Adam Young

Hi Kenny, Glad you enjoyed. Yes, there is a lot in the book. I set it out with summaries at the end of each chapter so it makes it easier to dip in and out to remind yourself of the concepts. Patch- I like that idea. I first started blogging as a means of organizing my thoughts. A book was the extension of this. The book and concepts within were gained from my teaching experience, but I also found that they are supported by the scientific literature on motor learning. p.s. you wont find it on a shelf at the moment - it is only available through amazon

Phil, I have actually been at the same academies for almost 8 years now. My 8 month stint at Turnberry (poor me) was due to a visa issue. So I would rather you didn't make assumptions about my professional career in front of others whose opinions may be influenced. Abu - It's a pretty big book and covers many different topics, from How we learn How to practice for technical adjustments How to practice for skill development How to practice for performance How to transfer your game to the course Goal setting and quantifiable practice How to use statistics during practice to knock shots off your game How attention (where you place your focus) affects both learning and retention (as well as performance under pressure). How to schedule your practice effectively over the course of a day, week, month or even year (important for tournament players) And much more. I will be open and say that the book is not for everyone. If you are a 28 handicap looking for a quick fix, I would look elsewhere. However, although the book is not for everyone, everyone will get something of value out of the book. - Even if that means using it as a doorstop because you had a disagreement with the author 3 years ago

Hi guys, Just came across this. Feel free to ask any questions and I will try my best to answer them. And for those who are looking to Phil McGleno for an unbiased review - I wouldn't count on it. The guy has a personal vendetta against me (to each their own), hence the instant bashing of the book without any knowledge of its contents. Ernest - yes, the free Ebook is what it is (free) and aimed more towards less info-seeking golfers. The Practice Manual is a very different animal - more for the serious golfer who wants to know more in depth details about how to link the motor learning research to practical applications. Sinned said "Now reading the book I'm getting it.I'll practice with a different mindset now, one I should've been doing for the past year" That was the main goal of the book. I also wanted to look at skill development strategies as opposed to pure technical work. Skills are often As I said, I will be happy to answer any questions and offer more details Adam Young

Ok, I'm going to have a go - although I'm nervous as hell, so be gentle with me Erik :) When the golf club hits the golf ball, what's required for the ball to go up in the air? the contact point of the clubhead and ball must be below the equator of the ball relative to the angle of attack In a properly struck golf shot, what does the divot tell you? point of contact with the ground What primarily determines the starting direction of the golf ball? clubface Can you actually compress a golf ball? between clubface and turf - no. does the ball compress on the clubface? yes Why is it easier to curve a 4-iron than a sand wedge? I'm finding this very difficult to word, as I understand the higher lofted club actually have more curve if the lie angle is incorrect. I'm going with "because there is less loft on a 4 iron, so the spin axis is more easily tilted if the face/path combo is not matched" What makes a golf ball break? What I consider the easiest question, although will probably get this one wrong for that reason. - Gravity my alternative answer is Einstein's theory of general relativity (although go with my first one) How do you increase backspin on a shot? What has to actually happen? striking the ball first increases spin compared to someone who gets too much grass inbetween face and ball. Increase the speed of the clubhead and the spin rate will also increase further. Increase the difference between loft and angle of attack (spinloft) and (to a point) the spin will increase. Strike the ball from below the centre of mass of the clubhead and vertical gear effect will increase spin increase frictional coefficient of the clubface and spin will increase If you look at any PGA Tour range, almost everyone has a different style of grip, posture, alignment, etc. How are they fundamentals? they are not - they are just dogma At what point in the swing do the hands reach their lowest point? ooh, interesting. Different for everyone. There are simply too many variables and moving parts to define one universal point. You would also only be able to truly identify this with 3D and not with stills With a driver, why does hitting up actually make the ball go farther? Twofold It tends to produce a lower spinloft for maximal compression of the ball thus maximising energy transfer it produces an optimal trajectory through launch conditions caveat - hitting MORE up on the ball does not always produce more distance. There are optimal launch conditions for each clubhead speed

Awesome stretch. What book is that. I loved the first page completely. as to McClean, I don't know what his marketing guys are telling him to do, but there are lots of other guys in the industry who are not happy with him about it. tut tut

