For all you Hardy fans out there...

[6bee1dee]

I will not understand why you are so angry in your posts, Jeff. There are better ways to address issues than always sounding like a little brick all the time. The rah-rah for a Hardy boy over a Homer boy is juvenile- just trash talk.

Three quick points:

1- Pros are gifted athletes that require lots of hand holding and stroking but little direction or instruction beyond keeping the keel even. They have a swing that scores that none of us will ever get close owning with all the instruction in the world. If you aren’t a pro now, you won’t be. Which leads to number two...

2- I could care less if a book like The Golfing Machine turned out champion after champion on the PGA tour. As I said, if you are a pro, you were blessed with a starting talent beyond belief.
What impresses me is how The Golfing Machine turns everyday golfers, average Joes and serious hackers into very talented golfers that play well and know their swing. That is what TGM does and other mainstream instructions can’t.

3- Homer didn’t develop two stroke patterns determined by the number of planes used. That would be putting the horse before the cart. No, his genius gave us two Stroke patterns determined by how the power package is delivered. Swing or Hit. Beats the limited by highly palatable two plane instruction.

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

With that said. Homer believe strongly in a single no shift plane. “Any plane shift is hazardous,” said Homer.

Nice theory but who are the great single no shift players?

All, or nearly all, of the real greats, male and female, have been Hardy one-plane or TGM multiple shift players: Snead, Hogan, Sarazen, Nicklaus, Tiger (the five career Grand Slam winners), Wright, Whitworth, Annika.

Jeff

What Hardy calls a single plane is what TGM calls a zero shift. But with TGM and the knowleadge it gives, shift all you want or not at all. It's only ONE PLANE into impact. So Homer didn't care if you double or triple shifted after reaching the turnerd shoulder plane as long as you know how to get back.

But it seems to me that Hardy agrees with Homer in his thinking that single plane (hardy) or zero shift (homer) is best.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

Nice theory but who are the great single no shift players?

All, or nearly all, of the real greats, male and female, have been Hardy one-plane or TGM multiple shift players: Snead, Hogan, Sarazen, Nicklaus, Tiger (the five career Grand Slam winners), Wright, Whitworth, Annika.

Jeff

Ernie Els, David Toms, Fred Couples...and anyone else who uses the turning shoulder plane.

I have a question though about the Hardy "one plane" swing.

After watching the US Open and getting a lot of Olin Browne and Peter Jacobsen why does it seem like every one of their swings have an OTT move? It "looks" like they get their hands and arms too far off plane behind them and thus have to come a little OTT to get on plane and due to the OTT move they have a very quick move back inside left after impact. Can anyone explain this to me?

thanks

 

[Vaako]

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

quote:Originally posted by Vaako

It won't. Quit pimping Hardy.

I'll buy you a bottle of Scotch if Browne makes top-10 after the smoke settles.


Vaako

EDIT: Or I'll send you the check, if you don't like Whisky.

T-2 after 54; pretty good for a 46 year old journeyman who's lost his card. Even if he finishes T-48th tomorrow, helluva accomplishment. Great, gutsy finish today.

Jeff

Yep and his work with Mumford goes a long way to explaining his new found golfing legs. Your Hardy is more like window dressing - dazzled you to the gills, obviously.


Vaako

 

[Vaako]

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

...

1- Pros are gifted athletes that require lots of hand holding and stroking but little direction or instruction beyond keeping the keel even. They have a swing that scores that none of us will ever get close owning with all the instruction in the world. If you aren’t a pro now, you won’t be. Which leads to number two...

...

IOW - most of the pros are on maintenance shedule with a well established pattern. Any gains to be made are in mental side of the game. And this is probably behind the infamous saying golf is 90% mental - now there's a slap to a club golfers face if I ever saw one.

The other route - for folks w/ not_nearly-optimized patterns - is a swing overhaul. And the caveat here is that you can use a swing overhaul more as a mental tool, a fresh start kinda thing.

Real magic w/ patterns, as far as I can see, is cutting out low-left from somebodys stroke without turning him/her into a weak "power"slicer. Otherwise it's pattern matching, incremental optimizing, you name it...

Now, I'm having real trouble seeing somebody with message "you can bend over more - or less" as turning anybodys golfing life around in a permanent basis. Be that Olin Browne or Joe Golfer. The Magic Pattern of Bend Over sound silly, no? And even here [EDIT: Here being Olin Browne] it's questionable what Hardys impact really is. Marketing it with magic word Plane is brilliant - but that's only marketing.


Who knows - we may have a Hollywood ending in US Open. Not holding my breath waiting, thou.


Vaako

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

Here goes the simple truth:

Jim Hardy teaches two patterns that both will work if done as he says.

He prefers the 'rounder' one, and teaches it--as is--to Peter Jacobsen and Olin Browne.

I repeat....if the Hardy patterns are done as is, they work.

BUT!...in my opinion...it is a TERRIBLE way to CLASSIFY swings with more exceptions then rules.

Homer provides a few more than two working patterns, but here are my favorites:

Never Hook Again!
"Up-the-wall-down-the-wall-left-of-the-wall"

Players include David Toms and Fred Couples.

