One Hour Conversation with Fredrik Tuxen this morning...

[Dariusz J.]

Well, kind of. I'm aware that Mickelson's release might not be a good model for the average chap to follow. I think common sense, rather than Trackman, would be enough for that conclusion. However, my post was more directed at your first paragraph, when you state that the numbers may not be enough to to draw any valid conclusions about Mickelson. Still not quite sure what you're getting at there. Once again, no critique on my part, just looking to learn.

If you read my post this way it means that my words are unclear. So, once again - I wanted to express that Mickelson's numbers alone are not enough for drawing a conclusion that his mechanics are the best to follow. A tool does not recognize mechanics, it recognizes a person's ability to produce better or worse numbers. Not coincidentally, Tuxen stated that of all pros Furyk's numbers were the best when the criterium is repeatability. Not a surprise at all to me.

I am going to say this the best way I how....

Y'all are full of pee-pee ka-ka.

Philly Mic is now a hacker?

Who said he is ??? Actually, he's farther from hackers than 95% of his tour companions.

Cheers

 

[Dariusz J.]

Phil's game has withstood the test of time better than most so I don't know how you can judge the ineffectiveness of his release.

And perhaps he is an exception that proves the rule...besides, if the conditions were less pampered either he would need to change his release or he would have big problems with winning tournaments - even with his great ability to deal with timing issues.

Cheers

 

[birly-shirly]

If a person has club face issues it would be seen through the consistency feature. Natep is right, it doesn't care about the "how". It will just tell you if the face is consistently squaring up or not. Why do you need it to tell you what release type the player is using? I remember not long ago there was a group that said any "handle raiser" had to have "high closure rate". Mickelsons face issues could be figured out a lot by the help of what numbers don't match up. I, for one, would love to see his numbers through the bag.

And another thing, it gets you away from preference. If Phil is talented enough to be consistent with a pattern that differs with anybody's preference, so be it. The numbers won't lie.

Kevin - could you expand on what "the numbers" might be? In the right hands, Phil's pattern is obviously better than most.

Earlier, I asked Brian whether he was saying that, within say 20 inches either side of impact, tour players were basically indistinguishable. Have you any hypotheticals of what numbers might not match up to reflect face issues?

I'm not asking you, or anyone else, to rip on Phil's swing. So if it's easier to deal in generalities rather than 1 particular player, go for it.

 

[OLIVER1]

If you read my post this way it means that my words are unclear. So, once again - I wanted to express that Mickelson's numbers alone are not enough for drawing a conclusion that his mechanics are the best to follow.


Cheers

I agree. Mickelson's numbers are not enough to to draw the conclusion that his mechanics are the best to follow, BUT they are enough to draw the conclusion that he's bloody brilliant. And that's the ONLY thing TM gives a hoot about...

 

[James Marshall (Hogan1953)]

I asked this in another thread but it went unanswered. Does the face close at a different rate depending on the VSP? Thanks.

 

[magicmarker]

And perhaps he is an exception that proves the rule...besides, if the conditions were less pampered either he would need to change his release or he would have big problems with winning tournaments - even with his great ability to deal with timing issues.

Cheers

unless he is the only one playing less pampered courses, I disagree. You undervalue his short game. Who do you think would dominate the less pampered courses making it difficult for him to win without a new release.

 

[Dariusz J.]

unless he is the only one playing less pampered courses, I disagree. You undervalue his short game. Who do you think would dominate the less pampered courses making it difficult for him to win without a new release.

I think these who would have best FIR numbers - a statistics that means a crap nowadays. Mickelson's short game would not mean a lot if he loses a stroke (at least) after a bad drive because he'd be lucky to chip it out to the fairway with one stroke.
This would be a real golf that revitalizes the true spirit of the name "fairway".

Cheers

 

[ekennedy]

Earlier, I asked Brian whether he was saying that, within say 20 inches either side of impact, tour players were basically indistinguishable. Have you any hypotheticals of what numbers might not match up to reflect face issues?

