Post on the left side?

Post on the left side?

gsw
Joined: July 27th, 2000, 11:22 pm

May 21st, 2009, 2:52 am #1

When you look at both the BGG video and the IMA video one thing consistent is that the drills start with a sort of posting or shift of the weight to the left leg. Symple Swing also teaches to post on the left leg and to hit into a firm left side. Maybe this is one of the SA fundamentals that we all should pay more attention to.


Stan
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 28th, 2005, 6:35 am

May 21st, 2009, 6:19 am #2

happens in all sports, hockey, baseball, and such where there is force that is going one way, to gain momentum and allow "power" there must be either a force shift as in SS or a wieght shift as in CGolf.

There has been to little regarding that, I told the guy I coach who use a CG swing to smack it down to his left foot, and he became longer and straighter.(increase shift and gain momentum)
He is a 300-330 yard guy.

If you look at swings over the years, that kinda move is done with some complicated moves.
Its not enough with a sit down move as this is similar to the long jumpers who press down before they go up where the sit down is done with the force of momentum to shift forward.
They shift their hips direction to gain height and speed forward.

The golf swing is over analyzed if you ask me.
Be on plane.
Shift weight forward, gain momentum for power, find the position at impact.
As every golfer who can play golf, never concerns how they do it.
For them its how it feels like, and even if the feels like is different from people who look at video and what the player tells them, that feel allows them to play golf instead of analyzing the swing.

I been a hacker all my life, so when I decided where to go I went with Symple as lesser motions appeal to me.
I am finnaly being able to play golf not hack around.

/rob
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2001, 7:22 pm

May 22nd, 2009, 12:02 pm #3

Robert said: "The golf swing is over analyzed if you ask me."

Me too, I agree for the most part it is way over analyzed....but someone who has a need for, or learns better with, more detailed analysis and instruction will profit from said instruction. Some learn by "diving right in" and learning as they go. Others despise that approach, and insist on a much more "sensible" and ordered approach. Some learn visually, others learn aurally. Some have to know why something works, others don't care as long as it works. All ways are right, as long as the learning takes place. The intake of the instruction must match the person's capacity to receive it.

Perhaps those among us who have coached and/or taught for long time could comment on this a bit more, even point us to some references about matching your coaching to your student's natural bent for learning.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 22nd, 2004, 9:58 pm

May 22nd, 2009, 2:10 pm #4

It is over analyzed because of a desire to simplify. Over time, in search of
one or two keys that will allow the birth of skill players have exhaustively
searched through physiognomy, physiology, kinetics, psychology, geometry, physics,
and who knows what else.

I have tutored in math for a long time and one thing that really strikes me is
the large percentage of students who have the attitude of "I can't do this because
I have a terrible memory or I have this or that inability". When I question these
students I always find that they have acquired a huge store of permanent memories
such as phone numbers, addresses, names, processes, etc. They just don't really
want to do the rote work that is required to create permanent memory and schools
have largely abandoned rote methods. I tutor GED students who are suddenly highly
motivated by being thrust into adulthood and almost none of them (some high school
graduates) even know the multiplication tables. Almost all of them are normally or
even highly intelligent! The ones who finally "get it" commit to simplify and
master one principle before moving on to the next and they learn to appreciate the rote
method of learning. By doing this they create a bell curve that slants increasingly
upward as what they learn begins to overlap and reinforce.

It occurs to me that Bertholy is largely a rote method of learning. It also seems to
me that those who stick with Bertholy acquire a knowledge of their game that extends
far beyond Bertholy.

The ones I know who don't learn to play golf well tell me things like "I'm not
athletic", I just play to enjoy the outdoors", "I'm not at all competitive",
"I'm too old to learn", and the worst attitude I encounter is the "I don't even
know why I'm out here, I should quit this game".
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 13th, 2001, 8:30 am

May 22nd, 2009, 7:33 pm #5

That is a great post!
LOL I thought it would be interesting to post my reaction to the excuses...

The ones I know who don't learn to play golf well tell me things like:
"I'm not athletic" I am more athletic then I look damn you.

"I just play to enjoy the outdoors" Golf courses are often beautiful but I don't let that interfere withe my pursuit of a low score.

