Quiros' Swing, Elbow Plane, Biomechanics, and NEW Manzella BLOG!

[Dariusz J.]

I never said it was bad. Obviously some of the best strikers in the world ever have done it. I just dont go out of my way to turn a natural TSP downswing into an elbow planer. I cant hit it worth a lick down there. I dont have the deep lag or axis tilt to do it.

What timing issues? And dont put etc., etc as if there's a million more reasons. Lets hear them all. I think you're a little biased to say it syncs the arms with the body better. Where's the proof in that? I cant remember ever telling an elbow planer to get off the elbow plane so I have no preference either way. I only said Ive seen ruinous results from people trying to match that forearm and shaft up pre impact. And what about aligning the shaft with another "real part" of the body - the right shoulder.

I apologize. You're right. In my haste I did type J. I'll stop doing that. It is indeed rude. In return, will you just type arms instead of distal parts?

OK, Kevin. No problems at all

Now, ad rem.

Why would you think that TSP is natural for you ? What is this important thing that makes TSP be natural for you and EP natural for me ? Genetic level ? Body built level ? subconscious mind level ? Or a habit ?
I ask since in the macroscale we are the same. We have arms and legs with the same joints. The 3-D physics works the same for all of us. We all live in the same reality. Please answer before I'll go on.

Timing issues - of course. I promise it's the last time I use the word distal - but it's a must here. Namely, the more distal the body part is the smaller are chances to coordinate its motion with the main body movement.
I'll give you some examples:
- hammering nail contest - the best and most consistent contestants tie the humerus to the side of the body and hit the nail with this whole side of the body; if they try to hit it with straightish arms farther from the body they would probably gain some power more (the radius would be considerably bigger) but they could not hit the nail at all;
- drawing lines - draw 10 or 20 lines on the wall trying to cover each other as well as possible with a pencil (making a thick one line); a. with extended arm(s) and moving arms or hands and b. with humerus(es) tied tight to the body and moving the body only; noone needs to be Galileo to state that the scenario b. wins easily;
- hitting golf balls - it's easy to imagine that when both humeruses are tied tightly to the main body during the downswing (the earlier - the better - hence EEP instead a plain EP), the better is the coordination with the main body motion; of course, such a scenario requires open torso, lead humerus tied accross the chest and the rear arm bent in elbow with the rear humerus perpendicular to the spine. Like Furyk today, like Trevino yesterday, like Hogan the day before yesterday.
- my theory only - but a good one: the more consistent is a golfer the bigger are chances that he will work out how to zero everything on the Trackman just via simple stance and ball position adjustments.

Cheers

Please forgive me if I mis-interpreteed your post--it is the internet and written words can be mis-interpreted, but that's how it sounded to me.

I only asked because, I want to know in an effort to help my own golf swing and to learn. You put out what I interpret as teasers in your posts like you know something that is very important, but then stop and don't tell what it is and why it is so important--the "etc, etc" is a perfect example.

You are right that Brian doesn't need me as an advocate, and he does a hell of a lot better job at than I would anyway. I was just stirring the pot a little in an effort to get some information.

Just for my clarification: is getting on the elbow plane early similar to getting an early "pitch elbow"?

OK, I apologize if I sounded too harsh in my last post.

As per your question - IMO, the difference between pitch and punch elbow are not very important in a macroscale; both can produce ultimately the downswing Early Elbow Plane with arms motion coordinated well with the pivot.
However, the pitch elbow scenario is better from one biomechanical point of view - it allows to locate the elbow joint onto the rear hip earlier and the joint is not forced to move in relation to the hip - compare this relation in case of Hogan and Furyk.
Who knows, maybe it will sound as a heresy, but the best scenario could be pitch elbow transforming into punch elbow...

Cheers

I told you already- I am trying in order to learn. I also said "for fun." Though I am not sure if that is good wording.

What I really meant, is that I'm not convinced it is any kind of Holy Grail, though it is interesting.

And yes Dariusz we know Ben Hogan was there.

(I will put that onto the table regardless of the fact that I recognize him to be a special player and certainly nowhere near a schmuck)

For now I see it as interesting and it is one thing I tinker with among hundreds.

Maybe I should just say I am very experimental.

It is no big deal.

But I don't stick with things that don't work.

You very well could have the answer. (anything is possible) I am very open-minded Dariusz.

For now though I am with Brian, if it weren't obvious enough already.

And for now, despite my efforts, I hit it vastly better on the TSP. It is not even close.

