Annika Sorenstam

[metallion]

quote:Originally posted by fmlutz

Jesper Parnevik also learned from Ballard or his ideas. Just my 2 cents.

According to a report from a Swedish PGA Swing Tech gathering this summer, Jesper was notably un-interested in discussing swing mechanics.

The report has that Jesper has been without a coach for long periods of his career. During the session Jesper associated different "body feelings" to the type of shot he wanted to play.

Per-Ulrik Johansson was also there. He was quite the opposite of Jesper and very clear about what he wanted mechanics to produce. P-U has had several different coaches during his career.

 

[Redgoat]

Bill,

Thanks for the kind words about my teaching. Yes, I remember the name for So Cal Junior golf. I also remember Bob May beating my brains in most of the time. Although I managed to get him here and there. It is always good to hear from juniors of that era. Hope all is well.

Brady

 

[fmlutz]

quote:Originally posted by metallion

quote:Originally posted by fmlutz

Jesper Parnevik also learned from Ballard or his ideas. Just my 2 cents.

According to a report from a Swedish PGA Swing Tech gathering this summer, Jesper was notably un-interested in discussing swing mechanics.

The report has that Jesper has been without a coach for long periods of his career. During the session Jesper associated different "body feelings" to the type of shot he wanted to play.

Per-Ulrik Johansson was also there. He was quite the opposite of Jesper and very clear about what he wanted mechanics to produce. P-U has had several different coaches during his career.

Metallion,

Does the Swedish PGA endorse the Ballard method? Did they ever use his theories or ideas on the swing?

Thanks

Mike

 

[mandrin]

Trying to squeeze the golf swing into the two dimensions of one or multiple swing planes is perhaps very attractive for its visual simplicity but it should not be forgotten that it actually takes place in three dimensions.

I suggest to look at Annika’s swing from a true, albeit very simple, 3D perspective: one main vertical axis and two horizontal axes of rotation. There is not so much left or right but rather symmetry of operation about the vertical axis of rotation.

mandrin

http://www.angelfire.com/realm/moetown/mandrin/golf/an_sor.html

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin
3D perspective: one main vertical axis and two horizontal axes of rotation.

You are missing one of the dimensions.

 

[David Alford]

Just looks like a very good, simple conventional swing to me. btw, I have played 9 holes with her.

 

[TGMfan]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

Trying to squeeze the golf swing into the two dimensions of one or multiple swing planes is perhaps very attractive for its visual simplicity but it should not be forgotten that it actually takes place in three dimensions.

Mandrin,

I'm afraid I don't see Annika in your link, but your point is well taken. Since an Inclined Plane is a 3-dimensional concept, attempting to portray it on a 2-dimensional photograph is usually misleading. Much like trying to decide whether the low end of the club is pointing at the Plane Line in any given picture of a pro.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by TGMfan

Since an Inclined Plane is a 3-dimensional concept, attempting to portray it on a 2-dimensional photograph is usually misleading.

TGMfan, there is seemingly a problem, the pic does not seem to remain. I have it up again, but for how long . . . . you might not quite recognize Annika.

You misunderstood, most likely because the pic did not show. I am not referring to problems with perspective. Inclined or not, a swing plane remains a 2D space.

With Annika’s swing I simply feel a rotation about a vertical axis and the arms and wrists hinging about their respective horizontal axis of rotation.

The arms move hence up and down in front of the body and are being driven by rotation form the center. The associated mental imagery is quite different from using concept of swing plane(s).

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin
The arms move hence up and down in front of the body and are being driven by rotation form the center. The associated mental imagery is quite different from using concept of swing plane(s).

How is it different? If you know how the arms- right arm, moves along the incline swing plane- what you describe as a different concept is easy to see.

Don't confuse the straight lines of the arms and the circular path of the clubhead.

 

[TGMfan]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin
Inclined or not, a swing plane remains a 2D space.

Mandrin,

Granted that any Plane is a 2-dimensional figure, an Inclined Plane is that figure positioned in a third dimension. In simple terms: Up, Back, and In; Down, Out, and Forward.

 

[MizunoJoe]

I believe that mandrin is making an important distinction here - it's an entirely different mechanism to swing the club directly on an inclined plane rather than to effectively do it by swinging the arms vertically in concert with body rotation.

 

[birdie_man]

quote:Originally posted by MizunoJoe

I believe that mandrin is making an important distinction here - it's an entirely different mechanism to swing the club directly on an inclined plane rather than to effectively do it by swinging the arms vertically in concert with body rotation.

I can see a good point in that.

I had such a hard time when I was starting out....my pivot was absolutely horrid. Always felt so unnatural (and confusing) for me to golf.

It's funny how some people can just pick up a club and pivot and some can't eh?

It's tough though. Start with a total lack of knowing what actually needs to be done with the club....and then you're supposed to blend a bunch of totally foreign movements all together (when you should be starting small and learning one thing at a time- as simple as possible).....

