Dan Grieve - 3 releases

[Hawkeye77]

1 hour ago, KD1 said:

 

Thanks for this. I had fun playing around with this at the range today, but I'm not sure if I'm executing closer to release 1 or 3.. lol

 

So I have a few questions:

1) Dan mentions that it's the opposite of everything you want to do in a full swing. So what's the danger of this bleeding over into full swing if we're not careful?

2) Is it not extremely steep? And if so, why is it not a problem?

3) I really feel like it's all noodley wrists and I'm picking at the ball. That about right?

4) I see several similarities between this and Monte's use the bounce 2.0. Where would you say the differ? Dan wants more lower body movement in the backswing is the first thing that comes to my mind.

5) For those of you who said you used to something like this back in the day.. what happened? What problems do you have with this?

 

I'd direct those to Dan - why would you think others can be accurate or effective filters for his information? Seriously, "extremely steep"? - no reason to think that at all if you read the book or even watched either of the above two vids.  And "Dan wants more lower body movement in the backswing" than Monte?  Which release are you comparing to which shot Monte is teaching? And again, how could you reach that conclusion if you've studied Monte's method and again, read Dan's book or watched the vids above?  Taking a little of this and a little of that and fooling around with it really isn't learning it or taking in what needs to be taken in to understand it and you clearly haven't really tried.  All "noodley [sic] wrists" --- you really haven't watched anything of Dan's if you are claiming this - can't really take your "observations" seriously.

 

Join his online academy, read the stuff he puts up there, buy and read the book and I'd say, take an online lesson or two if you want to know - and be intentional and serious about it.  Might be a good experience.

[KD1]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

you really haven't watched anything of Dan's if you are claiming this

 

Sure I did. I watched the one I replied to where he was asking Rick to do this:

 

 

And release like this:

Which looks steep to me here and feels steep to me when I played around with it.

 

The same video where the some of the first instruction he gave rick was to open his hips on the back swing. Monte teaches "legs stuck in cement" for short game shots. I'm not saying either is right or wrong or care about these kinds of pissing matches. I'm interested in key differences that one should be made aware of.

 

He said 2/10 grip strength. My feeling of my interpretation of this feels like my arms are limp like eminem's mom's spaghetti. If this is likely incorrect I would like to gain a better understanding... which is why I asked in the first place.

 

Look, I'm not criticizing your guy. I ask in good faith. I clearly stated that I just played around with this and liked it.

 

So I guess we're not allowed to ask questions for clarification about a golf instructor's instruction in a thread in the golf instruction forum now? I'm suddenly required to buy his book and/or pay to join his private community to even earn the opportunity to begin to think about asking first step questions?

 

[Nels55]

4 hours ago, KD1 said:

 

Thanks for this. I had fun playing around with this at the range today, but I'm not sure if I'm executing closer to release 1 or 3.. lol

 

So I have a few questions:

1) Dan mentions that it's the opposite of everything you want to do in a full swing. So what's the danger of this bleeding over into full swing if we're not careful?

2) Is it not extremely steep? And if so, why is it not a problem?

3) I really feel like it's all noodley wrists and I'm picking at the ball. That about right?

4) I see several similarities between this and Monte's use the bounce 2.0. Where would you say the differ? Dan wants more lower body movement in the backswing is the first thing that comes to my mind.

5) For those of you who said you used to something like this back in the day.. what happened? What problems do you have with this?

Unfortunately at times I have the attention span of a gnat and I can barely remember the video now.  Also I did not do much with hitting those types of flop shots and I am still hitting most all of my short game shots with my 60 degree so I am pretty much useless when it comes to giving you any sort of answer for your excellent questions.  

[Hawkeye77]

2 hours ago, KD1 said:

 

Sure I did. I watched the one I replied to where he was asking Rick to do this:

 

 

And release like this:

Which looks steep to me here and feels steep to me when I played around with it.

 

The same video where the some of the first instruction he gave rick was to open his hips on the back swing. Monte teaches "legs stuck in cement" for short game shots. I'm not saying either is right or wrong or care about these kinds of pissing matches. I'm interested in key differences that one should be made aware of.

 

He said 2/10 grip strength. My feeling of my interpretation of this feels like my arms are limp like eminem's mom's spaghetti. If this is likely incorrect I would like to gain a better understanding... which is why I asked in the first place.

