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?
-as per another one of your threads, axis tilt as defined in TGM assumes the head is centered. The ability to do this is a display of "Hula hula flexibility" with the hips and a resulting tilt of shoulders.
-the head back move, I think, is a compensation regardless of who is doing it. It allows more time for the primary lever assembly to lengthen by moving low point further back in the stance. A common move for junior golfers who cant support the increasing mass of the levers extension with their power packages or throw out action. A moved that once learned is hard to break especially for the physically weaker adult golfer be they male or female.
This is C.O.A.M. as Homer defined it (6-C-2-B) and as it should be applied when building your own machine. The reason we release a driver earlier than a wedge for instance. The reason some hang back. A reason for kids clubs.
You could with a long enough lever move the world but who here amongst us could move a lever of that length?
I played with a guy who overcame his driver yips by cutting it down to 5 iron length. He didnt seem to lose much distance.
I hope you guys don't mind the thread jack, but your driver yips comment hit close to home...
I quit the game this summer because of the driver yips. I couldn't even hit drivers on the practice range, buildings and other golfers weren't safe, and I didn't want my members to see me, I needed to give a few lessons and didn't want them to see how bad I was hitting it...
I solved the problem by beginning my journey of learning TGM, finding out that I had lost ALL MY LAG PRESSURE, along with losing all sensation of where the club-head and club-face were, and working with the Pure Ball Striker while reading the yellow book to get the lag feeling back. Sorry if that looks like a plug, but I consider it as a public service announcement. It has allowed me to play golf again, Just in time for the snow.
Now so it doesn't look so much like a thread jack, I'm keeping my lag pressure through the line of compression, with a steady head placed right between my feet, and striping it!
Kevin
Originally Posted by O.B.Left
Jeff
You wrote..........a frig it.
Couple of notes:
-as per another one of your threads, axis tilt as defined in TGM assumes the head is centered. The ability to do this is a display of "Hula hula flexibility" with the hips and a resulting tilt of shoulders.
-the head back move, I think, is a compensation regardless of who is doing it. It allows more time for the primary lever assembly to lengthen by moving low point further back in the stance. A common move for junior golfers who cant support the increasing mass of the levers extension with their power packages or throw out action. A moved that once learned is hard to break especially for the physically weaker adult golfer be they male or female.
This is C.O.A.M. as Homer defined it (6-C-2-B) and as it should be applied when building your own machine. The reason we release a driver earlier than a wedge for instance. The reason some hang back. A reason for kids clubs.
You could with a long enough lever move the world but who here amongst us could move a lever of that length?
I played with a guy who overcame his driver yips by cutting it down to 5 iron length. He didnt seem to lose much distance.
Where is Golfgnome?
O.B.
__________________
I could be wrong. I have been before, and will be again.
You wrote-: "as per another one of your threads, axis tilt as defined in TGM assumes the head is centered. The ability to do this is a display of "Hula hula flexibility" with the hips and a resulting tilt of shoulders."
I don't understand why axis tilt implies that the head be centered.
I prefer Yoda's advice given in post#16. The head position is dictated by the head position at impact. If one has a greater degree of secondary axis tilt at impact, then the head will need to be further back (away from the target). In Tiger's short iron swing, he doesn't have much secondary axis tilt at impact and his head position at impact would be centralised between his feet. However, when Tiger hits a driver he has a large amount of secondary axis tilt at impact, and that would cause his head to be behind the center of his stance. In that sense. Tiger Woods is following HK's advice by starting with his head at its impact location - which will be slightly behind the center of his stance when using a driver, and in the center of his stance when using a short iron. In both situations, that "head position" choice will allow the head to remain stationary.
You wrote-: "as per another one of your threads, axis tilt as defined in TGM assumes the head is centered. The ability to do this is a display of "Hula hula flexibility" with the hips and a resulting tilt of shoulders."
I don't understand why axis tilt implies that the head be centered.
I prefer Yoda's advice given in post#16.
Jeff.
Jeff
Quite right, instead of "Centered", I should have written "motionless" or similar.
Axis tilt as defined in the glossary:
"To change the plane of the Shoulder Turn without moving the Head, the golfer must tilt the Shoulder Axis by moving the Hips"
As for preferring Yodas posts to mine I can only say that I am outraged.
But I like Henny am wondering why anyone would want to have a compensated swing that held his head back in fix etc. To what end? Why not manage low point better and move the ball up in the stance with the head or pivot center in its uncompensated alignment?
You asked-: "But I like Henny am wondering why anyone would want to have a compensated swing that held his head back in fix etc. To what end? Why not manage low point better and move the ball up in the stance with the head or pivot center in its uncompensated alignment?"
That's a good question. I will express my biased opinion, which is based on human biomechanics.
I agree with Yoda that the ideal swing is to stay centered within one's stance. As Yoda pointed out in a previous post, look at the great three players - Player, Palmer, Nicklaus - and note how they pivot around an imaginary pivot axis that is centralised between the feet. I think that approach works very well for ALL golfers for iron shots and most golfers for driver swings.
