Brandel Chamblee (Again) Calls for Tiger to Ditch Sean Foley

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by bigoak

You and I agree.  I don't know what makes writers think I have stepped into the poop and that you are really going to tear me up.  There is some degree of fantasy at work.  I know nothing of your program and would have no reason to say anything negative about it.  I know nothing of Floley's program.  But I do know that if student is still practising drills on sunday that mastery has not been achieved.

So Tiger had not yet achieved "mastery".  So what?  He was still in contention on Sunday in a major.  Unlike almost every golfer on the planet.  Do you expect him to not play at all until he achieves this elusive "mastery"?  He hasn't achieved "mastery" so that means that Foley is deficient as an instructor.  Considering Tiger's record against every other player this year I guess no one has achieved "mastery" and every instructor is deficient.

Can we get a list of the guys who HAVE achieved mastery in golf?

[jamo]

Can we get a list of the guys who HAVE achieved mastery in golf?

Those who have played for 10,000 hours, duh. But if a T3 is Tiger Woods short of mastery, I'd be scared of Tiger Woods with mastery. Plus the whole "he has three wins, leads the Tour in money and FedExCup Points, and is the Player of the Year to this point" thing.

[brocks]

Those who have played for 10,000 hours, duh. But if a T3 is Tiger Woods short of mastery, I'd be scared of Tiger Woods with mastery. Plus the whole "he has three wins, leads the Tour in money and FedExCup Points, and is the Player of the Year to this point" thing.

Exactly. I hope the other guy is right. I hope that Tiger is still getting better, and has another 20% or so to go. Because if he is, a calendar Grand Slam sometime in the next few years is not out of the question.

[zipazoid]

An instructor doesn't have to have won on the tour to be a good instructor. How many tournaments has Butch Harmon, Leadbetter, Haney, Jack Grout, etc won?

And further, Chamblee is certainly 'qualified' to offer an opinion on Tiger. If hack Miceli can, Chamblee certainly can.

But now he just seems to be stubborn, not accepting that he could be, and possibly is, wrong.

In a way I get that. Hey, stick to your opinion & all that. But when your opinion is consistently one of being negative towards a certain person, one has to ask what kind of axe he has to grind. I mean, I can see the next time there's a discussion on TGC about whatever regarding Tiger, the moderator turning to Chamblee & saying 'Okay Brandel, why's Tiger wrong?'

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

And further, Chamblee is certainly 'qualified' to offer an opinion on Tiger. If hack Miceli can, Chamblee certainly can.

He is and he isn't, right.

He is because he's played the game at a high level.

He isn't because he's never played it at Tiger's level and he doesn't bother to ask Tiger or Foley (or others who might know) what they're doing. He talks about how Tiger's hitting the ball super low just because he sees "too much" shaft lean (in his opinion) without actually looking at Tiger's ball flight to know that it's too low - and others are saying Tiger's hitting it really high.

[deronsizemore]

Quote:

These people are in golf to make themselves a name. They’re all pointing at the Pyramids and calling it a diamond stack of rocks and saying they discovered them.

The thing about Brandel is that he obviously does no research into any subject he talks about. I could be wrong, but I've never heard a single person in the Stack and Tilt camp (or any other instructor teaching a centered axis swing) say that THEY discovered it. None. I really have no idea what issue Brandel takes with this type of instruction. It's how the best players in the game swing the club today and how they swung the club 40 years ago. Sure, every player isn't exact to every single piece of the pattern, but they have a lot of pieces.

Why wouldn't Tiger want to know the angles and numbers? Having a higher understanding of the numbers and the how's and why's can only make you a better golfer I would think. Tiger's ball striking has been pretty darn good this year I think, it's his putter that's letting him down. So, I'm not real sure what beef Brandel has other than he's ignorant on the topic and his only response is to attack that which he does not fully understand.

[brocks]

The thing about Brandel is that he obviously does no research into any subject he talks about.

(my emphasis) I'm far from being his number one fan, but he usually has more facts and figures than his colleagues when he talks about golf history or player stats, and most of the time he gets them right. As for swing theory, I know next to nothing about it, so I'll defer to the experts like iacas on that.

[Chas]

Chamblee is OK on the whole but imo he sometimes gets "intoxicated with the exuberance of his own verbosity", as my old man used to say about certain people.  He makes sense most of the time but sometimes he just goes too far out on a limb, without very much support under him.  Then he refuses to step back.

It is obvious to all but the anti-Tiger zealots that the man has made a strong recovery of form in the past year or so.  This is surely cause for praising the Woods-Foley relationship.

Zipazoid:  lol

[beachbreak]

Chamblee has a point.

If Tiger sticks to the program, he should be ready just in time to dominate the Senior tour.

Lookout Bernhard Langer!

[Lefty-Golfer]

Chamblee is tool bag...i don't think he believes half of his comments about tiger, he has boxed himself into a corner and will not admit to being wrong...his comment last night was "granted Tiger is still the best player in the world but not by near as large of a margin" Nobolo (? spelling) had this wierd look on his face and then made some funny understated comment but i forget the exact words. To paraphase his tone and facial reaction what he was saying is "Brandle you sound like a dick with ears and should stop this because it makes you look like an ass"

just my opinion.

