MRR

That's about all I took away from an IP presentation I attended. Millions get spent on lawsuits against small companies that are specifically not trying to infringe on IP (lawsuits that everyone considers foolish) because a major company MUST initiate them in order to properly protects its rights from future companies that would actively try to steal their IP. I'm pretty sure the solution is for the company with IP rights to just license to the other company, but I don't practice that type of law and cannot give an educated option.

The problem with that (and I'm not exactly disagreeing), is that required length is related to lie angle, is related to upper-body lean, etc. Changes in one can effect one/some/all of the others. But, there are certainly a few customizations that can be made based purley on height, arm length, and physical ability. For instance, my 6'0" frame and 6'4" wingspan precluded me from learning with my father's shortened clubs. I suppose I can retract my earlier statement to be "speak with a club fitter and have that person decide if it's time to be fitted". Just keep in mind that you are really asking that person if he/she wants money.

I don't join in with that consensus. My uneducated position is that clubs are fitted to be the best they can be for your swing. If you have bad form, then fitted clubs will reinforce your bad form. Do not compensate for a poor or inconsistent swing; build a good and consistent swing, THEN get clubs fitted. Ok, yeah, go get fitted.

Then you, sir, will enjoy my Neo-Nine(TM). It goes as far as most people's 6-irons. For some reason, I only sell 9-irons, and the number is upside down.

Nobody should. It makes much more sense for companies to simply have their degrees on them. Since it is possible for the end user to adjust that angle, then a minimum, the original loft is information that should be readily accessible. Too much BS marketing is done by someone stamping a "5" on a 6-iron and talking about how much farther they hit.

I'm interested is learning about your outcome. My thought, however, is you are letting the tail wag the dog (a common problem I have with many teachers have forgotten how to learn). In my experience, consciously lifting the foot involves different actions and muscles than "performing something that results in the foot being raise". It would be akin to a football punter. Most punters get lifted completely off the ground by the force of their kick, but I've never heard of a coach advising someone to hop into the air at impact.

Umm... OP has a single question; "Did anyone see Martin's school of golf show tonight?" Everything else was a statement. (But the final sentence may have been intended to be a question). The OP immediately brings up Blair. (my guess: the OP is male). Responses fixate on the fact that OP brought up Blair. Second post clearly states that that general tips might not be relevant to a particular golfer and, even if they are, might not be relevant to any particular issues at this time. Responses then state how difficult it is to have training programs when 1) there are many different types of swings and 2) people have different issues with said swings. Blair plays the role of a "student". This is not a blast, it is merely a fiction that any of the tips that the host gives are relevant to her at a given time or that they actually helped her swing. She is, aside from being too good a golfer to get anything out of those lessons, an attractive model. Martin is trying to present a teaching show that, as mentioned, must appeal to a wide audience when very few members of said audience suffer the same issues. He cannot start from scratch each week and he cannot be too advanced. He must walk a fine line and the audience must be aware that while most of his instruction has merit, very little of it has merit to the majority of the audience at any given time. It is up to the viewer to determine which advice applies. OP's question was vague, but answered. In fact, OP answered his own question when he said "correct"; Martin did say; swing, turn, shift up, shift, turn swing down.

Wish granted, but you live in True Korea and cable consists of one station while the internet has only two sites. At least it's free. I wish my boxers would stop riding up.

Wish granted; I finally break 110. My hips lock up later that night and I can no longer make a full swing. I wish all drivers would actually stay in the right-most lane, except to pass.

Golf Fix is closer to a good show. Really wish I could have recorded his putting setup pad that he went through last week. But, most people watching a channel dedicated to golf do not need the basics that his show teaches either. Especially when, like last week, he made two putts while demonstrating an incorrect swing, but missed the putt after applying his "fix".

Actually, what I saw of last night's episode (when I wasn't busy laying a bathroom floor) wasn't bad. It really brought together the fact that "Swing Slower" is physically incorrect, although it may be "feel" correct. The real issue is that bad golfers tend to swing the club too early in an effort to swing faster. Golf is riddled with good and bad advice tied up in poor word choices. I spent years as a teen+ incorrectly assuming what was meant when an instructor told me I had a "weak" grip. I knew not to grip too tightly, but I "obviously" had to grip tighter than I was because my grip was too loose (oh, those wasted years). This past weekend's televised event had an announcer state that a golfer's wrist was bowed in one direction, but it should have been bowed the other way. Now, I cannot always remember which way "bowed" is supposed to be, but I do know that "bowed" is one particular direction and "cupped" is the other way.

I've always found the theory behind School of Golf to be confusing. 1) A true beginner cannot learn anything from this show because it does not start from the beginning to show proper initial form. Nor should it; one cannot have a weekly show that always starts from step-1. 2) Someone who has been playing for a while will get nothing out of most episodes, get something out of very few episodes, and pick up something incorrect for their particular swing from the remaining episodes. 3) Someone constantly learning, like myself, can generally pick something up, but it gets contradicted a few weeks later when a pro with a different swing style wins over the weekend. I'm glad I've never seen a show saying "Loop it Like Furyk". 4) Having someone like Blair as a "student" is basically lying to people. "Ok, everyone, today's lesson is to say 'banana peppers'. Blair, when you start your back swing, say 'banana' in a French accent, then say 'pepper' when you start the downswing. Don't forget to roll your 'Rs' in 'pepper'". (Blair Swings) "Well look at that, the former NCAA female with the longest drive was able to hit the ball straight and long. Just goes to show, a 'rolling banana pepper' will help your game. Buy my books." 5) I think Blair looked better on The Big Break, before she had all the work done. She looks great now, I just think she looked better as herself.

