Is achieving max compression wrong premise?

[Archie Swivel]

Isn't one of the basic premises of TGM that one always desires to achieve maximum compression?

If so, why?

Some guys have a lot of feel with their hands and excel with their touch. I am a much better tennis player than golfer and I use my wrists like crazy to 'flip' the ball with HEAVY topspin. On my overhead shots, I do try to achieve 'maximum compression' so I can bounce the ball over the fence. I can hit a 105-110 mph flat serve with max compression, but I have more luck with a controlled 90 mph hard slice serve.

So is acheiving maximum compression a valid premise in the first place for golf?

Archman

 

[6bee1dee]

Homers states in 2-0 that the Secret of Golf is sustaining the “Line of Compression.” This LOC is the crowning achievement of perfect geometric precision, more so than fierce clubhead speed or muscle mashing</u>, that maintains compression on a particular point along a particular line through the arc of the impact interval. Think sticking the ball on the clubface for a nano second longer than if the LOC was wobbly and/or off center. All the clubhead speed and muscle isn’t worth a hill of beans against the precision of sweet geometric alignments. You can still sustain serious compression without 100 per cent power.

Is this maximum compression? I don’t know. I know Homer speaks of sustaining the LOC. In fact, this problem of maximiZING compression was the starting point of Homer’s research into the golf stroke. TGM started here.

 

[bullish]

Archie,

I don't think your tennis analogy is valid. In tennis, max compression doesn't mean a hill of beans if you cannot keep the ball in play. I contend that if tennis was a contest of who could hit it farther and more accurately, you would soon scrap the flippy heavy topspin shot in favor of one with max compression.