Hands too far forward?
- Thread starter Redgoat
- Start date
- Status
cherrybarry
New
Isn't Faxon taught by Ron Gring GSED?
EaglesNest
New
No expert on physics or golf, but why do the women run much slower times for the 100m sprint than men ? They both have efficient force but I am led to believe.
F=ma
Force= Mass*Acceleration.
So my assumption is that you can have force properly aligned in the golfswing but the governing factors behind it will be mass and acceleration(rotation).
Looks like Sergio's "monkeying around with his swing" has paid off. Impressive finish at the Masters and impressive ball striking this weekend at the Byron Nelson. Super lag isn't the hallmark of stacks of wins on the PGA tour. PGA pros are great athletes, but they are human. It simply takes time for major swing changes to become second nature and it looks as if Sergio is developing a certain comfort level. Don't get me wrong, I believe in the geometric fundamentals of TGM (my instructor is a GSED), but it seems like many believe that anyone that has a viewpoint somewhat contradictory to "the book" should be tarred and feathered. Interesting discussion to say the least.
E.
FanofHogan
New
I have started to see the tar and feathered point myself. I was going to ask PPT3 who else has been monkeying with their swing these days, I've got some extra cash and want to go to Vegas and pick a winner for the next tour event.
DukeNasty and Fan of Hogan,
Enjoyed the humor but did you look at what I actually said or didn't say. I certainly did not say Sergio would not win again. He is too awesome a talent for that. My point was should he have been fooling around with a winning formula. He already had a great swing and as far as who attacks who when it comes to The Golfing Machine it was Sergio who was being attacked because he stressed the clubshaft and looked a little different to "traditional" instructors. In fact a certain TV commentator and well-known instructor said he had too much lag to win on the PGA Tour. After he won suddenly he had a swing like Ben Hogan. Not a bad guy to be compared to wouldn't you say? Then Sergio is being told to change his swing if he is ever going to be a consistent winner. Well if one minute you are being compared to Hogan as a swinger and ball striker and Hogan had a little lag don't you think and the next minute you are being told lag is bad I'm sorry I am tuning out because Sergio's critics are not making sense.
Next point. Has he really "changed" his swing? I defer to his countryman here, Seve Ballesteros, who said at Doral that Sergio has not changed his swing at all but simply needs to putt better to start winning again. Well he putted better. I also want scientific proof that he has less lag than two or three years ago. Tell me exactly how much less does he stress it at startdown and does he have 1, 2 or any number of degrees more angle in his downswing or an earlier release point. I'm sorry I don't see it.
Is "changing" one's swing always such a great idea? For those of you old enough to remember check out Bob Tway's record after his three victory season in 1986. Tway who had a Golfing Machine background started running around to a number of famous teachers who shall remain nameless and went into a viscious tailspin. One of those teachers told me he couldn't figure out why Tway was trying to mess around with his swing and why he had even come to him in the first place. Bob Tway eventually went back to what got him there and has had a very distinguished career on tour since. The moral is sometimes messing with your swing only messes with your head and I still believe that is the case with Sergio no matter what the bandwagon jumpers say. Anyway it looks like all the "experts" and bandwagon jumpers have adopted Tiger as their new project. You see I prefer the positive, scientific approach, and variety of possibilities that The Golfing Machine presents. I like the way it explains how a swing like Hogan's or Sergio's works as opposed to the endless tearing down of our great golfers for the sake of filling up newspaper space.
Enjoyed the humor but did you look at what I actually said or didn't say. I certainly did not say Sergio would not win again. He is too awesome a talent for that. My point was should he have been fooling around with a winning formula. He already had a great swing and as far as who attacks who when it comes to The Golfing Machine it was Sergio who was being attacked because he stressed the clubshaft and looked a little different to "traditional" instructors. In fact a certain TV commentator and well-known instructor said he had too much lag to win on the PGA Tour. After he won suddenly he had a swing like Ben Hogan. Not a bad guy to be compared to wouldn't you say? Then Sergio is being told to change his swing if he is ever going to be a consistent winner. Well if one minute you are being compared to Hogan as a swinger and ball striker and Hogan had a little lag don't you think and the next minute you are being told lag is bad I'm sorry I am tuning out because Sergio's critics are not making sense.
