AMG Driver Video

[johnrobison]

22 hours ago, virtuoso said:

Point A: What the player is actually doing.

Point B: What the player should be actually doing.

A to B: The teacher finding the right "feel" language to get the player to actually change. It would be nice if the teacher knew what was actually happening. The feel is different for different players.

I agree. I know a few very very good instructors who have a solid understanding of what's actually happening and supposed to happen yet will almost never bring it up with the player. Whether external cues, internal feels, whatever... They're using a language to get the player to do the right thing without actually getting into the academics of what the right thing is.

[Mono]

On 8/28/2023 at 3:26 PM, MonteScheinblum said:

Yes and it’s all about what makes sense to people.  If you believe in the work of Dr. David Wright, which I do, you can’t tell a lower core person upper body feels and vice versa.

 

In this vein, to discount the “feel” of arms working down independently is very short sighted when you have the likes of Tiger Woods, Justin Rose, Bryson Dechambeau and Padraig Harrington saying so. 
 

Most tour players are mid core and you can tell them about any feel and they will make it work.  
 

Most human beings are upper, most golfers have been inundated with all lower body feels.  You could make a case that’s why most golfers have their arms trailing in the sequence.  
 

If you have spent thousands of hours on the lesson tee, your own feel biases are persuaded to change. Eliminating one avenue of thought, limits how many people you can assist.

 

Keyboardery….I’m stealing that.

 

Monte - i always appreciate your imput on this board - that said - i really wish you had never said 'dr david wright' - now i am down a whole other rabbit hole......

 

 

[virtuoso]

10 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

I agree. I know a few very very good instructors who have a solid understanding of what's actually happening and supposed to happen yet will almost never bring it up with the player. Whether external cues, internal feels, whatever... They're using a language to get the player to do the right thing without actually getting into the academics of what the right thing is.

Well, you can use technical language if it’s a technical player, but if not, don’t.

[MPStrat]

37 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

I disagree. There are plenty of very good players who don't and don't care to understand it academically. 

 

Without proof, here's my hypothesis: The number of players with an academic understanding yet without the ability to improve others or even execute it well, themselves, far outweighs the number or good players with very little academic understanding of it all, yet are much better ball strikers than most all of us in this discussion.

 

John, are you a struggling ball striker? I’m not bad. I was at one time, though. I paid people who I thought had the ability to improve others. Some did, some didn’t.  

 

I don’t disagree at all that the academic stuff on its own isn’t taking anyone to scratch but if you really want to make a big jump you have to take some serious ownership and learn things first. That’s part of the equation but nowhere near all of it.

 

 

 

. 

[MPStrat]

20 minutes ago, Mono said:

 

Monte - i always appreciate your imput on this board - that said - i really wish you had never said 'dr david wright' - now i am down a whole other rabbit hole......

 

 

 

Ya, that stuff is pseudo scientific nonsense. Save yourself the time. 

[tthomasgolfer605]

The only Doctor I would have taken a lesson from is Cary Middlecoff. 

[me05501]

I like AMG's content and appreciate a data-driven approach. At the same time they are bringing a lot of really complex thoughts to their instruction and it sometimes seems like they could afford to dumb it down a bit or make it easier to implement. I certainly can't manage five new ideas during the same lesson and I don't think I'm alone. 

[virtuoso]

45 minutes ago, me05501 said:

I like AMG's content and appreciate a data-driven approach. At the same time they are bringing a lot of really complex thoughts to their instruction and it sometimes seems like they could afford to dumb it down a bit or make it easier to implement. I certainly can't manage five new ideas during the same lesson and I don't think I'm alone. 

I imagine they don't expect a student to digest 5 new ideas in one session. But I don't mind them discussing 5 new ideas on one video.

[me05501]

1 hour ago, virtuoso said:

I imagine they don't expect a student to digest 5 new ideas in one session. But I don't mind them discussing 5 new ideas on one video.

 

I should hope not. Then again, when the rate is $500/hour there is probably at least a little pressure to give the appearance of providing appropriate value.  

[Soloman1]

2 hours ago, MPStrat said:

 

Ya, that stuff is pseudo scientific nonsense. Save yourself the time. 

 

Doc Wright (who has two PhD's) probably has more knowledge of human balance than anyone on the planet. He's spent a lifetime understanding and testing in the lab, in baseball and in golf.