 

Look, I'm not criticizing your guy. I ask in good faith. I clearly stated that I just played around with this and liked it.

 

So I guess we're not allowed to ask questions for clarification about a golf instructor's instruction in a thread in the golf instruction forum now? I'm suddenly required to buy his book and/or pay to join his private community to even earn the opportunity to begin to think about asking first step questions?

 

 

He’s not my guy. 
 

One bunker shot with his release 3 isn’t something to generalize from about his teaching and suggest he wants people to be extremely steep.
 

He doesn’t want 2/10 grip strength, which doesn’t mean limp wristed  anyway, two different things. 
 

Monte doesn’t teach legs stuck in cement for short game shots, lol.

 

Your takeaways are so far off they kind of render the questions moot. 
 

Buy the book!

 

 

 

[KD1]

37 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

 

He’s not my guy. 
 

One bunker shot with his release 3 isn’t something to generalize from about his teaching and suggest he wants people to be extremely steep.
 

He doesn’t want 2/10 grip strength, which doesn’t mean limp wristed  anyway, two different things. he literally said this in the video. His words, not mine... Are you trolling me?
 

Monte doesn’t teach legs stuck in cement for short game shots, lol.

Damn sure does. his words, not mine.

 

Your takeaways are so far off they kind of render the questions moot. 
 

Buy the book!

 

 

 

 

I'll be honest this is some bizarre gatekeeping reaction that I did not expect.

 

Anyway, if anyone else has anything to add I would love to have that discussion.

 

 

Edited January 31 by KD1

[Hawkeye77]

16 minutes ago, KD1 said:

 

I'll be honest this is some bizarre gatekeeping reaction that I did not expect.

 

Anyway, if anyone else has anything to add I would love to have that discussion.

 

 

Nothing “gatekeeping” about it. 
 

Where does Monte teach a “legs stuck in cement” short game? 
 

Just one of a couple of things you aren’t getting, IMO, would rather see you get the concepts correct and improve. 
 

And … buy Dan’s book and apparently Monte’s short game vids - plenty of good stuff for everyone.  

[KD1]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Where does Monte teach a “legs stuck in cement” short game? 

His words when I saw him in person last year. I do not recall if he uses the expression in his online material or not. Anyway, I want to be clear, again, I'm not trying to make this about anyone else. I'm interested in the differences that make Dan's technique uniquely his and pros and cons.

 

9 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Nothing “gatekeeping” about it.

"Your questions aren't worth a response. Go away." is kinda gatekeepy

 

 

10 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Just one of a couple of things you aren’t getting, IMO, would rather see you get the concepts correct and improve.

I also would rather I get the concepts correct and improve. That's why I'm asking.

 

12 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 buy ... apparently Monte’s short game vids

*Sigh* why such snark, bud? I have. This is how I was able to make the claim that I see several similarities and why I'm interested in discussion of their differences.

 

I'm not interested in continuing this direction. If you or anyone else would like to have a productive discussion Im game.

[Hawkeye77]

15 minutes ago, KD1 said:

His words when I saw him in person last year. I do not recall if he uses the expression in his online material or not. Anyway, I want to be clear, again, I'm not trying to make this about anyone else. I'm interested in the differences that make Dan's technique uniquely his and pros and cons.

 

"Your questions aren't worth a response. Go away." is kinda gatekeepy

 

 

I also would rather I get the concepts correct and improve. That's why I'm asking.

 

*Sigh* why such snark, bud? I have. This is how I was able to make the claim that I see several similarities and why I'm interested in discussion of their differences.

 

I'm not interested in continuing this direction. If you or anyone else would like to have a productive discussion Im game.

Only a guess, but sounds like you were given a feel to address an issue -  that’s a far cry from a “legs in cement” focus in his short game teaching, just like those who would extrapolate various ideas of his to suggest he teaches an “arms” swing. He held my hips from behind once but not because I need a frozen hips approach to my short game in general. 
 

Nothing “go away” in any of it, just challenged a couple of your claims and suggested, and still suggest, you take a closer and/or actual look at the source material.  

If you do, enjoy. 

