Now ..one thing in this discussion that has been overlooked is "Neutral Pelvis"...Neutral Pelvis is approximatley 30 degrees...and if you've ever looked at a lot of golf postures they range from 20- 40 degrees of waist bend...Coincidence???
I can not stress the importance of the ears as a marker and the tailbone location as a marker...take a look at the pics.....positioning of the ears....rotation of the pelvis locating the tailbone...
Last edited by annikan skywalker : 06-22-2006 at 08:20 AM.
Now ..one thing in this discussion that has been overlooked is "Neutral Pelvis"...Neutral Pelvis is approximatley 30 degrees...and if you've ever looked at a lot of golf postures they range from 20- 40 degrees of waist bend...Coincidence???
I can not stress the importance of the ears as a marker and the tailbone location as a marker...take a look at the pics.....positioning of the ears....rotation of the pelvis locating the tailbone...
Neutral pelvis? How is Mr. Baddeley's pelvis situated in relation to NEUTRAL in the picture posted? Which pro's pictures have a neutral pelvis?
Don't SOME the back problems of Mr. Nicklaus shoe up more from the face-on view? He had/has the "reverse C".
Hard to Tell..when clothes are on and they are only pictures!!! But you can guess!!! To me Badds has some "Swayback..going on!"
Nicklaus back problems come from not only the rotation ...but the excessive changes form lateral bending left and right versus the flexion forward and extension backward...The Angles in the 4 sections of his spine were constantly changing....
Hard to Tell..when clothes are on and they are only pictures!!! But you can guess!!! To me Badds has some "Swayback..going on!"
Nicklaus back problems come from not only the rotation ...but the excessive changes form lateral bending left and right versus the flexion forward and extension backward...The Angles in the 4 sections of his spine were constantly changing....
as- i believe i read somewhere that the early MORAD model (ca 1980s?) was tough on the back and was changed as a result ... can you shed some light on what those changes might be and what specifically in the old model was bad on the back and what in the new model is better for it and what tradeoffs in performance (distance, accuracy, etc) those changes produce. thanks.
as- i believe i read somewhere that the early MORAD model (ca 1980s?) was tough on the back and was changed as a result ... can you shed some light on what those changes might be and what specifically in the old model was bad on the back and what in the new model is better for it and what tradeoffs in performance (distance, accuracy, etc) those changes produce. thanks.
I never heard that...but you could be right...the early MORAD "swing" had a lot of Hip Acceleration ....but for the changes...there are way to many versions....
Some tour players I can think of that have/had back trouble are...
George Archer
Paul Azinger
Michael Bradley
Fred Couples
Ernie Els
Hale Irwin
Peter Jacobsen
Davis Love
Jack Nicklaus
Frank Nobilo
Payne Stewart
Lee Trevino
Fuzzy Zoeller
Some that have played/playing for many years with little or no injury that I have heard of...
Sam Snead
Gary Player
Craig Stadler
Nick Price
Miller Barber
Jay Haas
Raymond Floyd
Chi Chi Rodriguez
Dana Quigley
Do you think the difference is technique, genetics, posture, conditioning... or other factors?
Well ...you got Stads and Gary Player in the healthy column...so I think the "conditioning theory" is out the window...but I could believe genetics and perhaps style....
BTW...I know the only conditioning Stads enjoys is Duck Hunting in South America and working out with 12 ounce curls...
Hybrid Mode