I am trying though Dariusz. (it is something I very much will try to scratch off my list coming up)

Birdie, I appreciate the sincerity. Thank you. However, what would complete your answer is to describe at least one thought or method you did when trying to change your TSP (I presume) into the EP.
Is it possible that the way you did it was not the best one ?

Cheers

 

[Brian Manzella]

BLOG:The Curious Case of Two Golfers Forever Linked.

When you teach golf for a living for as long as I have, you get the opportunity to work with some talented folks.

But on the other hand, not that many really, really talented ones.

On some I hit. On some I missed. On some I hit, then missed, then hit again.

But these two were big hits, followed by big misses, and failed attempts at recovery.

If I had a time machine...

I remember a question that was directed to a panel I sat on at a Teaching Summit in Pennsylvania.

"How do you get to teach some PGA Tour players?"

A couple of the panelists answered with some sort of non-answer, but I spoke the truth.

"You have to know guys they know, and you have to be where they are. Period."

I never meet David Toms if is not for Michael Finney.

I never meet these Two Golfers Forever Linked if it isn't for him either.

One of these guys went to see Mike first. Mike referred him to me.

He was the kind of golfer who was trying to "shallow out his downswing."

I gave him permission not to.

I introduced him to the Turned Shoulder Plane from The Golfing Machine.

The rest was an easy—if not instant—success.

He went from the third or forth best amateur golfer in his age group (40-50) in Kentucky, to the 40th ranked amateur golfer in any age group, which includes the college flat-bellies, in the entire United States in about a year.

While we were rolling, he talked a pal of his into sending me his 8th grade son.

This son was a good athlete, and a golfer who could make good contact.

He had a set of ladies clubs, didn't use a driver because he couldn't, and couldn't possibly break 90 on a real course in a tournament.

In less than 18 months, he was 3 handicapper that had a tricked out set of single-frequency Ping's, had a driver he hit 260 dead straight, and shot two rounds below par in real tournaments.

Oh, yeah. One other thing.

They made two VERY similar swings.

And they were very similar to another swing I had help create. The one of Tom Bartlett.

The swing that I filmed of Tom at City Park that exists on website all over the web, was one where Tom made, what Homer Kelley, the author of The Golfing Machine, dubbed a "Single Shift."

The club started back on the Elbow Plane, shifted to the Turned Should Plane on the way to the top, and then proceeded toward impact on that Turned Shoulder Plane.

It was a thing of beauty.

Tom was playing in PGA Tour Schools at 19.

And then, sometime after that, he and another PGA Tour player student of mine with a Single Shift—the late Tommy Moore—both became very desirous of a Double Shift. A swing that returned to the Elbow Plane on the downswing prior to release and impact.

That desire kept Tom occupied for too long, and sent Tommy to the range to teach.

The Tom and Tommy attempts at "down-shifting" smarted me up before the first of the Two Golfers came to see me years later.

Smarter, but unfortunately, not smart enough.

Because for reasons I'd rather not discuss, I let myself think I could make these two golfers even better if I got them to get back on that damn Elbow Plane.

As you can probably guess by now, it didn't work out so good.

The 40-something amateur, who was a plus-6 handicapper for a while when all was good, fell far from the amateur rankings, and battled physical problems along the way that couldn't have been helped by all the changes.

The young rising star, could have—and should have—played college golf, turning down one really good offer. But, I know why he didn't. His confidence was shot from how far from his potential he was by high school graduation.

And all of it is my fault.

They were way closer to the "zeroes" of club path and club face angle when they went down and through the ball on the Turned Shoulder Plane. Their swings were simpler, and they were dominant ball-strikers.

If I could go back in a time machine, I might have the oldest U.S. Amateur champ ever and a young stud on the PGA Tour.

Instead, all I have is the chance to put them back where I had them.

I still teach the younger one, and one every so often, get a shot at the older.

But like two Humpty Dumpties, all the kings horses & me have had a tough time putting them back together again.

Why?

Mr. Kelley, espoused several great ideas in his treatise . One of them was the possibility of effective downswings on different planes—like the Turned Shoulder Plane. Or the Elbow Plane.

Another great idea was a theory he had about the Elbow Plane. He felt it was—almost totally—subconsciously used.

What he meant by that was simply this—player who effective utilize the Elbow Plane through the ball, have made the down-shift to it on the downswing naturally. They did not learn it.

That's why he liked the Turned Shoulder Plane.