 

His pinky finger knows more about golf, movement patterns and balance than you will ever know.

 

And he's a true gentleman who is very giving of his time and knowledge.

 

How dare you disparage someone and something you know nothing about. Despicable.

 

 

[MonteScheinblum]

26 minutes ago, me05501 said:

 

I should hope not. Then again, when the rate is $500/hour there is probably at least a little pressure to give the appearance of providing appropriate value.  

I can speak from experience here.  They approach things the same way I do.
 

They showed me the 3D data, force plate data and the Trackman numbers.  Which obviously I’m familiar.

 

Then two discussions.  
 

1.  What’s actually happening versus what should be happening.  My lead hip and rear hip moved out and back 7” respectively and each should be closer to 4” and my rib cage only turned 70-80*.  I had plenty of range of motion to go passed 90*.  Vertical force was second best they had ever seen.

 

2. The lesson.  Try not to bend the lead knee so much and get a little more feel of back to target.

Edited August 30, 2023 by MonteScheinblum

[MonteScheinblum]

9 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

 

Doc Wright (who has two PhD's) probably has more knowledge of human balance than anyone on the planet. He's spent a lifetime understanding and testing in the lab, in baseball and in golf.

 

His pinky finger knows more about golf, movement patterns and balance than you will ever know.

 

And he's a true gentleman who is very giving of his time and knowledge.

 

How dare you disparage someone and something you know nothing about. Despicable.

 

 

I’ve known him for over 40 years.  
 

What does a person like you who was an innovator of 3D technology....

 

A person like me who was the longest hitter in the world, played at the highest levels for decades, has collaborated with the leading experts for years and has given 10’s of thousands of lessons……

 

A duo of instructors who are among the most respected in the industry and experts with 3D technology…..

 

and a man who has spent most of his life studying human movement….

 

know in the face of someone who just knows better.

[johnrobison]

4 hours ago, MPStrat said:

 

John, are you a struggling ball striker? I’m not bad. I was at one time, though. I paid people who I thought had the ability to improve others. Some did, some didn’t.  

 

I don’t disagree at all that the academic stuff on its own isn’t taking anyone to scratch but if you really want to make a big jump you have to take some serious ownership and learn things first. That’s part of the equation but nowhere near all of it.

 

 

 

. 

That's the world as you see it through your own lens. There are MANY players who don't need it at all. Many, in fact, who are encumbered by it.

[MPStrat]

54 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

How dare you disparage someone and something you know nothing about. Despicable.

I understand Doc Wright is buddies with you guys, but the information is out there for anyone to read and poke holes into. I’m not alone in my assessment. Iacas has said the same publicly among many others who aren’t interested in rocking the boat. It’s crap.

[MPStrat]

4 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

That's the world as you see it through your own lens. There are MANY players who don't need it at all. Many, in fact, who are encumbered by it.

You are absolutely right that many players don’t need it.
 

But if you want to make a big jump, which is extremely rare, I believe it’s almost unavoidable. 

[virtuoso]

@MonteScheinblum

@Soloman1

Since you guys believe in the Wright Balance system, you can answer this question best.

 

If a golfer is an upper core player and they massively early extend, the Wright Balanced Certified instructor will say, "This is not a bad thing, it is actually a good thing because this is a common and necessary movement pattern that matches your core region."

 

The overwhelming majority of men are upper core players. Thus, early extension should be described as a feature, not a bug, for all these golfers.

 

Do you agree with this? (please don't answer with: "Depends on on much early extension" because the "posturing up" technique makes allowance for quite a bit.)

[MonteScheinblum]

8 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

@MonteScheinblum

@Soloman1

Since you guys believe in the Wright Balance system, you can answer this question best.

 

If a golfer is an upper core player and they massively early extend, the Wright Balanced Certified instructor will say, "This is not a bad thing, it is actually a good thing because this is a common and necessary movement pattern that matches your core region."

 

The overwhelming majority of men are upper core players. Thus, early extension should be described as a feature, not a bug, for all these golfers.

 

Do you agree with this? (please don't answer with: "Depends on on much early extension" because the "posturing up" technique makes allowance for quite a bit.)