Never Slice Again!
"Twistaway, then mash the inside of the ball before a full roll."

Players include Arnold Palmer in his prime and about 10,000 satified ex-slicers.

But....I teach many, many more patterns which will be the subject of an upcoming video.

Makes sense; I agree that there are many variations of Hardy's one plane swing and that he seems to prefer teaching the Snead model. I'm glad you are back. Hope you are feeling better and have a speedy recovery.

Jeff

 

[Brian Manzella]

Olin Browne is doing a Sam Snead pattern?

My belly is doing a better imatation of Tom Cruise's belly.

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

I will not understand why you are so angry in your posts, Jeff. There are better ways to address issues than always sounding like a little brick all the time. The rah-rah for a Hardy boy over a Homer boy is juvenile- just trash talk.

I'm sorry, which Homer boy did I root against? If you mean Toms, this is what I posted about him in this thread: "BTW, there is a ton of golf left. No reason why David can't bounce back." As far as Olin goes, I posted about him to tweak the Hardy-bashers on this site. Someone else decided to turn it into a pissing contest and a question of manhood. Anyhow, you can't deny that it is a nice story.

There is no denying that I do get my back up when someone attacks, without specifics, facts, photos or expert analysis, me, Hardy or anyone else. I'm looking for golf knowledge, without prejudice. A lot of Brian's stuff is great: his putting and grip articles are reference pieces for me; every golfer should study the "Confessions..." video. I'll use quality information from anyone. But I have little patience for "you're wrong because I say so" posts.

As far as Hardy goes, he has cleared up a lot for me, as well as for many others, but his theories haven't been 100% "proven" yet. Time will tell. Since I'm relying on his teaching, though, I very much want to know if anyone has found any real flaws in it. That's is why I find annoying those vague "he uses 'plane' all wrong" criticisms. They aren't very substantive. That said, I'm aware of one problem some students have had with his teaching that I've posted about elsewhere, but no one here has identified it or any others.

Jeff

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by jim_0068

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

Nice theory but who are the great single no shift players?

All, or nearly all, of the real greats, male and female, have been Hardy one-plane or TGM multiple shift players: Snead, Hogan, Sarazen, Nicklaus, Tiger (the five career Grand Slam winners), Wright, Whitworth, Annika.

Jeff

Ernie Els, David Toms, Fred Couples...and anyone else who uses the turning shoulder plane.

I have a question though about the Hardy "one plane" swing.

After watching the US Open and getting a lot of Olin Browne and Peter Jacobsen why does it seem like every one of their swings have an OTT move? It "looks" like they get their hands and arms too far off plane behind them and thus have to come a little OTT to get on plane and due to the OTT move they have a very quick move back inside left after impact. Can anyone explain this to me?

thanks

All those guys have played great golf, as have Norman, Weiskopf, Hale Irwin, Seve, Karrie Webb, Langer, Davis, Watson, etc. But, I'll take my list (plus others like Boros, Nelson, Venturi) over the two-plane list. Also, Ernie was one-plane in the past but has switched to two-planes since working with Leadbetter; no majors with that swing yet. Further, with his dramatic drop to the shaft-plane in the downswing, I don't see Couples in the two-plane/single shift category.

The OTT move of Browne and Jake is similar to Snead's, no? It is what Hardy tries to teach: closed stance, arms pulled in behind the body going back, arms dramatically left after impact. It's all in his book. Snead just looked better doing it.

Jeff

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by Vaako

Yep and his work with Mumford goes a long way to explaining his new found golfing legs. Your Hardy is more like window dressing - dazzled you to the gills, obviously.


Vaako

In the interview on Friday night that I saw, Olin only spoke about Hardy and his work to develop a "one-plane swing". When did he mention Mumford?

Jeff

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

Olin Browne is doing a Sam Snead pattern?

My belly is doing a better imatation of Tom Cruise's belly.

Very funny, but let's look at the facts. Hardy doesn't call it a Snead pattern, but on Brady Riggs's site, he has a side-by-side of Hardy students Jake and Pernice and he says their takeaway is what Snead used. Here's the link:

http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/221289/1/8579073

I haven't been able to frame-by-frame Olin, but I assumed his backswing is the same as Tom and Jake's, and, therefore, the same as Snead's. Also, the closed stance, arms behind the body going back and arms dramatically left are all very much a part of Snead's swing. You're the expert, though: what do you see?

Jeff

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

What Hardy calls a single plane is what TGM calls a zero shift. But with TGM and the knowleadge it gives, shift all you want or not at all. It's only ONE PLANE into impact. So Homer didn't care if you double or triple shifted after reaching the turnerd shoulder plane as long as you know how to get back.

But it seems to me that Hardy agrees with Homer in his thinking that single plane (hardy) or zero shift (homer) is best.

I think you've got it backwards: from Brian's posts I thought Hardy's one-plane swings were double or multiple-shift in TGM terms and that Hardy's two-plane is a TGM single or no shift. Brian, correct me if I'm wrong.