[adam e]

One of the places that golf commentary should go is somewhere like this.   The problem with golf, even at the highest level is that your confidence, swing and other factors change daily. Some days you feel good enough to swing aggressively, and other days you are just holding on.  At the PGA tour level, I think that commentators still have trouble knowing what is going on between someone's ears to be able to say with certainty.  The best commenters put their spin on things and don't talk about things they cannot be certain about.

And what people will always guess about someone like Tiger is what is really going on.   Let's face it, he's uber talented, but doesn't open up much.  Even his commentary on his own game is more about setting perceptions, rather than honest swing analysis.   So for anyone to really know what he needs, at any given time, is pure conjecture.   He obviously needed different people to look at his game, at different times, but games (and people) evolve.  So to say that a former coach would work now is not really a 100% sound analysis.  It's guesswork.   Even for people who really know the game.

I like a lot of Brandel's analysis when I watch golf, he has some good insights.  But unless Tiger was more forthcoming about what he is doing with the swing, where is head is and what exactly he is trying to accomplish, then a lot of this is guesswork.  I remember there was some incident where Johnny Miller said that someone has "choked".  And I think that's wrong too.  It might look like that.  For all you know, the guy had a bad stomach cramp and missed.   It's perfectly fine to say "That person should have made that putt.  that's what you train for, under pressure."  But it's different to say "He choked" w/o really knowing if there was anything else.

So it's really a measure of tone.  Perfectly reasonable to compare, do stats and try to see where Tiger was more successful.  To say some of what was at the top of this thread is just wading into waters where you don't know all the facts.  And with Tiger being so closed things, it's all guesswork.

[Beachcomber]

Did anyone catch yesterdays Golf Talk show with Chamblee?

He went off on Foley again.  And how he and hundreds of others like him is just copying instruction using video cameras and Trackman... And how he is ruining Tiger's natural abilities.

Then he went into a diatribe about how the natural golfers were in the era before the 60's.  How the best golfers in the world were in that era... And they all had unique and different swings.  And today's era, the talent at the top is watered down because they are all trying to copy the same swing mechanics.  And no one is swinging the club naturally.

Pretty interesting... And Chamblee was talking with conviction! Like it was fact!!

I would like to hear Chamblee talk more on this subject.... I was looking for a video - but couldn't find one on Golf Channel or elsewhere.

[dsc123]

Are any of you familiar with firejoemorgan.com?  Perhaps its time to start a firebrandelchamblee.com?

[jamo]

Are any of you familiar with firejoemorgan.com?  Perhaps its time to start a firebrandelchamblee.com?

If you can get Mike Schur, I'm in. :-P

[dsc123]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/sports/golf/on-the-golf-channel-an-analyst-who-is-not-afraid-to-get-rough.html?pagewanted=all

Mose is probably too big time these days.

[scottyjoe145]

I think Chamblee's beef is with mainly with GOLF and the general direction it's heading.  However, he could've chosen a better way to voice his frustration than to use Tiger as the centerpiece of his opinions.

I personally think that in order to stay out front in this sport you have to continually work on your game.  Tiger will most likely win a few more majors.  If that happens it will ultimately be because of the talent that Tiger posesses and the hard work/dedication that he put into his game.  Foley will be praised, but Tiger should ultimately recieve the glory.  This is the reason that Chamblee's argument has no merit.

[brocks]

Brandel went on at length last night about how players were worse today because of all the coaching and video analysis they get. He offered "proof" of his thesis by pointing out that video analysis really got going 30 or so years ago, and that's when parity hit the game. He is a classic example of somebody who starts with his conclusion, namely Jack is the best ever, and then argues backwards from that, and doesn't realize how dumb he sounds when he tries to shoehorn square facts into round holes. Nobilo had a bemused expression on his face, and quietly noted that that's also when the international players started becoming a force in the majors, which made it harder for players to compile the kind of numbers you saw in the 60's.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by brocks

Brandel went on at length last night about how players were worse today because of all the coaching and video analysis they get. He offered "proof" of his thesis by pointing out that video analysis really got going 30 or so years ago, and that's when parity hit the game. He is a classic example of somebody who starts with his conclusion, namely Jack is the best ever, and then argues backwards from that, and doesn't realize how dumb he sounds when he tries to shoehorn square facts into round holes.

Nobilo had a bemused expression on his face, and quietly noted that that's also when the international players started becoming a force in the majors, which made it harder for players to compile the kind of numbers you saw in the 60's.

I actually thank Nobilo for helping me realize that I should be careful when listening to Chamblee.  Without his "bemused expressions" and sometimes, it seems, flat out irritation at what is spewing from Chamblee's mouth, I'm afraid I could get sucked into believing some of his nonsense.  Because, let's face it, Chamblee is very good at his job.  He is full of you-know-what, but he sells it well.