"I'm not at all competitive" I am going to kill your sorry @ss.

"I'm too old to learn" Not while I can breathe.

the worst attitude I encounter is the
"I don't even know why I'm out here, I should quit this game". See number 3.

I like the math analogy. For some folks memorizing the tables is very easy and for others not so easy. I think that the same could be said about the fundamentals that the Bertholy program teaches.

I had a friend in hi school who could not add 2 and 2. I would like to see what you could have done with him. He definitely had a bad attitude towards math, trying to help him was very frustrating and it taught me a little about human nature at a young age. Even then I suspected that most of the problem was with the teacher not the student. I thought that he could do it because he was intellegent in other ways. For instance he could watch 10 guys playing hoops and tell you who the best players were in few minutes. He would remember them the next time hes saw them even if it was weeks later.

Regards, Herbert
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 30th, 2001, 4:02 pm

May 22nd, 2009, 7:34 pm #6

It is over analyzed because of a desire to simplify. Over time, in search of
one or two keys that will allow the birth of skill players have exhaustively
searched through physiognomy, physiology, kinetics, psychology, geometry, physics,
and who knows what else.

I have tutored in math for a long time and one thing that really strikes me is
the large percentage of students who have the attitude of "I can't do this because
I have a terrible memory or I have this or that inability". When I question these
students I always find that they have acquired a huge store of permanent memories
such as phone numbers, addresses, names, processes, etc. They just don't really
want to do the rote work that is required to create permanent memory and schools
have largely abandoned rote methods. I tutor GED students who are suddenly highly
motivated by being thrust into adulthood and almost none of them (some high school
graduates) even know the multiplication tables. Almost all of them are normally or
even highly intelligent! The ones who finally "get it" commit to simplify and
master one principle before moving on to the next and they learn to appreciate the rote
method of learning. By doing this they create a bell curve that slants increasingly
upward as what they learn begins to overlap and reinforce.

It occurs to me that Bertholy is largely a rote method of learning. It also seems to
me that those who stick with Bertholy acquire a knowledge of their game that extends
far beyond Bertholy.

The ones I know who don't learn to play golf well tell me things like "I'm not
athletic", I just play to enjoy the outdoors", "I'm not at all competitive",
"I'm too old to learn", and the worst attitude I encounter is the "I don't even
know why I'm out here, I should quit this game".
Yes! I agree with this sentiment exactly. Schools have largely abandoned the rote method of learning in favor of feel-good creativity. And yet the rote system is what made our country great. Neither of my folks went to college, but their degree of knowledge in the 3 R's, history, geography, etc. seems to outstrip many of my college educated friends. I attribute it to the intensive rote training they were given in public schools in the 1930's and 1940's. It wasn't fun, but it was effective.

I also equate the PB programs to a rote system of learning where you do it over-and-over until it sticks. You forgot to mention that often people who don't play golf well say things like: "I don't have time to do that; give me a method whereby I can play well with little effort." Our modern demands of instant gratification has made us an increasingly ignorant and lazy society. Let's hope that the pendulum swings back soon.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 22nd, 2004, 9:58 pm

May 22nd, 2009, 11:03 pm #7

That is a great post!
LOL I thought it would be interesting to post my reaction to the excuses...

The ones I know who don't learn to play golf well tell me things like:
"I'm not athletic" I am more athletic then I look damn you.

"I just play to enjoy the outdoors" Golf courses are often beautiful but I don't let that interfere withe my pursuit of a low score.

"I'm not at all competitive" I am going to kill your sorry @ss.

"I'm too old to learn" Not while I can breathe.

the worst attitude I encounter is the
"I don't even know why I'm out here, I should quit this game". See number 3.

I like the math analogy. For some folks memorizing the tables is very easy and for others not so easy. I think that the same could be said about the fundamentals that the Bertholy program teaches.

I had a friend in hi school who could not add 2 and 2. I would like to see what you could have done with him. He definitely had a bad attitude towards math, trying to help him was very frustrating and it taught me a little about human nature at a young age. Even then I suspected that most of the problem was with the teacher not the student. I thought that he could do it because he was intellegent in other ways. For instance he could watch 10 guys playing hoops and tell you who the best players were in few minutes. He would remember them the next time hes saw them even if it was weeks later.

