved)] over and over until cows return to the fairways. Might lead to some long term frustration, though.

 

I do agree with he idea if your basic ball flight has changed consistently, your swing has changed.

[wmblake2000]

While an athletic motion may not reside in conscious thought, conscious thought and conscious awareness play a role in change.

[lsh]

Ish:

 

When making the forward swing my intention is to swing the whole club in the direction of the target. Hitting the ball is a consequence of swinging the club in the direction of the target.

 

Sometimes, when I feel it necessary, I will focus on swinging the whole club in the direction of the target while brushing the turf on the target side of the ball. Something Manny asked me to do when I was hitting a series of thin shots. Still though the focus remains on what the club is doing.

 

Steve

Thanks to all who replied. I also hit more "thin" shots than anything else. I have been practice swinging with an intent to just brush the grass but not close enough to the ball to get a real feel for where low point is happening.

[birly-shirly]

.... Fair comment if you're talking about 1 isolated good shot. But if you change your ball flight with any consistency I'd think you've changed your swing, although the change might be barely perceptible on video....

 

Yeah. The "consistency" part is the catch. Reading and re-reading Dennis Clark's article makes pretty clear that our swings don't change because of what we are THINKING", while playing with the latest and greatest swing intent. Even WHEN it is an accurate and profitable intent. All we do is overlay that thought on top of what we regularly do.

 

Athletic motion does not reside in conscious thought. It is created in real time ("during the performance") by a part of the brain designed to create movement. Motions are reactions to requests.

 

Therefore, real change requires a neutral observer. Make use of what the 21st century offers: real-time insight into athletic learning. Real-time neutral observation. Real- time affirmation of actual movements. The 21st century works. Take advantage of it. Why use a 19th century learning method (aka "digging it out of the dirt") in the 21st century? OTOH, there's obviously nothing wrong with overlaying different swing thoughts, tips, etc over your personal swing fallacy [YPSF * (all rights reserved)] over and over until cows return to the fairways. Might lead to some long term frustration, though.

 

I've enjoyed Dennis' thoughts on golf for years now, and thought that article was classic. I don't think anything he said changes the basic premise that golf is, to quote John Jacobs, what the ball does. And to change what the ball does, you need to change what the club does. Which means "change". To bring this back to MDLT and his method, I think this is an important faultline - with good people and arguments on both sides.

 

In my experience, to make a real change in what the club is doing, what I often need to intend and to do FEELS quite exaggerated. I know from JustSteve that Manuel felt strongly that this was not the way to go, and that you should focus only on doing things correctly.

 

Regardless of the difference of opinion, I disagree with the idea that we need the latest technology to implement a change. I'm sure it helps, in the right hands. But I'd much rather see a good teacher with no toys than a mediocre one with a teaching bay like Q Division. I also believe that when you're out on the course trying to post a score, there is very little to separate you from the 19th century. You're still mostly just trying to put the clubface squarely on the ball. Call me a luddite, or call me a Harmonite, but I am a strong believer in practicing like you play so I'm not sure that the value of having radar or biomechanical data available to the player is self-evident.

[wmblake2000]

Birly the trick of course is to actually change a motion. The problem with ball flight is many things can cause ball flight change so as to be almost random feedback at the outset of a change. At least for me.

 

While I sometimes use exaggerated drills what works best for me is persistence over time so that I can feel subtle movement in the right direction. I do have the luxury of practicing 4-5 times a week when I am not abroad in India (where my business is headquartered). That makes my approach work. It helps that I really enjoy this.

 

But this sense of feel and ball flight is also supported by objective feedback - else I revert to old habits without noticing and the ball flight erodes. I use my iPhone to record a few swings maybe every 3rd practice.

 

I believe the key is to have a substantive positive direction - clear idea about what you are trying to do - that you persist in developing.

 

What I am seeing is using MDLT approach now for maybe 6 weeks is slowly it is absorbing Montes feedback into a single idea. I feel it coming together. But it's not a magic trick and I am just at the beginning.

[juststeve]

Birly the trick of course is to actually change a motion. The problem with ball flight is many things can cause ball flight change so as to be almost random feedback at the outset of a change. At least for me.

 

While I sometimes use exaggerated drills what works best for me is persistence over time so that I can feel subtle movement in the right direction. I do have the luxury of practicing 4-5 times a week when I am not abroad in India (where my business is headquartered). That makes my approach work. It helps that I really enjoy this.

 

But this sense of feel and ball flight is also supported by objective feedback - else I revert to old habits without noticing and the ball flight erodes. I use my iPhone to record a few swings maybe every 3rd practice.

 

I believe the key is to have a substantive positive direction - clear idea about what you are trying to do - that you persist in developing.

 

What I am seeing is using MDLT approach now for maybe 6 weeks is slowly it is absorbing Montes feedback into a single idea. I feel it coming together. But it's not a magic trick and I am just at the beginning.

