Backing the shaft up (now with page 2 Manzella Video)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Erik_K

Erik_K

New
hp12c said:
So I think I do that backing up the shaft the reason I say that is what Keving said about missing the vertical componant in the 1st stage of the DS. So I did this I went to a vertical wall, ah wait most walls are vertical, u know what I mean, I stood facing the wall real close, took my golf stance and my head almost touching the wall took my wedge and put it horizontal to the ground with the grip facing the target went to th top of my BS and when I started my DS slow I almost hit the wall went back up and started the DS again, slow, and wow! talk about vertical drop, what an eye opener. I though I was doing the vertical hand path not even close, I did this several times to really feel the positions. Now I wanna go smack some balls to see what happens.
Click to expand...

I want to give this a shot too. The "replacing the left arm" concept involves a vertical line running up the left shoulder at address (from DTL) it seems to me that, at least initially, your head can be very close to the wall and you can probably swing down to somewhere near last parallel. The hands should not hit the wall, unless I am missing something. After last parallel the club needs work out and around - don't make full swings with this drill!
 
M

Mike Richardson

New
Brian Manzella said:
<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/45039075" width="600" height="338" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe>
Click to expand...

Great video Brian. So there's out toss, tumble and lining up the club (as per box drill), all with the intent of swinging across the left leg?
 
curtisj76

curtisj76

New
So it looks like a move that an over the topper would do to not pull the crap out of it right?

Trying to figure out the hips part. You want your hips really open at impact right? Is it just that you don't want them to open too soon?

Does the "bumpy thingy" come into this at all?
 
Erik_K

Erik_K

New
curtisj76 said:
So it looks like a move that an over the topper would do to not pull the crap out of it right?

Trying to figure out the hips part. You want your hips really open at impact right? Is it just that you don't want them to open too soon?

Does the "bumpy thingy" come into this at all?
Click to expand...

Curtis -

I think nearly all good players have a substantial amount of "open hips" at impact. The shoulders are also open (or opening) but not as much as the hips.

I think the hips need to get out of the way so the hands can, in my opinion, basically get back almost where they were at address. If you don't rotate at all, I think you'll stand up, and the hands run away from your body, etc in an attempt to save the shot.

There's also a sequencing issue (hips, hands, clubhead). I don't think you want to the shoulders and hips turning together. This idea, to me, has always been a tough nut to crack.

I agree the backing the shaft up move is like an anti-pull move if I ever saw one.

Erik
 
Jwat

Jwat

New
I would bet that I back the shaft up as much if not more than most on this forum. I can definitely say that I can pelvic thrust with the best of them too. For me, these 2 things correlate and its something that I have yet to cure in the last 8 years. Ive lost alot of my golfing prime due to it.

I've worked on upthewall/downthewall, staying closed at impact, opening up before impact, carrying & tumbling, out toss, getting the right arm more forward in the ds. You name it or if its been on the website in the last 5 yrs I have implemented it.

I do believe that golf instruction is best through individual evaluation, but after all the posts over the years, I think that there would be a universal fix for this that would help at least the majority struggling with the 2 issues.

Also, I believe if there ever was a teach off out there with the best instructors this type of student would be the hardest to get instant results let alone fix.
 
Last edited:
B

birly-shirly

New
I would think that an "up the wall, down the wall" feel would make things worse, not better - if you already have the OTT move.

Not being critical - I made the mistake of seeing rightward divots, and push draws/hooks, and concluding that I COULDN'T be coming OTT.

My fault though - nothing wrong with the NHA pattern in itself.
 
M

Mike Richardson

New
curtisj76 said:
So it looks like a move that an over the topper would do to not pull the crap out of it right?

Trying to figure out the hips part. You want your hips really open at impact right? Is it just that you don't want them to open too soon?
Click to expand...

I find that, if you start bringing the club down as Brian shows in the video, my hips move laterally a bit automatically (as opposed to really opening). It's as if they have to because I'm pulling the club down away from the ball. You've still got your back to the target (ish) so there's an element of separation. Then, when I start to tumble and swing left, they really open up, like they're getting out of my way.
 
Jwat

Jwat

New
I believe that these issues are more pelvic specific than anything else. When the DS starts and the plevis moves laterally, it doesn't matter what the hips do.
 
A

art

New
Erik_K said:
Curtis -

I think nearly all good players have a substantial amount of "open hips" at impact. The shoulders are also open (or opening) but not as much as the hips.