 

 

[KD1]

56 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Only a guess, but sounds like you were given a feel to address an issue -  that’s a far cry from a “legs in cement” focus in his short game teaching

It was a general principle explained to the group as a whole. (Edit) I accept that it is entirely possible that I misunderstood what was said.

 

56 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

just like those who would extrapolate various ideas of his to suggest he teaches an “arms” swing.

I remember commenting to some others in the group I was surprised how the majority of his full swing focus was on getting more lower body action out of everyone. But he flips in the short game... I suppose that's another similarity with Dan's method in a way lol (re: opposites from full swing)

 

(Edit) go review montes swing in "use the bounce 2.0" and I think you'll find he hardly moves his hips at all in the backswing.

 

(Edit x2) I'll shut up now asking about differences. I wasn't trying to make this about anyone else. I am still interested in hearing more about Dan's methods.

Edited January 31 by KD1

[Hawkeye77]

 

1 hour ago, KD1 said:

It was a general principle explained to the group as a whole. (Edit) I accept that it is entirely possible that I misunderstood what was said.

 

I remember commenting to some others in the group I was surprised how the majority of his full swing focus was on getting more lower body action out of everyone. But he flips in the short game... I suppose that's another similarity with Dan's method in a way lol (re: opposites from full swing)

 

(Edit) go review montes swing in "use the bounce 2.0" and I think you'll find he hardly moves his hips at all in the backswing.

 

(Edit x2) I'll shut up now asking about differences. I wasn't trying to make this about anyone else. I am still interested in hearing more about Dan's methods.

Maybe check out his interview with Shiels in addition to the vid.  There’s also a group vid up on Grieve’s channel from a clinic. I’d still think at $10 the Kindle version of the book is cheap. 
 

Maybe some others will chime in but I’m not suggesting not asking questions, but encouraging diving deeper on your own as well. 

[MattC555]

I haven't seen Monte's bounce videos, but I can tell you things are way more specific in the book than in what Dan posts online.  You'd really have to compare setups, club angles, and finishes to see the differences. 

[MattC555]

18 hours ago, KD1 said:

 

Thanks for this. I had fun playing around with this at the range today, but I'm not sure if I'm executing closer to release 1 or 3.. lol

 

So I have a few questions:

1) Dan mentions that it's the opposite of everything you want to do in a full swing. So what's the danger of this bleeding over into full swing if we're not careful?

2) Is it not extremely steep? And if so, why is it not a problem?

3) I really feel like it's all noodley wrists and I'm picking at the ball. That about right?

4) I see several similarities between this and Monte's use the bounce 2.0. Where would you say the differ? Dan wants more lower body movement in the backswing is the first thing that comes to my mind.

5) For those of you who said you used to something like this back in the day.. what happened? What problems do you have with this?

 

1.  Setup is completely different than a full swing.  Outside of release 1 you'd be flipping a bunch.  Minimal shaft lean, etc.

2.  It is not extremely steep. 

3.  From the book:  "Bounce is your friend, almost always".  So definitely not picking the ball.  I consider his movements smooth, silky, not noodley.

4.  Haven't seen Monte's bounce 2.0.  Grieve's method aims to create a pivot line down the lead leg.  Minimal weight transfer, more of a rotational movement.(terrible advice for a full swing, great advice for short game).

5.  I used this method unknowingly a fair amount growing up before a "Pro" encouraged me to shorten my wrist motion.  Going all in on the method is way more fun, allows you to get creative, and is the best method for bunkers I've come across.  I don't strictly do 3 releases.  I use Release 1 most of the time.  2 and 3 are a blend for me depending on whats called for.  A full 3 is a flop shot moon ball that I rarely use on course.  Somewhere around a 2 and 1/2 would be my default bunker swing (wide, low, but release closer to 2).

 

 

Edited January 31 by MattC555

[KD1]

1 hour ago, MattC555 said:

1.  Setup is completely different than a full swing.  Outside of release 1 you'd be flipping a bunch.  Minimal shaft lean, etc.

So you haven't noticed any negative impact on your full swing? I only ask because Dan did allude to this in the video with Rick.

 

1 hour ago, MattC555 said:

2.  It is not extremely steep. 

... Somewhere around a 2 and 1/2 would be my default bunker swing (wide, low, but release closer to 2).

Wide and low was a disconnect for me. So your wide and low on the back swing but but still very narrow on the release?