In any case, Hardy has been very scrupulous about not publically advocating either method and he does teach both. However, the record book seems to support the one-plane swing for ball striking, longevity and championships and that is what most of his students chose to learn.

Jeff

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

All those guys have played great golf, as have Norman, Weiskopf, Hale Irwin, Seve, Karrie Webb, Langer, Davis, Watson, etc. But, I'll take my list (plus others like Boros, Nelson, Venturi) over the two-plane list. Also, Ernie was one-plane in the past but has switched to two-planes since working with Leadbetter; no majors with that swing yet. Further, with his dramatic drop to the shaft-plane in the downswing, I don't see Couples in the two-plane/single shift category.

The OTT move of Browne and Jake is similar to Snead's, no? It is what Hardy tries to teach: closed stance, arms pulled in behind the body going back, arms dramatically left after impact. It's all in his book. Snead just looked better doing it.

Jeff

So hardy's one-plane swing is basically a flat backswing with an OTT move which will end up pull-drawing the ball with a normal hinge and/or straight-ish to a fading the ball with an angled hinge?

 

[Vaako]

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

quote:Originally posted by Vaako

Yep and his work with Mumford goes a long way to explaining his new found golfing legs. Your Hardy is more like window dressing - dazzled you to the gills, obviously.


Vaako

In the interview on Friday night that I saw, Olin only spoke about Hardy and his work to develop a "one-plane swing". When did he mention Mumford?

Jeff

Look at page 1 of this topic.

Vaako

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

What Hardy calls a single plane is what TGM calls a zero shift. But with TGM and the knowleadge it gives, shift all you want or not at all. It's only ONE PLANE into impact. So Homer didn't care if you double or triple shifted after reaching the turnerd shoulder plane as long as you know how to get back.

But it seems to me that Hardy agrees with Homer in his thinking that single plane (hardy) or zero shift (homer) is best.

I think you've got it backwards: from Brian's posts I thought Hardy's one-plane swings were double or multiple-shift in TGM terms and that Hardy's two-plane is a TGM single or no shift. Brian, correct me if I'm wrong.

In any case, Hardy has been very scrupulous about not publically advocating either method and he does teach both. However, the record book seems to support the one-plane swing for ball striking, longevity and championships and that is what most of his students chose to learn.

Jeff

No doubt that Hardy has a problem with Planes since he admits to using a different definition of one according to the letters to the editor of this months GD. He, as BM pointed out, confuses golfers like Toms with the number of planes used. I have the feeling that, yes, Hardy and Homer agree that it is best not to have any plane shifts at all if it can be helped. Hardy is trying to achieve this but not as easily as Homer teaches it. And yes, Homer did teach that single plane, right forearm take-away, Swing or Hit to many, including Lynn Blake.


From what I have read, Hardy is pushing his one plane swing.

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by Vaako

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

quote:Originally posted by Vaako

Yep and his work with Mumford goes a long way to explaining his new found golfing legs. Your Hardy is more like window dressing - dazzled you to the gills, obviously.

Vaako

In the interview on Friday night that I saw, Olin only spoke about Hardy and his work to develop a "one-plane swing". When did he mention Mumford?

Jeff

Look at page 1 of this topic.

Vaako

OK, I did. A poster named Matt says Olin worked with Mumford; my question was: when did Olin mention it this week? I've only seen references to Hardy.

Jeff

 

[Brian Manzella]

I think Jim has an excellent point:

When someone does the Hardy pattern (the round one) as Hardy teaches, they are BELOW the turned shoulder plane at the top of the swing, so.....what they need to do is STEEPEN the downswing to get "back on the turned shoulder plane."

It didn't work today.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

I think Jim has an excellent point:

When someone does the Hardy pattern (the round one) as Hardy teaches, they are BELOW the turned shoulder plane at the top of the swing, so.....what they need to do is STEEPEN the downswing to get "back on the turned shoulder plane."

It didn't work today.

So...if i'm understanding this pattern, the reason why Vijay has success with this "hardy one-plane idea" is because he drops to the ELBOW PLANE and NOT THE TURNED SHOULDER PLANE right?

 

[ragman]

The "one plane" swing, as Hardy teaches it, definitely is an option.

If you bend over enough (as Hardy wants for the "1 Plane" swing), only minimal axis tilt is needed because the shoulder plane at the top is already pointing close to the plane/target line.

 

[dbl]

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee
No doubt that Hardy has a problem with Planes since he admits to using a different definition of one according to the letters to the editor of this months GD. He, as BM pointed out, confuses golfers like Toms with the number of planes used. I have the feeling that, yes, Hardy and Homer agree that it is best not to have any plane shifts at all if it can be helped. Hardy is trying to achieve this but not as easily as Homer teaches it. And yes, Homer did teach that single plane, right forearm take-away, Swing or Hit to many, including Lynn Blake.

I don't think Hardy is very concerned about shifts, in that his "1 plane" swing has them.

Like someone has said, a lot of the differences between his swings is due to setup, and he just advocates certain components be used depending on the setup chosen.