The Yellow book
- Thread starter Jamma
- Start date
- Status
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Joe...TRUER words were never spoken.
birdie_man
New
Ok so the hips slide first....
But hasn't it been taught (by some TGM ppl) that this in response to the hands? The whole basis of Hand Controlled Pivot...?
No?
Did I miss the boat?
But hasn't it been taught (by some TGM ppl) that this in response to the hands? The whole basis of Hand Controlled Pivot...?
No?
Did I miss the boat?
I'm talking about what physically happens first, they're talking about the mind being in the hands and giving the command to the hips to move. They aren't saying that the hands move and then the hips respond, the hands must move because the shoulders move, and the shoulder move is triggered by the hips. It's a chained sequence.
birdie_man
New
OK that's what I thought.
I think that since there seems to be so many different interpretations as to what Mr. Kelley meant by his two phrases "Hands Controlled Pivot" and "Pivot Controlled Hands" we need to at least acknowledge that on this point at least in TGM, confusion seems to reign. I have talked to several different AI's over the years and always gotten totally different answers. My own intuitive hunch is that he was not referring to any actual mechanical principle at all but rather what modern neurophysiology calls the "open loop" vesus the "closed loop" motor programs. A closed loop system is a series of commands from brain to body that do not depend on any self-correcting help from the sensory system in order to complete the motion successfully. Kind of like the sequential cause and effect action of dominos falling over one after the other.
As long as you get the dominos lined up in a row properly - grip, setup, aim and alignment, impact fix - and apply the proper amount of force to move the first domino, the entire action takes place on automatic due to physical forces.
The open loop system allows or requires a secondary system to the motor system called the sensory system, which allows the brain to send compensation instructions to various body parts so that a succesful motion can occur. The idea of Educated Hands - which was pioneered by people like Henry Cotton, Henry Picard and Ernest Jones and in the modern era Bob Toski and Jim Flick - or a Hand Controlled Pivot, I think is clearly a line of teaching thought that embraces the sensory feedback system over the direct motor system. There are more neuromuscular pathways to and from the brain in the hands than any other body part. Your hands will talk to your brain to let it know where they are located in space, whether they or the arms and even the entire body are in balance - or not.
I am sure most members of this board are familiar with the fact that golf teaching has always been divided into two opposing camps - Hand/Arms teachers and Body teachers. The Body teachers are advocating a mechancially simpler method that does not rely (ideally) on any sort of "hand save" or sensory system comepensation nor on any use of the hand/eye coordination circuit in the brain. The Hands/Arms teachers see the golf swing as almost entirely about feel and hand path awareness, clubhead mass and speed awareness, balance, rhythm and tempo. They also rely heavily on hand/eye coordination.
I certainly could be way off base here, but it seems to me that perhaps Mr. Kelley was talking about how the two above different neuromuscular methods and two teaching camps effect the golf swing and that you need to be one or the other when developing your stroke pattern, since at least on the surface, they appear to be incompatible.
My own view is that the golf swing uses both types of systems, although it is better from a teaching/learning standpoint to focus more on the direct commands of the motor system in the early stages of learning, and more on the feedback system (feel) in the later stages. I dont know of any great ballstriker who relied totally on a swing motor program absent any amount of sensory feedback as to both hand, body, and clubhead or clubshaft location, or to balance, rhythm and tempo.
But it would seem that a swing that was more "machine-like" would be more consistent over the long run than one dependent on the subtle compensations from the sensory circuit. TGM book clearly has elements of both in it's pages, which is one reason I think it is such a revolutionary book. One would guess though that Mr, Kelley had a bit of bias toward the sensory system for beginners since he seemed to recommend the Educated Hands chapter.
As long as you get the dominos lined up in a row properly - grip, setup, aim and alignment, impact fix - and apply the proper amount of force to move the first domino, the entire action takes place on automatic due to physical forces.
The open loop system allows or requires a secondary system to the motor system called the sensory system, which allows the brain to send compensation instructions to various body parts so that a succesful motion can occur. The idea of Educated Hands - which was pioneered by people like Henry Cotton, Henry Picard and Ernest Jones and in the modern era Bob Toski and Jim Flick - or a Hand Controlled Pivot, I think is clearly a line of teaching thought that embraces the sensory feedback system over the direct motor system. There are more neuromuscular pathways to and from the brain in the hands than any other body part. Your hands will talk to your brain to let it know where they are located in space, whether they or the arms and even the entire body are in balance - or not.
