Posture

[wulsy]

Does P1.68 say anything about posture change throughout the set?

Which part of the spine is it most important to get right, or in other words what part of the spine defines posture in the golf swing? Thoracic? Is the relationship between the cervical and thoracic areas of any relevance (ie head position)?

Thanks for any input.

 

[SteveT]

^^^ wulsy ....

Spinal alignments are a complex subject, and they fall into two catgories ... static at Address, and dynamic in the swing. There is an interesting although obscure book written by a British physician-surgeon-golfer that addresses some of your questions, namely:

The Dynamic Anatomy of the Golf Swing - W. Garden Hendry, M.B., F.R.C.S. -- The Parthenon Press, 1985. ISBN 0-88416-523-X


The spine must be considered a column that is cantilevered and then subject to torsion and eccentric loadings ... a challenging manoever. The vertebrae have little torsional range, but they seem to be most flexible somewhere between the lumbar and thoracic joints, but mostly thoracic. Chronic pain due to arthritis is usually found between T-12 and L-1 ... where the s-shape changes direction.

The shape of the spine changes during the golfswing because of the rotation and body positional mass loading. The head and neck axis is different than the general spinal axis or even the rotational axis. At Address the spine is most stable in a gentle s-shape, but during the swing the lumbar section flattens out so that the hip joints are brought under the straightened lumbar spine. There is question whether one should flatten the lumbar curve to realign it to the hip joints.

You raising the issue of posture change during the swing is critically important to the generation and transmission of the kinetic energy from the legs to the shoulders. Everybody's anatomical capabilities are different because of body shape, and that is why I ask questions of anybody seeking swing help on the forum because their body is covered by clothing and you can't really see what is happening to the body dynamo.

It seems like everybody ignores the action of the feet, legs, hips and torso ... and just discuss the arm and club action, most likely because it's the most evident moving parts. Any scientifically-based golfswing analysis must be holistic, otherwise it's just the usual anecdotal blather based on something from the tail end like the shot pattern and working back into the swing. That's not science .. it's just smorgasbord.

 

[birdie_man]

Testing real world results is not part of the scientific method?

I am not sure I'd call myself a scientist "per se", but I don't really care. I am just a dude. I like golf.

And I do know that results more than count. And working backward from ball flight is no joke. Maybe you can clarify your stance Steve. I am unsure.

I would not want to be a scientist under any criteria that discounts real world testing/results. Again- not sure exactly where you are at, thusly I ask.

You can't really be saying that, can you?

Steve do you conduct golf lessons in the nude!? You are crazy man. It's ok though I am too. Rarararararara.

To end on a positive note!- I agree that some ignore certain parts of the body. I am just discovering the feet. I am now a foot man. Ohhhhh baby.

But yes everything affects everything.

There were some interesting observations on the spine at Brian's Symposium.

 

[SteveT]

^^^ birdie_man .....

Science is universal .. and a good example is the science behind the D-plane and TrackMan.

Solving one person's golfswing problem is only anecdotal and cannot be used to justify the science or the methodology.

Reality is that golf instruction is a business and instructors must eat too ... while the average golfer is only searching for a quick golf tip that will mitigate their homemade swing mess for the weekend club tournament. So some old 50 y.o. fart decides he needs one lesson to get somebody to tell him what to do ... because his magnificent mind can direct his massive body for instant results. "Just tell me what to do!!!", he cries out!!!

No wonder BManz says he only tries to make minimal changes to a hacker's swing, because if he went beyond that, the entire homemade swing would unravel ... it's inherently unstable. The most profitable way is to use flight patterns, hopefully consistent, to diagnose the problem. If it's just a simple static Address or grip change, wonderful. If you must get into arm, hand, elbow planes, the problem is getting complicated.

If you have to get into the body dynamic anatomy, you are opening up a can of worms. Similarly on this fine forum, most of the 'advice' centers around the arm and club swing, because few want to delve into the golfer's decrepit body actions. What can you say about the segmental velocities of the various components of the body parts in the golfswing kinetic chain? Not much unless you can see what's happening, and clothing disguises it all.

To be truly scientific, you must take a holistic analysis of the entire golfer, not just his ball flight, arms and clubs. Tinkering is not truly scientific, although a scientific understanding of the golfswing can make tinkering more effective. If it works, the instructor is a 'genius'. If not, it doesn't matter because the pupil is most likely incompetent anyway.

Since the average golfer will not condition nor train, it all becomes a mutual shot in the dark. Apart from those on this forum, pitifully few will make a serious commitment to the game of golf. They just want 'fun', and from instruction they demand instant results for gratification.

Most here have paid the price in time, pain and money to achieve their status with their homemade swing, and they cling to their voodoo beliefs while trashing 'science'; but that's humanity.

 

[GolfHappy]

Profound.... and surprisingly true.

 

[ekennedy]

SteveT,

I don't quite understand the "war on science" as much as I don't understand the "war on Christmas." Both of them are completely made up. I enjoyed much of what you wrote (for a change), but I don't understand the chip on your shoulder about everyone's fear of science.

Golf is a difficult game, but it can be played (well) by people who look like Guy Boros and swing like Miller Barber, so it should give everyone hope that it can be done.

