You wrote-: "Jeff . . . Why should we pivot like that?"
Because there is no other way. What I mean is that if a human being does nothing more than rotate the pelvis 45 degrees by moving the right femoral head backwards/leftwards, and he lets his body/head move naturally/passively in an unrestricted manner, then he will end up with a reverse K posture. BM is exaggerating the upper body rightwards tilt motion.
In a human golfer, who consciously decides to keep his head stationary during the 45 degrees pelvic rotation movement, the natural movement of the upper torso becomes restricted and that is why the mid-upper thoracic spine becomes verticalized (when it would normally continue to spiral rightwards in a natural spiral arc).
You wrote-: "Jeff . . . Why should we pivot like that?"
Because there is no other way. What I mean is that if a human being does nothing more than rotate the pelvis 45 degrees by moving the right femoral head backwards/leftwards, and he lets his body/head move naturally/passively in an unrestricted manner, then he will end up with a reverse K posture. BM is exaggerating the upper body rightwards tilt motion.
In a human golfer, who consciously decides to keep his head stationary during the 45 degrees pelvic rotation movement, the natural movement of the upper torso becomes restricted and that is why the mid-upper thoracic spine becomes verticalized (when it would normally continue to spiral rightwards in a natural spiral arc).
Jeff.
Jeff,
Couple of questions would like to ask...
Is there any way to have a "look" of 45 degrees hip turn that did not come from rotation?
If you practice your quoted "drill", did you hit fat?
__________________
If you cannot take the shoulder down the clubshaft plane, you must take along some other path and add compensations - now, instead of one motion to remember, you wind up with at least two!
If the pelvis is square to the ball-target line at address, and then 45 degrees angled to the ball-target line at the end of the backswing, then it has rotated 45 degrees. How it got to that 45 degree rotated position could vary from a biomechanical mechanism perspective. For example, in my diagram I show how the right femoral head has moved backwards and leftwards. That could occur via different biomechanical mechanisms. One could use pelvic girdle muscles to pull the right pelvis back and secondarily the right femoral head back (because of its snug-relationship to the hip socket joint). Alternatively, one could shift the torso right-laterally against the resistance of a "fixed" right knee => that causes the deflected forces to slant the right thigh to the left => that drives the right femoral head left-backwards => then the pelvis moves secondarily to the movement of the right femoral head.
I only tried the drill once to understand the biomechanics. I think that BM was using that drill to teach golfers not to sway the pelvis laterally, but to rotate the pelvis.
Brady Riggs is teaching the same basic principle is this swing video lesson.
You wrote-: "And what's the problem with "the natural movement of the upper torso becoming restricted and that is why the mid-upper thoracic spine becomes verticalized (when it would normally continue to spiral rightwards in a natural spiral arc)." Sounds like the way it should work to me."
I agree. I stated the same thing in the previous post. It is a good idea to keep the head stationary.
That is my photo of Snead. It is interesting because Snead turned his pelvis more then 45 degrees (? 70 degrees). That causes the lower lumbar vertebra to move so far leftwards that the front of the lumbar spine will almost be facing away from the target. With the addition of an erect posture, one could then rotate the upper torso around a near-vertical spine. Then, one would not end up with a reverse K posture - like Hogan. In fact, Snead has a small degree of reverse pivoting. The reason is that he has a near-vertical spine, and then the addition of a >100 degree shoulder turn torques his upper thoracic spine even more left-of-vertical.
If the pelvis is square to the ball-target line at address, and then 45 degrees angled to the ball-target line at the end of the backswing, then it has rotated 45 degrees. How it got to that 45 degree rotated position could vary from a biomechanical mechanism perspective. For example, in my diagram I show how the right femoral head has moved backwards and leftwards. That could occur via different biomechanical mechanisms. One could use pelvic girdle muscles to pull the right pelvis back and secondarily the right femoral head back (because of its snug-relationship to the hip socket joint). Alternatively, one could shift the torso right-laterally against the resistance of a "fixed" right knee => that causes the deflected forces to slant the right thigh to the left => that drives the right femoral head left-backwards => then the pelvis moves secondarily to the movement of the right femoral head.
I only tried the drill once to understand the biomechanics. I think that BM was using that drill to teach golfers not to sway the pelvis laterally, but to rotate the pelvis.
Brady Riggs is teaching the same basic principle is this swing video lesson.
Jeff.
Jeff,
I am seeing it a little differently. I am seeing Mr. Manzella creating some tilt by moving his head and shoulders back over the right foot. I am seeing Mr. Riggs create some tilt by moving his hips forward while keeping his head more stationary. Mr. Riggs motion reminds me a lot of VJ Trolio's Hogan "secret" move. I really like that motion.