I am sure most members of this board are familiar with the fact that golf teaching has always been divided into two opposing camps - Hand/Arms teachers and Body teachers. The Body teachers are advocating a mechancially simpler method that does not rely (ideally) on any sort of "hand save" or sensory system comepensation nor on any use of the hand/eye coordination circuit in the brain. The Hands/Arms teachers see the golf swing as almost entirely about feel and hand path awareness, clubhead mass and speed awareness, balance, rhythm and tempo. They also rely heavily on hand/eye coordination.
I certainly could be way off base here, but it seems to me that perhaps Mr. Kelley was talking about how the two above different neuromuscular methods and two teaching camps effect the golf swing and that you need to be one or the other when developing your stroke pattern, since at least on the surface, they appear to be incompatible.
My own view is that the golf swing uses both types of systems, although it is better from a teaching/learning standpoint to focus more on the direct commands of the motor system in the early stages of learning, and more on the feedback system (feel) in the later stages. I dont know of any great ballstriker who relied totally on a swing motor program absent any amount of sensory feedback as to both hand, body, and clubhead or clubshaft location, or to balance, rhythm and tempo.
But it would seem that a swing that was more "machine-like" would be more consistent over the long run than one dependent on the subtle compensations from the sensory circuit. TGM book clearly has elements of both in it's pages, which is one reason I think it is such a revolutionary book. One would guess though that Mr, Kelley had a bit of bias toward the sensory system for beginners since he seemed to recommend the Educated Hands chapter.
birdie_man
New
I don't think that placing an emphasis on the hands makes you rely on hand-eye coordination or timing anymore that using a STT. Either way you're making a motion and the ball essentially gets in the way....you don't have to "pick it" more or rely on hand-eye more or anything like that IMO.
....
There's also some debate over whether or not you can utilize physics (and I guess your pivot) as much by using the hands over using a STT....I agree to a point about that but I'm not sure there's as huge of a [power] difference as some ppl think there is.
...that is, between just turning the shoulders as the first move (STT) VS. taking the club back with the hands.
....I think it's also important to realize that if you take it away with the hands it doesn't HAVE to be straight up the TSP...there can be differences in the plane of the hands and right shoulder....how steep/flat.
...
I still lack a bit of clarity as to the exact definitions of HCPivot and PCHands to tell you the truth.....I think HK coulda defined it more distinctly.
Regardless of the terms and how you define things and classify things though.....there's lots of good points to make....
One thing to remember is that you should always at least be aware of the hands and their Alignments.....what Alignments they should have....do have, etc......gotta know em, monitor em.
....
There's also some debate over whether or not you can utilize physics (and I guess your pivot) as much by using the hands over using a STT....I agree to a point about that but I'm not sure there's as huge of a [power] difference as some ppl think there is.
...that is, between just turning the shoulders as the first move (STT) VS. taking the club back with the hands.
....I think it's also important to realize that if you take it away with the hands it doesn't HAVE to be straight up the TSP...there can be differences in the plane of the hands and right shoulder....how steep/flat.
...
I still lack a bit of clarity as to the exact definitions of HCPivot and PCHands to tell you the truth.....I think HK coulda defined it more distinctly.
Regardless of the terms and how you define things and classify things though.....there's lots of good points to make....
One thing to remember is that you should always at least be aware of the hands and their Alignments.....what Alignments they should have....do have, etc......gotta know em, monitor em.
Possily Mr. Kelley believed that his term Hands Controlled Pivot was much in line with the Jones/Toski/Flick line of thought which is that the swing "starts" so to speak with a feel sense awareness in the hands/arms and your intention should be to do something, ie to move the hands/arms as the primary body part, and then the body will react to that hands/arms intention-awareness-motion.
Flick states this explicitly. I think it is easily proven to be more like a very strong belief, in his case approaching religous dogma, and not a fact that can be demonstrated by close analysis of the best ballstrikers. A bit of a chicken and egg aspect to the debate about which moves what - body or hands as well.
I have tested beginner golfers with no exposure to reading about the golf swing and asked them to "just swing your arms/hands" and their pivot did not respond or react in a way that is even close to fundamentally correct. Hardly any pivot at all. Just an all arms swing.
