Our offices are tilting from the stack of mail we've received about Stack & Tilt, Part Two in the September issue. Suffice it to say there is no agreement out there on the merits of this new swing. Here are three letters that suggest the oceanic range of opinion:

Leaning "No" is Robert Barber of Phoenix:

Having just read this months deeper explication of the so-called "Stack and Tilt" golf swing, I am convinced that the proponents are charlatans who have backed off their original claims about their "radical new" golf swing... Nowhere in their original article do they include a "hip slide" to shallow out the swing--and if there's a hip slide, then they are simply passing off the old "reverse C" as something new.  What's the point?  When I tried the swing, I liked it because it really kept my hands passive through impact--and because it was easy to get a "feel for", ie load weight on front knee while swinging back to the inside and straightening the right leg--then pulling around and slinging the club from the inside as the hips rotated fast because of the straightening of the left leg and the lifting up that was said to shallow out the swing through impact.

I know that when I tried the swing they proposed, it did NOT require any hip slide, but only a turn---and when I watched Aaron Baddeley swing at the United States Open, there was no hint of a hip slide, either.  Johnny Miller commended Baddeley's great , simple "action" during the TV broadcast, and if there was a "reverse-C" hip slide in Aaron's swing, there's no way that Miller would have missed it. These men are lying about the swing to cover their own tails, which suggests that they stole it and are pretending now that they didn't.

Shame on these ideologues for trying to con people, especially since the original 'Stack and Tilt" without the hip slide is a good swing that really makes things simple. Requiring a "hip slide" makes the swing much harder to repeat--and pretending that this was really their teaching all along is a con that few people can buy.  They sold the swing as a rotational swing around a fixed axis, and now they are changing that claim...

Leaning "Yes" is Ron Nay of Hickory, N.C.:

Dear sir, I am a 67-year-old golfer who has been doing the Stack and Tilt swing for 2 months.  I have a back condition called spondylolithesis. I have had no back problems with this swing, in fact, it makes it better with the upward stretch on the follow through. I have improved my distance and accuracy with this swing. It may be interesting to you that Mac O'Grady learned alot of his swing from not only Homer Kelly but from Joe Norwood, a great teacher in L.A. who was still teaching late in his 80's and into his 90 years old. Thank you for the Stack and Tilt articles. Plummer and Bennett have made an outstanding contribution to the game of golf and to golf instruction...

Waxing philosophic is Pete Ginieres of Hampton, NH

Messrs. Plummer and Bennett should take some comfort in the words penned by Jonathan Swift nearly 300 years ago- "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."  Amen to that.

Personally, I liked what Butch Harmon said in the new issue: "I don't believe there's one set of fundamentals for everyone. And I don't think Stack & Tilt is for everyone." But I am glad that Plummer and Bennett, with Peter Morrice, created these articles. They've got a bunch of people playing better. We even had one fellow on this blog who said he made a hole-in-one the first time he tried it. I'm leaning "skeptical" on that. On the other hand, he made the hole-in-one and I can't play to my handicap.

--Bob Carney

(Photo: Chris Stanford)

There was not a great deal of golf in our Maine family vacation, but we played one round and wished we'd played another. The round we played: Point Sebago Resort, a sturdy, natural-looking layout, a little rough around the edges, close to Sebago Lake, near Portland.

The one we wish we had: Clinton Golf Course, a nine-hole track about 25 northeast of Augusta and south of Bangor. Here was its ad in the Bangor Times:

Clinton Golf Course

Play at Your Own Pace

Tee Times Every 1/2 Hour

Being a stickler for pace of play, that last line got my attention. I called and spoke to Brandy Brown, who with her husband, Mike, a coach at Maine Central Institute during the winter, runs the place. "Was that a misprint?" I asked. No, said, Brandy. "We try to give people a relaxing experience." And you really keep to pace? "We run into problems once in a while when we have someone playing 18 (and making the turn)," she said. "Then it may be more like 15 minutes. But for the most part it's half an hour."

The golf course opened in 1994 and was built by Brandy's in-laws, Paula and Steve Brown, a real estate exec who owned the land and loved golf. It was literally built by hand by the family and neighbors. In 2001, the Browns opened Clinton to the public. They encourage charity events, and give the course over to the Mid-Maine Homeless Shelter once a year with all proceeds that day (and some others) going to the Shelter.

CGC is beautifully maintaind ("Some of the neighbors still work on it. Paula has planted gorgeous annual and perennial gardens," says Brandy) and is a haven for families and beginners who don't feel comfortable at some "big" courses. Still, whether you're accomplished or not, the pace of play is right: "It's about an hour and 45 minutes walking and a little faster by cart," says Brandy. The course measures 3265 yards for nine, 6400 yards, 18.

