Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 1132 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

About 48 hours out from getting my second shot (Pfizer), and zero side effects. I honestly feel a little cheated out of the full experience, haha. But I also get to pretend I’m tougher than my wife, since she had a reaction.

-- Daniel

In my bag: :callaway: Paradym :callaway: Epic Flash 3.5W (16 degrees)

:callaway: Rogue Pro 3-PW :edel: SMS Wedges - V-Grind (48, 54, 58):edel: Putter

 :aimpoint:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Replies 3.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Moderator
Posted
16 minutes ago, David in FL said:

Well, there you go!  For those that “survived a fear-filled year”.

I’m glad someone cares about those poor souls.   😁

I'm not necessarily responding to you as much as the living in fear idea (I assume you were being sarcastic but I know there are opinions out there like this).  Why is it wrong?  Living in fear is better than death.  People are afraid of many things and that is perfectly normal and ok.  Isn't concealed carry out of fear?  Isn't locking one's car door or homes at night out of fear?  We take many things for granted, but there are many who have strong experiences.  The virus has effected a lot of people and their families.  It is ok and normal to be fearful of it.

Philip Kohnken, PGA
Director of Instruction, Lake Padden GC, Bellingham, WA

Srixon/Cleveland Club Fitter; PGA Modern Coach; Certified in Dr Kwon’s Golf Biomechanics Levels 1 & 2; Certified in SAM Putting; Certified in TPI
 
Team :srixon:!

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
33 minutes ago, DeadMan said:

About 48 hours out from getting my second shot (Pfizer), and zero side effects. I honestly feel a little cheated out of the full experience, haha. But I also get to pretend I’m tougher than my wife, since she had a reaction.

But your wife was tougher than you during childbirth... 😁


Posted
4 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

But your wife was tougher than you during childbirth... 😁

She got epidurals and didn’t have to witness the bloody horror show that I did! 

-- Daniel

In my bag: :callaway: Paradym :callaway: Epic Flash 3.5W (16 degrees)

:callaway: Rogue Pro 3-PW :edel: SMS Wedges - V-Grind (48, 54, 58):edel: Putter

 :aimpoint:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
1 hour ago, phillyk said:

I'm not necessarily responding to you as much as the living in fear idea (I assume you were being sarcastic but I know there are opinions out there like this).  Why is it wrong?  Living in fear is better than death.  People are afraid of many things and that is perfectly normal and ok.  Isn't concealed carry out of fear?  Isn't locking one's car door or homes at night out of fear?  We take many things for granted, but there are many who have strong experiences.  The virus has effected a lot of people and their families.  It is ok and normal to be fearful of it.

Good points.

Although I think the post wasn't about mocking living in fear as much as their derived belief that the threat is fictitious is in the first place hence the fear is laughable. Not much you can say to that.

Vishal S.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
1 hour ago, DeadMan said:

She got epidurals and didn’t have to witness the bloody horror show that I did! 

I ducked out under the guise of fainting from the sight of blood and the potential for losing my breakfast.  It didn't change a thing about how I bonded with my son.  Jeez, I can go off topic so easily.  Discipline yourself James!


Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, phillyk said:

I'm not necessarily responding to you as much as the living in fear idea (I assume you were being sarcastic but I know there are opinions out there like this).  Why is it wrong?  Living in fear is better than death.  People are afraid of many things and that is perfectly normal and ok.  Isn't concealed carry out of fear?  Isn't locking one's car door or homes at night out of fear?  We take many things for granted, but there are many who have strong experiences.  The virus has effected a lot of people and their families.  It is ok and normal to be fearful of it.

I would say there is a significant difference between living in fear and taking prudent precautions.

When people were shooting at me I was genuinely afraid.  I’m not “afraid” that someone will break into my house, or that I’ll be attacked while out with my family, or especially that I’ll catch a virus.  But there’s nothing wrong with taking prudent precautions nonetheless if we think that’s the right thing to do.

For those that consider getting vaccinated to be a prudent precaution, I certainly would encourage them to do so!   :beer:

 

 

18 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Good points.

Although I think the post wasn't about mocking living in fear as much as their derived belief that the threat is fictitious is in the first place hence the fear is laughable. Not much you can say to that.

You’d be wrong.  I was mocking the article that contends that we’ve all been “living in fear” this past year.

For those few who have been, well, not much you can say about that except that I hope they find a way to get past it.