However, if a very flexible golfer, who has a lot of hula hula flexibility, wants to drive the ball a very long way, then there is a mechanical advantage to having a great deal of secondary axis tilt at impact.
Here are a series of photos of Jamie Sadlowski from the latest issue of GD magazine. He recently won the 2008 Long Drive Competition with a drive of 418 yards.
Note how much secondary axis tilt he has at impact. I think that he needs that much secondary axis tilt to stay in balance - considering the force of forward momentum of his arms/clubshaft that are swinging towards the target. I previously argued that a golfer needs to have a braced skeletal structure (from the top of the stationary head -through the spine-through the pelvis-down the left leg to the left foot) at impact. I think that Sadlowski anticipates the need for that braced skeletal structure, and its shape, at impact, and he therefore sets his head behind the center of his stance at address. Then he simply needs to keep his head stationary as he swings into impact against a firm supportive (braced) left leg and a braced rightwards-tilted spine that is kept braced by a stationary head.
That's why I think that HK was very wise to allow for that need in special circumstances - by stating that one should start with one's head at the anticipated impact location. Most of the time that will mean a stationary head centralised in the stance, but under special circumstances (as above) it may be better to have one's head right-of-center.
Jeff.
p.s. The Gulbis photo was posted as a joke - and it is equivalent to recommending Furyk's steep off-plane backswing clubshaft movement as a role model for the average golfer. Although HK catalogued that backswing variation in his book, I presume that he would recommend a backswing plane in the steepness range that is some where between the elbow plane and the turned shoulder plane.
I think I saw this guy do an expo at the tour event in Moline. Don't remember the name, but he looks about the same. He was flying it about 370. He also missed the entire range about half the time. He had no idea where it was going. They also play with drivers in the 5 degree loft range.
Long drive guys just have to get one of six in the grid.
You asked-: "But I like Henny am wondering why anyone would want to have a compensated swing that held his head back in fix etc. To what end? Why not manage low point better and move the ball up in the stance with the head or pivot center in its uncompensated alignment?"
That's a good question. I will express my biased opinion, which is based on human biomechanics.
I agree with Yoda that the ideal swing is to stay centered within one's stance. As Yoda pointed out in a previous post, look at the great three players - Player, Palmer, Nicklaus - and note how they pivot around an imaginary pivot axis that is centralised between the feet. I think that approach works very well for ALL golfers for iron shots and most golfers for driver swings.
However, if a very flexible golfer, who has a lot of hula hula flexibility, wants to drive the ball a very long way, then there is a mechanical advantage to having a great deal of secondary axis tilt at impact.
Here are a series of photos of Jamie Sadlowski from the latest issue of GD magazine. He recently won the 2008 Long Drive Competition with a drive of 418 yards.
Note how much secondary axis tilt he has at impact. I think that he needs that much secondary axis tilt to stay in balance - considering the force of forward momentum of his arms/clubshaft that are swinging towards the target. I previously argued that a golfer needs to have a braced skeletal structure (from the top of the stationary head -through the spine-through the pelvis-down the left leg to the left foot) at impact. I think that Sadlowski anticipates the need for that braced skeletal structure, and its shape, at impact, and he therefore sets his head behind the center of his stance at address. Then he simply needs to keep his head stationary as he swings into impact against a firm supportive (braced) left leg and a braced rightwards-tilted spine that is kept braced by a stationary head.
That's why I think that HK was very wise to allow for that need in special circumstances - by stating that one should start with one's head at the anticipated impact location. Most of the time that will mean a stationary head centralised in the stance, but under special circumstances (as above) it may be better to have one's head right-of-center.
Jeff.
p.s. The Gulbis photo was posted as a joke - and it is equivalent to recommending Furyk's steep off-plane backswing clubshaft movement as a role model for the average golfer. Although HK catalogued that backswing variation in his book, I presume that he would recommend a backswing plane in the steepness range that is some where between the elbow plane and the turned shoulder plane.
Jeff,
Can I chim in here?
I like were this whole post is going, read a bunch of it for the second time. Thought I would write something, however guys smarter than me have done so.
Great picture you posted of Jamie here. I have to say however, one of my good friends took 7th over all in the Remax with jamie. Said that kids is amazing at such a young age. However he did say he almost did not make it because one out of four of his balls curves more than anyones out there.
I will say however he will win more Remax LD deals in the future, he has a ton of talent.
I think for the average golfer they can learn alot from what he does in his swing, but must pick and choose what part. It fully a pure power stroke rather than a control stroke.
I think you nailed that one well.
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?
Love your posts, HennyB. In your life on the PGA TOUR, you've probably seen more great golf swings -- and more Golf Instructors, great and not-so-great -- than anybody on this site. Don't hold back on your insights . . .
Love your posts, HennyB. In your life on the PGA TOUR, you've probably seen more great golf swings -- and more Golf Instructors, great and not-so-great -- than anybody on this site. Don't hold back on your insights . . .
Hybrid Mode