All really effective golf swings are on the Turned Shoulder Plane at some point in the downswing. Some down-shift to the elbow some, stay right where they are.

Or were.

Damn.

 

[Damon Lucas]

Hi Darious,
I enjoy the contributions you have made with your thesis as well as the theories that you are positing here.

I will say that on a 'macro' level your 'biokinetic' approach will likely not work with a modern approach to motor skill acquisition.

Simply put, most people will not put the thousands and thousands of hours into theoritical suppositions. Period. Secondly, to my best knowledge, gross motor skills are best acquired through external focus rather than an internal segment by segment focus and analysis.....for the player.

 

[ralphyp]

Great Post Brian, very enlightening.
Ralph

 

[1pipeline]

looks like Cink to me

 

[spktho]

Brian's and Damon's posts bring up the study of motor skill acquisition and the first thing anyone learns when studying skill acquisition is that the less components there are to learn, the easier. In Brian's shared experience that one extra movement added to an already complex movement pattern proved to be too much for those that he mentioned--even though both the student and teacher fully understood the movement(s).

Very interesting. Damon, could you expand some more on the "modern" approach to skill acquisition? I basically learned that the best way to acquire a motor skill is: to have it explained, see it done properly, perform it with guided practice, then independent practice with periodic feedback. That was a while ago. Is that outdated now?

 

[Damon Lucas]

spktho,

That is pretty much it. The periodic aspect is critical, as compared to repeated and mindless practice. Most training aids are pretty dangerous in this respect.

It is a fascinating subject area though and one most people have neglected while researching the technicalities of the swing. Read back through Brian's posts and you'll hopefully see what I am saying and appreciate them in a different light.

 

[ZAP]

The above post by Brian is exactly what you would never see from another teacher.
It is also why he continues to get better at what he does. The ability to know something and still question it at the same time is a rare trait. One of the things that keeps me here is the search for the truth even if it does not fit the current belief.

 

[spktho]

spktho,

That is pretty much it. The periodic aspect is critical, as compared to repeated and mindless practice. Most training aids are pretty dangerous in this respect.

It is a fascinating subject area though and one most people have neglected while researching the technicalities of the swing. Read back through Brian's posts and you'll hopefully see what I am saying and appreciate them in a different light.

Great info. Thanks for expanding some on it. I am definitely living the problem with a lack of proper feedback. Struggling reading ball flight only on my own swing.

You may be eluding to the beauty of Trackman and instructors who can get their students' having consistent numbers.

 

[Kevin Shields]

When my transformation is complete, and its close, I'll explain with Brian's help how a double shift for a natural TSP player almost drove me out of the game I love.

Again, every player I teach that has an EEP downswing, had it when they came. For the life of me, I'll never be able to understand why you would want to go down that road if it isnt in your swing DNA. I'll never let what happened to me happen to anyone under my watch.

 

[birdie_man]

Whoa.

Good, interesting posts.

Turned into a good thread.

...

Birdie, I appreciate the sincerity. Thank you. However, what would complete your answer is to describe at least one thought or method you did when trying to change your TSP (I presume) into the EP.
Is it possible that the way you did it was not the best one ?

Cheers

Dariusz,

A few things I have tried in a direct effort to shift to the Elbow Plane and of course also to hit it better...

Off the top of my head:

-consciously trying to loop my hands to the inside, like Trevino and Furyk look like they are doing (are they really doing it non-consciously?)

-feeling as though my hands are lower at impact (total dud thusfar)

-more open hips/shoulders at impact

-different sequences and (combinations of) usage of hips and shoulders in downswing (throw in a "step on left foot" for good measure)

-left shoulder more left through impact (Trevino finish)

-trying for Pitch Elbow (with full roll?)

-"maintain spine angle"

-"keep back to target"

-"drop (wait) and pivot"

-start with shoulders somewhat closed...independently from the rest of the body (terrible and unathletic, as far as I can tell)

-combinations of the above, combined with whatever else I happened to be trying at the time (things surely not listed here and/or tried with seperate intentions from all this EP stuff)​

...

