[Hennybogan]

OB left

You wrote-: "Your looking at his driver swing, I believe. His iron swing is more balanced, centered if you will. No wobble at the top.

The premise of the book is that it is a machine, a golfing machine that we are trying to build. It doesnt take much to see the need for balance and a vertical c.o.g line about which to rotate. Like the spinning top."

I agree with your position about having a centralised swing and the idea of minimising any sway/wobbling. Tiger Woods stays more centralised, with less secondary axis tilt, in his short iron swing - compared to his driver swing where he has far more secondary axis tilt. I made that point in a previous post where I stated that I believe that a stationary head is a marker of a stable pivot structure. I compared Mike Bennett to Anthony Kim, and I stated that Mike Bennett's COG remained closer to the center and that one could conceive of him having a very centralised pivot center and a very centralised pivot axis - like a spinning top. I think that it's a much better technique than the idiosyncratic technique of Natalie Gulbis. Natalie Gulbis is to Mike Bennett (re: centralised pivot axis and stationary head) like Jim Furyk is to Anthony Kim (re: keeping the clubshaft on-plane during the backswing). One can get away with atypical moves, but that requires a compensatory adjustment action. I prefer staying as close to the TGM model as possible. I simply don't think that HK's idea of a "stationary head" mandates a pivot axis in the center of the stance. I think that for driver swings (where one places a premium on distance) that certain golfers may prefer to have their stationary head (which stabilises their pivoting skeletal structure) just to the right of the center of their stance - like Anthony Kim. That allows them to have more secondary axis tilt and still remain stable and balanced.

Jeff.

Jeff. Go ahead and get your head more to the right. None of us cares if you do.

I don't see how it allows more secondary axis tilt. It just means you have to change your tilt less in the downswing, it does not change the range of motion.

The modern "got to have it now" generation.

A bunch of teachers see axis tilt at impact in good players and don't in poor players, so they preset it at address (reverse K), instead of teaching people how to change the axis tilt dynamically. It is just fine with a ball high on a peg. And there are other compensations one can make to hit the ball off the ground. But why?