The price is also right: Nine holes, $25 walking, $35 riding; Eighteen holes, $50 walking, $70 riding.

That goes for weekdays or weekends. They want you to have a relaxing experience.

--Bob Carney

New Jerseyan Thomas Csapo is bugged by all of the weeping and gnashing over Michelle Wie. Ron Sirak has done several pieces for Golf World, of course, and in the September Digest Jaime Diaz wonders about Wie, too. We should have known, says Csapo, that Wie's choices were adding up to disaster.

I really can't believe that you are asking such a silly question knowing what has happened to Michelle over the years. Before she even had time to realize what a 10 Million Dollar contract was with Nike for some reason she was on a quest to beat men on tour. Why did that happen and why was it permitted and why did the media play it up so much?That action in my opinion helped ruin a potentially very bright star in ladies golf. Anyone that has played the game for any length of time understands the great value of having confidence in your game. By having this child at the time play in that arena was not only foolish but very destructive to her mind game.

Great, great points, Thomas. The media, most of us of anyway, were not as skeptical as we ought to have been about the Wie family "branding" strategy. Let's face it, we were taken with her.

Two additional points. Ultimately, it was Wie and her parents who made these decisions (no matter what the media said) and they did it for her financial future, not necessarily her golfing future, which, as you say, was probably harmed. (See Dave Anderson's column today in the Times on Jack Burke and his plea for separation of "art" and "commerce" for support). Two, at the same time, some of us still think she'll be an LPGA star, with Leadbetter's teaching. But based on the reporting Jaime and Ron have done, it will mean Michelle's parents will have to step back some, as Earl Woods eventually did. For any parent who wants to the best for their kid, that's very hard to do. But in this case that kid is very talented. Here's betting she'll find a way out of this.

--Bob Carney

You don't have to fear change. Change brings hope. Jack Burke Jr.

It's the complaint as old as our magazine: Your instruction isn't consistent. The latest reader to complain is Paul Metzger of Oakton, Virginia, who accurately points out contradictory messages about hitting hybrids in the February and August 2007 Breaking 90 sections:

The February Breaking 90 section says "Hit hybrids like irons...just remember not to sweep your hybrids like you would fairway woods. Play the ball slightly ahead of center in your stance, and hit the shot like you would a middle iron."

But in August, Bob Toski gives the opposite advice, says Metzger:

Don't hit down on the ball as you would with an iron...Don't take a divot...Play the ball where you would for a fairway wood.

Metzger argues that at the very least we ought to forewarn readers about the differences because "sometimes the contradictory advice isn't in issues so far apart, but from issue to issue.

Couldn't agree more, Paul. I've long thought we ought to run a paragraph in the front of the magazine that says:

Golf Digest publishes instruction from the very best teachers in the game, whose approaches do not always agree. We urge you to experiment. But we recommend that you seek the advice of a PGA or LPGA professional as you work on your swing and try these tips.

The case in hand reminds me of tips I read years ago about hitting fairway woods. Byron Nelson recommended sweeping fairway woods. Ben Hogan advised to hit them just as you might an iron, even to the point of taking a divot. Two of the greatest players and minds in the game with contradictory messages about how to hit a wood club from the grass.

But it's more than different strokes for different folks. Last night, in his acceptance of the PGA's Distinguished Service Award, the great player and teacher Jack Burke said something very wise about accepting change and accepting the fact that our games and our swings change constantly, even within a round.

You shouldn't fear change. Change brings hope. You change every round. You hit that one shot and you want to repeat it. But you don't get to repeat it. That was it.

Was it Gardner Dickinson who said:

They say golf is like life, but don't believe them. It's more complicated than that.

--Bob Carney

Count one down-to-earth Michigander as leaning "no" on the FedEx Cup competition: From Rick Singer of St. Clair Shores:

I’m exhausted from hearing about the “excitement” of the FedEx Cup. I’m your average golfer. I make what I consider a good living. I find it a bit insulting that the PGA Tour asks me to get excited over watching a group of guys who this week are playing in a no-cut tournament (Bridgestone Invitational) where the winner will take home $1.3 million. The purses are getting out of the world, not to mention pro golfers do not need to win tournaments in this day and age; sponsorships alone guarantee them a very comfortable living. That said, I ask the PGA what am I suppose to be getting excited about when it come to the FedEx Cup? Is it the fact that I get to watch a bunch of millionaires play for even more millions some sponsor is willing to throw at them?

If I had it my way, I’d have them playing to get in a position to buy into the FedEx Cup tournament. For example, the top money winners in the world get the option to buy into the playoff by spending $100,000 of their own money. If some players opt out you just continue down the money list.  I’d be much more eager to watch guys playing for their own money than watch another wealthy sponsor throw an even more ridiculous amount at these guys...

