The best Trackman numbers as far as controlling face, path, and ascent/descent.....

[Brian Manzella]

Well...

What if the jr. golfer naturally swung up and down the same plane and was a pretty good golfer? Would you change that? If so, why?

When I said "I WOULD ABSOLUTELY NOT TEACH THAT GOLFER A SWING THAT WENT UP & DOWN THE SAME PLANE," I meant it.

I wouldn't teach a young beginner junior golfer (remember, that was what I was asked), a specific backswing plane.

Now a top of the backswing LOCATION, yes.

A takeaway that they could do, using the pivot and the arms/hands/club unit—yes.

A downswing idea, sequence wise, general location wise—probably.

A great pivot—absolutely.

But any kind of BULL$#!+, artificial, make a line-drawer happy, Haneyfied, outside the pivot, up some plane for the sake of it, baseline at the target, PLANE LINE takeaway and backswing—no emeffing way.

Now for your DIRECT, much different—but very good—question:

What if the jr. golfer naturally swung up and down the same plane and was a pretty good golfer? Would you change that? If so, why?

If they did it naturally, and it didn't adversely effect any other component, why not.

So, no I wouldn't change it under those, 1 in 250 cases.

 

[mb6606]

Now, you are changing the context of what you were talking about in the first place...sure you can have a shiftless swing, but who, that could play at all, does?

Come on mb

I guess you can report back now and talk about all the heresy that is going on here!

You guys are funny

I am changin nothing. Here is the orginal statement by TOBELL
"There is no such thing a a shiftless swing--period. You can draw lines til the cows come home, but everybody has some shift in their swing."

I disagreed saying if you really wanted to you could have a shiftless swing sighting HK's plane board with a zero shirt swing.

I did not say that it was desirable or that PGA players swing this way. All I stated is that it IS POSSIBLE. I also said I doubt anyone would teach Furyk's swing to a young beginning golfer. It is amazing how people infer things rather than stick to the posts.

I have no agenda. I was one of the first posters on this board - bought Brian's first VHS demo video way back when and so on. I have never ripped or demeaned anyone on this board. I am strictly seeking answers to this wonderful game of golf - period.

 

[Brian Manzella]

I am changin nothing. Here is the orginal statement by TOBELL
"There is no such thing a a shiftless swing--period. You can draw lines til the cows come home, but everybody has some shift in their swing."

I disagreed saying if you really wanted to you could have a shiftless swing sighting HK's plane board with a zero shirt swing.

I did not say that it was desirable or that PGA players swing this way. All I stated is that it IS POSSIBLE. I also said I doubt anyone would teach Furyk's swing to a young beginning golfer. It is amazing how people infer things rather than stick to the posts.

I have no agenda. I was one of the first posters on this board - bought Brian's first VHS demo video way back when and so on. I have never ripped or demeaned anyone on this board. I am strictly seeking answers to this wonderful game of golf - period.

Thank you MB, for your support of BrianManzella.com!

But....

There has NEVER BEEN ONE recorded ACTUAL SWING with one plane.

I think it actually could be done.

But it never has.

We are THE SITE that looks for answers as well, which is why you probably frequent this site.

I think some of the other members have had enough of "book literalists" and take the occasion to rip 'em.

I fully understand, but they have become very "yesterday's news" to me.

 

[Michael Finney]

i just thought it was funny that of ALL the great players playing the game today, the one with the consensus funniest back swing was producing the best numbers (according to tuxen and trackman).....it makes you think...

teaching students to have good trackman numbers under the pressure of tournament golf is another story not related to jim furyk or his innate golf talent...

but this thread has been interesting - carry on

 

[holeout]

You can groove any pattern you desire but why make a difficult game any harder by adding plane shifts?

This was your original post about the subject, mb.

I can see that you never inferred that a SHIFTLESS swing was perfect, nor preferable. You just said you'd never ADD any plane shifts.

Fair enough.