I do not. Production no longer leads to all the jobs that it used to. Automation results in fewer employees and with more consistent and usually higher quality. Mass production also creates a lot of waste. I love this country enough to hope that mass production can happen somewhere else and this great nation can find sources of revenue that do not have so many negative effects. What I WOULD like to see is a continuation of society's seemingly newfound love for the kind of quality that can be achieved only through small shops and skill beyond a machine. I've experienced the difference between a $90 pair of mass produced shoes and a $350 pair of Allen Edmonds. The $350 pair is less expensive in the long run. Your opinions may vary.

You cannot; at least the way things are now. Just like the wagon industry tanked when automobiles became standard, or my father's travel agency never recovered from the internet, it might be time for a new model. One thing is certain, nobody can steal quality. A major company in my area, at least to my knowledge, does not patent any of their products. They simply produce them far better than anyone else can and have no real competition at this time.

This is horrible, but far from unique. 1) Using Kickstarter sites allows a company to raise a certain amount of funds based on pre-sale. This jackoff knockoff company did not take away any of those sales. 2) Major companies do this all the time. It is hardly a coincidence that the Mustang, Charger, and Camero somehow look more like each other than any other car year after year, or that several animated films will come out in a year from different houses that are nothing like anything seen before, but are just like each other. 3) To the left, companies have been around for decades that buy up patents and wait until a better company tries to actually help society by making a product, then sue that new company. As much as I dislike everything about this person, I know he is not alone. He's basically selling bootleg DVDs, but ripping off the little man instead of a corporation.

Or a ball that would have gone past the hole with enough backspin to end up in the hole, but instead goes off the stick and back a long ways. However, that has nothing to do with a long putt, which is the limited topic of this discussion.

1) You stated that you prefer to take the flag out when you putt. Since the rules allow you to do this, then you should do so. I fail to understand why you are complaining against a rule that allows you to play to your personal style. 2) You opine that a well-struck putt is less likely to go in if the flag is in place. Study suggests otherwise. Rules do not exist exclusively for “well struck balls”. Otherwise we would have no rules for “out of bounds”. Even if your conclusion were true for well-struck balls, study and my experience has shows a great tendency for a struck pin to seriously impede the velocity of a ball, and rules need to apply to people who would snipe the pin instead of use correct speed. Or are you suggesting that the rules should require the use of a radar gun to determine the speed at which the ball strikes the pin to assess the correct penalty? I disagree with a two-shot penalty, but iacas gave a reasonable explanation.

Eh, very well. You are much more versed in golf than I.

From my memory of physics, I think iacas is misinterpreting / misapplying 1badbadger's point. True, a ball that is so weak that it deforms easily cannot rocket off of anything. However, the point of compression is a bit different than that. Let us assume two balls. "A" is a very weak ball; it can be fully compressed with a swing speed of 50 mph. "B" is similar to Pro-V; it can be compressed fully only with a swing speed of over 100 mph. To iacas's point, a swing speed of 90 mph will fully compress ball "A", but ball "A" is so dead already that almost no power gets stored and the ball hardly moves. Ball "B" does not fully compress, but there is still enough compression for it to launch a bit off the club. To the left, 1badbadger's point is that a fully compressed ball "A" will fly much farther than a non-compressed ball "A", likewise for "B". It's the ability to achieve full compression that allows ball "B" to be all that it can be. In summary; to get the most power out of a ball, you need to fully compress it. To find the right ball for you, you need to find the strongest* ball that you can fully compress. *"strongest" is probably not the correct term, but I'm not an engineer.

I question the need for panels on the carts anywhere. As SavvySwede pointed out, that's not really the best way to charge. This isn't a think relegated to the southwest, though. There's a new course in the snow-belt of western New York that is, AFAIK, 100% solar. http://www.parkviewgc.com/

I wonder which part was their least favorite; 1) Hitting a second shot from 30 into the rough 2) Going from a 20 foot chip to a 30 foot putt (and then a 15 foot putt after that).

I agree with everything you say except for your conclusion. As a longtime beginner golfer, I can state that (at least for me) learning a full swing first is just not an easy process. More importantly, it is not something the novice can just go out and practice whenever he or she wants. Learning proper putting and chipping technique can be a great stepping stone to learning more advanced full swings. Being off a little bit on a chip or a putt might mean you have to walk an extra five feet to retrieve your ball, but being off a little bit on a full swing can lead to a very discouraging slice that ruins your whole day. Granted, I wouldn't want to take to the course without knowing how to make a full swing unless I were in a scramble, but I think the easiest way to learn that full swing is learning shorter swings first. If you found it easy to learn the full swing right away, then I have a feeling that you were already a rather athletic person who had the basics down through some other activity. EDIT: I guess it's the difference between "having fun" and "playing golf". I have a perfectionist personality (despite all evidence to the contrary) and get the greatest joy from hitting all shots well. Building up from putting to driving seems to be the easiest way to learn it all .

I'd ask the instructor about it first. He could be a good instructor who is trying to train your body to overcome a flaw you have developed. Nobody goes on the course swinging with just one arm or on one foot, but those are useful drills. To the left, he could be like my father was to me and be compensating for a perceived set-in flaw instead of correcting swing basics. I suggest speaking with the pro about it first. If it's the former, stick with it. If it's the latter, move on. Having dealt with many different people in the past; some want to know the "why" of everything while others are somehow confused to the point of backsliding when they get too much information.

Now I'm picturing the elderly couple from Caddyshack. That's a peach, hon.

I tentatively agree. While you do not want an instructor who can teach only one type of swing (unless, of course, it actually is a perfect fit), you also do not want an instructor who will allow or even enforce a crappy swing. I've had way too many of the latter (including my father, whose lousy "instruction" drove me away from the game for much of my youth) tweaking little things to give a minor improvement instead of breaking everything down and building it all up correctly.