Yes and it’s all about degrees.  I am an upper and EE a little and have a very high handle even when I am swinging well.  I also don’t get that open.  

 

If I stay in flexion the way a lower or mid does, and/or return the handle lower, and/or get super open at impact…and I can on purpose…..I have a super steep angle of attack a huge left path and I lose speed.

 

The issue is when an upper guy has other issues, he EE’s more than he should.  When I come out too vertical, I EE more and have too high off a handle and miss it off the planet right.

 

Hypothetically an upper guy has an optimal EE number of 5*.  If he’s too vertical coming out of transition and drops the right shoulder early or excessively, he will EE 15*.  Bad!!!!!!

[CasualLie]

15 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

@MonteScheinblum

Edited August 30, 2023 by CasualLie

[CasualLie]

Sometimes posting with an ipad is really screwy.... Anyways... Nevermind...

[MonteScheinblum]

Slight EE, barely open, shaft pointed right at my core center

[virtuoso]

12 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Yes and it’s all about degrees.  I am an upper and EE a little and have a very high handle even when I am swinging well.  I also don’t get that open.  

 

If I stay in flexion the way a lower or mid does, and/or return the handle lower, and/or get super open at impact…and I can on purpose…..I have a super steep angle of attack a huge left path and I lose speed.

 

The issue is when an upper guy has other issues, he EE’s more than he should.  When I come out too vertical, I EE more and have too high off a handle and miss it off the planet right.

 

Hypothetically an upper guy has an optimal EE number of 5*.  If he’s too vertical coming out of transition and drops the right shoulder early or excessively, he will EE 15*.  Bad!!!!!!

Fair enough. If an upper core player comes to you and is not going EE for the wrong reasons, you would encourage him to ignore it. Even if he was jumping up on his toes, because upper core players need to use vertical force to create speed. Essentially: the more vertical force, the better. And, you would discourage him from trying to do the "keep the butt on the wall" thing for hip movement. Am I describing your position fairly (trying to avoid strawmen--they pop up around here quite a bit.)

 

I'm not trying to trap you in a corner. I will tell on myself in advance. If Larry Rinker came to me for a lesson (yeah I know he played on tour, yada, yada), and he asked me to help him hit it better, he would not leave my tee looking like the pic below at impact. 

 

 

For reference:

[MonteScheinblum]

15 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

Fair enough. If an upper core player comes to you and is not going EE for the wrong reasons, you would encourage him to ignore it. Even if he was jumping up on his toes, because upper core players need to use vertical force to create speed. Essentially: the more vertical force, the better. And, you would discourage him from trying to do the "keep the butt on the wall" thing for hip movement. Am I describing your position fairly (trying to avoid strawmen--they pop up around here quite a bit.)

 

I'm not trying to trap you in a corner. I will tell on myself in advance. If Larry Rinker came to me for a lesson (yeah I know he played on tour, yada, yada), and he asked me to help him hit it better, he would not leave my tee looking like the pic below at impact. 

 

 

For reference:

To what you asked me…..yes 100%.  I don’t make aesthetic changes.  I make changes to hit the ball better and farther and better aesthetics result.  
 

As to your second question.  Brian Gay through his career looked very much like this as well and we was an ATM.

 

If……..Larry was having a path I found extreme and it was producing a two way miss, I’d change it.  If he was pumping one drive and wedge after another at the target, I wouldn’t touch it and I’d take him to the chipping green.

 

Just like Wolfe, DJ, Floyd, Furyk, Lehman, etc,. Who have outlier extremes in their swings, so does Larry here and so does Gay.  You have to be really careful what you tell these guys and all elite players, especially juniors and young pros.  It’s mostly how they differ from their good and bad ball striking trends.  That’s how I work on my swing,  I compare.

 

For the average Joe, extremes are seldomly successful.  So even if a guy is an upper, IMO, you can’t just say he’s an upper so this is OK.  If he hits blocks and hooks all day, you have to temper it.

 

On the lesson tee, it’s not hard to predict how a golfer would measure out.  The way they move and the way they react to the discussion tends to give it away without the extensive measuring process. Although that has its benefits too as far as stance width and other setup standards.

Edited August 30, 2023 by MonteScheinblum

[MonteScheinblum]

I once posed a question to Dr. Wright.  He told me most tour players were mid and most men are upper.”

