More "PLANE" Truth

[BC MIST]

golfin-buddy or anyone

A plane is mathematically defined as a path of points on a flat surface extending infinitely in all directions. As all the motions in a golf swing are “circular” or rotational, the constant reference to planes seems strange. Planes then refer to positions at a particular moment in time during a golf swing and should be used a checkpoints.

A lady mentioned to me that in taking lessons from a local Ottawa professional, she was being taught to swing on plane. I asked what that meant and her eyes glazed over because she had no clue. Now, with the constant reference to planes that we hear everywhere, specifically what planes are the gurus talking about? There could be many but, I feel there are two that are meaningful. One is the line drawn from the ball, up the club shaft and extended, when the golfer is in the address position. (down the line view) “The Golfing Machine” calls this, I believe, the shaft axis plane.(SAP) The other plane of significance is a line drawn from the ball up parallel to the shoulders when the golfer has completed his backswing. This is called the turned shoulder plane.(TSP)

In the Hardy, single plane swing, the golfers hands move back and up along the shaft axis plane to about waist height, after which the move more vertically until, at the top, they are on the turned shoulder plane line. The left arm is now parallel to or coincides with the turned shoulders. There is an obvious plane shift here and the hands AND the club DO NOT stay on the same plane line. In an efficient downswing the golfers hands move back downward to the shaft axis plane and stay there until impact. Obviously this is another plane shift. About half way down the club shaft and the right forearm coincide forming two force vectors from which maximum efficiency is achieved. Checking good ball strikers like Ben Hogan, Moe Norman, George Knudson, Nick Faldo, Nick Price, Trevor Immelman, and so on, they all pass through this position. To me, this is important. The only part of these golfers anatomy that stays on the same plane(SAP) going back and coming down, is the right elbow. By referring to the attachment of John Dunnigan, a US instructor, you can see how the hands et al actually move, and you can see that the elbow stays ON PLANE.

Golfers with upright swings who swing down where their hands are on the turned shoulder plane(TSP) are way above plane and unless they compensate by blocking the hands coming through, they are very likely to come over the top. Jack Nicklaus, Scott Hoch, Jim Furyk and the pre Hank Haney Tiger Woods, are some examples. The other characteristic of these guys is excessive leg drive, necessary to create the blocking motion. This excessive leg motion, perceived as a source of power, caused the golfers to get famously “stuck” causing erratic shots. While these guys with upright swings are great players and have an inate ability to repeat their compensating swings. The flatter, one plane Hardy type swings are much better and simpler to learn for those of us here who are mortals, and we’re all mortals.

One advantage of a single axis swing (Moe Norman) is that the shaft axis plane is a little more vertical. Moe hands traced a path slightly under the SAP going back, was slightly above the SAP at the top and bang on coming down. The less plane shifting there is the easier it is to come into the bal properly. Think how good Jim Furyk would be if he did not have to do his loop d doop each time.

What I would like then, are opinions on what you consider to be the ideal planes, what parts of the golfer follow those planes and of what importance they are.

[EWhelan]

Think Locus - Never Arc

locus: The exact path traced out by a point moving in accordance with a defined condition. Plural: loci
Modern University Dictionary

arc: Part of any curve (unfixed). Plural: arcs
Oxford Dictionary

An arc is part of a curve and all arcs are unfixed in their position. That definition may be a good description of millions of golf swings, but the word arc should play no part in fixing a golfer's mind on precisely how and where he/she must swing his/her clubhead.
A locus is the exact path traced out by a point moving in accordance with a defined condition, a perfect description of the head of any golf club being swung in the hands of an expert player.
Locus, arc:both such little words-one precise, the other imprecise. In latin locus means "a precise place or path. With nothing in this world calling for greater precision than the path of a clubhead on its way to a ball, all golfersn would do well to adopt the word to fix precisely in their minds their prime objective in every swing they ever make.
Remember........The ball is hit by swinging the clubhead up a precise locus to the top, and down a second precise locus through the ball.
............The thing goes wrong in that most instruction covers the plane of the swing just as it covers the path of the clubhead. Seldom, if ever, does it extend to planes and paths plural. Too many would-be golfers leave the practice tee with the belief that there is one plane and one path.
That the downswing "mirrors the backswing" is a classic piece of sophistry still often taught today. The downswing must do no such thing.
The downswing plane...must be made to change.....When path and plane are being taught, it must be made clear that there is a second, quite different, plane for the downswing that sets the clubhead on a second, different path. It is this change to a second plane and path that leads the clubhead correctly to the front at the level of the knee, so well described and illustrated in Hogan's Five Lessons.
-Taken from Such a Little Secret by J. Wilson Barrett

