Larry golf swing

His lower body is now active after 50 years of not being active.
His chain of release have started to change. All created trough understanding what to do instead of doing drills. Now it’s a golf swing.

I made some suggestions which should improve things a bit further. Discovering what it like to do things which you haven’t done is as hard for Larry as its for Hans. Old feedback gets in the way of the new better one.

GJ Larry

Spring Break Hans (updated)

While its winter greens and early there is time to smack balls out there.


I am also a big fan of comparing integrity. It shows if your swing is going off or what kind of power and athletic action reside in it.

comp 2

The above shows during late summer in august last year in blue short and black pants. While the images are of different angles there are some more power there now. More athletic and a more mobile movement and while some stiffness is there still in his body he keep working that with intu-flow.

While imagery don’t tell us what is going on there is some idea of pressure points and leverage. Mike Austin was built with a long spine and his ability to move within that was put into action at an early age. I cant myself do that but the good thing you don’t need to. The RBIm system is focused on maintaining high precision within the desired distances 300-350 yards.


Hans is now getting into integrity Mike had while doing his own thing. One reason he is long and not having compensations like other swing systems have including some Ultimate Perfect swing systems are due to him are able to swing within the organization I defined during the modeling of Mike Austin. I am also able to do so now.

Hans wont be a clone or copy of Mike as that isn’t how modeling works.

Modeling works by creating the definition of the result which was in my case, the motion of Mike Austin. It will mean you will tend to map some movements in the motion similar to Mike as your using similar or the same pressure points while swinging. Motion was done early 2014 and then distilling down, mapping and defining and improving been a years work for me. Once found then you can replicate what someone else is able to do as your defining the variables within the model. Like I did with dyslexia and RBIm 3.0.

It’s a system built for consistency as I wanted to hit it long while being accurate.

Hans has also started to measure the feedback now and are improving at a good rate.

Hans talk and feedback practice

Weather did halt his plans to go south so stay at home and practice on winter greens.
He was happy with his practice and things he is working on improves. His feedback from the old is gearing towards an update with the new 20% effort swinging which will allow him to play with more precision and efficiency. Mechanically he is really where he should be and next is to be able to use that new improved efficiency effectively. Distance he is long and hit all the targets he needed.

Keep on doing what he is doing is pretty much it atm.

One area I want to make sure he is able to do a lot better is approach shots. While the dispersion is fine the distance control is key and he made improvements there today. Updating ones perception and be able to utilize the new feedback have started to work for him. Skrattar

Tomorrow new day for practice.

I feel he is on track.

The waiting game

Still winter here. Temperature been ok as far, around zero so some snow is melting but today it snowed so more than 10 weeks away for courses here to open. If lucky ranges might open at the first week in April. If the spring is coming. Feels like a Disney movies atm like the Frozen one.

My sennheiser cable to my headphones started to act up so ordered a new one. Listening to one channel get tedious fast.

Indoors my golf swing feels great now. Nothing more to do there for the moment, next phase to hit balls. Then to find out what I can do with it scoring wise.

So I wait.

I keep working my physical bit, 2 days of intermittent fasting so loosing weight is going great at and until the season starts I am likely to drop between 5 to 10 more kilos. At that point I guess I have 10 more kilos to go. Golf during summer helps as you spend time walking a lot of up and down where I play. Having CFS don’t make you go out and work the fitness part of life.

That hole walking up that hill make sure you hit the green.
Short your smoked, right your gone and left well just don’t. it’s a 120 yard hole so not long but ranked as the most difficult one. I like it. If your not sure if you can find the ball and then find it and need to drop or hit it from tee again, well make sure your physical status is good as its uphill..a lot.

Sad that I have so many weeks and such to be able to start playing.

Atm anything to golf feels complete.

Waiting game reside now.

Applying the RBIm 3.0 protocols

Elicit reference to self using location based contrasting questions.
Skype session to study here.

If the individual cant hold onto their attention due to the comparison mode kicks in (distractions) then we apply a identification protocol.

If the individual say, “ I cant do that” ask why.
Apply mapping protocol to map the context they offer you.
It be a sequence of beliefs or casual reasoning.

I cant do it due I keep loosing it. (keep asking why)
Why do you keep loosing it?
I don’t know it seems like…….

If your trained in observation models you will find as soon you ask, why cant you do that then they will access their social sphere around them where they have stored their information about that. Its like anything we do we need to access and retrieve such information around us in the air as the brain needs to know what the context is about and what behavior to do. If your not trained in such calibrations and observations you can then listen to what they say and then go from there.

Why questions asks about casual reasoning.