Fair enough. I have made a swing path change before and it wasnt easy, but the rewards are often big when (and if) the change is successful. There are many ways to change your path. The info MVmac and Iacas give will be good stuff to follow. I also experiment with a very instinctive approach to it - when I want my path more left I literally just rehearse and visualise the club swinging left through impact (plus whatever face angle I want to see) and keep adjusting the feeling until I find the flight I want. I do the same for a draw also. My advice to you is to start with small swings first, until you can learn to strike the ball nicely with the path you want - then just add speed. Don't be afraid to experiment with extremes also (too much in to out for example). I have done a lot of messing around with swing path, and now have the ability to vary it by as much as 90 degrees (45 left to 45 right) if needed. This makes it much easier to refine the path when you get down close to neutral, or where you want to be.

then get on the range and hit 50 drives with a fade and 50 with a draw. Note down where the ball finishes in relation to your target. The one which has less balls to the right of your target (out of bound) - use this one on the course. you can learn a lo from this type of pattern finding in your own game. Work out an anti left shot, and an anti right shot - use them wisely. For me, anti left is the feeling of opening the face a little at address and feeling a hold off release. An anti right shot is when I feel the rotation of the clubhead through impact

Quote: Originally Posted by mvmac So you're saying the weight shouldn't be forward at impact? Obviously you can get a positive AOA with the weight forward, it is actually preferred. you can also be well behind the ball at impact with a driver and have a lot of pressure on your front foot, even though the mass of your body is relatively neutral. This is how a lot of the guys bomb it. Why is having weight forward and positive AOA preferred with driver? Quote: Yes but remember, the feeling of closing the club face or rotating the forearms more will rotate the path more to the left. To an extent yes - but the amount of face closure will far outweigh the shift in path. It is just an option that I and all the guys I play with use as a tool. I know it needs to be used in the right hands, but so does eveything. A stronger grip can sometimes make someone slice it more - I think I remember Iacas saying this happens to him. For the majority of people, getting the clubface to close through impact is simple and effective. Not always the best fix though, I agree Quote: I'm just trying to give the best advice I can with the information provided. I don't like telling a slicer to close the face more when they probably already have the face aimed left at impact, dorsi flexed left wrist and elbows pulling apart (typical slicer). Sometimes a slicer gets rid of those wrist and elbow positions when they close the face effectively through impact, and sometimes they can change their swing direction more positive and still maintain those positions (which would cause a problem for low point, which would also have to be rectified). What is wrong with having a face aiming left at impact - that is how I hit my fade shots, and every tour pro who fades it does the same. Quote: Why would the swing direction still be to the left? I want to get it rightward or as close to a positive swing direction as possible. Oh, my mistake. I mis interpreted what you said as to just hit more downward on the ball to compensate for the (likely) left swing direction.- something which would lower the flight too much - whereas closing the face would not have as detrimental effect on trajectory (as I can demonstrate with my high fades)

Quote: Originally Posted by mvmac First question I want to ask is where is the ball starting? Most slicers start the ball left, so closing the club face is only going to start it more left. This is the point MV - we want him to start the ball more left so that his shot doesn't end up right of his target like it has been. As clubface is the most determinant factor of dierction, this would be the most efficient change. The clubface would also get more matched to the path - so there would be less curvature. Quote: I would recommend you work on your path, which is probably too far to the left. Why is the path too much across the ball? - Weight is not far enough forward at impact - Left wrist isn't flat at impact, meaning the left wrist is cupped with the club head overtaking the hands, path will be across the ball. Solid impact position would have the grip end forward of the club head. I agree that path change could be a long term solution, but the two are not mutually exclusive, they work in conjunction with each other. A higher handicap player would also tend to have more problem changing path without supervision from a coach - would you not agree? Why is the path too much across the ball? In most cases it is a reaction to the ball going right - instinctively a player will want to swing more left. Or, physical limitations can cause this to be the issue from the start - either way, a face change will deal with the psychological elements and overcome the physical (if that is the problem). It is rarely just a case of lack of education imo - but I do deal with players of different levels on the whole, so I respect your opinion. If a player has a predominant left path due to poor body action, putting more weight on the left will only shift path more right through d-plane effects. It will essentially produce a square path but with a left swing direction - it will also mean the player is hitting the ball too much on the downswing - not great for driver. Add to that the fact the face is going to be more open to the swing curve at this point, the ball will likely slice more - or become a block fade at best. players tend to lose their wrist position at impact due to the fact that their path is too left. This is their way of adding loft to the face to get some kind of flight on it. Maybe I didnt understand your suggestions - but I would suggest with a face change first - or if you are going to hit the path, go with changing the swing direction, not just manipulating the d-plane.

