I can imagine PA#1 release contributing to drag loading the clubshaft if the actively straightening right arm contributed to the release of either PA#4 or #2 in a coordinated/complementary manner. However, how would that be possible? How can active PA#1 release at a certain point in the downswing produce a better left arm movement than the standard method of releasing PA#4 in a pivot-driven swing? Also, how can contributory active PA#1 release improve on the centrifugal release action of PA#2?
I not only cannot understand how a four barrel swing action can be better than a triple barrel swing action (4:2:3) -I also cannot understand how it can be even be equal (because active release of PA#1 can cause considerable interference/harm in a swinger's action).
Jeff.
I agree - tricky stuff. it would have to be 4, 1 , 2 , 3.... which would mean pivot throwing left arm off chest (right shoulder fly wheel)...then a bit of PA1 (using right shoulder as backstop brace off which to push) .. then 2 and then 3....
LIke DG and others have said....seems surplus to requirements...
I wonder if many use their PA1 later...almost overlapping 2 and 3??...but then how does that differ from 4 barrel hit??
When you watch Lynn and Ben doing their pitches on one of 6Bs videos on youtube....
there is discussion about adding some active PA1 on the swinging pitch (Lynn says that early on) ....and I am not sure that that discussion has been fully dissected.
There is a definite difference in what happens to the impact bag when Ben hits it and when Lynn hits it.... maybe because Lynn hits it harder but Ben's club has no recoil at all....
Ask Ben Doyle about 4 barrel swing - it seems to be the pattern he aims for by all accounts. 3rd edition patterns may have been Homer giving in to his and other pros' demands for a powerful pattern to teach....??? maybe
I am more than happy to take Homer's advice and not try and do it...yet at the same time it would be menatlly satisfying to at least know what he is telling us to avoid.
I not only cannot understand how a four barrel swing action can be better than a triple barrel swing action (4:2:3) -I also cannot understand how it can be even be equal (because active release of PA#1 can cause considerable interference/harm in a swinger's action).
Jeff.
Before I get associated with a 27 page thread on 4 barrel anything- please note that I just answered in a very simple and general way - the question that started the thread. I never said that you'd want to use it, that it was better than anything else, that it was recommended, needed, that it might have it's advantages and disadvantages depending on the situation. I did say it was a Player's choice/option- as you have the option to drive your car over a cliff if you want.
Secondly, the Right arm can help the pull of the clubshaft (maybe passively versus "actively") (maybe directly or maybe indirectly) or as Homer Kelley stated at least "aid in the support of the left arm pull" 10-24-F 6th edition. So using accumulator #1 does not always mean that you are pushing the entire left arm and clubshaft as a unit (Primary Lever Assembly). For example, can you grab a club with your right hand only and pull it by straighteing your right arm? Can you pull an arrow out of a quiver along the shaft of the arrow with your right hand by straightening the right arm? Or as noted in 10-24-F - you can have the right arm push the left arm and as a result create more pull on the clubshaft.
While initially it is important to understand the difference between hitting and swinging: In hitting you are pushing with the right arm and actively using accumulator #1. At some point you also need to learn that because you may be using accumulator #1 - it doesn't mean that you are hitting, pushing the clubshaft. GolfBulldog certainly is on track in that the loading procedure has a big play in this- if the shaft is loaded and "swinging" (as opposed to the hitter's ENTIRE primary lever system (left arm and clubshaft) working as one unit with no "separate" momentum of the clubshaft) then you are swinging and if accumulator #1 and it's corresponding pressure point(s) have some lag and acceleration/power requirements then you're using it. Just understand that we're using this for the course, for real life and if you understand the essential characteristics you'll be able to help your swing- we don't need to measure your right tricep, and pressure points in a lab and determine that it did contribute .0000000001% to the movement and therefore we categorize you as a 4 barrel swinger. It is important to understand the principles.
So on the big picture- you can do about anything- you just have to understand what you're doing so that things work together and that you can repeat it and you can fix it if it goes off course.
__________________
Life Goal- Developing a new theory of movement based on Brain Science
Interests - Dabbling with insanity
Hobbies- Creating Quality
Here is my dumbed way way down take on this. Analogies are kind of irritating I know, my apologies.
At first glance it would seem logical that pushing and pulling would provide maximum power. In fact it does. But first appearances in golf are often way off the mark. Take the square to square club face for instance.
Imagine a car stuck in the snow. One man pushing , one man pulling is obviously better than only one of em for sure. But the car has structure that these two hard to coordinate forces can not break.
Now imagine the car as being made out of balsa wood or spun sugar or whatever. This car had best be pulled or pushed but not both for fear of mis coordinated forces destroying its structure, its raison d'ete.
Im thinking for most all golfers the flat left wrist is the spun sugar car stuck in the snow. Push and pull if you want but for crying out loud dont break it.
