Interesting question....

[Bigwill]

They sell one of those things, actually, so I'm sure there's merit to it. I think my swing speed may have even benefited from all-out swings with a momentus, so I have no issue with resisted swings improving speed. But I wonder how much more beneficial it would be than just a comprehensive weight program; I'm sure there are anecdotes for both. That would be a great study to perform; comparing golf specific strengthening vs. overall general strengthening, to see if either is more effective. And if there is a difference, is it significant enough to say one is definitively better than the other?

I think the toughest part of a study like that would be having true apples to apples comparisons. If one guy is using one method and a second is using the other, how much do individual physical differences skew the results? It would be interesting.

 

[johnnymarlboro]

I've seen video somewhere with Rickie Fowler doing an exercise with a stretch band essentially simulating the start of the downswing. Couldn't find it though, think it may have been on Golf Channel or something.

 

[BIGBALL]

yeah, Drew, I got all that. That's not what I meant.

What I meant was, if Lifter wants to train for more speed, he should work out with heavy weights or heavy resistence, not train with light stuff. So, if he learns how to move heavy stuff fast, when he goes to the actual lighter club, it will move a lot faster. That is how you make the biggest gain in clubhead speed.

That really isn't so Virt...

 

[Virtuoso]

That really isn't so Virt...

Ok, convince me otherwise. I don't care what the answer is...just give it to me.

I've had lots of guys come back to get their speed measured after comprehensive golf specfic exercise programs. They never worked with anything heavy. No increase in clubhead speed. Lots of disappointment.

 

[drewyallop]

yeah, Drew, I got all that. That's not what I meant.

What I meant was, if Lifter wants to train for more speed, he should work out with heavy weights or heavy resistence, not train with light stuff. So, if he learns how to move heavy stuff fast, when he goes to the actual lighter club, it will move a lot faster. That is how you make the biggest gain in clubhead speed.

Ok virt, I get you now. Thought you were talking about club mass not weights.

 

[drewyallop]

Ok, convince me otherwise. I don't care what the answer is...just give it to me.

I've had lots of guys come back to get their speed measured after comprehensive golf specfic exercise programs. They never worked with anything heavy. No increase in clubhead speed. Lots of disappointment.

Agree that training with enough resistance is important. The thing I question is training with resistance and speed. I am a believer in high intensity workouts and that requires moving the resistance very slowly to muscle failure. See earlier posts on "Body by Science".

 

[Tony D'Antonio]

I'm not sure which is the easiest but I think golf is the hardest. You have to be good at a lot of skills to play pro golf. In baseball, if you can throw hard, really hard, you will get a look at a pitcher. I sort of did this at the college level. In football, if you are really big and workout, or really fast and workout you can get a look. In basketball, if you are 7 feet tall and do the least bit of agility training you'll get a look. Coaches in all these sports always think they can turn raw talent into a professional. In golf, no one looks and then decides to sign you to a pro contract, you have to shoot a number and that means you have to drive it ok, hit irons ok, have a decent short game, putt well and manage your emotions. You just have to do a whole bunch more stuff to make it to a tour than the other sports. Tennis is probably tough too.

Time out!!

Lets start over. Of the EXISTING people already into the sport, at least 17 or 18 years old, competing somewhere....college, mini tour, minor league baseball. Which sport is easiest to break into.

The whole young child, money, opportunity is a great discussion, not the one I had in mind.

 

[birly-shirly]

Agree that training with enough resistance is important. The thing I question is training with resistance and speed. I am a believer in high intensity workouts and that requires moving the resistance very slowly to muscle failure. See earlier posts on "Body by Science".

Surely the common sense approach is to do both, but separately.

Olympic weight lifters might be the ultimate in explosive force and power, but I suspect that they still do slow reps with high resistance to build enough strength to handle the more demanding technical lifts.

Cyclists workout with weights, and they also ride up hill in a HIGH gear (ie slow pedal turnover) to build strength. But they also ride on the flat in a low gear, spinning their pedals at upwards of 120rpm - for the neuromuscular adaptations to moving FAST. The idea is ultimately to be able to combine the strength and the speed to increase POWER.