Edited by David in FL

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
25 minutes ago, David in FL said:

You’d be wrong.  I was mocking those “living in fear”.  :-D

You are obviously downplaying the threat for others.

25 minutes ago, David in FL said:

I would say there is a significant difference between living in fear and taking prudent precautions.

Why is their a difference.. i.e mutually exclusive? 

I think @phillykmakes good points about fear being a healthy instinct, even prudent. Not all fear is paralyzing. 

 

Vishal S.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
26 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

You are obviously downplaying the threat for others.

Why is their a difference.. i.e mutually exclusive? 

I think @phillykmakes good points about fear being a healthy instinct, even prudent. Not all fear is paralyzing. 

 

Don't anyone here be a Ted Nugent.  

210421131310-ted-nugent-covid-19-super-t

Singer Ted Nugent, who has repeatedly implied that Covid-19 is a hoax, now has the virus. He continued to downplay the rationale behind testing and vaccines.

 


Posted
19 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Don't anyone here be a Ted Nugent.  

210421131310-ted-nugent-covid-19-super-t

Singer Ted Nugent, who has repeatedly implied that Covid-19 is a hoax, now has the virus. He continued to downplay the rationale behind testing and vaccines.

 

Yeah, I understand that the jury will always be out for some. What I don't understand is how are they so SURE of it being a hoax. As I said, not much you can say to that. 

Vishal S.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Just now, GolfLug said:

Yeah, I understand that the jury will always be out for some. What I don't understand is how are they so SURE of it being a hoax. As I said, not much you can say to that. 

Because other people (not doctors or scientists) they trust in say it's a hoax???  Or, life is easier if you treat it as a hoax???  Yeah, personally I hate wearing a mask or social distancing (8 feet for me) or washing my hands.  But I do it... why give death a chance to come after me?


Posted
3 hours ago, DeadMan said:

She got epidurals and didn’t have to witness the bloody horror show that I did! 

Ha Ha

John


Posted
48 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Yeah, I understand that the jury will always be out for some. What I don't understand is how are they so SURE of it being a hoax. As I said, not much you can say to that. 

The jury is always out for some because they are waiting for people to confirm their ridiculous notions despite there never being a shred of evidence to support their insanity. They are not interested in how a jury makes a decision, or how scientists and people with more education or brain cells than them work things out. If you're someone like Ted Nugent you can behave as if you know more than the "sheep" who follow "science" because you do "your own research", meaning watching a Youtube video put out by a moron. They like to think they are above the MSM and normality and it's a way to excuse themselves for never having read anything or studied anything for more than a second. And the macho stance is attractive for weak people with now real power over their own or any one else's life.

Studies show that the more evidence you present to people with particular prejudices to disprove their "theories", the more entrenched they become in their beliefs.

Prove that something is a hoax and they just think it means it's proof that the "cover up" is really good and has to involve people at the highest level of government.

I mean.... there are people who seriously believe the earth is flat and can disprove gravity because if you hold a marble underneath a tennis ball it falls to the ground rather than sticking to the tennis ball like I am sticking to Australia down here.

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Posted
6 minutes ago, Shorty said:

The jury is always out for some because they are waiting for people to confirm their ridiculous notions despite there never being a shred of evidence to support their insanity. They are not interested in how a jury makes a decision, or how scientists and people with more education or brain cells than them work things out. If you're someone like Ted Nugent you can behave as if you know more than the "sheep" who follow "science" because you do "your own research", meaning watching a Youtube video put out by a moron. They like to think they are above the MSM and normality and it's a way to excuse themselves for never having read anything or studied anything for more than a second. And the macho stance is attractive for weak people with now real power over their own or any one else's life.

Studies show that the more evidence you present to people with particular prejudices to disprove their "theories", the more entrenched they become in their beliefs.

Prove that something is a hoax and they just think it means it's proof that the "cover up" is really good and has to involve people at the highest level of government.

I mean.... there are people who seriously believe the earth is flat and can disprove gravity because if you hold a marble underneath a tennis ball it falls to the ground rather than sticking to the tennis ball like I am sticking to Australia down here.

@Shorty  Next time you post you should speak your mind.  😉  P.S.  Just how do you Aussies stick to the earth?  Suction shoes?  Velcro?


  • Moderator
Posted

I’m wondering by the time booster shots are needed in a year (assuming, who knows) if you can opt to switch vaccines. 