And I still have things to try. (honestly) If you have any ideas I am all ears man. (I am not afraid to try)

Trust me, I plan to rule everything out. If I am one thing it is thorough...not always organized, but thorough.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Yep, a couple of great posts above.
Seems you are fairly convinced that downswing planes depend on one's DNA or is subconscious mind's thing. I do not want to spoil the party but a couple of observations, if I may. The same Homer Kelley who said that planes are in the subconscious mind area, thought (at least until the 3rd edition of his TGM book) that swinging on the EP is superior and unmatched experience. Somehow later he changed his point of view. Inquiring minds wants to know why. One scenario is that he was right and you are right here as well. The other one is that he changed goals and abitions from truth to universality. Another theory is that he simply failed to know the real nature of the EP vs. TSP ?
You know, it's very easy to cover mysterious things by saying - it's DNA thing or it's subconscious mind thing. I do not believe in it - it's a matter of body mechanics, changes in equipment and various trends in teaching, IMO.

Here is a small challenge - could any of you give me an example of a successful golfer with a TSP downswing in Hogan's era ? I mean the period after the hickory shafts gone away and before these upright swings of Nicklaus and Watson ?

Cheers

 

[birdie_man]

This is gonna get good.



I can't.

But Brian would be the best to ask I presume.

Even if there aren't...why? What's your point?

And I hate to tell you man but...crappy Nicklaus and crappy Watson...were a little more than just 'OK' golfers (and ballstrikers) Dariusz.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz,

A few things I have tried in a direct effort to shift to the Elbow Plane and of course also to hit it better...

Off the top of my head:

-consciously trying to loop my hands to the inside, like Trevino and Furyk look like they are doing (are they really doing it non-consciously?)

-feeling as though my hands are lower at impact (total dud thusfar)

-more open hips/shoulders at impact

-different sequences and (combinations of) usage of hips and shoulders in downswing (throw in a "step on left foot" for good measure)

-left shoulder more left through impact (Trevino finish)

-trying for Pitch Elbow (with full roll?)

-"maintain spine angle"

-"keep back to target"

-"drop (wait) and pivot"

-start with shoulders somewhat closed...independently from the rest of the body (terrible and unathletic, as far as I can tell)

-combinations of the above, combined with whatever else I happened to be trying at the time (things surely not listed here and/or tried with seperate intentions from all this EP stuff)​

...

And I still have things to try. (honestly) If you have any ideas I am all ears man. (I am not afraid to try)

Trust me, I plan to rule everything out. If I am one thing it is thorough...not always organized, but thorough.

Birdie, OK. It seems you tried many different ideas. But you never thought about using ground forces to swing sequentially from the ground up, have you ? about benefitting from the theory of limitations in your hard structure (bones & joints) ? about stopping to trust muscles ? about subduing the motion of distal parts to the main body ? about stopping to trust your arms, hands and fingers ?

Be frank

Cheers

 

[Dariusz J.]

This is gonna get good.



I can't.

But Brian would be the best to ask I presume.

Even if there aren't...why? What's your point?

And I hate to tell you man but...crappy Nicklaus and crappy Watson...were a little more than just 'OK' golfers (and ballstrikers) Dariusz.

OK, you're right. I removed the word "crappy" although this is what I think about such swing types as a theorist. Similar, I guess, what Brian thinks about push elbow

Cheers

 

[birdie_man]

Be frank

I very honestly will be. But I'll have to get back to you tomorrow. It is way too late. (I am brutal for staying up)

 

[Dariusz J.]

Hi Darious,
I enjoy the contributions you have made with your thesis as well as the theories that you are positing here.

I will say that on a 'macro' level your 'biokinetic' approach will likely not work with a modern approach to motor skill acquisition.

Simply put, most people will not put the thousands and thousands of hours into theoritical suppositions. Period. Secondly, to my best knowledge, gross motor skills are best acquired through external focus rather than an internal segment by segment focus and analysis.....for the player.

Thank you, Damon.

A very interesting comment - but...what would you say if there is a cascade of events in the motion occuring one after another automatically, because one's hard structure won't let it happen another way ? Because of torques and limitations in joints and bones...letting you have 95% of the job done during the setup. No conscious thoughts from there. Simply, benefitting from natural body limitations.
What external focus would you need there if the internal segments code is, say, already deciphered and one does not need to decipher it every time while standing over the ball ?

Cheers

 

[Kevin Shields]

Birdie, I disagree that this is gonna get good. In fact, its getting worse. I cannot believe we"re having an argument over the elbow plane like its 2005 again.

Great strikers are on the EP, others on the TSP. If i have a person who has a less than perfect swing and they fix things in a proper order and end up on the elbow plane, early or late, thats wonderful. If they dont, thats fine too.