Next point. Has he really "changed" his swing? I defer to his countryman here, Seve Ballesteros, who said at Doral that Sergio has not changed his swing at all but simply needs to putt better to start winning again. Well he putted better. I also want scientific proof that he has less lag than two or three years ago. Tell me exactly how much less does he stress it at startdown and does he have 1, 2 or any number of degrees more angle in his downswing or an earlier release point. I'm sorry I don't see it.
Is "changing" one's swing always such a great idea? For those of you old enough to remember check out Bob Tway's record after his three victory season in 1986. Tway who had a Golfing Machine background started running around to a number of famous teachers who shall remain nameless and went into a viscious tailspin. One of those teachers told me he couldn't figure out why Tway was trying to mess around with his swing and why he had even come to him in the first place. Bob Tway eventually went back to what got him there and has had a very distinguished career on tour since. The moral is sometimes messing with your swing only messes with your head and I still believe that is the case with Sergio no matter what the bandwagon jumpers say. Anyway it looks like all the "experts" and bandwagon jumpers have adopted Tiger as their new project. You see I prefer the positive, scientific approach, and variety of possibilities that The Golfing Machine presents. I like the way it explains how a swing like Hogan's or Sergio's works as opposed to the endless tearing down of our great golfers for the sake of filling up newspaper space.
FanofHogan
New
I like the golf machine too. I am a person who thrives on analytical type knowledge and information. But, I dont think the golf machine is the end all to end all forms of learning the golf swing. While I really do not care for Ledbetter, he didnt get to where he is by being a down right idiot. And I didnt accuse you of saying Sergio would never win again. It was just humor and that is all I intended it to be. I dont know why these guys decided to switch teachers or change their swings, but I guess they feel they reach a plateau and need to do something or go elsewhere. Why does David Toms no longer work exclusively with Brian? I am pretty positive it isnt a reflection on Brian's abilities. He's a sharp guy. It just seems that any time there is a discussion on the golf swing and someone dissagrees with or questions any aspect of TGM they flamed. I hate that. And it does nothing but make the flamer look less than what they are. Now, I am no where near a swing guru, and there are many more people on this forum that know tons more about the golf swing than I do. I just wish we could all share what knowledge we have without saying, "It's my way or no way."
bagger1rick
New
Tway went to OSU.
Holder and what he does or doesn't teach his players about TGM is a mystery. Nothing is ever mentioned about the golf swing in the articles and interviews I have read/seen here in Okla. My hunch is that these kids come already equipped with good swings and he might tweak them a bit, adjust the alignment, or such. But I doubt that he puts them through 12-1 or 12-2, and does swing reconstruction.
Here in the great TGM wasteland, I hesitate to even ask anyone with "credentials" about TGM after the last time I made that mistake.
4 years or so ago, when the new head pro showed up at my course, I saw him hopping around on one leg, obviously doing David Lee's Gravity Golf drills. We discussed that idea for a while, and when he said he didn't really teach it, I asked him about TGM. He dropped his club and came at me slowly, like a Tiger stalking an Eland, his eyes becoming narrow slits. He hissed, "If you have that book, go to the nearest river, and throw it in. It is WORTHLESS." He actually acted this out with an imaginary throw into the distance.
Here in the great TGM wasteland, I hesitate to even ask anyone with "credentials" about TGM after the last time I made that mistake.
4 years or so ago, when the new head pro showed up at my course, I saw him hopping around on one leg, obviously doing David Lee's Gravity Golf drills. We discussed that idea for a while, and when he said he didn't really teach it, I asked him about TGM. He dropped his club and came at me slowly, like a Tiger stalking an Eland, his eyes becoming narrow slits. He hissed, "If you have that book, go to the nearest river, and throw it in. It is WORTHLESS." He actually acted this out with an imaginary throw into the distance.
ppt3,
All pros mess around with their swings. Tiger did it after crushing the entire field at the 97 Masters and went on to crush every challenger for a stretch of golf that even he may not repeat. Furthermore, just because your swing "looks" good doesn't mean it is the most effective swing for you. Phil's swing has always looked long and fluid with tons of lag, but he had to change certain things as well as adopt a different strategic approach to the game in order to win the big one. Jacobsen changed his full swing as well as his putting stroke and went on to win on the big tour at age 49. Sure all these players won in the past, but defining the correct winning formula for each player is a moving target.
