It was a great podcast. I have been following TMM for at least ten years, probably more. I find him fascinating. I love his method of delivery. Of course I used to watch Jimmy Swaggart for his delivery, too. Didn’t buy what Swaggart was selling, and I don’t think TMM is for everyone either. I really learned the ball flight laws from his YT stuff. As far was this steep stuff goes some people are “brush brush” people and some are steep. The guy in Omaha, Jim Sieckman is a shallow, brush brush guy. Stan Utley and Andrew Rice seem to be more brush brush people. But the best chippers CAN do steep when they want to and let me assure you, Brian Gay is a steep guy and he is as good at chipping/pitching as there is in the universe. As JM aka TMM says, don’t be afraid to try it.
Such a great interview.
TMM?
Trackman Maestro
Thank you!
One last thing on this one: if Joe Mayo and Scott Fawcett ever got in a room together, would be so difficult for them to coexist because both of them think they are the smartest person in any room that they are in.
It’s too bad they operate in different areas of the game because I could see it being a mutual fart sniffing instead of a slap fight.
Listened last night and just couldn’t wait to get on the trackman today a the simulator. The thing that really resonated most for the first time with me was the relationship that if you are neutral, the path has to be “in to out” while the swing is descending and has to be “out to in” on the upswing. Essentially the bottom of the swing has to also be the “end” of the arc.
I’ve understood for some time “the ball starts on clubface angle” and the variance between path and face create the spin “draw/cut” but it never fully clicked that it is impossible to have face right of target, path right of face, and be hitting the ball on an ascent from a neutral position, essentially you must have manipulated “aim/setup” if you create that dynamic and think you are neutral.
Some of what Joe says he seems intentionally myopic in his explanation because it would be easy to realize there is a difference between “feel and real”
As for the chipping, I like what he says, it made click for me the “stand up” lesson Tron got at TGI.
Yes, but that’s only relative to the baseline of the plane, or the “swing direction.”
I can hit up on a ball and swing out… if the baseline/swing direction is far enough to the right by itself.
Man, don’t kill my joy from finding something today 
My 68 at Plainfield in fake sim golf was real!
Also, now watching the golf guru podcast, I can’t help but laugh that his jersey collection is hanging in the background on hangers on molding.
Essentially, similar but inferior to the way that my 12 year old displays his jersey collection off the mantle in his bedroom.
Wowza. What an interview that was! Gonna go hit some chip shots in my basement now
Am I wrong to think that Joe overstates the difference between what his preferences are and what would be measured in a player performing the preferences of Dan Grieves or Short Game Chef (both of whom I like and agree with a lot)?
As someone who has previously had a tendency to shove the handle too far forward, I prefer feeling a little more “shallow” throw, to make sure things line back up fairly neutrally coming into impact. I also think trying to control trajectory makes more sense than focusing on spin like Joe seems to do. That said, I think the ideal stock pitch is some combination of Grieves-Short-Game-Chef rotation with a little bit of the Mayo head forward in the backswing, raising/extending on the downswing/through impact (at least that’s what I feel when hitting the crispiest, mid-trajectory chips that I can). In other words, I honestly don’t think the stock Grieves release 1 or 2/Short Game Chef stock 20 yard chip is all that different from stock Joe Mayo pitch.
Shoutout to James Ridyard, who I think doesn’t get as much love and does a good job of explaining how these warring factions aren’t really in contradiction, and most short game shots are a blend of all these things, with different shots requiring different ratios of ingredients.
I mean… we’d have to both be on the same page in terms of how much he “states” it for me to agree or disagree to the degree by which he "over-"states it.
Are they generally different methods/approaches? Yes. But Joe can teach the other shot… and I think Dan/Parker can teach Joe’s “preferred” shot too.
Different players will prefer different options. I will say that I’ve pointed out a few times that my flop shots are 6° down, and that I don’t think 10-12° down is all that steep. 2 minutes on a clock (the minute hand) is 12°. It’s not that steep.
I’ve also said a few times that the shots are all on a spectrum, and most shots you’ll ever hit are somewhere in the middle. Rarely are you going “pure chip” or “pure pitch.”
Fair enough, I guess what I would say is that, in my humble opinion, the Dan/Parker method is closer to the sweet spot in terms of managing risk and achieving optimal dynamics (in terms of strike/launch/etc) on the types of short-game shots that a player will be called upon to hit the most. Also, it seems like the method that would work (and be easier to properly apply) for a larger population of golfers.
I could never figure out the short game chef method. It wasn’t bad for me/probably did what he explains in making pitches more forgiving. But I could never find the bottom, always felt like I was chunking it even though it came off the club ok.
I personally think Dan Grieve and James Ridyard are better than Short Game Chef.
It’s what I teach to most players, but good players generally need to know how to hit them all.
I feel you.
The issue I found - and it’s a me problem - with the Chef approach (and I should stress I never paid for his teaching I sorta just binged what was available on socials and the TGJ YT videos he did) was that it had me more focused on the way and place my wedge’s sole was hitting the ground than the way the face of it was hitting the ball.
I like the effect the right technique has in creating buffers for a shot hit slightly fat or nipped a bit too low on the face, but perhaps it’s as much about how you learn as it is about what they teach.
Totally agree. Since going back to my old “technique” I do know how to use the bounce and what the clubhead is doing a little more.