[Yoda]

Mr. Blake,

Please ban me too.

Although I have found TGM invaluable in my continuing study of the game of golf, and I believe it is an important piece in the overall picture, I also believe it is only a piece.

I think there are many ways to make a golf stroke. I think there are many ways to describe these strokes and teach them. While I may disagree with many teachers, methods and theories, and I may be partial to others, I do acknowledge that some people have gotten extraordinary results with methods or theories that I find lacking. I think there is always something new to learn about the game of golf, and sometimes ideas different from our own can be the most illuminating.

I also think this is an exciting time for the study of the golf swing, as technological advances are allowing insights into golf swing mechanics like never before and many bright minds are doggedly studying these mechanics with real world data in hand.

I have learned a lot from you and this site's members, and for that I thank you. However, I find this site's intolerance to any ideas other than it's own particular TGM interpretation to be limiting.

I don't think I am the type of disruptive element you want for your little Yellow colored world, where there is a hitter lurking under ever rock. To be safe, you had better ban me as well.

Hit 'em long and straight,

Clay

In the 3 1/2 years since the founding of LynnBlakeGolf.com, we have published more than 50,000 posts in more than 5,500 threads. The subject matter and opinion contained therein is widely diverse and encompasses virtually every facet of the game. We even have an entire forum -- The Lab -- devoted to the exploration of new frontiers in golf. Except on rare occasion to remove profanity, vulgarity, vicious personal attacks or unacceptable links, not a word has been deleted from these tens of thousands of posts, nor has a dime been charged to read them.

So, there is substantial evidence that, not only am I tolerant of divergent views, I actually encourage their expression and personally finance their distribution. At the same time, I am growing increasingly intolerant of those who belittle the work and opinions of others. And when that derision is directed at this site and the work we do, my tolerance now approaches zero.

This was the mistake DukeNasty made. My beef with him had absolutely nothing to do with his opinions or views. It had everything to do with his blatant disrespect of ours.

What I find amusing in your post -- and his, too -- is that, before I came along, nobody talked about Hitting, certainly not as a viable alternative to Swinging. It seemed that the concept had died with Homer Kelley. In fact, I was accused and criticized in some quarters as "selling hitting". It is a fact that I have written hundreds of posts examining and explaining the hitting concept in its many dimensions. This is not 'selling'; this is educating.

Now, you accuse me of exactly the opposite, that I would find "disruptive" the contributions of all those hitters "lurking under every rock" of my "little yellow colored world" (still yellow, but not quite so "little" anymore: 5,677 registered members, 52 countries, etc.). This is ludicrous on its face. Besides, why would hitters lurk under rocks when we have an entire Forum devoted to Hitting and a moderator who is perhaps its most widely professed proponent?

We do agree on one thing: The Golfing Machine is only a piece in golf's fascinating puzzle. There are countless websites devoted to the various other pieces. We are devoted to this one.

And the record shows that nobody does it better.