To Reference Or Not To Reference
 

It is not difficult for me (and no doubt, certain other knowledgeable posters) to include paragraph references to The Golfing Machine® in posts. My earlier posts included a great deal of this, but lately, I've backed off considerably (but not completely). I am sure some members find them valuable and others view them as clutter. However, to date I have done nothing to quantify those numbers. Please respond to the attached poll. I will use its results to guide my future writings.

Poll Results
 

Don't let the results fool you, I think many folks find the references useful whether they realize it or not. Sometimes, I think I have an idea and I will read a post and the reference and see that I was right on or wrong (works both ways).

I say why not.

Anything extra is welcome in my mind....just so long as it IS extra....i.e. don't just start leaving it at "10-2-B!!!!!! You fool!!!"

The "dumbed-down" explainations are ALWAYS welcome (and needed), especially for new readers.

I mean, if this were all that easy we could just use the book and we wouldn't need you (or anyone else- "the instructor") at all Yoda.

But that's not that case- we do need you.

So....I say write as much as you want but DO NOT leave out the "dumbed down" explainations of TGM.

-Paul

How about this: when I finally get off my lazy behind and buy the book, I think some of them may prove to be invaluable.
That's my vote.

Redan

And One More Option...
 

That's great, Redan! :D

Tips and Tricks for Remembering References
 

Regarding references in the book, they locate information that is essential -- not merely incidental -- to the subject at hand and which must be considered as replacing those numbers at those locations as though written in those locations (see 3-F-2).

One of the most common complaints when one studies the book is the amount of references littered throughout. I believe life becomes much easier if the reader has a brief idea of what the references are about without turning to them everytime. So how do you remember references and its content? Do you just have to sit down and learn them? Certainly not (unless you really want to)! You can go quite far with a few pieces basic information:

• There are 24 Components in the Golf Stroke. Their general theme is discussed are Chapter 7, and their Variations are discussed in Chapter 10. Hence both these chapters have 24 sub-chapters, with each sub-chapter denoting the relevant component. So if I want to learn about Plane Angles, I know it's going to be in the same subchapter both chapters 7 and 10, e.g. 7-6 and 10-6.
  
  
• A lot of things follow a general order.
  For example, when talking about the Power Accumulators in chapter 6-B. We should know there are only 4 Power Accumulators. Then all you need to know is that the Accumulator #1 is discussed in 6-B-1, then you will also immediately know without any learning that Accumulator #2 is in 6-B-2 and Accumulator #3 is in 6-B-3, and Accumulator #4 is in ... yes, you guessed it, 6-B-4!
  After further inspection, we can see there is obvious correlation between the sub-sections of 6-B-1/2/3/4. Maximum Power is always discussed in sub-section A, Zero Accumulation is always discussed in sub-section B, and Max Trigger Delay in subsection C.
  
  So if I wanted to know how to achieve Maximum Power with Accumulator #1. I think:
  Hmmm....what chapter are Accumulators in? Chapter 6 (The Power Package) of course because it's part of the Power Package.
  Hmmm...which bit of chapter 6? 6-B because subsection B is where all the four Accumulators are discussed. Well it's the first Accumulator we want, so it's going to be in 6-B-1.
  Hmmm...so which bit of 6-B-1? Max Power is always discussed in sub-section A for all the Accumulators
  So there we go: 6-B-1-A.
  Obviously, this process can also be reversed. You see 6-B-1-A being referenced in one of Yoda's posts. Now instead of skipping it and thinking what a geek he is, you can go through the logical steps above.

I have many more other examples, but gotta go now.

Stick with it!

I like the written explanations best, but having the paragraph references sends me right to the proper section of the book to study. If the goal of this site is to help bring TGM to the masses then clear and concise written explanations are best. Most people don't have the patience to look up things in the book---but the hardcore TGM junkies love those references! I vote for keeping the paragraph references but not making them the focal point of the posts.

Gotta have 'em!