Now if you're left wrist is made of steel go for it. Me, Ill take the one guy pulling golf wise.
Mike - you wrote-: "Secondly, the Right arm can help the pull of the clubshaft (maybe passively versus "actively") (maybe directly or maybe indirectly) or as Homer Kelley stated at least "aid in the support of the left arm pull" 10-24-F 6th edition. So using accumulator #1 does not always mean that you are pushing the entire left arm and clubshaft as a unit (Primary Lever Assembly). For example, can you grab a club with your right hand only and pull it by straighteing your right arm? Can you pull an arrow out of a quiver along the shaft of the arrow with your right hand by straightening the right arm? Or as noted in 10-24-F - you can have the right arm push the left arm and as a result create more pull on the clubshaft."
I have great difficulty understanding your position. I thought that the definition of PA#1 release is that it must be ACTIVE and not passive. If there is a small amount of triceps action in the downswing that ensures that there is active extensor action (via PP#1) and a maintained sense of clubhead lag (via PP#3) then it doesn't imply that PP#1 is being actively released.
I also don't know what you are implying when you state that one can grab an arrow out of a quiver with the right hand and pull it down to the ball. That's obviously possible if one grabs the arrow with the right hand (palm and/or fingers). However, in a golf swing the right hand doesn't grip the clubshaft and pull - it can only PUSH at PP#1 and/or PP#3.
I don't have the 6th edition of TGM. If HK states that the right hand can push on PP#1 while the left hand pulls on the grip, I can easily understand that this is theoretically possible - but that doesn't mean that it is advantageous. If you look at the hand-drawn diagrams I posted, it can be seen that an optimised downswing pivot-action should optimally release PA#4 and maximise left arm speed at some point in the mid-downswing. Why would one need to add any active release of PA#1 to supplement an optimally fast left arm speed? Why add a push element to a pull element and complicate the swing by introducing a major timing problem - that any push by PA#1 must be perfect in both timing and degree of push force to complement the already optimised release of PA#4 and #2?
Golfbulldog - you wrote-: "I agree - tricky stuff. it would have to be 4, 1 , 2 , 3.... which would mean pivot throwing left arm off chest (right shoulder fly wheel)...then a bit of PA1 (using right shoulder as backstop brace off which to push) .. then 2 and then 3...."
That four barrel combination is theoretically possible, but it would only make sense from a practical standpoint if the downswing pivot action did not adequately release PA#4 and additional push force was needed from PA#1 to fully release PP#4. However, surely it is easy to get a full release of PP#4 from the downswing pivot action alone? Why would one want to add an additional factor and complicate the downswing by introducing a major timing element?
I would be interested in your opinion as to whether a four barrel swing pattern is truly possible or desirable.
DG stated the following - "Tomasello Chapter video series contains a 4 barrel swinging pattern."
I don't see any description of a four barrel swing pattern in the TT series. TT describes the role of the arms in chapter 2. In that chapter he states that the right arm hits and that the right arm must be driven to a full straight arm position post-impact. However, in that chapter he doesn't state whether that advice applies to a hitting or swinging action.
The only time that TT addresses this specific issue is in chapter 9 on hitting versus swinging. At the start of that video lesson TT demonstrates a classic triple barrel swing action - 4:2:3. He states that the right arm should end up straight in the followthrough, but he specifically states at 2:23 minutes into the lesson that the right arm is not driving to a straight right arm position and that it is responding to the centrifugal release of PA#2. From my perspective, this doesn't represent an active release of PA#1 (an active push action) - because it is not being driven to a straight line alignment by an active triceps muscle contraction action. If PA#1 is not actively releasing, then how can DG imply that TT is recommending a 4:1:2:3 swing pattern?
Here is swing video of Anthony Kim' swing.
One can see that his right arm goes to full extension after impact, but I don't see any evidence that he is driving the right arm to full extension via any active release of PA#1. I think that he has a triple barrel swinger's action - 4:2:3. Do you agree?
I have viewed the gallery video of you hitting a driver in cold weather. You stated that you were hitting, but at one point in the video you stated that you would swing. You then stated that you had to recalibrate your mind for a swinging action, and you then performed a swinging action. Was your swinging action a triple barrel swing action? Did you have any sense of actively releasing PA#1 in your downswing?
Homer's words:
It theoretically meets maximum Power demands.
It is the most complicated "orthodox" uncompensated procedure.
It also has the greatest margin of error in execution.
It requires the most practice, fortitude and dedication.
It is for the gifted competitor.
Except for the driver, why not just switch to a longer club and avoid the risk?
Homer audio-
"...no point in 4 Barrel Swinging."
"...no real advantage..."
"If you try to exceed Momentum Transfer, it will resist."
Psycho 1 and Psycho 2!
Linear Mode
