Revenge of the cliches

[birly-shirly]

I should know better. I'd guess most people on this board already know better, at least if they've been paying attention. I've read my Cochrane and Stubbs, and my Jorgenson, and I know that there's no such thing as a "heavy hit", and that there's no extra juice on the ball if I keep my weight behind it, and I'm leery of the whole active vers passive hands distinction.

But, I was on the range today, hitting 50 - 60 yard wedges and working on my pivot. What I was working on isn't really the point of this - but I was working on a feeling that Nick Faldo describes whereby the transition and downswing pivot is a combination of the left side pulling away from a right side that offers a little resistance to the forward motion and turn.

Anyway, once I had this move down, I found myself hitting the ball really well. And all the words that came to mind to describe the results I was getting were, well, kind of heretical. My tempo felt slower, but the ball was flying really nicely. Kind-of effortless, but forceful, distance and flight.

"compressed" - check.
"heavy blow" - check.
"weight behind the ball" - check.
"passive hands" - check.

Now the last thing I want this to sound like is one of those "I've found the secret" posts. It's not a secret and I'm sure it's not "the" answer either. But what I thought was interesting is that I've got so used to thinking about golf solely in "ballistic" terms - clubhead speed, path, alignment. I've been, and I think I can say this about myself, quite smug that I've not been taken in with all that movement mumbo-jumbo and subjectivity, the unscientific stuff, that you get when other people describe their game.

But there you go. An afternoon on the range with some Faldo swing-thoughts and I've gone native.

I guess that what I've taken out of today is that with even the best understanding of what really, factually, happens in a golf swing - there's still quite a bit of room for subjective interpretations of what the swing feels like. Even when that flies in the face of what we know to be actually true.

I could be wrong. But my guess is that this is old hat for anyone who actually teaches on a day to day basis.

 

[SJO]

The scientific stuff is for scientists. Those terms came about not because they were scientifically accurate or necessarily factually correct, but because they described a feeling. When you get that sort of feeling, you're sorted in my book, just keep using it and adding to it. I abandoned some feelings because I found out they were 'wrong'. That was stupid in hindsight.

 

[greenfree]

I should know better. I'd guess most people on this board already know better, at least if they've been paying attention. I've read my Cochrane and Stubbs, and my Jorgenson, and I know that there's no such thing as a "heavy hit", and that there's no extra juice on the ball if I keep my weight behind it, and I'm leery of the whole active vers passive hands distinction.

But, I was on the range today, hitting 50 - 60 yard wedges and working on my pivot. What I was working on isn't really the point of this - but I was working on a feeling that Nick Faldo describes whereby the transition and downswing pivot is a combination of the left side pulling away from a right side that offers a little resistance to the forward motion and turn.

Anyway, once I had this move down, I found myself hitting the ball really well. And all the words that came to mind to describe the results I was getting were, well, kind of heretical. My tempo felt slower, but the ball was flying really nicely. Kind-of effortless, but forceful, distance and flight.

"compressed" - check.
"heavy blow" - check.
"weight behind the ball" - check.
"passive hands" - check.

Now the last thing I want this to sound like is one of those "I've found the secret" posts. It's not a secret and I'm sure it's not "the" answer either. But what I thought was interesting is that I've got so used to thinking about golf solely in "ballistic" terms - clubhead speed, path, alignment. I've been, and I think I can say this about myself, quite smug that I've not been taken in with all that movement mumbo-jumbo and subjectivity, the unscientific stuff, that you get when other people describe their game.

But there you go. An afternoon on the range with some Faldo swing-thoughts and I've gone native.

I guess that what I've taken out of today is that with even the best understanding of what really, factually, happens in a golf swing - there's still quite a bit of room for subjective interpretations of what the swing feels like. Even when that flies in the face of what we know to be actually true.

I could be wrong. But my guess is that this is old hat for anyone who actually teaches on a day to day basis.

Whatever works. I personally use a feeling of uncocking my right wrist down the plane right from the top of the b.s.

Interestingly the first thing that moves as i try this is my left knee and away goes my pivot but what i'm trying to do doesn't match the picture. When i try pivot first all hell breaks loose, why? i don't know and i don't care, it works for me. Your not alone.

Maybe that's why some things work for some people and for others it's death. We are wired different. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Erik_K]

Hey whatever works for you. I know I am totally guilt of "paralysis by analysis" - too many swing thoughts, images, articles, science, etc going through my head while I am over the ball. Sometimes just one thought or swing key is all you need. It sounds like you found some thoughts (or feelings) that have really helped your swing. Great job!

Brian can get super detailed, and technical, but my experience with him is that he always ties to boil the issues down to fairly simple faults/fixes - one little bit at a time.

Erik