Post by Jeff Martin on Jan 22, 2012 18:11:22 GMT -5
One of our forum members spotted this the other day over at the "Answer Man's" and was perplexed as hell by it:
Of course, this "answer" provided no real insight:
So, a "jeffy golf" investigation was conducted! This is what we found.
During Dr. Neal's presentation, Brian demonstrates for the camera what he has come to describe as "tugging": an immediate retraction of the lead shoulder to start the downswing. He explains that this is a swing fault they have been spending a lot of time addressing, then asks Dr. Neal if it is "over-rotational, over lineal or something else". Neal gives the following unexpected answer: "Tugging" only becomes "problematical" if the player let's the lead arm get "pinned" to the chest and doesn't have sufficient strength in the back and the posterior lead shoulder to pull the lead arm down into impact.
In other words, the "scientists" that have blessed "everything" they teach didn't think "tugging" was that big of a deal, so as long as the player had a strong back and lead shoulder. THAT was interesting, and quite different from how Manz presents it in his "answer" above. (Kelvin disagrees with Dr. Neal, BTW, but that's another story).
Undaunted, Manzella persists and describes how they were seeing great improvement in some instances where the player was instructed to get a little more separation or "independent" movement of the arms from the shoulders in the first move down. Manz asked why this improvement happened. Dr. Neal: "I don't know."
So much for the "science" being behind the "new release".
One more gem. An audience member asked Dr. Neal about the role of internal and external rotation of the hips and legs and their effect on timing during transition (something Kelvin covers quite thoroughly in his series on the hips and legs). Neal's answer: "I have no measurements of what the legs do." Laughter.
So much for the "all the research is done" bluster. It's barely started.
Jeff
Of course, this "answer" provided no real insight:
So, a "jeffy golf" investigation was conducted! This is what we found.
During Dr. Neal's presentation, Brian demonstrates for the camera what he has come to describe as "tugging": an immediate retraction of the lead shoulder to start the downswing. He explains that this is a swing fault they have been spending a lot of time addressing, then asks Dr. Neal if it is "over-rotational, over lineal or something else". Neal gives the following unexpected answer: "Tugging" only becomes "problematical" if the player let's the lead arm get "pinned" to the chest and doesn't have sufficient strength in the back and the posterior lead shoulder to pull the lead arm down into impact.
In other words, the "scientists" that have blessed "everything" they teach didn't think "tugging" was that big of a deal, so as long as the player had a strong back and lead shoulder. THAT was interesting, and quite different from how Manz presents it in his "answer" above. (Kelvin disagrees with Dr. Neal, BTW, but that's another story).
Undaunted, Manzella persists and describes how they were seeing great improvement in some instances where the player was instructed to get a little more separation or "independent" movement of the arms from the shoulders in the first move down. Manz asked why this improvement happened. Dr. Neal: "I don't know."
So much for the "science" being behind the "new release".
One more gem. An audience member asked Dr. Neal about the role of internal and external rotation of the hips and legs and their effect on timing during transition (something Kelvin covers quite thoroughly in his series on the hips and legs). Neal's answer: "I have no measurements of what the legs do." Laughter.
So much for the "all the research is done" bluster. It's barely started.
Jeff