I listen to people on television that are former tour players or Top 100 Instructors that often say things that clearly contradict your beloved science. Even though you have science on your side (and I'm not arguing that its not), anytime I hear someone that is so unflinchingly convinced that they are right all the time, then maybe science IS the Kool-Aid and you are drinking it. Golf is art AND science.

Why don't you spend the next hour trying to convince yourself that you are wrong about something?

 

[proguy747]

drive for show. putt for dough!

 

[SteveT]

SteveT, .................... Golf is art AND science.

Why don't you spend the next hour trying to convince yourself that you are wrong about something?

I could be wrong about something or other ... but I doubt it ...

Also, behind every great artist, there is a solid scientific explanation. You can't achieve artistry unless your fundamentals are impeccable and solid. Most artists in any field of endeavor had great talent in their youth, and evolved into great artists.

Perhaps science is the gateway to greater improvement for those who aspire to be artists, since everything else has failed them.

Please do a forum search for "horton" and read some of his (my) entreaties to BManz in 2003-4 when I dared question the gospel of Homer and condemn the TGM orthodoxy. Judge me then.

 

[wulsy]

^^^SteveT

Thanks for the book recommendation.

On the science/art theme, IMO you have to translate the scientific fact into something (feel, image) unique to you/your swing to make it work for you. Otherwise its just a scientific fact.

 

[ekennedy]

Wulsy,

I agree. I love this forum and reading about the golf swing and all of its idiosyncracies. But part of the challenge is trying to take that information and use it in "real world" situations to become a better teacher and player.

It probably deserves its own thread, but I grew up idolizing Seve. Seve was an artist. At some point in the late 1980's, Seve turned to science and lost his ability to create shots and become a technician.

Its one of the great tragedies in the history of golf, along with belly putters and the stimp meter.

 

[Brian Manzella]

I completely disagree with Steve T's statements:

"No wonder BManz says he only tries to make minimal changes to a hacker's swing, because if he went beyond that, the entire homemade swing would unravel ... it's inherently unstable. "

BA-loney!

Some folks just need a push in the right direction.

The only thing "inherently unstable" is all the damn compensations that golfers put ON TOP OF THEIR NORMAL MOTION because of bad contact or ball-flight.

Just the right grip change, or set-up adjustment could improve some golfers by a few strokes.

The premise shows a complete lack of real-world on the lesson tee experience.

The most profitable way is to use flight patterns, hopefully consistent, to diagnose the problem. If it's just a simple static Address or grip change, wonderful. If you must get into arm, hand, elbow planes, the problem is getting complicated.

It is very obvious, you have no idea.

None of that is "complex." Some lessons are more subtle, some less.

Profitable???

People need help with CONTACT and BALL-FLIGHT.

They don't, and won't do ALL THAT OTHER STUFF 98% of the time. A good teacher can help ANYONE.

I

f you have to get into the body dynamic anatomy, you are opening up a can of worms. Similarly on this fine forum, most of the 'advice' centers around the arm and club swing, because few want to delve into the golfer's decrepit body actions. What can you say about the segmental velocities of the various components of the body parts in the golfswing kinetic chain? Not much unless you can see what's happening, and clothing disguises it all.

That's why we are going into 3D research.

An effective Kinetic Chain requires a blend of body, arms, and hands, and that's what we do in our lessons.

FAR TOO MANY posting of swings on the forum lately. Very soon, it will be in another section and won't be free.

To be truly scientific, you must take a holistic analysis of the entire golfer...

Again....

98%+ of golfers won't do anything but make a swing adjustment.

It is the job of the Manzella Group to help golfers play their best with what they have.

That's why this forum is so popular.

But, and please don't take this the wrong way steveT, but viewership is down measurably since you have started hijacking every thread, and berating golfers for their weight.

 

[duckjr78]

I could be wrong about something or other ... but I doubt it ...

Also, behind every great artist, there is a solid scientific explanation. You can't achieve artistry unless your fundamentals are impeccable and solid. Most artists in any field of endeavor had great talent in their youth, and evolved into great artists.

Perhaps science is the gateway to greater improvement for those who aspire to be artists, since everything else has failed them.

Please do a forum search for "horton" and read some of his (my) entreaties to BManz in 2003-4 when I dared question the gospel of Homer and condemn the TGM orthodoxy. Judge me then.

Steve, I have read some old "horton" stuff and I don't see what you say is there. I don't see you questioning TGM and "trying to help people see the light."

What I did see was the same as I see now. A ton of verbose psycho-bable that is obviously intended to confuse and iritate as opposed to help.

Quite often, I will read a book or watch a movie that is much like your posting style. I call it "genius for genius sake." It is intentionally unintelligible so that no matter what criticism someone has, the author can always say, "you didn't understand it." Anyone with some time and a thesaurus can do that. That is where you have ended up. I see no evidence of you trying to help anyone, only put them down.

It takes a true understanding and intelligence to actually help someone and there are more than a few people on here who can do that. These are the people here who's posts I am interested in reading.

If you truly want recognition (like you seem to) for being intelligent about the golf swing, why not tone it down a bit and just try helping someone? I think you might find what you have been looking for all along.

 

[willgolfer]

Vacation for Steve?

 

[aaron_lohan]

Steve hasn't got any lesson tee experience, if by his own opinion he rarely breaks 90 he can't possibly have become a PGA pro.