Regards, Herbert
Out loud? You say that out loud?

The ones who are not at all competitive are amusing because
they are competing with me to be the least competitive and
I always make it a point to lose that battle.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 22nd, 2004, 9:58 pm

May 23rd, 2009, 12:27 am #8

Yes! I agree with this sentiment exactly. Schools have largely abandoned the rote method of learning in favor of feel-good creativity. And yet the rote system is what made our country great. Neither of my folks went to college, but their degree of knowledge in the 3 R's, history, geography, etc. seems to outstrip many of my college educated friends. I attribute it to the intensive rote training they were given in public schools in the 1930's and 1940's. It wasn't fun, but it was effective.

I also equate the PB programs to a rote system of learning where you do it over-and-over until it sticks. You forgot to mention that often people who don't play golf well say things like: "I don't have time to do that; give me a method whereby I can play well with little effort." Our modern demands of instant gratification has made us an increasingly ignorant and lazy society. Let's hope that the pendulum swings back soon.
But rote learning may be the best way to create a firm
base of knowledge. Once you have a foundation additional
knowledge will relate to the base by cross-reference
and can be assimilated more easily in many ways.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2001, 7:22 pm

May 23rd, 2009, 2:26 am #9

It is over analyzed because of a desire to simplify. Over time, in search of
one or two keys that will allow the birth of skill players have exhaustively
searched through physiognomy, physiology, kinetics, psychology, geometry, physics,
and who knows what else.

I have tutored in math for a long time and one thing that really strikes me is
the large percentage of students who have the attitude of "I can't do this because
I have a terrible memory or I have this or that inability". When I question these
students I always find that they have acquired a huge store of permanent memories
such as phone numbers, addresses, names, processes, etc. They just don't really
want to do the rote work that is required to create permanent memory and schools
have largely abandoned rote methods. I tutor GED students who are suddenly highly
motivated by being thrust into adulthood and almost none of them (some high school
graduates) even know the multiplication tables. Almost all of them are normally or
even highly intelligent! The ones who finally "get it" commit to simplify and
master one principle before moving on to the next and they learn to appreciate the rote
method of learning. By doing this they create a bell curve that slants increasingly
upward as what they learn begins to overlap and reinforce.

It occurs to me that Bertholy is largely a rote method of learning. It also seems to
me that those who stick with Bertholy acquire a knowledge of their game that extends
far beyond Bertholy.

The ones I know who don't learn to play golf well tell me things like "I'm not
athletic", I just play to enjoy the outdoors", "I'm not at all competitive",
"I'm too old to learn", and the worst attitude I encounter is the "I don't even
know why I'm out here, I should quit this game".
Cd thank you for a wonderful post! There is so much you said in there.

I especially like what you said about Bertholites knowledge of their game extending far beyond Bertholy. I think this is true for anything that we have learned to do so well that we can do it without thinking about it.

Carlos Santana certainly will find it it hard to recall his first years of guitar. I wonder if Kyle Busch remembers his first few miles behind a wheel. Lebron does things now he couldn't imagine 9 years ago.

We are the same way though to a lesser degree. Which one of us can honestly say they know no more, or have the same or less proficiency with a golf club than we did when we first started? Sometime just for giggles and grins, show up at a course as a single and ask if they can fit you in with a foursome. It is very educational and enlightening, and both humbling and encouraging all at the same time. You more than likely will find yourself saying "That was me" as they make wild unbalanced swipes at the ball with wicked over the top and outside in moves as they align themselves 45 degrees left of the target. Then the fouth guy hits and you think " My word do I have a long way to go! I wish that was me!"

We can learn anything we really want to learn so well that we can do it without thinking about it. This is a fact....it is just harder to learn as a adults, and we often times just choose to opt out, instead of going through the mundane-ness of it all. When we were kids, we didn't have a choice - WE HAD to learn to tie our shoes.

Does anybody really think that given the proper time and motivation they couldn't develop a fine swing?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 22nd, 2004, 9:58 pm

May 23rd, 2009, 2:46 am #10

To build a foundation you have to dig.
Quote
Like
Share