Quote Originally Posted by Mike Duffey View Post
That analogy is a little off. That example would be a golf coach telling you to make a swing change that he did not think was good.

I think the better analogy is this: You run a cookie business, and you are making some money but not as much as you like. You hire an accountant to look at your revenue and expenditure. The accountant gives you a list of all of your expenditures, and notes that you are spending a lot of money on chocolate chips and brown sugar.

At this point, things get interesting. The accountant states that you can save money by buying cheaper ingredients, you the baker, have to decide if the cookies will taste as good with cheaper ingredients. The accountant/biomechanist can tell you what is going on, it is up to the baker/coach to decide what changes (if any) can and should be made to improve the product.

I expect that Dr. Kwon's Ph.D. in biomechanics and his professional interests in biomechanical analysis software and sport biomechanics makes him pretty well qualified to make a biomechanical assessment of a golf swing. I don't believe he would pretend to be a golf coach and give swing instruction based on the 3D data he collects. He has, by the way, been doing golf-specific analysis for years; the fact that he has other interests doesn't mean he doesn't know the golf swing. I hope everyone here has at least one other interest in life.

The main reason I bring this up is to illustrate what should be the interaction between scientist and coaches. Perhaps some people here are familiar with Vladimir Zatsiorsky - while in the Soviet Union, he was one of the top couple guys in the Soviet Institute for Sport. I was lucky enough to have him as one of my two Ph.D advisors and to hear some of his stories. One thing he greatly missed after coming to the U.S. was the lack of communication and, to be honest, collegiality between exercise scientists and coaches. In his country, they worked side by side year round. In this country, well, we know that is not the case. I find it unfortunate that we do not have better interaction between the two groups.
Mike,

Something simpler for you to understand...

Its like the cook who doesn't enjoy eating. Imagine, if you will...you take your missus out for a nice dinner.

Steak is off, wine is flat.

You tell the maitre d' so, who promptly informs the chef and the sommelier.
The chef flatly tells you you are wrong, because he followed the recipe to the letter and the meat was 'farm fresh'.
The sommelier is seething and says you are wrong because the wine came from a famous region, say Napa Valley.
They have just discounted the possibility that a black swan event occurred.

That Kwon has other interests are great. But it is obvious that golf is not high on that list.

The goal of science is to disprove theory and not to find evidence that bolsters it.
Like gold that goes through a fire, anything that is worthless will melt away.
If you do not have a body of personal experience, then you would have less avenue to disprove your theory.

A last word on civility...your behavior on Facebook is unbecoming of a Penn State U staff.
No doubt Nick Chertcock's page is a closed group, yet, bear in mind that there are people (who actually used to respect you) reading your posts.
Will you like it if someone went to https://www.facebook.com/PennStateHHD and posted in the manner you did?

Think about it.

Is that the legacy you want to leave behind? Not that you have a great deal. http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/Show...sp?tid=1032096

duffey 1.PNG

Leave the rowdy behavior to the (other) golf pros.