I assumed that people who are good in a given field also know what they are doing. I later had to revise that as I understood that while people can be really good at doing things often they have no real idea what they are doing.
I assume if you work as a coach, therapist or such that if you need to change for any reason you then can do so. I however found therapists really bad at that in fact I found most of them borderline crazy. I guess one reason they seek out such education is to get help themselves but that system don’t hold water that well.
I also assume if you play golf that you do know what your doing but I also found out again that was a nice wake up call and not true at all. I mean Tiger Woods spent 5 years and then sunk that ship with, “hurt my body and don’t hold up the last nine holes in a major”.
I figure whatever experts say we might need to question the nature of the fields we engage into.
It will shatter some beliefs people have they are told are that is the way we do it as that is how it works. None as far have asked me much about how do you add 50 yards in 2 minutes to someone’s swing? I did that as I applied the technology I come from. I didn’t change anything just optimized.
I like to think about the performance itself as optimization to create a better efficiency doing whatever you do. I talked to Hans after his nine holes today and I asked him, are you surprised? He said, yes. I knew he be. Still I ask the question as I might be wrong the model I calculate might be off so I better do a reality check now and then but the model is never off.
Whenever beliefs we have had as assumptions how things work, performance to produce a result is a important thing if your in sports and an elite level performer. Those ladies and men are motivated to be better. What they might believe to become better often falls into guesswork. You can have a perfect technique but if your head isn’t able to produce a winning experience to go with whatever you might be able to do then are useless.
I had this friend who loved hitting balls at the range but never play due to when he played he couldn’t do it perfectly. He started to blame himself then slowly it became no fun so one day he stopped playing.
To be better I check stats, where are people doing well in a field, what makes the difference for golfers for example the difference happens in putting and the long game. That makes sense to me the longer from the hole the more accurate you have to be. Hans played 9 holes and his average from the hole Proximity was 7m over 9 holes. The tour average over a season is around 9 for the leader. The last on the list was Baddely a stack and tilt swinger was at 12, 2014. Now its only 3m difference but that shows you cant loose on the proximity to the hole as it is then harder to make par and birdies. I said to Hans, you should be able to reach around 6m as an average. That would be 3m better than the PGA tour average best.
Now, am I nuts?
I might be or a genius. The question is under debate still.
What I do is to calculate the models output what result it produces. I am pretty good doing that and one reason I am a genius I might add but don’t take my word for it, most here will complain about my use of the English grammar, spelling,. sentence of order words and punctuation. Lucky for me I am not a genius about being a professor in linguistic as that would really be bad for my reputation. I do think you agree with me there don’t you?
Nice of you.
I calculate the model and its never wrong. Then I make predictions and the swing motion I developed for golf alone wont be good enough without the performance model the optimized efficiency of the zone action while you perform.
Together then for my calculations to make any sense that is where I end up with making predictions. The performance wont go off the chart much there wont be much deviation if any over a season. Sure the individual might deviate from the model and instruction due to beliefs, pressure or such but that still are outside the model.
For me its more like, ok done with the golf motion, now applied the performance model then I want numbers, so Hans tells me, hit 9gir, shot 3 under and was 7m in average and I say, good job. He almost match the number I wanted and then I wait further on if he is able to maintain, improve etc..of that and if so whatever happens is then analyzed for either containment or improvement.
Once confirmed, I am done with the field. It don’t hold my interest anymore the model works so I am like, ok what else might I go with this then?
This all started a long time ago but the event that really set me on track to create a performance model happen a few weeks ago. To conceptualize it have always been the thing I wanted to do, as I know what its like to just do it so I was like, how do I make a model out of this?
I then forget about it and worked on other things, the answer will be revealed sooner or later due to what needs to be done. In some point I told Hans to do this thing and as I told him about this I started to get the familiar notion again that I had gone into the other side again.
The dark side of the force.
Powerful it is, seductive illusive.
Then the avalanche was on. The stones and snow had started to pick up speed. Now I had the way to contrast this and then what happen was now obvious and obviously so but then as you get the hand in a cookie jar and find the cookies but haven’t figured out how to get them out yet. Its like reading a book backwards I guess the answer is there and then as any detective novel you then can read the book and say, I know who killed him.
That explains a lot to me and suddenly the system brings out a new model.
Once fresh out of the oven then its baking hot.
Then its revision time to go back and recalculate the data previously and to streamline the performance itself. It allows explanations why things didn’t work before moments I took notes off, why is this happening when the swing trainers say it should work in fact it isn’t?
The swing motion has peeked interest from someone Hans knows, he looks at it and was impressed with Larry also. (me to but don’t tell him I said that)
I love it when a plan works.
Håkan Lans is an inventor here, he built his first submarine at age 16, yea the marine had to visit him about that, he later invented the world standard for boat navigation system that should be implemented for airplanes also but they don’t want it as it is to secure. Many who manufacture similar systems that cost 20 times more or even more than that try to limit the system as they cost more and works worse. Lans invented the mouse for pc, the color on your screen you use now he has a patent for.
One day he was with his boat and the idea came to him so he developed the math for the navigation and then sat on it for 10 years.
There could been someone else who made a system and then patent it but he waited due to he wanted to make sure when it was out then he be having the patent ready to go as he wanted to make sure no time wasted. Once it was out as he explained it a guy in the audience said “OF COURSE!”
Made easy to explain once you figured it out anyone can use it without giving you credit or money for the patent then wouldn’t be doable.
I am in a similar situation, I solved what Mike Austin did, I can teach it I also added a performance model upon that.
Now what to do?
I am not much for business if any, I know what I like which is research the interest I have. I worked to help Hans pretty much to do what he loves to do as that for me seemed like something fun to do. I didn’t know I had to learn the swing into details to develop what I did but that came from finding out how to package what I knew was true but haven’t found a good way to explain as no other model is there for it.
My approach isn’t for the amateur, its for tour pro, elite level performances as it is what I want to do as it seems like fun. They are highly motivated individuals but often are taught bad things in good measure that they then have trouble to actually perform better and how to improve it.
I can explain to them what they think and feel and then translate it into a understandable thing to then improve for them what they cant really talk about.
Its pretty much a lot of work, study, analyze, test, then analyze and evaluate then do again. That is from the end when the data is collected as that has a phase also. 2010 and to now it took 4 and a half year the way I worked this.
Now it works.
Anyone know how to do a patent application?