I don’t think you understand that the average golfer really doesn’t care to see money thrown at guys that already live such a comfortable life that more money is very low on their “need to get list”.

Rick, that new format is intriguing, though I'm not sure you'd get many takers on the "own money" aspect. As for your main point, maybe this will help. When 47-year-old Mark Calcavecchia was asked last week at Firestone why he endures his growing number of ailments to compete on Tour, here was his response:

"Buying a $2 million lot [in Tequesta, Fla.] and building a $2 million house motivated me. I've got about $200,000 in the bank and $5 million in debt, that motivates me, so I've got to keep going."

Come to think of it, that probably doesn't help. But Calc was as close to an average golfer as we could get.

On the competition itself, I'm of the wait and see persuasion. If it makes the end of the season more exciting, no matter how they do it, count me in.

--Bob Carney

When Mr. Style (our Marty Hackel) took a few hits in this space a couple of weeks ago for making over Billy Mayfair and replacing his belt with one that cost, um, $530 dollars, I enjoyed the barbs, but thought that perhaps our readers had missed a simple point: Marty Hackel had transformed Billy Mayfair into a studly clothes horse.  He looked great! Well, now comes a thoughtful English reader who saw it all:

Dear Marty,
I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed seeing the Billy Mayfair makeover in Golf Digest: I am English.
As we get beamed a lot of US golf on tv,  then I am always amazed at the similarity in dress and by the ill fitting clothing. Would you agree that the European golfers tend to be better dressed? Tiger is one that steers clear of  the khaki trousers. I rarely see US golfers in the grey trousers, as modelled by Billy Mayfair, but they are a pleasant change from the khaki (and would be my preferred choice). I guess that different fabrics are required to those that may be appropriate over here?....

Okay, he couldn't resist one belt at the belt.

I am never going to be that concerned with style and will never pay $530 for a belt (we normally think that clothes cost exorbitant amounts in the UK!).

Thoroughly enjoyed the article. Andrew Litchfield

Thanks, Andrew, and about the Europeans being better dressed:  Let's see...Poulter, Clarke, Swenson, Garcia...

Well, they're easier to find, for sure.

--Bob Carney

Hogan, Hardy, O'Grady, Boomer, Grout....you've suggested plenty of potential progenitors of the Stack & Tilt, New Tour Swing, taught by Andy Plummer and Mike Bennett. Here's another, surprising one from Chris Cejka of Scottsdale:

You guys are going to love this. Several months ago when your article about the "radical" new swing that tour pro's are experimenting with surfaced I read the article with great interest as I was really struggling trying to find my form and thought what the heck, I'll give it a shot.  With issue in hand, I took the copy right out to the practice tee and started getting instant, positive results.  While pounding balls on the range, my ever inquisitive father and self proclaimed golf nut, told me that he remembered reading about "something similar" to stack & tilt in a Golf Digest article "many years ago".  You must note, my father has an extensive, archived series of Golf Digest copies going back almost five decades. Sure enough, several weeks later, he produced an article of the April, 1958 Golf Digest monthly (which I now have in hand) that had a article written by Jerry Barber titled "The Shiftless Swing".  The article shows frame by frame pictures of Barber's swing and how he stays firmly planted on his left side while swinging....further reinforcement that what you feel is not always what is really going on in the swing and somewhat contrary to what most modern teachers are articulating to their students today.  It proves to me, at least, that most swing ideas are recycled and that it's the interpretation, proper articulation and success of these ideas that make us view it (the idea) as "new".  Either way, thanks for article, I'm getting success with it and that's what counts!

Thanks, Chris, and thanks to your father. For our readers, here is an excerpt from that 1958 Barber piece, which begins with a quote from Jerry:

"In teaching or playing, I have to disagree with the moving the weight onto the right foot during the backswing."

...Players who do move their weight almost entirely to the right leg on the backswing do not have enough time to re-position the body on the downswing, Barber points out.

He mentions that a common fault of the average golfer who does shift his weight to the right left is that he will first hit the ball, then let his weight come over on the left side.

This, as Barber says, does not give the left side a chance to lead the shot, and the player is robbed of both power and accuracy. Many players do not improve because they shift their weight to the right leg too much in the backswing, thereby not letting the left side lengthen the downswing....

What's more, Barber's swing seemed also to encompass the "pelvic thrust" that Plummer and Bennett advocate, though he did not talk about that in the article. Great stuff, Chris.

--Bob Carney

In our society, more and more, people are running around offended by syllables, even. People are afraid to say anything. Rush Limbaugh

What is it with Rush Limbaugh? It’s weeks after we published this interview and you’re still screaming about it. I count it screaming when, no matter how neatly typed the letter it contains the sentence, “Cancel my subscription.” Here’s Doug Phillips of Tucson, who was “shocked and disgusted” to see the Final Exam with Limbaugh:

This man is a racist. He is a bigot. He is a cruel bully….He is the worst kind of celebrity because he uses his notoriety to encourage, cruelty, hatred and the destruction of civility in our country. To treat this villain as a normal person is to ignore all of the past abuses of women, minorities, and gays that have occurred in this country for so long.”