....then toss in some uneducated hands and bad clubface control...and then some more really bad instruction (from GDigest, a buddy who just read GD, or sometimes even a teaching pro).....a bad temper.....and a BUNCH of other crap.....

.....and you've got yourself a big, confusing, seemingly endlessly frustrating puzzle....

....that only gets harder with more bad information.

And if you can't relate to that try swinging left-handed....and imagine you now know NOTHING about the planes in a golf swing and swinging a club- just like a beginner.

-Paul

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by MizunoJoe

I believe that mandrin is making an important distinction here - it's an entirely different mechanism to swing the club directly on an inclined plane rather than to effectively do it by swinging the arms vertically in concert with body rotation.

How is it? I have seen Brian teach his "sugar on the arms" drill that allows the vertical drop of the arms swing on the incline plane because of the pivot.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

How is it different? If you know how the arms- right arm, moves along the incline swing plane- what you describe as a different concept is easy to see.

Don't confuse the straight lines of the arms and the circular path of the clubhead.

6bee1dee, the concept of plane, if used in an intelligent way, is very useful in learning, teaching and understanding a golf swing. However it is entirely possible to have a coherent concept of a golf swing without reference to any swing plane.

For some that is perhaps a bit difficult to swallow being likely accustomed using several planes associated with various body parts. However just forget planes, turn your body, and move arms/club vertical in front of the body.

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

How is it different? If you know how the arms- right arm, moves along the incline swing plane- what you describe as a different concept is easy to see.

Don't confuse the straight lines of the arms and the circular path of the clubhead.

6bee1dee, the concept of plane, if used in an intelligent way, is very useful in learning, teaching and understanding a golf swing. However it is entirely possible to have a coherent concept of a golf swing without reference to any swing plane.

For some that is perhaps a bit difficult to swallow being likely accustomed using several planes associated with various body parts. However just forget planes, turn your body, and move arms/club vertical in front of the body.

Golf was taught in the past without the concept of planes.
I am out of the dark ages.

I will admit that I was stubborn about becoming knowledgeable about planes, the planes that run along the ground horizontally, or parallel to the body vertically or the ones on an incline plane the shaft/sweetspot lies on. But once it became clear- I don’t think much about them when I swing. I leave it to the hands to get me through the swing.

As I said, turn and shake the sugar off the arms, snap and rest. See, no plane thoughts but the planes were there.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by TGMfan

quote:Originally posted by mandrin
Inclined or not, a swing plane remains a 2D space.

Mandrin,

Granted that any Plane is a 2-dimensional figure, an Inclined Plane is that figure positioned in a third dimension. In simple terms: Up, Back, and In; Down, Out, and Forward.

TGMfan, to put it more technically, the swing plane concept is a 2D geometric constraint relation imposed on the 3D golfer ensemble.

This constraint relation is supposed to make it easier to execute a swing. However if another way does not require this constraint relation for equal results than it points to the partial truth of this constraint.

TGMfan since you like simple terms - “Up, Back, and In; Down, Out, and Forward” is still taking place in 2 dimensions.

 

[rundmc]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

quote:Originally posted by TGMfan

Since an Inclined Plane is a 3-dimensional concept, attempting to portray it on a 2-dimensional photograph is usually misleading.

TGMfan, there is seemingly a problem, the pic does not seem to remain. I have it up again, but for how long . . . . you might not quite recognize Annika.

You misunderstood, most likely because the pic did not show. I am not referring to problems with perspective. Inclined or not, a swing plane remains a 2D space.

With Annika’s swing I simply feel a rotation about a vertical axis and the arms and wrists hinging about their respective horizontal axis of rotation.

The arms move hence up and down in front of the body and are being driven by rotation form the center. The associated mental imagery is quite different from using concept of swing plane(s).

Based on the "arms and wrists hinging about their respective horizontal axix of rotation," if Annika were to not rotate at all (I'm assuming you mean her body/pivot) where would her arms and wrists hinging end? Her nose? Right shoulder?

 

[MizunoJoe]

"“Up, Back, and In; Down, Out, and Forward” is still taking place in 2 dimensions."

Not in any swing I've ever seen. The Up, Back, and In results in the shaft tracing out a curved surface.

 

[mandrin]

MizunoJoe, I know what you are referring to but it becomes quite confusing. TGMfan acknowledged that “Up, Back, and In; Down, Out, and Forward” takes place in the 2 dimensions of a plane, you however tell me you have never seen this happen and implying the 3 dimensions of a curved surface.

The basic problem is that the plane concept is not quite capable describing accurately various types of golf swings and yet remaining simple. If one has to introduce curved planes and shifting between all kind of planes, what is left of the simple limpid notion of a plane?

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by rundmc

Based on the "arms and wrists hinging about their respective horizontal axix of rotation," if Annika were to not rotate at all (I'm assuming you mean her body/pivot) where would her arms and wrists hinging end? Her nose? Right shoulder?

rundmc, would you mind to reformulate so I don’t have to guess?