1 - understand what is happening. If your ball is slicing right, your clubface is aiming further right of you path at impact. To turn your slice into a fade (my recommended advice for you), find a way of closing the face more. I would try the following route, but it is pretty individual what would work or not. 1 - strengthen your grip. Close the face at address and grip it as normal. Then with your hands on the grip, rotate the club back to neutral - this will automatically set a stronger grip position for you 2 - add a bit of face rotation through impact. Rehearse in slow motion the act of the clubface closing (rotating) through impact. 3. Just shut the face at address a little and then grip it. Try to rehearse the clubface coming back to this position at impact (or more closed). The above advice doesn't address the swing path, but it will turn your slice into more of a manageable fade. Plenty of players played great golf like this - Paul Azinger was a very closed face fader, as was David Duval.

How often do you go out of bounds when you hit your driver? you would probably (at your handicap) be better at hitting 150 yards off the tee, then another 150 up there, 40 yards to the green and get a 5, or potential 4 if your short game is good. With your handicap, you are probably hitting 20% out of bounds (costing you 4 shots every 10 times you play it). Even when you do hit the fairway, you are probably only taking advantage of it and par-ing the hole 40% of the time (max). Meaning, by playing the hole 10 times with a driver, you would shoot 10 over. By playing for bogey as I said, you would almost take out the risk of out of bounds, and maybe get a few pars from pitching it close, resulting in a lower score. The only real way to tell is to do the test yourself. Play the hole 5 or 10 times with each strategy, and you will see which one provides the best score. In fact, do this for every hole on your course

What specifically has made you longer. It is doubtful that it is an increase in clubead speed, as the swing does not generally promote that (specifically over a more traditional model). As Iacas said, was it an improvement in ball/turf contact - or was it a better clubface/path relationship (did you stop slicing it for example).

Lustig is a quack with an agenda. He makes up a load of bull to fit his agenda, which doesnt even fit with the scientific evidence. Obesity is a result of overconsuming calories and not burning enough..... FULL STOP The average American consumes between 2700-3000 calories a day now compared with 30 years ago being more 2,200 - 2,500. Add to this more sedentary lifestyles and you have a recipe for obesity and its' related diseases. Carbs are only to blame if eating them causes an excess in calorie consumption or somehow lowers metabolic rate (which it doesnt - eating carbs actually raises leptin levels and raises metabolic rate). but again, this comes down to energy in vs energy out. And insulin doesn't cause obesity. Even if the role of insulin was to store carbs as fat (which it is not), it can't magic energy out of thin air. If my blood was injected with insulin and I ate only 1,000 calories a day, I would not gain weight. Even if all of that 1000 calories was instantly converted to fat, my body still burns 2000 caloires at some point - this comes from fat stores and so the net result is minus 1000. Again, this is not just an opinion that is more logical that this guys' argument, it is FACT backed up by several studies in controlled settings. here's one for shits and giggles http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357 Why do people want to completely ignore the laws of physics which are supported in diet trials and studies? Everyone is looking at this way too intricately. You are all looking at such small parts of the big picture - analyzing the omplex interactions between cells and insulin and ghrelin. WIDEN OUT YOUR VIEW, you will see that it only looks at one side. The real answer is much much simpler than all this boloney about how insulin and carbs makes us fat.