At any point of this the individual will tell you what the contexts are.
Mapping them into separate contexts are important as the brain is able to create generalizations will several independent context’s drawn into one.

Like, what did you do during your vacation?

You answer, had fun, enjoyed the time spent etc…

Now that shows you spent one week or 2 days or 3 weeks was, fun or enjoyable but we know you had several days and hours doing all that. So we ask, a what question,
what made you have so much fun, enjoy it etc..

Then you will be able to specify a context much easier.

Like: well we did this horseback riding and the sun and sand and swimming was wonderful there as the beaches went on forever.

Contexts: Horseback riding, sun, swimming, beaches sand,

The same thing happens with a distraction. Once we elicit the self location and access it as the individual puts their attention there and then often they will remove the attention due to them become distracted for some reason, it will be due to their comparison mode kicked into gear to check for evidence that it works. (doing so also remove them from their experience)

The RBIm 3.0 is a faith oriented system to self.
There is no need to believe.

Once we start mapping contexts that distract and are able to map them into context and have a sequence down into steps then you check those with the individual and feed them back like this,
If I understand you correctly this happens first then this and then that?
If they confirm you check again to make sure they didn’t forget any, if they deny they are then able to add more information until you complete the mapping.

So first you went on horseback riding?
(yes or no)
(you didn’t do anything else before that also?)
(yes or no)

Typically once you done this a few times the pattern emerges for you and for them as they become more aware what is going on to some extent.
Once you know the contexts and the casual reasoning with them you can then sequence them up into the step and order they have, even use paper and pen if needed to keep track of this.

At some point you will be able to define the contexts and then the order and casual reasoning in them.

I had this problem for 10 years. (what did happen 10 years ago?)
They explain what did happen.
You map the sequence of contexts.

What happens is the generalization we have about life is filled with several sources creating evidence for us in how this works. The end result is then a mix of those events that made of the generalization about this and also provide its own evidence (contextual casual reasoning).
Like “Life sucks” and you ask why they say due to some evidence. (casual reasoning)

Beliefs then works like what we know as double binds or paradoxes or moment 22 situations. It means the belief itself is true for the individual due to the evidence that confirms their belief to be true. Like “Life sucks” so then the individual will have a casual reasoning why that is so. Their evidence will act as a pivot point in how perception then exclude anything else that isn’t the proof of its own evidence.

Client says, I cant feel good.
Client says, If I do my parents was right about me.
Client says, They said I was crazy thinking like this.

So if you change and feel good your parents was right about you and therefore you cant change to feel good as you cant give them the satisfaction of them being right?

Client, yes.

So the client was stuck in the same double bind for decades due to the casual reasoning that if she did feel good and changed her parents would been right and then she couldn’t change to feel good.

The good thing about our minds, its all made up anyhow.

When we understand how the distraction works with mapping of its contexts and its sequence and order and the casual reasoning we then apply the resolvement protocol for that.

Another example: Asking client, so what’s going on?

Client, I have a problem when I am alone.

Me: Ok, are you alone right now with me?

Client, no.

Then you ask how she knows she has the distraction, being alone is a problem.

In this case, when I come home from work and its all silent in my apartment then I know I am alone.

Test of solution, leave the radio on when you go to work.

Client, why?

Just do it.

Problem couldn’t be replicated again.

Why? Can you answer that? Contexts acts as evidence also. Its then static for the individual as its proof this is how it is.

To resolve that we apply the resolvement protocol in RBIm.

You might noticed I didn’t ask why with that client. I asked how and not why.
I already knew the why the question then becomes, how.

If you know that the horseback riding starts first you then isn’t as much ask the why but starts ask how as the what question about the horseback riding then will start to display the how.

The reason the horseback riding and everyone else either was fun or enjoyable is the evidence that is now static and provide the evidence that they had a good time enjoying with fun on their vacation.

Static evidence means, it wont change for the individual. (generalized)
Context acts as a platform that has casual reasoning linked upon it.

Its like anything we do, faith is a projection the brain does all the time for us. To do so it uses some platform to do that for us. Then it use old generalized information static evidence and then we can confirm the world we have works the way it works for us. New information simply have a hard time to get a hold of us to change. It don’t have the evidence for it. Since the brain is constantly projecting for us we then can use that phenomena to create a FutureNow platform instead placing our own best system in its place and let the brain do that one instead.

Context allows organization of information. Once formed we then add casual reasoning on top of that so then the brain can add several sources of contexts to this and treat it like one single event. (generalization) even when it isn’t. The main issue for the individual is they are only aware of the power of fun or enjoyment when they regard the horseback riding. The contexts acts as navigation for the casual reasoning as the behavior that arise from that are linked to the context.