[MattC555]

No negative impact on my full swing.  They are different.  I use release one up to about 60 yards.  I slightly widen my stance and allow a bit more hip turn from 40-60 yards.

By wide and low I mean setup.  Not the swing.  Release 3 has a wide stance with a fair amount of knee bend.  He advocates lining up open to the target(release 3 only).  I prefer to remain in line with my target. 

 

It really is worth purchasing the book for the screenshots.  A ton of great info. 

Edited January 31 by MattC555

[mstuewe]

Does anyone have input on the online lessons Dan provides?  What sort of lesson does he give, how comprehensive is it?  What is the process?  

 

I have gone through his YouTube series, and am about to dive into the book.  I am going to stick with his program this year, and was thinking lessons once the weather turns and I can get outside for some real chipping work.

[i*windows]

I was looking at the same but the problem with online lessons is that you don't get immediate feedback, if you watch Dan's videos he is always tweaking the backswing a little and watching the release. It's so hard to do this in an online lesson where you just send in one video. I would be more tempted to read the book which is great and then record your videos and see if you can self diagnose any issues. This is what I have started to do, and have release one nailed on and can easily spot if I'm not doing it right. When you have your pattern sorted then maybe reach out to Dan if there are things you want to tweak, his contact details are in the book.

[GolferHomz]

Love Dan's stuff, brought the book and watched all his video content.

Its made such a huge difference to my short game, no more thinned shots through the green or chunked chips that end up 2 feet in front of me.

Took me a while to get the body rotation down and the length of swing for release 2.

Also "for me" getting the setup right is critical, get those shoulders level!

[RacineBoxer]

On 9/20/2023 at 8:22 AM, Luckydutch said:

One thing I didn’t really get about his book was where he talks about how the lob wedge should only be for emergencies.

 

Once I’d started to implement his techniques and use the bounce properly, the lob wedge became no harder to use than any other wedge.

 

Also, perhaps it depends on the courses you play somewhat but I find that more often than not, I appreciate having that extra loft.

 

Let’s say I need to play on average 10 short game shots per round. Maybe 2 are bunkers and of the remaining 8, maybe only 1 will be from a fairway or green fringe where I can take something like a gap wedge and play a release 1.

 

The courses I play at tend to have small greens, heavily guarded and never more of 3ft of fringe before you’re into the thick stuff. Bunkers tend to be short left and right so you almost always want to take a club that can carry to the centre of the green meaning your misses are going to tend to be left or right, not short.

 

The upshot is that at least 7 out of 10 short game shots I need to make are out of thick rough onto a small, fast green, often over a raised mound or sometimes bunker. In those situations, I almost always want the most loft I can get and a release 2. 
 

Am I missing something? Why should I *not* take the lob wedge there?

 

I think to some extent its about how each person uses the tool. We all have our differences. I spent about 6-10 years hitting almost all my <50 yard shots with a 60. Got pretty proficient with nipping it pretty clean, ball first, tons of spin, small little divots was my preference. But my misses were bad. Too much shaft lean exposing the leading edge and my miss was a chunk that went often went only about 1/2 the distance I wanted it to. The past 5 years I've converted to the shallower technique that you see a lot of guys teaching these days and I've gotten to the point where I almost never use my 60. You would think with the shallower technique I shouldn't be so nervous with the 60 but I still have far too many shots where the leading edge digs. So I avoid using it like the plague.

 

I saw this today (below). I think this is my problem with the 60. I see all that loft and it messes with my release (i.e. I want to release it stronger to get the ball to go). Compared to my 54 where (after all my years of using a 60) it looks like relatively low loft so it encourages me to release it softer.

 

( 60 DEGREES ❌) Removing the most lofted club from the practice bag . I’ve met many great short game players over the years who have an… | Instagram

 

[Luckydutch]

On 2/12/2024 at 5:17 PM, RacineBoxer said:

 

I think to some extent its about how each person uses the tool. We all have our differences. I spent about 6-10 years hitting almost all my <50 yard shots with a 60. Got pretty proficient with nipping it pretty clean, ball first, tons of spin, small little divots was my preference. But my misses were bad. Too much shaft lean exposing the leading edge and my miss was a chunk that went often went only about 1/2 the distance I wanted it to. The past 5 years I've converted to the shallower technique that you see a lot of guys teaching these days and I've gotten to the point where I almost never use my 60. You would think with the shallower technique I shouldn't be so nervous with the 60 but I still have far too many shots where the leading edge digs. So I avoid using it like the plague.