Dariusz, take me for example. I have a bad back and weak hips and glutes but very long, strong arms. My left arm was fused from a bike accident in a way that turns it inward so i dont have much #3 accumulator roll. I have thick front deltoids, good for lifting and dropping. Putting someone like me on the elbow plane causes pain, fat shots, and open faces.

To be fair, my eye still like the look of some swings on that plane but wont you concede that playing down there could also cause some ballflight issues, even if "biomechanically" you think its more efficient?

Some camps, while succesful at what they do, have such a limited view or opinion, would cringe if I just got someone's arms up and dropped them later who was hitting it fat instead of being on the left side with steeper shoulders and a flat arm swing.

I just started yesterday with a talented 14 year old who is a natural elbow planer who hits alot of scruffy in to out heavy shots. To be fair, I absolutley do not plane to get his downswing to the TSP.

Another thing, elbow plane lovers seem to think (correct me if im wrong) that all TSP swingers are these wide, 1970's style sweeping swingers. I see plenty of pivots that would fit nicely into each type of DS. If your left arm cant stay in easily, you uncock your left wrist better than you roll the entire arm and dont have problems with downarching the lead wrist like Cink and Toms, you'll hit it better on the TSP, period.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Great strikers are on the EP, others on the TSP. If i have a person who has a less than perfect swing and they fix things in a proper order and end up on the elbow plane, early or late, thats wonderful. If they dont, thats fine too.
Dariusz, take me for example. I have a bad back and weak hips and glutes but very long, strong arms. My left arm was fused from a bike accident in a way that turns it inward so i dont have much #3 accumulator roll. I have thick front deltoids, good for lifting and dropping. Putting someone like me on the elbow plane causes pain, fat shots, and open faces.

Please do not understand me wrong, Kevin, but with your actual state of health (bad back, bad lead hand), you're not considered an average case in a macroscale. If TSP is now "natural" (read: good for your golf) it is not convinced that it would be the same "natural" for you if you're a totally healthy man (which I wish you).
It may look like TSP is a "deviation" from EP forced by unusual things happening with the organism.

To be fair, my eye still like the look of some swings on that plane but wont you concede that playing down there could also cause some ballflight issues, even if "biomechanically" you think its more efficient?

Of course not. I'd never change to a "biomechanically" superior pattern in such a situation. I am just against classifying all possible components as equally good for an average human from a biomechanical point of view in a macroscale. That's why what Kelley wrote in the 3rd edition is much more appealling to me than what was published in later editions.
There are superior and inferior components. Sometimes theoretically inferior components bring superior results for an individual. But always must be a mechanical reason for this, IMO. This is not a genetic level, nor a subconscious mind level.

Another thing, elbow plane lovers seem to think (correct me if im wrong) that all TSP swingers are these wide, 1970's style sweeping swingers. I see plenty of pivots that would fit nicely into each type of DS. If your left arm cant stay in easily, you uncock your left wrist better than you roll the entire arm and dont have problems with downarching the lead wrist like Cink and Toms, you'll hit it better on the TSP, period.

I hear you. So, how would you comment their TSP as a "forced deviation" from their EP caused by sort of subnormal wrist motion ? As far as I remember, Toms is very close to have his rear forearm perpendicular to the lumbar spine approaching contact and if not his lead wrist excessive ulnar deviation he'd be prolly a textbook EPlaner. Makes sense - or not ?

Cheers

 

[mgranato]

I could be a poster child for this topic.

My index was a steady +3 when my downswing was on the TSP - although I had no idea at the time what a TSP or EP was. I just made what was for me a natural downswing that let me hit the ball the best. Basically a self-taught swing that looked pretty orthodox.

Because of my ignorance about the different swings, I allowed myself to be convinced that I needed to get to the EP to get to the next level. I spent my last 2+ seasons trying to get there. My 100 yards and in shots were the first to go, then my irons, and lastly my distance - which was the only thing in golf that came really "easy" for me. My last 2 seasons were frustrating struggles, 70 one day followed by 80 the next.

This golfing purgatory coincided with a injured back. Being so frustrated with golf, I gave it up in November '08 and had back surgery in April '09. During my recovery time I spent hours reading the archives from this forum. Bingo! I finally realized why my game went to pot. The one thing about my swing that I did very naturally, I stupidly changed. I'm now back relearning how to score again, and also back on the TSP.

No doubt in my mind that if I hadn't stumbled across Brian's post about Phil and Tiger/natural TSPers and EPers, I would have quit the game for good. Golf is a miserable game if there's not light at the end of the tunnel.