Roger Maltbie Tiger Analysis

[Todd Dugan]

Huh? What do you mean Tiger "hasn't gotten stuck in years"? When Tiger began using TrackMan in early 2011, Sean Foley was astounded to discover that his impacts were extremely in-to-out. In other words, Tiger was extremely "stuck" less than a year ago!

Under Haney, his most reliable shot, especially with the driver, became a fade.........which requires an out-to-in path for accuracy. He struggled to draw the ball. Nobody who easily produces an in-to-out path struggles to draw the ball. This change in tendency resulted from getting more "on plane"/less "across the line" at the top, under Haney.

 

[Jared Willerson]

Todd, there are various reports by people "in the know" that Tiger was as much as 10 degrees inside out when starting with Foley.

I don't think people truly understand how convoluted Tiger's swing had become under Haney. BTW, Haney's "fix" was more inside out.

 

[Lindsey Newman]

It would have been cool to see if Tiger could have taken the old Haney backswing left enough to hit the shots he wanted. I thought he was close. But if your make up and reaction to that position at the top won't allow it then I guess the whole sale changes were needed. I just think he is/was so leg driven that he could not do it.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

It would have been cool to see if Tiger could have taken the old Haney backswing left enough to hit the shots he wanted. I thought he was close. But if your make up and reaction to that position at the top won't allow it then I guess the whole sale changes were needed. I just think he is/was so leg driven that he could not do it.

There were times he did that, the way he was able too was he "carried" a bit to get the club to not go so inside out. When he did that he actually hit/played very well.

 

[DCgolf]

I know this is basically a swing forum and a lot of us are teachers, but here's my TW take: he is a rare animal with a golf club, a savant of sorts. There are many people who are teachers right on this forum who Tiger could have won with too. Call it a heightened awareness of club/ ball contact or whatever, but he's won pointing it left, across the line, in to out, strong grip, weak grip, whatever. And I for one believe he's ready to win again. Big time. Like majors. This year. Just an aging club pro's opinion...

 

[Smash]

Under Haney, his most reliable shot, especially with the driver, became a fade.........which requires an out-to-in path for accuracy. He struggled to draw the ball. Nobody who easily produces an in-to-out path struggles to draw the ball. This change in tendency resulted from getting more "on plane"/less "across the line" at the top, under Haney.

It would be pretty tough to draw it significantly considering how weak his grip was and how much roll he had under haney.

Tiger under haney was hitting 3 woods off 4 inch tee as a drill. his "solution" for any shots right... completely shallowing him out. With short irons he was hitting push draws without even taking a divot... Anyone who watched him in person would describe it as "scrapey".
He'd have to be swinging seriously in to out to hit a push draw with that angle of attack. No where close to inline. If he faded it, it was a stuck push fade in which he aims 60 yards left.

I cant find one swing on youtube under haney that TW doesnt finish with a high,late right shoulder from them being literally closed to target at impact. Probably one of the only guys on tour at the time to have closed shoulders at impact as their standard swing.

 

[DCgolf]

Watched him year after year at Augusta hit some of the most beautiful draws on 2, 5, 9, 10, 13, 14,17. Time after time...

 

[Lifter]

Tiger explaining his 2009 Haney swing

Under Haney, his most reliable shot, especially with the driver, became a fade.........which requires an out-to-in path for accuracy. He struggled to draw the ball. Nobody who easily produces an in-to-out path struggles to draw the ball. This change in tendency resulted from getting more "on plane"/less "across the line" at the top, under Haney.

Todd, just look at what Tiger said he was trying to do under Haney in June 2009:

Tiger Woods: What's changed in my swing: Golf Digest

Another difference is, now I can really post up: My left leg stays flexed into impact and straightens in the follow-through (6). Before, it would straighten well before then. This better leg action allows a natural release and extension down the line.​

Please explain: if you were trying to teach a student to hit a fade, why in the world would you advise him to flex the left leg into impact and extend down the line?

P.S.: I'm sure there's plenty of footage out there of Tiger getting super-stuck with the driver in 2009 and early 2010. And possibly even earlier.

 

[seikialice88]

During Sunday's final round, Maltbie observed that under pressure, Tiger tends to revert back to an old flaw, which was to lay the shaft off at the top too much. He said that was something ingrained in him during the Haney days and he's working to undo it.

That sound right?

i don't understand the question.

 

[DCgolf]

The golf swing is just a portion of the complete formula needed to win tournaments at the highest level. However, I realize that this is a forum based around discussing the swing.