 

What Monte teaches is sound and most of the elements that Monte teaches will emerge if the de la Torre concept is properly applied. As Manny taught me, what matter is the way the club moves. The major difference is how the swing is taught. Manny taught the swing as a unified whole. At least here in the Forum Monte tends to offer fixes for particular flaws, what I might refer to as a band aid approach, but very sound none the less.

 

Steve

[DOSKI]

Birly the trick of course is to actually change a motion. The problem with ball flight is many things can cause ball flight change so as to be almost random feedback at the outset of a change. At least for me.

 

While I sometimes use exaggerated drills what works best for me is persistence over time so that I can feel subtle movement in the right direction. I do have the luxury of practicing 4-5 times a week when I am not abroad in India (where my business is headquartered). That makes my approach work. It helps that I really enjoy this.

 

But this sense of feel and ball flight is also supported by objective feedback - else I revert to old habits without noticing and the ball flight erodes. I use my iPhone to record a few swings maybe every 3rd practice.

 

I believe the key is to have a substantive positive direction - clear idea about what you are trying to do - that you persist in developing.

 

What I am seeing is using MDLT approach now for maybe 6 weeks is slowly it is absorbing Montes feedback into a single idea. I feel it coming together. But it's not a magic trick and I am just at the beginning.

 

And ball flight can often be the result of a personally invisible link in a kinetic chain much further on up the road. Takes a lot of experience and training unwinding those chains and then presenting the concept to a golfer. Then finding the move, feel, or intent that actually changes the causal link. Then working the change into the player's swing without harming the good parts. Now, the only problem is taking the change out into the real world. World class pros have problems with all of this. How many times have you read, "so and so thinks it'll take six months before this change is a real part of his game?" And they use coaches and every tech tool.

 

The bolded section is the issue. Sure we learn and modify movement or intent through reading or conscious motivation. But what method of learning is most efficient? What provides the easier path? Random feedback? Maybe we should focus on (pun intended) using what humans already do to learn movements. Isn't that basically what de la Torre laid out?

 

Frankly, a lot of players screw around with swings because it's fun. And we like the different feels and ideas. Just part of the hobby.

[juststeve]

DOSKI:

 

Ball fight is the result of the way the club moves, not an invisible link in a kinetic chain. If the club is moving correctly it doesn't matter what the other parts of the body are doing or in what sequence. That is a key concept in Manny's approach. Concentrate on moving the club correctly because if you do nothing else matters. If you don't move the club correctly you can have the greatest kinetic chain in the history of golf, and the shot will still turn out poorly. Stray from that and you may be able to play good golf, but it will have nothing to do with what Manny taught.

 

Steve

[games]

DOSKI:

 

Ball fight is the result of the way the club moves, not an invisible link in a kinetic chain. If the club is moving correctly it doesn't matter what the other parts of the body are doing or in what sequence. That is a key concept in Manny's approach. Concentrate on moving the club correctly because if you do nothing else matters. If you don't move the club correctly you can have the greatest kinetic chain in the history of golf, and the shot will still turn out poorly. Stray from that and you may be able to play good golf, but it will have nothing to do with what Manny taught.

 

Steve

 

Steve, I really enjoy your posts. I picked up UTGS two weeks ago, and I keep reading and re-reading Chapter 4.

Are you located in the midwest? Do you give lessons based on MDLT principles?

[juststeve]

DOSKI:

 

Ball fight is the result of the way the club moves, not an invisible link in a kinetic chain. If the club is moving correctly it doesn't matter what the other parts of the body are doing or in what sequence. That is a key concept in Manny's approach. Concentrate on moving the club correctly because if you do nothing else matters. If you don't move the club correctly you can have the greatest kinetic chain in the history of golf, and the shot will still turn out poorly. Stray from that and you may be able to play good golf, but it will have nothing to do with what Manny taught.

 

Steve

 

Steve, I really enjoy your posts. I picked up UTGS two weeks ago, and I keep reading and re-reading Chapter 4.

Are you located in the midwest? Do you give lessons based on MDLT principles?

 

No, I'm in Texas and I practice law. I'm not remotely qualified to give lessons although I do know a great deal about what Manny taught, being his student and friend for a long time. If you go to Manny's web site and look under the take lessons tab you can find a number of teachers who teach Manny's concepts. They got on the site with Manny's approval so at least at the time they got there he approved of what they were teaching. A number of them in the mid-west.

 

Steve

[birly-shirly]

For those who want to deal in ballflight - I believe some of the apparent randomness can be cleared up if you subscribe to the view that hooks, pushes, thins and heel-shots are all likely related to the same basic issues in your swing. Likewise slices, pulls, steep chunks and toe-side misses. The number of faults in your swing is probably far smaller than the number of bad shots that they cause. If you're trying to diagnose from ballflight, you have to go on trends and not overreact to the occasional genuine outlier.

[The Pearl]

What a great discussion.