If I was going to set about trying to increase clubhead speed, I'd look first at whether raw, general strength was a likely limiter. Even if it doesn't look that way, some basic conditioning probably makes sense in terms of long term health and injury prevention.

At the same time, I'd work on flexibility.

With a reasonable base level of strength and suppleness, I'd combine some sort of golf-specific resistance club (for which I think a weighted club would be ok) and a shaft only. (Equivalent to high and low gear efforts on a bike). But I'd work on both with a swing speed radar to ensure that I'm progressing with both.

And of course, to transfer any gains in strength and/or speed to hitting a real golf ball, I'd mix those exercises up with whacking the bejayzus out of a ball with my normal driver.

 

[drewyallop]

Surely the common sense approach is to do both, but separately.

Olympic weight lifters might be the ultimate in explosive force and power, but I suspect that they still do slow reps with high resistance to build enough strength to handle the more demanding technical lifts.

Cyclists workout with weights, and they also ride up hill in a HIGH gear (ie slow pedal turnover) to build strength. But they also ride on the flat in a low gear, spinning their pedals at upwards of 120rpm - for the neuromuscular adaptations to moving FAST. The idea is ultimately to be able to combine the strength and the speed to increase POWER.

If I was going to set about trying to increase clubhead speed, I'd look first at whether raw, general strength was a likely limiter. Even if it doesn't look that way, some basic conditioning probably makes sense in terms of long term health and injury prevention.

At the same time, I'd work on flexibility.

With a reasonable base level of strength and suppleness, I'd combine some sort of golf-specific resistance club (for which I think a weighted club would be ok) and a shaft only. (Equivalent to high and low gear efforts on a bike). But I'd work on both with a swing speed radar to ensure that I'm progressing with both.

And of course, to transfer any gains in strength and/or speed to hitting a real golf ball, I'd mix those exercises up with whacking the bejayzus out of a ball with my normal driver.

Many good points birly. But many are contradicted in the book I referenced. I suggest you get the book for a more complete argument. I think you would be surprised at how much high intensity training can contribute to overall athletic performance, including speed. But note that there are may be insurmountable limits imposed by an individual's genetic makeup.

 

[conkanen]

Many good points birly. But many are contradicted in the book I referenced. I suggest you get the book for a more complete argument. I think you would be surprised at how much high intensity training can contribute to overall athletic performance, including speed. But note that there are may be insurmountable limits imposed by an individual's genetic makeup.

Been doing strength/fitness training for years and Body By Science was the most eye opening read on the subject I have ever set eyes on. Enough science and footnotes to satiate most here I would imagine. I just returned the book to the library and I definitely will be buying a copy of this one.

 

[DCgolf]

Do we have 7, 10 MPH increases? Is their Tman or FS evidence where one has seen this? I mean on a long term average basis. And what spefice drills and weights and exercises create the increase. I've got over 100 students would love to know and I want to tell them.

 

[mgranato]

DC, have you read Body by Science?

 

[DCgolf]

No. I'll get it tho. I read Golf Anatomy

 

[birly-shirly]

Many good points birly. But many are contradicted in the book I referenced. I suggest you get the book for a more complete argument. I think you would be surprised at how much high intensity training can contribute to overall athletic performance, including speed. But note that there are may be insurmountable limits imposed by an individual's genetic makeup.

Drew/MGranato/Conkanen - in broad terms, what does the book say that contradicts what I posted? I read the earlier posts about the book, and I read this summary - THE BOOK »

I first learnt about low volume, high intensity conditioning as a student 20 years ago, and I'm on board with that, so long as you can safely push yourself to the requisite level of intensity.

I don't know though, and I didn't see anything in that page I linked to, about the development of sports-specific speed.

