xiphos888

Quote: It is a fact that when you have different length clubs, you the club has different release points. This is a fact of physics not "my" logic or opinion. When you have different release points, you have to set up differently to compensate for that, or ad least you should. This adds more complications to the process. You also may have noticed that when the length of the club change so does the distance you stand from the ball and the plane of the club shaft. This effects your swing plane as well due to the fact that the club shaft dictates the initial swing plane. You may not notice that you swing differently with each club, but you most likely do. So using logic we can say that generally speaking, if we were to add more steps or more complications, a wider variety of end results could arise. Single length golf clubs make setting up to the ball easier, in return it helps return to the ball a little easier. I think we can agree that the longer a club shaft is the harder it is to hit. Single length clubs off set the modest distance loss in the long irons with increased impact consistency. In a precious post you said that this would be a band aid. I would say that it is no more a band aid than having the lie angle adjusted properly, or using graphite shafts, or having the right loft on your driver etc.

I am a full time golf instructor and my co-worker uses the extraordinary golf method. His student do not get better and many of them leave feeling ripped off. The reason the throwing motion is hard to get into an effective swing is that they are similar motions, but at the end of the day very very different. If you look at the people in the throwing club motions on video, they are out of position 100% of the time. Why? Because the release point is in a much different area. About 2 feet from the other release point. I will say that there are many great things about the book, but over all it falls short of being worthwhile for myself. Shoemaker says that because people do not get better that the current golf culture is wrong. He says current golf instruction does not work and is not effective. That goes against statistics. 10% of golfers take 99% of lessons (or something close to that). Out of those golfers they report a 99% satisfaction rate. By that stat, the reason golfer do not get better is not from taking lessons, but rather not taking lessons. One other big mistake Shoemaker makes in his book is this: he says that you must stay present. Then he tells you repeatedly to find a connection with the target. The target is the future. The current is you alignment, your grip, the wind, your aim etc. To only have target connection is like staring at the finish line in a race. Unless you move your legs fats you can connect all day long, but you will not win. All of sports science says that you do not focus on the outcome (target) you focus on the performance (swing) and the outcome will be achieved. My personal belief is this: Information is not the enemy. Poor information is . I would suggest getting with a good golf instructor that is not method based and work on your swing flaws and learn you swing strengths. I personally hat not knowing why I am playing bad, and even worse why I am not playing good. Shoemaker's method does not educate you. At the end of the day the motion makes the shot not the target. Let mechanics produce and feel re-produce. There is a difference between feel and real.

The book is pretty good. A newer book by VJ Trilio is out that discusses some of the same concepts.

Re-cycled balls are often actually re-painted. Beware of those. As far as new balls are concerned, I always suggest to people that they should play the highest spin ball they can afford. You will not become a scratch golfer overnight switching to a high performance ball, but they will allow you to develop the skills to do so. Take a look at the lower priced Bridgestone balls, and the Srixon high spin.

I think they are great balls. The more spin the better I say. They will tend to go a less off of the driver, but will spin much more around the green when you need it. Give the Srixon Zur c a try.

The spin milled wedges are not actually milled. The are cast to look like the are milled. I just thought I would throw that out there.

Tom Wishon (the guys with more golf club design patents than anyone else) says that and cavity at all makes a huge difference. From there you must have a gigantic cavity to get anymore forgiveness. As far as mats go, if you are hitting the ball first like you are supposed to mats should not make a huge difference. However, if you are hitting the ground first- chunking the ball then mats will add forgiveness. I would say get the ones you like the best and forget about forgiveness. I doubt either will make a big enough difference to impact your scores.

I would play as much bounce as your conditions will handle. Try and get a wedge that has a multi bounce sole such as the Cleveland Dsg, Scratch, the current Srixon wedges.

Getting an estimate with a range finder defeats the purpose of having one:) I think the GPS is better all around. The range finder is great inside 100, but I play in heavy wind (oregon coast) and it can be hard to hold the range finders steady.

I would have to agree. Obama is a great speaker and he does inspire people. But, he fails to speak about anything in general. He is like all politicians as he speaks of change, but he speaks of it more and does not give any specifics. The guy scares me. His background is shady, even for a politician.

Depending on the size of the range they can last a while, but they can get beat up. Especially when people do not know how to keep all of their divots together. A mat allows you to hit a little behind the ball, whereas turf will tend to grab the club. Just pay close attention to the sound you make. Learn the difference between a fat shot and a solid one. Listen for ball first.