I think Mr. Kelley was perhaps talking about a feel-based perception, in a vague way about the mind/body connection, and how the brain and body communicate. The downside to using Hand awarness as the main focal point or command center is that most of my students anyhow instinctively will use the internal visual channel - not the feel channel- to try to "track" where the clubhead is throughout the swing, leading to steering, flinching and an early release. This is what I mean by the hand-eye circuit, its static - not dynamic like the hand-eye used in hitting a baseball, it comes from conscious mind manipulation of the club, kind of like threading a needle.
If your awareness of Hand alignments is feel-based, that is a very positive and effective way to play golf. But I still do not see much evidence that hand path awareness alone will somehow magically make your pivot respond with the correct body motion. I dont doubt that there are a tiny minority of very gifted for golf athletes - like Tiger or Michelle Wie - who in fact used that method in the early stages of their careers. But they are the exception that proves the rule. I think to be your best you need to use both systems but I do not believe that doing one well creates the other automatically. That is a huge "reach", an example of false hope, and I certainly dont see it logically, empirically or from a science-based perspective.
One can also make a somewhat generalized judgement that traditional golf instruction has been dominated by exactly that kind of theory for at least the past 80 years or so, and we all know about the miserable rate of improvements for average golfers during those decades.
I know in my own case that I have spent a lot of time the past 15 years or so working on my pivot mechanics, and it has helped my ballstriking immensely. I always had really good Educated Hands from day one in playing golf, always had clubhead mass and speed and clubface angle awareness, always could sense my Release point. Mostly because for my first two years in golf I used my Irish grandfathers wooden shafted clubs. You learn all of the above especially lag real quick with those whippy sticks!
Flick states this explicitly. I think it is easily proven to be more like a very strong belief, in his case approaching religous dogma, and not a fact that can be demonstrated by close analysis of the best ballstrikers. A bit of a chicken and egg aspect to the debate about which moves what - body or hands as well.
I have tested beginner golfers with no exposure to reading about the golf swing and asked them to "just swing your arms/hands" and their pivot did not respond or react in a way that is even close to fundamentally correct. Hardly any pivot at all. Just an all arms swing.
I think Mr. Kelley was perhaps talking about a feel-based perception, in a vague way about the mind/body connection, and how the brain and body communicate. The downside to using Hand awarness as the main focal point or command center is that most of my students anyhow instinctively will use the internal visual channel - not the feel channel- to try to "track" where the clubhead is throughout the swing, leading to steering, flinching and an early release. This is what I mean by the hand-eye circuit, its static - not dynamic like the hand-eye used in hitting a baseball, it comes from conscious mind manipulation of the club, kind of like threading a needle.
If your awareness of Hand alignments is feel-based, that is a very positive and effective way to play golf. But I still do not see much evidence that hand path awareness alone will somehow magically make your pivot respond with the correct body motion. I dont doubt that there are a tiny minority of very gifted for golf athletes - like Tiger or Michelle Wie - who in fact used that method in the early stages of their careers. But they are the exception that proves the rule. I think to be your best you need to use both systems but I do not believe that doing one well creates the other automatically. That is a huge "reach", an example of false hope, and I certainly dont see it logically, empirically or from a science-based perspective.
One can also make a somewhat generalized judgement that traditional golf instruction has been dominated by exactly that kind of theory for at least the past 80 years or so, and we all know about the miserable rate of improvements for average golfers during those decades.
I know in my own case that I have spent a lot of time the past 15 years or so working on my pivot mechanics, and it has helped my ballstriking immensely. I always had really good Educated Hands from day one in playing golf, always had clubhead mass and speed and clubface angle awareness, always could sense my Release point. Mostly because for my first two years in golf I used my Irish grandfathers wooden shafted clubs. You learn all of the above especially lag real quick with those whippy sticks!
birdie_man
New
Most beginners have no idea how to use their body.....like some people say: "the Pivot needs to be trained (maybe seperately)."
I had no fricken clue how to make a turn for the first few years I was playing.......that and clubface control were prolly the two most unnatural feeling things ever.
And then you have to coordinate the two together....holy crap! Very hard at first.....very confusing and awkward.
Pivot needs training.
- Status