 

I said, “So basically tour players were able to succeed because they worked hard and it didn’t matter what all the bozos told them, they could make it work. Whereas the majority of average golfers struggle because most golf instruction is lower body centric.”

 

Coy smile.

[virtuoso]

2 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

To what you asked me…..yes 100%.  I don’t make aesthetic changes.  I make changes to hit the ball better and farther and better aesthetics result.  
 

As you your second question.  Brian Gay through his career looked very much like this as well and we was an ATM.

 

If……..Larry was having a path I found extreme and it was producing a two way miss, I’d change it.  If he was pumping one drive and wedge after another at the target, I wouldn’t touch it and did take him chilling green.

 

Just like Wolfe, DJ, Floyd, Furyk, Lehman, etc,. have outlier extremes in their swings, so is Larry here and so is Gay.  You hav etc be really careful what you tell these guys.  It’s mostly how they differ from their good and bad ball striking trends.  That’s how I woke on my swing,  I compare.

 

For the average Joe, extremes are seldomly successful.  So even if a guy is an upper, IMO, you can’t just say he’s an upper so this is OK.  If he hits blocks and hooks all day, you have to temper it.

 

On the lesson tee, it’s not hard to predict how a golfer would measure out.  The way they move and the way they react to the discussion tends to give it away without the extensive measuring process. Although that has its benefits too as far as stance width and other setup standards.

All fine and good, but I was more interested in whether you would change Larry if his last name wasn't Rinker. I'm familiar with the concept of trying to unnecessarily change a guy that already plays golf for a living. I'm sure Larry hits it fine, but other guys that look like Larry don't hit it fine. I wouldn't say, "You're upper core, so all systems are go." That looks terrible, I would change it.

[MonteScheinblum]

Just now, virtuoso said:

All fine and good, but I was more interested in whether you would change Larry if his last name wasn't Rinker. I'm familiar with the concept of trying to unnecessarily change a guy that already plays golf for a living. I'm sure Larry hits it fine, but other guys that look like Larry don't hit it fine. I wouldn't say, "You're upper core, so all systems are go." That looks terrible, I would change it.

Like I said, if Larry’s name was Joe Smith and he hit it well, I wouldn’t change it and I’d take him the the chilling green.  If a guy who won 50 mil on the tour was hitting it all over the map looking like that, I would.

[virtuoso]

3 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Like I said, if Larry’s name was Joe Smith and he hit it well, I wouldn’t change it and I’d take him the the chilling green.  If a guy who won 50 mil on the tour was hitting it all over the map looking like that, I would.

That's how I feel. If the guy is hitting into the maintenance shed, I would say, "I don't care if you are upper core, we are doing something different."

[MonteScheinblum]

6 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

That's how I feel. If the guy is hitting into the maintenance shed, I would say, "I don't care if you are upper core, we are doing something different."

Yep.  The whole point of Dr. Wright and Larry’s ideas is everyone has a different body and pigeon holing everyone into DJ’s impact is a good way to ruin everyone and injure them.  

Edited August 31, 2023 by MonteScheinblum

[virtuoso]

2 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Yep.  The whole point of Dr. Wright and Larry’s ideas is everyone has a different body and pigeon holing everyone into DJ’s impact is a good way to ruin everyone and injure them.  

I assume you knew that without the help from Larry and Dr Wright.

[MonteScheinblum]

2 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

I assume you knew that without the help from Larry and Dr Wright.

LOL, well, when I was a kornferry player in the 90’s I didn’t.

 

I was trying to get 40* open with a bent right elbow at impact….because that’s what everyone told me to do.
 

Turned myself from a pretty high level pro into a 5.

Edited August 31, 2023 by MonteScheinblum

[MPStrat]

24 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

I once posed a question to Dr. Wright.  He told me most tour players were mid and most men are upper.”

 

I said, “So basically tour players were able to succeed because they worked hard and it didn’t matter what all the bozos told them, they could make it work. Whereas the majority of average golfers struggle because most golf instruction is lower body centric.”

 

Coy smile.

This post says a lot. 

 

Breaking news: 
 

The majority of tour players in history have succeeded despite violating the Wright Balance System, upper core, square hips-early extension model. 
 

I wonder why this pattern didn’t prevail on tour before the bozo industry really got cooking.