At a bit of a tangent, why is it that most reputable coaches (including endurance sports coaches) preach the benefits of resistance training - but weight-training coaches so often seem to HATE cardio work with a passion. Surely they can't all by pumped up gym bunnies who can't run the length of themselves....And why, whilst we're on the subject, did they illustrate their web page with an anatomical illustration of a runner - if they're going to harp on about "the negative effects of traditional aerobic-centric exercise" or "the popular misconception that aerobics or “cardio” are effective or even necessary for fat loss"?

 

[mgranato]

Drew/MGranato/Conkanen - in broad terms, what does the book say that contradicts what I posted?

The book says your wrong!!!!

 

[birly-shirly]

That's just the drugs talking!!!

 

[drewyallop]

Drew/MGranato/Conkanen - in broad terms, what does the book say that contradicts what I posted? I read the earlier posts about the book, and I read this summary - THE BOOK »

I first learnt about low volume, high intensity conditioning as a student 20 years ago, and I'm on board with that, so long as you can safely push yourself to the requisite level of intensity.

I don't know though, and I didn't see anything in that page I linked to, about the development of sports-specific speed.

At a bit of a tangent, why is it that most reputable coaches (including endurance sports coaches) preach the benefits of resistance training - but weight-training coaches so often seem to HATE cardio work with a passion. Surely they can't all by pumped up gym bunnies who can't run the length of themselves....And why, whilst we're on the subject, did they illustrate their web page with an anatomical illustration of a runner - if they're going to harp on about "the negative effects of traditional aerobic-centric exercise" or "the popular misconception that aerobics or “cardio” are effective or even necessary for fat loss"?

Yeah birly. I guess the picture of the runner invalidates the book .

I am not going to do your research for you birls. Get the book.

 

[birly-shirly]

Yeah birly. I guess the picture of the runner invalidates the book .

I am not going to do your research for you birls. Get the book.

Tell me why, and I might.

Telling me that I'm wrong, and that the book is going to explain everything, isn't all that persuasive. Neither is that stuff that I linked to. But I like to keep an open mind, and maybe the book is better.

 

[drewyallop]

Tell me why, and I might.

Telling me that I'm wrong, and that the book is going to explain everything, isn't all that persuasive. Neither is that stuff that I linked to. But I like to keep an open mind, and maybe the book is better.

It is working for me birls. And the book is not that expensive.

 

[spktho]

Drew/MGranato/Conkanen - in broad terms, what does the book say that contradicts what I posted? I read the earlier posts about the book, and I read this summary - THE BOOK »

I first learnt about low volume, high intensity conditioning as a student 20 years ago, and I'm on board with that, so long as you can safely push yourself to the requisite level of intensity.

I don't know though, and I didn't see anything in that page I linked to, about the development of sports-specific speed.

At a bit of a tangent, why is it that most reputable coaches (including endurance sports coaches) preach the benefits of resistance training - but weight-training coaches so often seem to HATE cardio work with a passion. Surely they can't all by pumped up gym bunnies who can't run the length of themselves....And why, whilst we're on the subject, did they illustrate their web page with an anatomical illustration of a runner - if they're going to harp on about "the negative effects of traditional aerobic-centric exercise" or "the popular misconception that aerobics or “cardio” are effective or even necessary for fat loss"?

Hopefully not giving too much away:

Regarding sport specific speed, it appears that working the muscles that are used in a specific athletic motion to "positive failure" allows for the recruitment of more muscle bundles, thereby effectively "waking up" the neural connections to the less used muscle bundles.

Regarding "cardio" work, if the body's cells--namely muscle cells--can keep up with the aerobic demand, there are less muscle bundles recruited. If the first line muscle bundles("slow twitch") deplete their glycogen stores, then the next line of muscle bundles(type II and other "fast twitch" which use many more muscle cells) are recruited. The object of high intensity low duration exercise is to deplete the glycogen stores of all muscle bundles being worked without damaging the muscle too much thereby making the body replenish those stores utilizing anabolic reactions like replicating mitochondria and transporting materials across the cell membranes. This makes the body "work more" when not exercising. It is also very important therefore, to allow adequate recovery time.