Re: TV announcers - I don't get why they feel compelled to explain every missed shot. I much prefer the European Tour announcers; they'll comment on the miss, but not necessarily try to break it down and explain it to the viewers at home - hopefully because they realize that they might not know why each miss happened.

Agree 100%. That's why Renton Laidlaw is one of my favorites. The fact is the announcers DO NOT KNOW, or cannot know what went wrong. They have no way of knowing. Nor do players or teachers without the aid of very detailed, sophisticated equipment-TRACKMAN etc. It's silly for them to guess. But the public demands it and buys into it, so...and they say it with such conviction. The subtle movements that misdirect a shot are imperceptible to any human eye. I defy anybody to tell me WHAT sent the ball WHERE it went.

 

[BrendanC]

Come off it guys! It is possible to tell what has happened in a swing from looking at it and it is possible to intelligently discuss golf swings.

Sure, some announcers spout a lot of BS and sure, machines and measurement will let instructors get a deeper insight.

But if am playing with my usual four-ball, I can tell if my mate has just hooked the crap out of it.

Do not discount what truly expert eyes are able to discern from even small slices of information.

 

[BrendanC]

I know this is basically a swing forum and a lot of us are teachers, but here's my TW take: he is a rare animal with a golf club, a savant of sorts. There are many people who are teachers right on this forum who Tiger could have won with too. Call it a heightened awareness of club/ ball contact or whatever, but he's won pointing it left, across the line, in to out, strong grip, weak grip, whatever. And I for one believe he's ready to win again. Big time. Like majors. This year. Just an aging club pro's opinion...

Reminds me of a story about Tiger winning with a massive hook that he took from the range onto the course one day. He just fitted the hook into the course.....

He seems to almost need to make it difficult for himself and that's why an "out there" swing theory guy like Haney made golf seem difficult enough to keep it interesting.

Truth is, golf should be an easy game for Tiger. As soon as he realises that, everyone will need to watch out.

 

[Kevin Shields]

Brendon, your mate probably has a swing that is a hook waiting to happen so you know that. If a Tour pro has a swing that produces pure shots almost all of the time but is prone to a certain miss, the best an announcer can do often is to point that flaw out (if they actually know it). It's really mostly silly to try to detect some little thing on video if a guy misses a green right and they say "Look, right there the face is wide open.." or something like that.

 

[Steve Greffen]

Brendon, your mate probably has a swing that is a hook waiting to happen so you know that. If a Tour pro has a swing that produces pure shots almost all of the time but is prone to a certain miss, the best an announcer can do often is to point that flaw out (if they actually know it). It's really mostly silly to try to detect some little thing on video if a guy misses a green right and they say "Look, right there the face is wide open.." or something like that.

They have to say something I guess, otherwise they would sound like Peter Allis, commenting on some dude eating ice cream in the crowd. Not sure which one I'd rather hear...maybe a mute? LOL

 

[Jared Willerson]

I am a fan of the Euro announcers as well. Low key, understated, an element of classiness.

America's announcers are ok, they just seem to be a bit more on edge and try to inject themselves into situations more than they should.

I don't have vitriolic hatred for any golf announcer, they all do what they are paid to do.

 

[Lifter]

Here's a higher-quality video of Maltbie's analysis:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vv7M0SCfCdk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Matt 4-L]

I have a "Bud" and my favorite way to watch golf is when they have a feed that is ambient sounds only with no commentators, you can hear the strike on the ball, birds chirping and the fans ooooooohs and aaaaaaahs.

 

[ScottRob]

euro commentary is less irritating, but substantially more sedating! I wanted to throttle the NBC B-team when they kept referencing what Tiger made us "used to" as it pertains to his constant brilliance, especially him having never missed anything inside 20 feet...EVER! The euro commentary does not work off a short list of controversy-producing sound bites. I am torn on the issue, that is why I watch both! If I want to be left alone, then Renton is the man, if I want to provoked by innane chattering, then Johnny Miller is the way to go. I like Roger, he seems to be a bit more cagey in his offerings, not so cock-sure.

 

[aaron_lohan]

Yeah sometimes golfers can make the same swing and get 2 completely different results, my bad swings don't really look any different than the ones that produce a perfect result, I would imagine for tour pros that is even more the case as they are more consistent.

 

[gaspasser1]

I think what mjstrong said was interesting. Announcers here tend to analyze swings and find flaws for the miss, almost in an effort to provide viewers with a tip or a fix. Sort of the golf magazine approach to the game. I like it at times, but usually I'd rather just watch the action (or lack of...)