E.
All pros mess around with their swings. Tiger did it after crushing the entire field at the 97 Masters and went on to crush every challenger for a stretch of golf that even he may not repeat. Furthermore, just because your swing "looks" good doesn't mean it is the most effective swing for you. Phil's swing has always looked long and fluid with tons of lag, but he had to change certain things as well as adopt a different strategic approach to the game in order to win the big one. Jacobsen changed his full swing as well as his putting stroke and went on to win on the big tour at age 49. Sure all these players won in the past, but defining the correct winning formula for each player is a moving target.
E.
DukeNasty,
I don't know if I agree with your statement that all pros mess around with their swings. Not if the Bruce Lietzke banana under the headcover story is true. No tinkerer Bruce. Moe Morman said he trapped his swing late in his teens and hit it straight every day for the rest of his life and if you ever saw him play you would know he wasn't kidding. Awesome. Hubert Green once said he saw his swing on video and almost threw up and just kept playing with what was an extremely effective action and didn't worry about it.
You see the real question here is whether you really believe Sergio had too much lag in his swing and it was affecting his ability to play the game. I am sorry but I find that whole notion nonsensical. Here was a guy who I believe recorded the lowest handicap index in the history of amateur golf, won his club championship at age 12, was the youngest competitor on the European Tour, won the British Amateur, finished 2nd at the PGA Championship at age 19, won three times on the PGA tour by age 22 and on and on. So just how bad was he with "too much lag." Now he wins once and all the anti-lag people are trying to tell us how he has improved because of "swing changes" that I defy someone to prove scientifically.
As far as Phil Mickelson goes two years ago he was going to knock them dead because he was shortening his swing and just recently I heard the opinion from another "expert" commentator that it is good to see Phil go back to what he knows best which is his long fluid swing. So which one is it? The fact of the matter is Phil Mickelson is a great player, has been a winner from the time he was little, and played some great majors before which he didn't win. Remember Payne Stewart's putt, the longest in the history of the tournament to win on the last hole. That's professional sports.
Not sure what gets everybody's shorts in a knot when it comes to lag but like MizunoJoe's buddy there seem to be a whole lot of people who get their back up about the concept and the book. Too bad. Homer and Ben Doyle are truly great, generous people and with an open mind the book is a treasure trove.
I don't know if I agree with your statement that all pros mess around with their swings. Not if the Bruce Lietzke banana under the headcover story is true. No tinkerer Bruce. Moe Morman said he trapped his swing late in his teens and hit it straight every day for the rest of his life and if you ever saw him play you would know he wasn't kidding. Awesome. Hubert Green once said he saw his swing on video and almost threw up and just kept playing with what was an extremely effective action and didn't worry about it.
You see the real question here is whether you really believe Sergio had too much lag in his swing and it was affecting his ability to play the game. I am sorry but I find that whole notion nonsensical. Here was a guy who I believe recorded the lowest handicap index in the history of amateur golf, won his club championship at age 12, was the youngest competitor on the European Tour, won the British Amateur, finished 2nd at the PGA Championship at age 19, won three times on the PGA tour by age 22 and on and on. So just how bad was he with "too much lag." Now he wins once and all the anti-lag people are trying to tell us how he has improved because of "swing changes" that I defy someone to prove scientifically.
As far as Phil Mickelson goes two years ago he was going to knock them dead because he was shortening his swing and just recently I heard the opinion from another "expert" commentator that it is good to see Phil go back to what he knows best which is his long fluid swing. So which one is it? The fact of the matter is Phil Mickelson is a great player, has been a winner from the time he was little, and played some great majors before which he didn't win. Remember Payne Stewart's putt, the longest in the history of the tournament to win on the last hole. That's professional sports.
Not sure what gets everybody's shorts in a knot when it comes to lag but like MizunoJoe's buddy there seem to be a whole lot of people who get their back up about the concept and the book. Too bad. Homer and Ben Doyle are truly great, generous people and with an open mind the book is a treasure trove.
FanofHogan
New
My problem isnt with Homer and Ben having closed minds, it just seems that so many other TGM people have this closed mind. Mind you, I am not accusing you of that. It just seems that any time on the internet where I have seen different philosophies intermingle it's always a TGM proponent that appears to be non-bending in their beliefs.
- Status