Anyone who looks at this video of Homer Kelley's Swinging Golf Stroke -- deliberately abbreviated in accordance with his own words -- with its wonderful...
-- Standard Pivot and Lagging Clubhead Takeaway;
-- Snap Loading at the Top;
-- Delayed Release; and
-- Impeccable Impact and Follow-Through alignments...
And then utters the damning words in your quote...
Obviously has no concept of a geometrically-correct Golf Stroke.
Lynn you are spot-on...just like Mike O.
...
I have heard people "diss" this clip of Homer....obviously they know nothing.
Birdie: Thats been done already my friend, like the thread title asks:
Stationary Head - To Be Or Not To Be?
I like HKs analysis personally, who's do you like? Maybe you're gonna do said analysis?
Done without bias by whom?
...
HK doesn't comment on what pros do in TGM as far as I know...
BTW I've already said (prolly more than 2 times) that while HK's opinions obviously DO deserve a large amount of respect and DO hold a substantial amount of weight they are not the END to any argument by any stretch.
If that's what you think then I think you are kidding yourself frankly.
...
BTW no I am not gonna do the said analysis right now. Are you?
That would take forever and would require many sequences and lots of time.
It is the only way tho if we are gonna start tossing pictures around.
Last edited by birdie_man : 11-17-2006 at 08:26 PM.
Are you suggesting that the golf swing hasn't been studied by plenty of book authors and such for many decades? Forgive me for not citing specific examples, it was a general statement. You can use a photo or sequence to argue ANY point whatsoever. That's what I love about TGM, the golfer pictures inside only demonstrate the alignments and not 'this is how ____ does it'.
Quote:
BTW I've already said (prolly more than 2 times) that while HK's opinions obviously DO deserve a large amount of respect and DO hold a substantial amount of weight they are not the END to any argument by any stretch.
If that's what you think then I think you are kidding yourself frankly.
Are you suggesting that the golf swing hasn't been studied by plenty of book authors and such for many decades?
Heck no. So....have "they" come to the same conclusions as you seem to have?
Quote:
Forgive me for not citing specific examples, it was a general statement. You can use a photo or sequence to argue ANY point whatsoever.
No big deal.
Fair enough....I just said for any given golfer you need to look at more than one sequence and more than on shot type and with different clubs in hand. Fair, no?
Quote:
That's what I love about TGM, the golfer pictures inside only demonstrate the alignments and not 'this is how ____ does it'.
That is well and good as one facet of things. "How _____ does it" should hold some ground tho.
Quote:
Not the end, just the best to date IMO.
It IS the best to date.
Quote:
This thread seems to have run it's course, and I don't want to see us lower our standards here. Please either edit your posts regarding other instructors or delete them.
The ridiculous, false, and slanderous insinuations continue on the other forum, but we have put that entire organization on permanent "ignore". I would ask that friends of LBG do the same.
What's been done is forever behind us now and there is no looking back.
Thanks
You are 100% right Bagger.
There's no need to get into this...
I mean....honestly, when certain things are brought up I find it very very hard not to respond...
....but I do realize we're at the point where the thread can turn into to a crap-throwing contest. (or at least a pointless argument that has no place on a forum dedicated to golf instruction)
And frankly I feel like I should respond to those last few posts (and can easily) but I will refrain.
I'd rather talk about golf than shift the topic to something else anyway.
Last edited by birdie_man : 11-21-2006 at 12:26 AM.
Hybrid Mode