But you can't get mad that some people saw this post as advocating more of a "perfectly up and down the turned shoulder plane swing" rather than a "best pattern for the player, regardless of shift or no shift". If it's not what you meant, fine. But when you follow up this post by arguing a shiftless swing is possible, then backtrack by saying that you would never advocate said swing, something smells fishy.

I ain't mad at ya . But you gotta see where we're coming from, too. Glad to have you around.

 

[tobell]

Non-compensated folly

Mb,

I think the real issue is the folly of promoting the concept that an ideal "non-compensated" pattern will produce the best results; and furthermore that the only sensible reason to deviate from said pattern is due to either the physical or psychological limitations of the player. I know first hand that this "non-compensated" ideal pattern (12-0 Stroke patterns) has been pushed as the ideal in certain circles, and I said then and now that the pursuit of these patterns is a waste of time as they are in fact not dynamic. Equally foolish however, is your assertion that you can "swing with any pattern you wish"...we all know that doesn't necessarily result in accomplishing anything useful.

The fact is, there are many varied and effective swings being used at the highest levels of competition..we can and should have the humility to learn from them, and understand why and how they work. I visited another site several weeks back, and the posters were rambling on in a condescending manner about a magazine article regarding Trevor Immelman's thoughts concerning his release. The "puck release" advocated by his instructor Nick Bradley has been around for many years, but it was dismissed with ridicule and prejudice without any serious consideration whatsoever simply because it violates a sacred tenant in a sacred text (specifically the #1 imperative). Frankly, this attitude is the height of conceit. When a Master's champion shares his thoughts, I for one am willing to give it careful consideration. However, those on that site collectively went so far as to say that Immelman could not distinguish "feel from real", this sort of arrogance constructs a cloak of ignorance no truth can penetrate. Hubris!

Bottom line, let's not be coy, you can't effectively swing in "any" pattern you choose. You can't effective swing with zero plane shift. You can learn from the best players in the world, whether they swing with a looping triple shift plane action or violate the "1st imperative"!

 

[Brian Manzella]

I think the real issue is ...let's not be coy...

Are you trying to be coy yourself here, tobell?

 

[tobell]

Are you trying to be coy yourself here, tobell?

LOL. I may have started that last post out a bit on the coy side, but it snowballed into a direct slam.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Back to our regularly scheduled programming....

Why is Jim Furyk the best at producing good numbers on TrackMan, which really can be translated into, Why is Jim Furyk the best at hitting the ball where he wants to?

Would you ever ADD a shift to a golf swing?

Would you ever add a different plane line on a backswing?

Is the shiftless plane swing possible to do will swinging at and hitting a golf ball?

What really makes a golf swing good?

 

[2mongoose]

Ok I'll bite

Would you ever ADD a shift to a golf swing?

I can't fathom a good argument for it, so I'll say no.

Would you ever add a different plane line on a backswing?

I would - to manipulate the plane line for whatever type of shot you wanted to hit.

Is the shiftless plane swing possible to do will swinging at and hitting a golf ball?

Some have been close, but it doesn't look like it's possible. I'll defer to all those bio kinetic junkies who insist it's not either possible or optimal.

What really makes a golf swing good?

Being a bit vague aren't we?

IMO, all world-class golf swings have the proper blend of rhythm, balance, a forward leaning shaft @ impact and enough clubface/plane line control to execute any shot desirable.

 

[Brian Manzella]

I'd add one more.....

Would you ever take Plane Shift away from a swing?

 

[StewartBannatyne]

Why is Jim Furyk the best at producing good numbers on TrackMan, which really can be translated into, Why is Jim Furyk the best at hitting the ball where he wants to?

His backswing, transition and initial parts of his downswing create the ability to control the clubface and the path of the golf club through the hitting area
with more consistancy than anyone else.

Would you ever ADD a shift to a golf swing?

If it was required for a player to gain consistancy, distance, accuracy, or better results.

Would you ever add a different plane line on a backswing?

If it was required for a player to gain consistancy, distance, accuracy, or better results.

Is the shiftless plane swing possible to do will swinging at and hitting a golf ball?