I would bet if there was a blind taste test of tour quality golf swings, they would be basically indistinguishable through the impact area. Phlly Mc included. The farther from impact, the more recognizable the swings would become, which is to say, irrelevant.

 

[wulsy]

I'm sure there are very clever men out there who would say that EVERY swing is different and that it's not irrelevant to each player how they are further away from impact. The uniformity of impact DEPENDS on the lack of uniformity both pre and post impact. I'm feeling very clever tonight.

 

[OLIVER1]

The uniformity of impact DEPENDS on the lack of uniformity both pre and post impact. I'm feeling very clever tonight.

That has me fascinated. How so, Wuls?

 

[Brian Manzella]

 

[ekennedy]

I'm sure there are very clever men out there who would say that EVERY swing is different and that it's not irrelevant to each player how they are further away from impact. The uniformity of impact DEPENDS on the lack of uniformity both pre and post impact. I'm feeling very clever tonight.

The ball doesn't care if it appears to the casual observer to have a high rate of closure.

Don't hurt yourself by patting your back too hard, Wulsy.

 

[OLIVER1]

Don't hurt yourself by patting your back too hard, Wulsy.

What with patting yourself on the back, and the door hitting you on the way out, your poor back is in for quite a beating tonight..!!!

 

[Kevin Shields]

I asked this in another thread but it went unanswered. Does the face close at a different rate depending on the VSP? Thanks.

No, I don't see why it would. Before anyone pounces, remember VSP has nothing to do with the handle

 

[Kevin Shields]

Kevin - could you expand on what "the numbers" might be? In the right hands, Phil's pattern is obviously better than most.

Earlier, I asked Brian whether he was saying that, within say 20 inches either side of impact, tour players were basically indistinguishable. Have you any hypotheticals of what numbers might not match up to reflect face issues?

I'm not asking you, or anyone else, to rip on Phil's swing. So if it's easier to deal in generalities rather than 1 particular player, go for it.

I have no idea....maybe attack angle would be high

 

[Kevin Shields]

They're not? If the numbers are great, ergo, the swing is great. Is that not correct? This is where I'm getting a little confused, I suppose.
Unless this is a backdoor way of saying that because Mickelson's numbers are great but he struggles with waywardness then the numbers are spurious... In fact, mark me down as more than a little confused.
Dariusz, I'm not critiquing your contention, just looking for a little more clarification, I guess...
I apologize for taking up valuable time on this thread, but I'm desperately trying to learn this ASAP...

"Spurious, Mickey Mouse mate.....not genuine. And they're woooorth........"

 

[OLIVER1]

"Spurious, Mickey Mouse mate.....not genuine. And they're woooorth........"

Hee hee. Off we go again...
"Bad boy. What do I keep tellin' ya? Stick to being a gangster"

 

[OLIVER1]

And just so we stay on topic and don't threadjack....

"...And they threw in this Trackman wiv a load of moody gold..."

 

[magicmarker]

I would expect Phil's numbers to show some variations. I heard him say in an interview that his personal way of shaping shots was to just let his body sway forward on the downswing for a fade and to stay behind it for a draw giving the face more time to close. He went on to say that everyone in his camp was different and that was just how HE did it, NOT Watney or D Johnson. Could lead him to some different numbers where you wouldn't always expect for differently shaped shots.

 

[Kevin Shields]

So may musicians and artists that were natural geniuses I'm sure had technique snobs scoffing at the way in which they went about their methods. Mickelsons the same way, pure golfing genius. He wins when he makes smart decisions, not improves techniques so much, even though he's won some despite bad tactical errors. It always cracks me up when people get on their high horse about someone like this stalling and flipping, as if they are thumbing their noses at his swing. And he could give all of us 5 a side or more. I wonder how many pure naturals growth have been stunted by people who said they couldn't make it with this or that technique.
I wonder how many people that don't like his swing have stood side by side with him and watched him hit balls on the range? He just plays the game and attempts shots and tries to score in a manner that not too many are familiar with.