I think the hips need to get out of the way so the hands can, in my opinion, basically get back almost where they were at address. If you don't rotate at all, I think you'll stand up, and the hands run away from your body, etc in an attempt to save the shot.

There's also a sequencing issue (hips, hands, clubhead). I don't think you want to the shoulders and hips turning together. This idea, to me, has always been a tough nut to crack.

I agree the backing the shaft up move is like an anti-pull move if I ever saw one.

Erik
Click to expand...



Dear Erik_K,

It was informative to me reading that you were a scientist, and reading about your habit of speaking in the language of the users. I immediately had the thought of how great AND INFORMATIVE it would be if BRIAN required AT LEAST those of us that 'comment', fill in an appropriate description of our primary and secondary characteristics, which for me are certainly "Applied Scientist/wanabe better golfer".

As for this incredibly informative thread, I can not find ANY responses regarding 'injuries, or injury potential', crunch factors or instantaneous crunch factors, and much too little on 'accuracy' and most of all dispersion characteristics using this/these swing characteristics, right or wrong.

Finally, as determinable from even my sketchy self description, my only 5 years as both an applied scientist and wanabe better golfer until joining this site, had NEVER before heard or read expressions like "up the wall", and many now being defined in our "CLASS PROJECT". So, rereading many of the recent posts before retiring last night, I pledged to myself to wake up with a better understanding, why I had such a 'limited' vocabulary, after so much schooling, and such a long 'non-golf' career, AND VOLLA, THERE IT WAS ,THE ANSWER, "NON-GOLF CAREER".

So, yes, in closing, I have a few last comments, different than above, (1), I LOVE the idea to communicate MANZELLAISM'S and their associated humor AS A STANDARD, for golf has been much to serious, and yes, BBKIB was my attempt to keep up with Brian's boys, (2), I recognize the frustration I have when getting NO responses to requests for even 'qualitative' performance data from such a diversified BUT GOLF FOCUSED GROUP, so please understand, and accept my apologies, for in conclusion, (3) For any, and hopefully ALL of us to improve, better yet 'continuously improve', IMO we must GENERATE AND SHARE THE DATA AND BE WILLING AT LEAST TRY WHAT THE DATA ARE SUGGESTING.

Very sincerely, and appreciatively,
art
 
Erik_K

Erik_K

New
art said:
Dear Erik_K,

It was informative to me reading that you were a scientist, and reading about your habit of speaking in the language of the users. I immediately had the thought of how great AND INFORMATIVE it would be if BRIAN required AT LEAST those of us that 'comment', fill in an appropriate description of our primary and secondary characteristics, which for me are certainly "Applied Scientist/wanabe better golfer".

As for this incredibly informative thread, I can not find ANY responses regarding 'injuries, or injury potential', crunch factors or instantaneous crunch factors, and much too little on 'accuracy' and most of all dispersion characteristics using this/these swing characteristics, right or wrong.

Finally, as determinable from even my sketchy self description, my only 5 years as both an applied scientist and wanabe better golfer until joining this site, had NEVER before heard or read expressions like "up the wall", and many now being defined in our "CLASS PROJECT". So, rereading many of the recent posts before retiring last night, I pledged to myself to wake up with a better understanding, why I had such a 'limited' vocabulary, after so much schooling, and such a long 'non-golf' career, AND VOLLA, THERE IT WAS ,THE ANSWER, "NON-GOLF CAREER".

So, yes, in closing, I have a few last comments, different than above, (1), I LOVE the idea to communicate MANZELLAISM'S and their associated humor AS A STANDARD, for golf has been much to serious, and yes, BBKIB was my attempt to keep up with Brian's boys, (2), I recognize the frustration I have when getting NO responses to requests for even 'qualitative' performance data from such a diversified BUT GOLF FOCUSED GROUP, so please understand, and accept my apologies, for in conclusion, (3) For any, and hopefully ALL of us to improve, better yet 'continuously improve', IMO we must GENERATE AND SHARE THE DATA AND BE WILLING AT LEAST TRY WHAT THE DATA ARE SUGGESTING.

Very sincerely, and appreciatively,
art
Click to expand...