Doug has an ally in Xavier Baeza of San Francisco:

Imagine my dismay upon reading the Final Exam with Brad Garrett found in the July 2007 issue. Surely, your photo editor could have introduced Mr. Garrett to a shower, comb, and razor before he posed for the accompanying pictures.

And then to follow-up this month with a drug addict, draft dodging, Viagra smuggling moron extolling the virtues of Republican entrepreneurialism, exceeds the bounds of your magazine's journalistic endeavor. Maybe, Rush Limbaugh should explain how tournament cars aren't some form of corporate welfare. Or better yet, he can lobby for the exclusion of those who are afflicted with Parkinson's from golf as their trembling is only an attempt to sand bag their handicap.

The inclusion of such declasse items above only serves to undermine the standard which your magazine's parent company strives so hard to maintain. I am sorry to say, I will never read your magazine again. And that is too bad, because it seems to have so much to offer the golfer-reader.

Then last week Jesse J. Lewis, a columnist for the Birmingham Times, called it “One of the ten dumbest interviews in 07” because it was both “racist and divisive.

I just happen to think that golf is moving in the right direction by involving people from all walks of life, whether Democrats, Republicans, Asians, what have you. For them to come forward with an article of this nature and if the trend should continue, this would definitely have a negative effect on the golfing industry.

We hear you. Just as we hear the screaming from the other side of the aisle when we mention Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Paul Casey, Martha Burk, the war in Iraq, Barack Obama….people who with inadequate grooming or foreigners (read: Geoff Ogilvy, Australian), who dare to talk about the U.S. Presidential election!

Here’s our point of view. We’re inclusive. If you play golf, if you love golf, if you’re great at it or just really passionate about it, no matter who you are, we may write about you. We don’t think that’s divisive. Nor does it mean that we agree with everything you say, especially if you have a radio show in which you frequently air arrogant and intolerant views.

Most of all, we understand that it can be annoying when people we judge to be complete idiots love the same game we do. On the other hand, sometimes, in a small way, it’s reassuring.

--Bob Carney

(Photo: Ben Van Hook)

In response to previous posts, a few of you have asked how to contact the Stack & Tilt teachers, Andy Plummer and Mike Bennett.

Here is the general (business) number for the two teachers: 503-650-7140

One poster asked about the teacher in the Cleveland area who's teaching the Stack & Tilt swing.
It is Steve Bordner. He teaches at The Country Club in Pepper Pike, Ohio. The
golf shop number is 216-831-9252.

--Bob Carney

I don't know how that par putt missed. Sergio Garcia

Mike Lach of Irvine is still bugged by Sergio Garcia's comments following his failure to close at Carnoustie.

I could not believe Sergio’s comments after the tournament.  For three days he got every break imaginable and in the end two guys tried to hand it to him on a silver platter and he couldn’t close the deal.  Who does he think was hitting those makeable putts that didn’t go in.  He complained about slow play and he’s one of the slowest...The so called bad break of hitting the pin on 16 was actually a good break.  The ball was going so fast, it would have gone over the green or been 50 to 60 feet away.  At the end of regulation play, he had a one shot lead and needed to hit the green and two-putt and he couldn’t do it. I guess that sphincter just got too tight for him.  I’m glad others don’t make excuses and look for something or someone to blame.  Monty had the same opportunity last year, didn’t come through and took his medicine like a man, so did Phil.  He needs to take a long look in the mirror to see what the problem was.

Mike, I ran into a tour sport psychologist at the airport a couple of days ago and he was talking about the same thing. The psychologist said, "How about Sergio? He can't win. He speaks from his heart and he gets killed for it. Pretty soon he'll learn how to say nothing like the rest of them."

Lot of truth in that. Sergio was like one of us after that round, in agony, reliving every shot, wishing the bounces could have gone the other way. He started out by saying, "I had my opportunities. Unfortunately, I didn't convert," but then the Universal Disappointed Golfer took over. How many times, after losing a match or not qualifying for the club championship, have you hung your head and said: "I hit a great shot on (name the hole). I can't believe it didn't (turn, bounce, stop, roll, go in). I thought I played (well, my game, good enough to win, really tough down the stretch...)." Like us in that situation, Sergio was feeling sorry for himself. Would he be better off not unloading like that? Sure. But, like Monty's heart-on-the-sleeve style, it's what makes him fun to follow.

Go easy. We all agree Sergio should grow up a bit. But not too much. We'd like him to keep talking....

--Bob Carney