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted

 

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
2 hours ago, nevets88 said:

I’m wondering by the time booster shots are needed in a year (assuming, who knows) if you can opt to switch vaccines. 

I would think so. 

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

A friend is on a ventilator today. 52 years old and he never took Covid seriously. This article hits too close to home.

edb38347fbe534588871ed240216f74e

ROYAL OAK, Mich. — At Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, in one of America’s worst coronavirus hot...

 

Stuart M.
 

I am a "SCRATCH GOLFER".  I hit ball, Ball hits Tree, I scratch my head. 😜

Driver: Ping G410 Plus 10.5* +1* / 3 Hybrid: Cleveland HIBORE XLS / 4,5 & 6 Hybrids: Mizuno JP FLI-HI / Irons/Wedges 7-8-9-P-G: Mizuno JPX800 HD / Sand Wedge: Mizuno JPX 800 / Lob Wedge: Cleveland CBX 60* / Putter: Odyssey White Hot OG 7S / Balls: Srixon Soft / Beer: Labatt Blue (or anything nice & cold) 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 1132 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • I like discussing the golf swing. Whether you call it "swing theory" or what, I like to talk about things that can expand the potential for what I know and understand. As a scientist, I like being shown that I'm wrong, too, because as I've said a bunch of times… "you're wrong and here's why" is an instant opportunity to upgrade my knowledge. I also like to help golfers, and one of the things I'm most glad to have moved away from from 15 years ago was the "Hands In" idea from S&T. Jim Waldron is often credited (probably rightly so) with explaining why so many Tour players and good players talk about "keeping their hands in front of themselves" while it appears that they're moving their arms around their bodies. From over 30 years ago: I've also got videos like… this (Instagram link here😞 I'm happy to say that I've become friends with Shaun and Mike at Athletic Motion Golf (AMG), too. I tend to get along with other smart folks who measure things, who look critically at information, who don't assume that what they thought 20 years ago holds true today. I get along with folks who look for chances to instantly upgrade their knowledge. Andy Plummer remains one of the people who does not look for these opportunities. He didn't care in early 2013 when we had evidence that the information in their S&T 2.0 DVDs was bogus, and they seemingly don't care now. They've been attacking (it's their favorite pastime) AMG in particular for the better part of a year now. There have been a few shots back at them from AMG (like… this), no doubt. But as is typical of the AMG fellas, it's with measured data. Well, recently, Andy took yet another shot at AMG: https://www.instagram.com/p/DZfHe0DuPXC/. Andy demonstrates that true power in the golf swing comes from doing stuff like this: Andy claims that the idea that the arms mostly lift and lower, while the body turns, is bogus. What golfers should be doing is using "angular velocity" to abduct and adduct their shoulders to move the club fast like this (above). Then he makes a ridiculous example of what AMG supposedly teaches, but misses by a mile. Now, it doesn't take a biomechanist to know that you can't possibly swing as Andy demonstrates. His right arm is so far around and behind him that his left arm would have to grow several feet to reach the grip of the club (or alignment stick), and a follow-through with the right arm position like that would be absolutely silly. But, it's a demonstration, so let's not read too much into it. However, I find ideas like this dangerous. Again, I like to help golfers, and in my opinion, the idea that you should abduct and adduct your arms a lot is a dangerous one. There's some adduction and abduction going on, but… it's not much. Anyway, this statement was posted: 130 degrees of dynamic range of horizontal abduction and adduction is quite the claim! I posted some comments to Andy and others, and was issued a challenge: Well, okay then. Here's Bryson's lead shoulder adduction: This measures the angle between the "virtual spine," the left shoulder, and the elbow. Bryson has a 97.34° "adduction angle" at P1, a 62.53° angle at P4, and returns to an 89.21° angle at impact. Rounding, that's a change of 34° from address to the top, and then a change (back toward the angle at address) of about 26° from the top to impact. If we want to worry about only horizontal abduction and adduction (where D = adduction and B = abduction): Left shoulder: 8.33° D, 38.74° D, 14.67° D Right shoulder: 1.03° D, 55.75° B, 14.04° B If we call moving the arms farther around you as negative, those are changes of -30.41° from P1 to P4 for the left shoulder and +24.07° from P4 to P7 for the left shoulder and -56.78° and +41.71° for the right shoulder. I have no idea on earth where he gets 130°. From the last frame of Bryson's swing where he's at 126.98°? But the lowest that number gets is 62.53°, for a range of 64.45, or less than half of the 130° claimed (plus it includes