LynnBlakeGolf Forums - Alignments Vs. Positions

LynnBlakeGolf Forums (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/index.php)

- The Golfing Machine - Basic (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Alignments Vs. Positions (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8023)

Air,
Have you ever considered another form of entertainment? I have a certain amount of fear of a few of these characters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.B.Left (Post 83178)

Wait a minute .........the whole 1st chapter is about the difference between position golf and alignment golf isnt it?

Yoda?

Maybe the first paragraph in the Introduction (6TH EDITION)

Quote:

PREFACE: INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK

It may be that an octopus – or a “thing” from outer space - would need a different procedure, but for people-shaped golfers there is actually only “one swing,” as depicted in Chapter 8 and discussed in Chapter 7. This Basic Stroke is not a basic procedure but its basic geometry. Almost anyone can do an imitation that could appear to the untrained eye to be as good looking as those of many experts. And all that would need to be added would be more precision in the Component relationships. And that this book can supply. In fact, that is all it is intended to supply. Without that “Basic Motion” it couldn’t even do that. See 3-0. The relationships in the Golf Stroke can be explained scientifically only by geometry, because geometry is the science of relationships. So learn Feel from Mechanics rather than Mechanics from Feel. “Alignment Golf” – Feel from Mechanics – dispenses with all dependence on “mandatory” Positions, which can be perfectly executed and still miss the ball. They facilitate things but guarantee nothing – unless you know the relations the are supposed to facilitate. Alignment utilization is indispensable but the utilization procedures are optional. Alignment Golf simply smothers Position Golf, so translate your “Position Procedures” into “Alignment Procedures” as fast as you are able to do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryG (Post 83218)

Air,
Have you ever considered another form of entertainment? I have a certain amount of fear of a few of these characters.

You tell me.. :confused1

Quote:

Originally Posted by airair (Post 83224)

You tell me.. :confused1

For starters, be careful around ICT. His kindness and consideration are so daunting you start looking for charities to make contributions.
Kev Carter is just as bad. He's so nice to people you start feeling guilty just being in the neighborhood.
A day with Yoda and you spend a year wondering why you don't have as much energy and passion for something--anything.
That's just three for starters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryG (Post 83235)

I guess nice persons are problematic if you don't feel that you are just as nice as them. But most of us don't have great problems with receiving nice treatment from nice persons. That should a a delight that shouldn't hurt. :naughty:

Jerry, you forgot your lovely family!

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryG (Post 83235)

After a week with Jerry and his great family, the people's republic of Minnesooota was looking pretty great!

:laughing1 :laughing1 :laughing1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daryl (Post 83070)

It's better to achieve "Positions" through "Alignments" than "Alignments" through "Positions". If "Alignments" change, then "Positions" change. The reverse is not true.

The assertion is correct but the supporting argument is incorrect.

You can't state that if alignments change, positions change but if positions change, alignments don't change. How can something be linked one way but not the other?