 

I saw this today (below). I think this is my problem with the 60. I see all that loft and it messes with my release (i.e. I want to release it stronger to get the ball to go). Compared to my 54 where (after all my years of using a 60) it looks like relatively low loft so it encourages me to release it softer.

 

( 60 DEGREES ❌) Removing the most lofted club from the practice bag . I’ve met many great short game players over the years who have an… | Instagram

 

 

Makes sense.

 

I find a release 1 with my 60 to be a very consistent and reliable shot for me. I'll confess that the release 2 is tricky in terms of distance control with it and I will typically only use it in emergencies, as Dan suggests.

[harveythomas]

On 2/5/2024 at 4:13 PM, i*windows said:

I was looking at the same but the problem with online lessons is that you don't get immediate feedback, if you watch Dan's videos he is always tweaking the backswing a little and watching the release. It's so hard to do this in an online lesson where you just send in one video. I would be more tempted to read the book which is great and then record your videos and see if you can self diagnose any issues. This is what I have started to do, and have release one nailed on and can easily spot if I'm not doing it right. When you have your pattern sorted then maybe reach out to Dan if there are things you want to tweak, his contact details are in the book.

I really like his book and videos.  He looks like a really good short game coach.  I haven’t managed to master his technique but suspect I’m not doing it right and need a series of lessons.  In the past I’ve used similar techniques to chip and pitch very well (as in 50 percent up and down rate even when not putting great) but for some reason I have lost it again. 
 

your post touches on the value of video and learning the skill to analyse and diagnose well using it.  I think this is a key skill to learn for those wanting to become plus handicap golfers.  Even for me aspiring to get down below a 6 again I think it’s a skill I need to develop.  

[mstuewe]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiswcvG08aEAxUZ_8kDHc8rA3sQtwJ6BAgdEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Donss4R-RWh8&usg=AOvVaw05teMsHYu2C1FgKMnW7uNa&opi=89978449

 

Dan and Colin talk short game.  I find it fascinating that there were 2 things Dan and Colin disagreed on, the use of a 60 around the green for all shots and squaring up the stance in the bunker.

 

I am noticing more and more tour pros say they just use the 60 around the greens.  Colin, Wesley Bryan, Jason Day all mention this in various YouTube videos I’ve seen recently.  I am more inclined to align with Dan and Sieckmann, but it’s fascinating.

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

40 minutes ago, mstuewe said:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiswcvG08aEAxUZ_8kDHc8rA3sQtwJ6BAgdEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Donss4R-RWh8&usg=AOvVaw05teMsHYu2C1FgKMnW7uNa&opi=89978449

 

Dan and Colin talk short game.  I find it fascinating that there were 2 things Dan and Colin disagreed on, the use of a 60 around the green for all shots and squaring up the stance in the bunker.

 

I am noticing more and more tour pros say they just use the 60 around the greens.  Colin, Wesley Bryan, Jason Day all mention this in various YouTube videos I’ve seen recently.  I am more inclined to align with Dan and Sieckmann, but it’s fascinating.

 

 

 

I'd be interested in @MonteScheinblum's take --- I know he's said forever that part of what sets apart club choices/technique choices around the greens for pros vs. us average folks are their (1) natural gifts, combined with (2) the ability to work hours and hours a week on their short games. For me, using my 58 degree less as the default club around the greens gives me, IMO, more margin for error.  

 

Dan definitely was not trying to convince Morikawa that his 60 degree should be his emergency only club, lol, (more demo of what Morikawa does, not a lesson and I'm sure he wouldn't change him) but . .  he definitely tried to get that through to Rick Shiels who was there for a lesson - understandable to me. Grieve has a vid out about his practice and the part about hitting different windows of flight and spots on the green with different lofted wedges using the tree branch as a guide was one good way of practice and sorting out what works or can works for the player.  

Edited February 25 by Hawkeye77

[Laaandry]

3 hours ago, mstuewe said:

I am noticing more and more tour pros say they just use the 60 around the greens.  Colin, Wesley Bryan, Jason Day all mention this in various YouTube videos I’ve seen recently.  I am more inclined to align with Dan and Sieckmann, but it’s fascinating.