Art -

It's just a lot easier to keep the terminology as straightforward as possible. I've been interacting with Brian for nearly a decade and his ability to COMMUNICATE is second to none. Let me state this another way...it's actually not so easy to get complex ideas across in simple terms. Brian, I believe, does not intend to water down his findings, knowledge of science/math governing the swing, etc. Rather he deals with people who can barely break 120 (me), gifted tour players, equipment experts, and physicists & scientists daily. He must be able to communicate effectively with all sorts of people from different walks of life.

This site, if nothing else, has some bits of pieces of information from sides of the spectrum. I think many of our terms are actually very precise. Brian's way of describing things makes the conservation relatively easy to facilitate (and also easy to remember!).

I can tell you in my line of work, if you want to be really valuable, you MUST be able to carefully consider your audience. You need to be able to dive down into the weeds and develop complex analysis and solutions and also give a "bird's eye" view with high level terms (think executive summary).

The truly great teachers (go read/listen to Feynman's lectures) could distill complex ideas for the masses and leave the room knowing the students picked up a few useful ideas and learned something. I'll be teaching a material science course at the US Naval Academy in the Fall - a course that is notoriously tough to teach. I will absolutely try my best to blend the convoluted scientific vernacular with tons of layman's definitions. One needs to be able to sound intelligent at a technical meeting, but you also need to "get to the bottom line" with management too.

Erik
 
B

birly-shirly

New
Thanks Kevin

Your comments have cleared up a big misunderstanding that I've been labouring under for too long.

I took this to the range this evening - and basically hit a lot of balls aiming my downswing at a point about 12 - 18 inches back of the ball, and 4 - 6 inches inside of the target line. Basically, just a feel of keeping my upper body turned and my arms swinging down in front.

It's a bit too early to say for sure how things are - not least because we had thick, thick fog on the range and even a short iron would disappear into the mist. But I would not have believed that this change wouldn't result in snap hooks and huge pushes - and it was clear that I was actually starting most balls on line. Also clear was that I was launching the ball much higher - which for me is a good thing.

Best of all - I'm making much better contact on the face. There's still a bit of dispersion - but the middle of my misses is the middle of the face. Previously, everything was tending towards the heel with the occasional J Arthur thrown in. Never sniffed a shank in a hundred balls which, believe me, makes for a pleasant change.

Thanks again
 
O

OLIVER1

New
As a continuation to this...Is it possible to over-tumble (as opposed to being OTT) at the onset of the downswing, then have to back up the shaft?
 
O

OLIVER1

New
Lindsey Newman said:
Yes! and that would be THE ultimate example "of over the top".
Click to expand...

Cheers, Lindsey. Now I'm more confused than ever...:(

I guess what I'm asking is, is it possible to over-rotate the left arm on the downswing before an impact stage, so that by the time impact comes, it's more of a waft with a rigid left arm or a shaft back-up?
 
Last edited:
L

Lindsey Newman

New
OLIVER1 said:
Cheers, Lindsey. Now I'm more confused than ever...:(

I guess what I'm asking is, is it possible to over-rotate the left arm on the downswing before an impact stage, so that by the time impact comes, it's more of a waft with a rigid left arm or a shaft back-up?
Click to expand...

Sorry, did not mean to confuse. The primary purpose of the tumble is to get the club head to track "out" to the ball. If you tumble from an already steep position you would probably "wheef" and your ball would not "experience impact". Tumble is a steepening move and you certainly would nt want to tumble an already steep shaft. Really, I don't think anyone ever has, before my eyes, steepened an already steep shaft.
 
B

birly-shirly

New
Does this work both ways?

I.e. do you have the choice to either tumble the club to encourage a more vertical handpath OR keep the body turned and handpath in so that the club tumbles as a reaction?
 
L

Lindsey Newman

New
birly-shirly said:
Does this work both ways?

I.e. do you have the choice to either tumble the club to encourage a more vertical handpath OR keep the body turned and handpath in so that the club tumbles as a reaction?
Click to expand...

Me thinks that your question is player dependent. Some may have to do all of that. I do believe its improbable that one would have an overly out hand path AND tumble. Again, they may miss the ball completely to the outside.
 
gmbtempe

gmbtempe

New
Kevin Shields said:
Can be but certainly not always. Shallow undercuts and hooks are the case depending on skill level
Click to expand...

This has been my experience...a pretty good teacher once told me that its pretty amazing you hit the ball so well from your position at Delivery, you got great hands.................

I took that as saying, you really should suck a lot worse than you do!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top