Tiger, as most accomplished players have a tendency to do, errs in swinging to far to the right. One of the reasons why Hogan is so esteemed is his ability to swing left which, as is well known, helped him battle a hook.
John Jacobs stated that the hooker tends to be too shallow while the slicer is too steep. However, this may be an incomplete description because there is the danger that angle of attack and vertical swing plane, which are distinct, will be conflated. Tiger used to shallow a steeper backswing plane, as many good players do, while Hogan looked to stay pretty shallow throughout, exhibiting more of a uniform vertical swing plane angle throughout his swing. Butch Harmon tried to get Tiger to stay on a more uniform vertical swing plane angle by swinging up and down the so-called Turned Shoulder Plane, a la David Toms. In fact, and I wish I could find the video, Butch Harmon on the Golf Channel (Academy?) once analyzed Toms's swing and talked about how great it was in that David was able to keep the club out in front of him so well (and not letting the club fall behind him by shallowing out and changing the vertical swing plane angle dramatically). Basically Tiger would go from steep to shallow (and at times too shallow, or "stuck") and, since the golf swing requires rotation and occurs in three dimensions, this change in vertical swing plane angle would have an impact on his horizontal swing plane/swing direction which would be shifted overly rightwards. So what do you do from there? Tiger said he was too reliant on "timing" with his "great hands" and that he'd have to "flip" to "save" the shot.
With the club "stuck", Tiger was forced to steepen at the last second with a "flip" such that he could steepen his vertical swing plane angle and re-direct his swing direction leftwards by standing the club up. Of course, in doing so, you run the danger of getting too steep (from being too shallow) and get the fats. Hence, what Brian described for Tiger at the end stages of his time with Hank Haney (also remembering how Brian described Haney's prescribed backswing as forcing Tiger to over-drop).
A key element of this release that Brian and Michael are discovering and teaching is the fact that it should, ideally, occur with the body stable (something Tiger definitely struggles with). Brian said that pivoting like crazy is crazy. People took that as a rip on no-shift pivots but it's also an admonishment of what could be termed an over-pivot. Michael and Kevin have multiple times discussed the ideas of an over-turned and over-leaned pivot and Brian has also presented Ben Doyle's milk crate pivot idea. Pivoting like crazy is crazy and there's a continuum of pivots and the extremes are what's crazy.
What's paramount is the movement of the club. That's because it is the only thing hitting the ball and what the ball does is what golf is all about. So much time and effort has gone into discussing the body and positions that the body gets into (thereby having implications on what the pivot should or shouldn't be). Keep the focus on the club by paying attention to what the ball does (and to be have the most accurate gauge of this Trackman/Flightscope are a must).
The idea that beginners should start to learn by hitting chips and moving up was flawed from the start because the notion was based on teaching a certain anatomical reference point, the flat left wrist. Ultimately, that's just a point in time and who cares about a certain body position when really we're only concerned with what the ball, and thereby what the club, is doing?
Brian and Michael: in teaching the beginner, would you say now that the beginner would be best served by learned how to hit a pitch shot? To me, that sure seems like it'd be the way to go. You'd get an appreciation for how the club swings, how the body responds to the swinging of the club, and of the D plane (because most pitches require a leftward swing that generally is most readily accomplished from a stance that's leftwards of where the face is pointing at address).
I thought Kevin wrote a great post about wanting to avoid erroneous descriptions even if it encourages a certain feel because inevitably, those are the band-aid fixes. Sure, whatever works but you want something that works in the long term and a true understanding based on real science gives us the best chance for that, I believe. In the end though, yes, whatever gets the ball and club doing the right thing but the reason why this is the best forum on the planet is because the proprietors are open to advancing their knowledge and avoiding faulty concepts and obscured terminology. I can't stand to read some of that Golf Machine (pardon my language) crap.
Brian, thanks for the response to Virtuoso's post, I really didn't know how to respond (and could not really understand what was even written and trust me it wasn't for a lack of time or effort) and your answer was very helpful. You've got an amazing talent at taking complicated concepts and turning it into something everyone can use. To paraphrase DC, "knowing it in all of it's complexity and teaching it in all of it's simplicity; that's genius." I can't wait for my lesson with you in Pittsburgh