What am I missing?
Kevin
__________________
I could be wrong. I have been before, and will be again.
I think that BM and BR are performing the same pelvic rotational movement from a biomechanical perspective, except that BM is deliberately allowing his head and upper torso to rotate as far as possible to the right (head is outside his inner right foot) to exaggerate the drill effect and to get that clubshaft perpendicular to the ball-target line. By contrast, BR is probably attempting to keep his head more stationary and within the boundaries of his stance.
I think that BM and BR are performing the same pelvic rotational movement from a biomechanical perspective, except that BM is deliberately allowing his head and upper torso to rotate as far as possible to the right (head is outside his inner right foot) to exaggerate the drill effect and to get that clubshaft perpendicular to the ball-target line. By contrast, BR is probably attempting to keep his head more stationary and within the boundaries of his stance.
Jeff.
Jeff, I don't think we see reality differently, I just don't have an understanding of bio-mechanics as you do. I do appreciate all the time you put in studying the swing and enjoy you sharing what you learn.
Thanks,
Kevin
__________________
I could be wrong. I have been before, and will be again.
Yoda - you wrote-: "We encourage debate on the fine points, Jeff, and we welcome your contributions. We also can handle being patronized (as long as we feel we are being educated). But, don't continue to insult us with obvious contradicitons.
That tactic does nothing to further the objectives of this fraternity and destroys your own credibility within it."
-----------------------------------
You seem to be implying that I am acting in "bad faith" by tactically trying to get away with some obvious contradiction. That's terribly unfair! I may be arrogant and stupid and uninformed and totally wrong, but I am not trying to intentionally mislead anybody.
Brian was concerned that golfers tended to reverse pivot if they rigidly kept their heads too still. He suggested that a golfer should learn to pivot the pelvis correctly by having a free rotation of the pelvis that would allow the spine to acquire a rightwards spinal tilt. Brain was not concerned if the head moves slightly to the right. He wasn't promoting a deliberate movement of the head. He was simply stating that it is more important to keep the base of the neck still.
His exaggerated drill may produce an excessive upper torso tilt to the right and excessive head shift to the right, but he was not encouraging upper torso swaying (which is a lateral torso movement without a major rotary component). In fact, I think that he was essentially dealing with the same problem-issue that Brady Riggs was talking about - a reverse pivot due to swaying the pelvis right-laterally instead of rotating the pelvis. Both instructors were encouraging a movement of the right femoral head left-backwards, thereby inducing a pelvic rotation, and that pelvic rotational movement would naturally cause the spine to become more oriented towards the right (as I previously described).
I think that both golf instructors are encouraging the correct method of rotating the pelvis in the backswing, which inevitably causes the spine and upper torso to acquire a rightwards-tilt. However, my personal belief is that this reverse-K postural movement should not be exaggerated to such a degree that the head moves more than 1-3" right off its central position. My personal bias is that a small amount of rightwards head movement is acceptable during the backswing, but that it is very unacceptable to allow the left side of the head/face to move closer to the target at any time point during the backswing or downswing (compared to its address position).
I may be wrong in my opinions, but I am definitely not trying to mislead anyone or reconcile obvious contradictions.
I think that BM and BR are performing the same pelvic rotational movement from a biomechanical perspective, except that BM is deliberately allowing his head and upper torso to rotate as far as possible to the right (head is outside his inner right foot) to exaggerate the drill effect and to get that clubshaft perpendicular to the ball-target line. By contrast, BR is probably attempting to keep his head more stationary and within the boundaries of his stance.
Jeff.
I'm confused Jeff . . . could we clear up exactly where we stand here . . . are we moving our head or not? We have one post where we've got people moving their head to their right foot . . . then we have posts where we should leave the head where it is . ..
I'm lost . . . what was the point of the deal with the head moving over the right foot? What exactly is the biomechanic "optimum" . . . and "optimum" to what end?
I think I got lost in all the spine talk as to what the point of this is . . . would you mind restating your position? Sorry to be such a doofus.
I'm confused Jeff . . . could we clear up exactly where we stand here . . . are we moving our head or not? We have one post where we've got people moving their head to their right foot . . . then we have posts where we should leave the head where it is . ..
I'm lost . . . what was the point of the deal with the head moving over the right foot? What exactly is the biomechanic "optimum" . . . and "optimum" to what end?
I think I got lost in all the spine talk as to what the point of this is . . . would you mind restating your position? Sorry to be such a doofus.
Hybrid Mode
