I received John & Carmen Bostic St.Clair's book, and I've been breezing through it :-)  "With some thought" to what they've been doing.  Interesting history, BTW what's the narrative point of view of this book John?..the alternations between POV occur without any forewarning to the reader, sometimes its coming from a third perspective "they did this and that" and then it shifts to first person "I"?  (I thought this was a collaboration between Carmen Bostic St.Clair and yourself, sometimes its written like the workings of your personal internal dialogue????  Is this the *arrogance* that you attribute to yourself, eh?). Anyhow on page 263 *they* write,"where the difference between achieving success and failing to place is rarely determined solely by the actual physiological competencies of the performers but by what is erroneously referred to as the mental state of the performers involved...the phenomenon itself is strong evidence, indeed, for the unity of mind and body achieved by such performers in competition". I wouldn't disagree that the mind-body high performance status is at play here, in fact I have often stated that myself.  But the more interesting question is how does one get to achieve that "high mind-body status"? and my point has been that if you are going to quickly train a novice to reach anything like that sort of level (and by-pass years of trial and error, and unconscious modeling by the individual him or herself), you need to make some key physical distinctions (like put your foot on this peddle to accelerate, and on this peddle to break in a car).  BTW your high performance state is not mutually incompatible here either.  I shall be exploring the benefits of the "high performance state" used in the games.  However, the model I have developed is purely based on generic movements, by focusing on these - in a similar light to the beneficial application of eye accessing cues for internal representations/although instead in this scenario its for linking to the resulting external effects (these developed through studying a whole range of high performers and testing it on myself and others). For those interested my modeling of the golf swing has resulted in some important distinctions like:  The models you get in book shops, and usually get from your local golf pro are complete rubbish.  You do not need to have *the right grip*, you do not need to have a *specific stance* etc...  These tales are not empirically represented by the high golf performers in the world...look at the range of strange grips, stances and other golf swing features.  No my model only contains what all high performance golf players (i.e. the pros) use and nearly all the hacks/amateurs DON'T use! ...By applying a high performance physical model to an individual's learning, you create direct fast-track to high performance...this could be enhanced by including a *high performance state* along side the learning.  But it IS the *physical model* that enables this fast-track to High Performance to occur (O.K. My claim).  The benefit of developing models of excellence are so that you can teach them quickly to others. If you think I am wrong, I will throw down the gauntlet to John to prove me otherwise!  That is learn to hit the golf ball a long way (~300 yards) using the New Code (himself - then we know it is applied correctly) over the next couple of months (it'll be a fascinating adventure!!!)  If you can do that, we would all be the far wiser and informed!