 

Dan talks about this in a video (can't remember which one) but that the reason pros often use a 60 is because of the skills obtained from an obscene amount of practice. He think an average amateur should avoid using it due to the finesse needed and there is more low-hanging fruit short game wise by avoiding it. There are also more advanced techniques he's alluded to that he teaches his tour players but not ams.

[mstuewe]

3 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

I'd be interested in @MonteScheinblum's take --- I know he's said forever that part of what sets apart club choices/technique choices around the greens for pros vs. us average folks are their (1) natural gifts, combined with (2) the ability to work hours and hours a week on their short games. For me, using my 58 degree less as the default club around the greens gives me, IMO, more margin for error.  

 

Dan definitely was not trying to convince Morikawa that his 60 degree should be his emergency only club, lol, (more demo of what Morikawa does, not a lesson and I'm sure he wouldn't change him) but . .  he definitely tried to get that through to Rick Shiels who was there for a lesson - understandable to me. Grieve has a vid out about his practice and the part about hitting different windows of flight and spots on the green with different lofted wedges using the tree branch as a guide was one good way of practice and sorting out what works or can works for the player.  

 

I thought it was pretty funny that Morikawa says he hits 60 degree everywhere, and then his first chip landed in the upslope and died.  I have to imagine Dan thought, "thats exactly why you loft down to a different wedge."

[Hawkeye77]

15 minutes ago, mstuewe said:

 

I thought it was pretty funny that Morikawa says he hits 60 degree everywhere, and then his first chip landed in the upslope and died.  I have to imagine Dan thought, "thats exactly why you loft down to a different wedge."

I thought the same, lol. 

[Hawkeye77]

On 2/25/2024 at 12:22 PM, mstuewe said:

 

I thought it was pretty funny that Morikawa says he hits 60 degree everywhere, and then his first chip landed in the upslope and died.  I have to imagine Dan thought, "thats exactly why you loft down to a different wedge."

The Me and My Golf guys (actually wearing non-matching outfits) now have one with him explaining his technique - honestly not much in any of it but they all seem nice and easy to watch. First one is uphill, downwind, lots of green and ….. short, short, short with the 60. His description of his technique and intent would be opposite of Grieve on that shot - he’s standing in an upslope and moving the ball way back, using the leading edge and trying to drive (“force”) it to run out like a putt and what he describes seems the antithesis of what one might think but he’s darn good and could whip most here in a chipping contest. Other than the start they have him hitting some really tough shots. 

[joemcsorleypreswickGC]

i`ve implemented a few things from his book to my armory the only one im a bit sceptical about is the longer pitch shots from 40-100 yards, really struggle with getting his technique down, width of stance dictating how far back the club goes. Combine this with the release 2 he looks for its feels very handsy and not very controllable. 

[infinii]

On 1/31/2024 at 3:32 AM, KD1 said:

 

Thanks for this. I had fun playing around with this at the range today, but I'm not sure if I'm executing closer to release 1 or 3.. lol

 

So I have a few questions:

1) Dan mentions that it's the opposite of everything you want to do in a full swing. So what's the danger of this bleeding over into full swing if we're not careful?

2) Is it not extremely steep? And if so, why is it not a problem?

3) I really feel like it's all noodley wrists and I'm picking at the ball. That about right?

4) I see several similarities between this and Monte's use the bounce 2.0. Where would you say the differ? Dan wants more lower body movement in the backswing is the first thing that comes to my mind.

5) For those of you who said you used to something like this back in the day.. what happened? What problems do you have with this?

 

You should re-read the book if you can't tell the difference between release 1 and 3. If you haven't read the book, do you really deserve someone to dissect it for you when it costs like $10 for the kindle edition?

[nitram]

"How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat"?

 

 

 

[KD1]

6 hours ago, infinii said:

 

You should re-read the book if you can't tell the difference between release 1 and 3. If you haven't read the book, do you really deserve someone to dissect it for you when it costs like $10 for the kindle edition?

 

My questions were clearly in direct response to the video that was quoted in that specific post. Nothing more. Seriously, what is with this gate keeping? (rhetorical question. my questions have all been answered weeks ago so not sure why we're still on this)