No. I do not believe that there is an axis of rotation between the left foot and the upper swing center.
I think that the idea of a pivot axis is merely a mental construct imposed on a human being's 3-D torso movement in space during the downswing. In that sense - in the sense of a mental construct - it makes more sense to me to imagine why a person would imagine a "hypothetical" pivot axis between the upper swing center and the left foot rather than between the upper swing center and a point on the ground midway between the feet.
Either way, I don't personally find the mental construct of a pivot axis helpful. I simply cannot understand how this "mental construct" could help a golfer move his torso better in space. I think that one merely needs to position one's head in a "desired' position at address, and then start the downswing with a hip shift-rotation movement that produces secondary axis tilt, that allows the right shoulder to move downplane. Then, by keeping the head stationary, the torso will spiral in a rotary manner towards impact, and beyond impact.
I don't understand why an upper swing center that is slightly right-of-center should predispose to a draw, or why it should be described as a compensated swing rather than an uncompensated swing.
I have recently posted two driver swing sequences - Tiger Woods and Stuart Appleby - where the head/upper swing center is marginally behind the center of the stance. I cannot understand why their swings would be labeled "compensated" or "draw biased". I don't believe that a small amount of right-of-center positioning of the pivot stabiliser point should predispose to a draw - if the golfer can easily shift his lower body forward onto the lead leg during the downswing and avoid a "hanging back" problem. I think that a "hanging back" problem will only occur in a good golfer if the head is positioned very far right-of-center (where the golfer is overtly leaning to the right).
Threaded Mode