Traceability
 

I think that the references are important in order to provide a positive and unambiguous connection between illustrative examples provided in forum posts and pertinent sections of the book. In this way greater understanding of the book can be obtained making it a more practical reference for everyday use rather than an arcane textbook of golf mechanics and geometry. Simply put, the references allow one to place the sticky note explanation (forum post) in the correct place in the book.

Where to look next to the explanation is great. Treat it as most don't have the book, but those that do will have the number next to it to look up. I do occasionally, but it's easier to understand straight from the horses mouth then trying to diasect the bible of golf.

I just remember posts that looked like a foreign language to me.

yes
 

One reference leads to another,
that leads to another,
that leads you to yet another
and so on and so forth and
next thing you know
you are fluent in Kelley.
And that goes straight to the hands.

The references are handy as a footnote tool, so to speak. I will reiterate the above that a response of a reference only is annoying, and more of an ego thing. Drives me nuts when someone makes a post consisting of nothing more than, "6-E-2."

Using of reference to supplement the text/response is good IMO.

Every post is an opportunity to learn.

References increases the value of the information on this site. It will make it easier to go between the book and the various discussions long after the discussions have ended.

I like references, but I like them when there is a corresponding explaination or 'real' world example to it.
I don't find it useful when all you get is a reference to a part in the book, sure it will explain what you are after but having an example or easier to understand explaination along with the reference is a better way of learning.
Alex

I couldn't say it better myself.

Alan (Weightshift)

Paragraphs
 

I realize that the references to paragraphs in the book form a continuous never ending loop but the idea is go go only as deep as you need to answer your question. I find them very helpful and feel that they make the answers more complete.

The "one page wonders" we see in Golf Digest and Golf Magazine have no supporting data and most of the time, if they are correct(and most of the time they are not), only apply in very narrow cases and under very specific instances.

As far as those who do not have the book..... you need the book if you are going to get serious about this study. I believe the only way to do it is full immersion into the subject. This includes, self study ( book, forum and practice) and help from an AI ( and practice).

Indifference to Reference?
 

Mr. Kelley put reference in the book for a reason. It is up to the individual whether or not they decide to use them. Having references will keep everyone happy:)(3-A) .

References
 

I like the references, but they do clutter the sentence or paragraph when they are within the body of the note.

My preference would be an explanation or answer to a question and then at the bottom of the post it could say something like - "please refer to 6-B-3 for further study"

The references are very helpful... but for me, a novice, they aren't enough. I need a little further explanation BUT I need the references too.

To Reference or Not To Reference
 

As a beginner, I feel *very* strongly that the references should be placed in parentheses *after* plain-English explanations are given. It absolutely kills any chance of a newbie understanding what is being said when numerals are used *instead* of words.

One of the main complaints that non-TGMers have about TGM is that its proponents seem to delight in keeping TGM as an elitist, arcane cult. I know, because that's exactly how I felt until quite recently. I would have turned to TGM two years ago if the TGM posters on another forum had not insisted on using sentences along the lines of: "Well of course in the downswing, one must 6.b.3 before 3.9.2.ing." I'm exaggerating, but not by much.

Even if one does have the book right in front of him, many of us badly need simple explanantions of what the book means. I have a Masters Degree, but, as a golfer, I am in first grade. Of course, the video clips on the site provide the best explanations of all, and I am very grateful for them. Along these lines, I really hope that Yoda's DVD will be understandable for beginners.

teach

I agree wholeheartedly...the book on its own is impossible to truly understand without the help of an AI or theses forums that bring it to life.

I think its important to understand the book ...as that is what gives TGM its structure.

I think you need to write a simplified version of the book to reference.
dp

Good post teach.

I agree man.

References are a must for me.What is scary is you A I's (and others)who obviously are very knowledgable,are still somewhat dependant on Yoda to clarify certain things . My point is that the references (in the book) ARE the book , but the language is Homers and without more insight into what Homer meant ,it can be misinterpreted.So should Yoda be re writing ,not a simplified version, but one which is more explanatory?..You experts teach me every day-keep posting -and referencing!