|
Post by bullet on Dec 18, 2010 20:44:37 GMT -5
Here is another gem that the stack and tilt boys get a kick out of....... sure is different to that rotated in forward flexion poster he used to display as the ultimate pivot a couple of years back to axe the tripoders www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhIswVn2RpU
|
|
|
Post by wedgey on Dec 18, 2010 20:49:22 GMT -5
Yes i believe it's all over the various forums that Mac has based his concepts on science and was one of the first to use science to back up his concepts and medical based is science based other wise let's just go see witch doctors when were ill or for a golf lesson. I never said morad science was blown up Horton said the terminology was incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by wedgey on Dec 18, 2010 20:53:43 GMT -5
Here is another gem that the stack and tilt boys get a kick out of....... sure is different to that rotated in forward flexion poster he used to display as the ultimate pivot a couple of years back to axe the tripoders www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhIswVn2RpUThese are all methods fighting each other making all kinds of claims and none of them are without flaws, so for every video you drag up there's others that are just as flawed. You think S&T is the "method" there's tons of great players that are not in the S&T hall of fame...lol.
|
|
|
Post by bullet on Dec 18, 2010 20:57:52 GMT -5
Here is another gem that the stack and tilt boys get a kick out of....... sure is different to that rotated in forward flexion poster he used to display as the ultimate pivot a couple of years back to axe the tripoders www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhIswVn2RpUThese are all methods fighting each other making all kinds of claims and none of them are without flaws, so for every video you drag up there's others that are just as flawed. You think S&T is the "method" there's tons of great players that are not in the S&T hall of fame...lol. I don't get your point wedge, did you watch the video and what it portrayed? If you did , let me know what it portrayed
|
|
|
Post by wedgey on Dec 18, 2010 21:08:16 GMT -5
These are all methods fighting each other making all kinds of claims and none of them are without flaws, so for every video you drag up there's others that are just as flawed. You think S&T is the "method" there's tons of great players that are not in the S&T hall of fame...lol. I don't get your point wedge, did you watch the video and what it portrayed? If you did , let me know what it portrayed Yeah i saw it before and i'm saying that personally i don't prescribe to any single method as they all have good stuff and some not so good stuff depending on the individual, some people can use a single method and all of it's concepts and others can't and have to try and cobble together what works for them. I know that B.M. trashes other methods and others trash B.M. that doesn't interest me and only adds interference to trying to learn some good solid golf info. and i believe i posted that earlier only to be attacked. I don't care where the info comes from and have no problem with B.M., Lynn, Mac, Jeff, Richie, or whoever , if they have some good info. I could care less what happened 5 yrs ago. Time's a wasting...lol.
|
|
|
Post by bullet on Dec 18, 2010 21:23:55 GMT -5
well wedgey just to fill in the blanks , thats a recent video which is in reality a lot of stack and tilt / morad on how the body moves in relation to spine inclination and its effect on face rotation how ironic thats the worlds greatest instructor trashes on methods or whatever you wanna call them and then produce a video skirting the realms of plagiarism....... just beautiful
|
|
|
Post by wedgey on Dec 18, 2010 21:54:17 GMT -5
well wedgey just to fill in the blanks , thats a recent video which is in reality a lot of stack and tilt / morad on how the body moves in relation to spine inclination and its effect on face rotation how ironic thats the worlds greatest instructor trashes on methods or whatever you wanna call them and then produce a video skirting the realms of plagiarism....... just beautiful Yes i noticed that and i believe b.m. said that there are things in S&T and other methods that he would use in his teaching and other things he doesn't like, so what, others have done the same and not given credit where it's due. Like i said i don't care about that and even if i did there's nothing i can do about it, so i'm not going to worry about it. I mean where did Foley get his stuff did he credit anyone when he started to work with Tiger, no he said he got his stuff from various sources and didn't give credit to P&B or anyone else, what can you , i, or P&B do about it, answer, pretty much nothing, except complain. Life's to short. Anyways it sounds like you have some kind of axe to grind with B.M. and it's better to take that up with him, i'm done with this.
|
|
|
Post by richie3jack on Dec 20, 2010 10:45:37 GMT -5
I think the issue people have is that Brian's threads and discussions in 2003 are similar in tone to where they are today. It's more than just arguing a point, but it's about Brian more or less giving the definitive answer even if it's woefully incorrect. I think we are all guilty of that from time to time, but Brian seems to be guilty of it a lot more than most.
The thing is that we can be wrong and we are often wrong when it comes to the golf swing. But too often for my tastes Brian will act like he completely forgets how wrong he once was...so when he gets adamant about being absolutely correct now, it hurts his credibility.
I'm just a novice in MORAD, but I've found that much of what Brian and his scientists have discovered, Mac discovered back in the 90's and perhaps earlier. I think when it comes to MORAD, Brian has probably talked to people who really didn't know it that well and he seems to have run with their inaccurate interpretations. The idea that Mac came up with MORAD by using tracing paper is woefully misinformed. From what I do understand, it's clear that Mac has talked to plenty of doctors, engineers, physicists, professors and biomechanical experts.
I've personally received a ton of great information from Brian and/or better ways to understand that information. But I can certainly understand some of the frustration his critics have with him. For instance, we have Kevin Shields telling us that John Daly in his prime was a far superior ballstriker than Grant Waite in his prime. Then when I show the stats on the PGA Tour over 10+ years and Grant's stats were far and away better, Kevin says we shouldn't look at stats. Then when I make my case further, he says he never said Daly was superior ballstriker to Grant. And because that's not true because it's written for the world to see....it's frustrating.
3JACK
|
|
joec
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by joec on Dec 20, 2010 14:20:38 GMT -5
ritchie, maybe his real point was to say that he had played with both. maybe it was 'nt. the bm site can help in the future with their science research. i agree with you that morad has been the leader for quite awhile. although i can not prove that. but it is difficult to gather the morad results. if brian and his troups let their results be known, they might make an impact on the golfing world. how much difference is yet to be determined. man, i only wish morad had a website.
|
|