saevel, tis isnt aimed at you, but the both of you and the false theory of it all Quote: I don't think it matters, your body is going to store carbs the same way no matter what, so if you eat carbs at night, as long as you don't go over your glycogen limit at dinner, your not going to gain any weight, except water weight from storing more glycogen. Then overnight your just sleeping, which primarily burns all fat anyways due to the fact is such a low heart rate. I do agree eating carbs for breakfast is good if you are low, for me, i never had an issue with be groggy or not having energy in the morning due to low glycogen levels. Guys - this really misses the point completely. Whetehr you eat your food late at night or early in the day will not make a difference how you would imagine. Sure it makes logical sense that if you are eating late at night, you body is metabolically slower, therefore you will store more of those calories as fat. But it looks at the small part of the picture, the post prandial state. Let me put it this way. Guy one (lets call him guy A) eats his 2,000 caloires for breakfast. He is somehow magically efficient and doesnt store any of it as fat, and burns all of those calories away during the day. Guy two eats the 2000 calories at night. Uh oh, insulin spike and stores all of it as fat (not that this would happen anyway). But what you ahvent seen is, during the day he burned the same 2000 calories as guy A, WHICH CAME FROM FAT stores. Net gain in fat = same as guy A. Yes he technically gained more fat - but he also lost more too during his morning fast. This is the same to your point of glycogen - it doesn't make a difference. You are looking again at the short term - not the bigger picture. Even more to the point, taking in food late at night has been show in several studies to actually aid in FAT LOSS. the big hooha was because the people who ate late at night lost less weight. What wasnt mentioned was they maintained more lean mass but lost more fat mass. Put that in your pipe, smoke it, and ponder on the ramifications for your 'no carbs after 6pm' 80's style philosophy Quote: I will go after this, saturated fats are not bad for you. There has been many studies in the past 5 years showing that saturated fats don't cause heart failure, that inflamation causes heart failure. There has been no conclusive study to show that saturated fats are as evil as they are portrayed. I am not saying we should make them 100% our diet of fat. Fats from Olive Oil, nuts, and are conclusively more beneficial than saturated fats, but humans have been eating meats for a long long time, and saturated fats are apart of that. I personally just don't check, i don't eat hamburgers 24/7. but i am not afraid of cooking one up every other day. Or enjoying a steak or bacon when i want to. The only fat i worry about is Trans Fat, i just try to stay away from that as much as possible. Lots of the studies have shown that eating fat and even saturated fat does not increase MARKERS of poor health. But more research has shown that it can still create the diseases regardless of the markers present. Having low cholesterol is an indication, and only an indication, that you are healthy regarding heart disease. I am not against fat at all, I am just pointing this out. Also, most of these studies have been done whilst in a caloric deficit. It is the caloric deficit and not necessarily the type of food we are eating which create the health markers. Quote: Not sure on this one, i have heard about people who do marathons come out with less muscle. But i think the running once or twice a week, not for extreme distance is fine. But i also think its more about how we run now. We were never meant to run with supporting shoes, we were meant to run barefoot. Besides loosing muscle due to marathon running, i believe that shoes are what are causing people to have knee problems. I use to run with new balance shoes, i switched to Nike Free shoes, and i can just run a lot longer with no pain to my legs at all. It also strengthens my ankles and feet muscles to support the impact from running and walking, which is beneficial to a golf game. Want a stable golf swing, strengthen your ankles by balance and getting rid of supportive shoes. Yeah cardio cuts down the Mtor pathways (muscle building) and amps up AMPK pathways (catabolic for muscle). But in reality, it is probably negligible to overall muscle loss/gain unless youa re killing it for hours every week. Saevel is right about knee injuries. Plus most of the studies show youa re just as likely to have knee injuries regardless of whether you are running or not. Seems like you cant outrun your genetics/ageing. Quote: Originally Posted by saevel25 Its been a while since i researched weight lifting, i know there are some myths involved with reps, but i can't remember. I do know there was a study done showing that outside the first set you do, your not gaining any significant gains. So really if you know your weight and reps, just do one set, anything after that isn't significant to muscle growth. You basically stressed your muscles enough in the first set for what session. Simply not true. These studies are ones done on newbies who can basically look at a weight and gain muscle. If you ave anything more than 1 year training experience, one set is not going to stimulate musclee growth. However, it can be an efefctive way to maintain muscle whilst on a caloire deficit.. Although, again, slightly higher volume is going to be more necessary for advanced trainees/people not on drugs.