part of the swing, post-impact, that has no bearing on what the ball does). For good measure, another pretty good player: Left: 22.55° D ➡️ 33.35° D (∆ 10.8°) ➡️ 17.36° D (∆ 15.99° from P4, 5.19° from P1) Right: 15.03° D ➡️ 24.29° B (∆ 39.32°) ➡️ 1.93° D (∆ 26.22° from P4, 13.1° from P1) Of the biomechanists and experienced 3D users (on any platform), none of them have seen anything like 130° of dynamic adduction/abduction from a good player P1 to P7. And, like my little joke above, even if you go to the end of the swing, you rarely get much more than a little over halfway there. Maybe Andy is adding them? He does say in the video "and then add it to that with the lead arm." (I think that's what he says, but this isn't an additive type system.) I regularly coach golfers out of positions with a lot of adduction and abduction. I regularly work golfers away from moving their arms around their bodies. Even my juniors (the ones who have paid attention anyway! 🤣) can recite "arms = up/down, body = around." Like this: So, I don't know where this leaves us. Andy claims to have seen something on GEARS that shows 130° of dynamic adduction/abduction. I'm open to being wrong, but… I don't think I am here on this one. And, until that comes to be, I will continue to stand up for what I think is the best information, and do my best to work with golfers toward simpler, easier moves that don't get them stuck. Simpler, easier moves like the moves Tour players and great players tend to make, not complicated, difficult moves. Shaun and Mike said it in a video once where they demonstrated that the average Tour player adducts their lead arm 20° across their chest from the top to impact (P4 to P7), while the amateur often tries to go 40°. They said something like "the amateur is trying to move their arm TWICE the distance in the same amount of time as the professional athlete." Yep. The swings of great players are often easier and simpler. They are not abducting and adducting their arms much in comparison to average golfers. As a smart man once said: "Why would you teach something (abduction in this case) that bad golfers already do?" On a related note… the S&T crowd continues to be… well, who they've been as long as I've known them. Take this comment for example: I mean… I would think that this is pretty self-explanatory, but then again… I didn't think it needed explaining to begin with. P.S. As I was finishing up this article, another biomechanist replied with something so simple I hadn't even thought of it as I had immediately jumped into looking at the actual measurements: "90 doesn’t even seem physically possible.“ No, sir. It doesn't.
    • Day 285 6-14 practiced low point control in some dirt by our garden. Objective was to see how far infront of a set point I could get the divot. No ball. 
    • Interested to hear from those who have gone through something similar. I'm currently around a 9 handicap and have logged 50 rounds so far this year. My issue isn't really my handicap itself, it's the amount of score variation. Looking back through the year, I've had scores ranging from 73 to 95, with everything in between. Within the last week alone I went: 92 - 74 - 80 - 89 - 93. I appreciate there is always a variance to scoring and that is fine but I seem to have the issue of being capable of a mid to low 70's round and then the next day adding 20 shots onto that. Others I know around my handicap, they seem to live in the low-mid 80s and occasionally shoot high 70s. In contrast, I seem to have a very high ceiling and a very low floor. My goal is to get to 5 but I feel a million miles away from that at the moment. I have had periods of lessons where I have got better but that baseline level never seems to have improved and the only sort of logical conclusion I can come to is because my fundamental ball striking and clubface control is not good enough. Over the years I've been through the usual cycle of swing thoughts and feels. Something works for a few rounds and then it disappears. This latest episode involved a "looser arms, smoother swing" feel which coincided with some good golf before scores drifted back upwards this week. The more I look at my scoring record, the more I wonder whether the answer is much simpler. Perhaps score volatility is ultimately just a reflection of strike and clubface variability. If strike and face control vary significantly from day to day, then perhaps 74 one week and 93 the next shouldn't be surprising. So my questions are: Has anyone else experienced this sort of variance? Did you eventually become more consistent, and if so, how? Was it primarily technical, mental, course management, practice-related, or something else? Did you manage to raise your floor, or are some golfers simply naturally more volatile than others? Interested to hear from anyone who has gone from being a "74 or 94" golfer to someone who lives in the 70s and low 80s.
    • Wordle 1,821 3/6 ⬜🟨🟨🟨🟨 🟨⬜🟨🟨🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,821 4/6 🟩⬜🟨⬜🟨 🟩🟨⬜🟨⬜ 🟩🟨🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.