Potentially with extremely short, upright golf clubs that would allow the plane of the shaft to match the plane of the arms, but even with that, it would be extremely difficult, I would assume because of the way the shoulders work in their sockets. One armed, yes. With both arms, there has to be some rotation in order to allow them to both move at the same time.

What really makes a golf swing good?

The ability to control the clubface and true path of the club through the hitting area. It is probably more fair to say controlling the clubface and true path (D-Plane) at impact, with great consistancy.

Would you ever remove a plane shift?

If it was required for a player to gain consistancy, distance, accuracy, or better results.

Stew

 

[tobell]

Definition,

Preconception:
n.
The unconscious perception of movement and spatial orientation arising from stimuli within the body itself.

In simple terms we're talking about feedback and perception. Perception of what? The location, orientation and direction of the sweet-spot. Because perception is unique to each individual each individual requires a unique feedback specifically tailored to their unique perception. Some folks require dramatic plane shifts to produce the feedback necessary to perceive the location of the sweet-spot while others do not. The act of discovering the swing pattern that will produce the feedback required for the individual is both science and art. The act of executing the selected pattern is art.

 

[fronesis]

Would you ever ADD a shift to a golf swing?

Well...in my one lesson with Brian he did teach me to add a shift. So I really hope the answer is yes!!!

 

[tobell]

A plane shift can help clear the way for the sweet-spot to get to the ball..it can get both the shaft and arms out of the way..so sure, add a shift if you need.

 

[vjsinger]

I wonder if Furyk stumbled upon this swing one day/week or over time it sort of morphed into what he has now or if his dad is really that smart and he taught it to him? I think Tobell is right with the Perception analysis BTW...good stuff. I deal with this sort of stuff all of the time in my profession(music). Its really amazing what you have to say/do to some students to notice or make the slightest bit of change, while others you really walk on the fine line of saying too much and overcoaching. The best student I had (he plays professionally) was very in tune with his body/surroundings and he always had to feel he was making a huge change, but to me I felt to be quite small.

 

[mb6606]

Tobell to quote Homer Kelley: "Feel no concern for the PERFECT STROKE. There are trillions of precision patterns with totally correct alignments and relationships, perfect for some application or preference."

I am with Brian. I would rather discuss Furyks amazing Trackman numbers than TGM.

 

[Kevin Shields]

It started as an anti hook drill his dad gave him

 

[tongzilla]

His backswing, transition and initial parts of his downswing create the ability to control the clubface and the path of the golf club through the hitting area
with more consistancy than anyone else.



If it was required for a player to gain consistancy, distance, accuracy, or better results.



If it was required for a player to gain consistancy, distance, accuracy, or better results.




Potentially with extremely short, upright golf clubs that would allow the plane of the shaft to match the plane of the arms, but even with that, it would be extremely difficult, I would assume because of the way the shoulders work in their sockets. One armed, yes. With both arms, there has to be some rotation in order to allow them to both move at the same time.


The ability to control the clubface and true path of the club through the hitting area. It is probably more fair to say controlling the clubface and true path (D-Plane) at impact, with great consistancy.


If it was required for a player to gain consistancy, distance, accuracy, or better results.

Stew

Brian, please don't post using other people's accounts.

 

[James Marshall (Hogan1953)]

One of the key issues here, in my opinion, is the difficulty of identifying what is an optimal pattern for any one individual. There are too many options/physical limitations which make proving that all the other solutions/sets of component that exist are not potentially better at least a tricky proposition.

Obviously there is only one appropriate true face and sweetspot path at impact to successfully execute the intended shot. How to get there optimally for that individual is the challenge for the teacher so often sets of components that have "worked" for other individuals are employed with the hope that they will work for this particular player with the better teachers customising from there and working with and away from players' tendencies instead of undertaking a complete overhaul.

Jim Furyk's pattern has proved successful for him, whether he could have done better with another pattern is now too late to determine. Is his pattern optimal for any random golfer? Probably not. With the guidance of a teacher and hours on the range we learn to work out what works well enough to achieve our goals in golf given our own time and physical limitations.