[byerxa]

IMO whatever gets you to the position shown in the last picture reliably is what counts. From that position the shot will almost always be gold. Lots of people have great success getting to there in all kinds of different ways. Furyk says he does not feel like he is looping, while a Chad Campbell probably does not feel his backswing is very low.

My problem is getting there reliably. Lately I have been focusing on posture and balance and letting the club go back to where it wants while keeping these things under control. When I focused on these things while playing a round last week I hit the ball very well. I now need to get with my instructor and a video camera and see what is actually happening to re-calibrate my feel to what is actually happening.

[golfin-buddy]

golfin-buddy or anyone

A plane is mathematically defined as a path of points on a flat surface extending in all directions. As all the motions in a golf swing are “circular” or rotational, the constant reference to planes seems strange. Planes then refer to positions at a particular moment in time during a golf swing and should be used a checkpoints.

A lady mentioned to me that in taking lessons from a local Ottawa professional, she was being taught to swing on plane. I asked what that meant and her eyes glazed over because she had no clue. Now, with the constant reference to planes that we hear everywhere, specifically what planes are the gurus talking about? There could be many but, I feel there are two that are meaningful. One is the line drawn from the ball, up the club shaft and extended, when the golfer is in the address position. (down the line view) “The Golfing Machine” calls this, I believe, the shaft axis plane.(SAP) The other plane of significance is a line drawn from the ball up parallel to the shoulders when the golfer has completed his backswing. This is called the turned shoulder plane.(TSP)

In the Hardy, single plane swing, the golfers hands move back and up along the shaft axis plane to about waist height, after which the move more vertically until, at the top, they are on the turned shoulder plane line. The left arm is now parallel to or coincides with the turned shoulders. There is an obvious plane shift here and the hands AND the club DO NOT stay on the same plane line. In an efficient downswing the golfers hands move back downward to the shaft axis plane and stay there until impact. Obviously this is another plane shift. About half way down the club shaft and the right forearm coincide forming two force vectors from which maximum efficiency is achieved. Checking good ball strikers like Ben Hogan, Moe Norman, George Knudson, Nick Faldo, Nick Price, Trevor Immelman, and so on, they all pass through this position. To me, this is important. The only part of these golfers anatomy that stays on the same plane(SAP) going back and coming down, is the right elbow. By referring to the attachment of John Dunnigan, a US instructor, you can see how the hands et al actually move, and you can see that the elbow stays ON PLANE.

Golfers with upright swings who swing down where their hands are on the turned shoulder plane(TSP) are way above plane and unless they compensate by blocking the hands coming through, they are very likely to come over the top. Jack Nicklaus, Scott Hoch, Jim Furyk and the pre Hank Haney Tiger Woods, are some examples. The other characteristic of these guys is excessive leg drive, necessary to create the blocking motion. This excessive leg motion, perceived as a source of power, caused the golfers to get famously “stuck” causing erratic shots. While these guys with upright swings are great players and have an inate ability to repeat their compensating swings. The flatter, one plane Hardy type swings are much better and simpler to learn for those of us here who are mortals, and we’re all mortals.

One advantage of a single axis swing (Moe Norman) is that the shaft axis plane is a little more vertical. Moe hands traced a path slightly under the SAP going back, was slightly above the SAP at the top and bang on coming down. The less plane shifting there is the easier it is to come into the bal properly. Think how good Jim Furyk would be if he did not have to do his loop d doop each time.

What I would like then, are opinions on what you consider to be the ideal planes, what parts of the golfer follow those planes and of what importance they are.

To be honest, there is really only one position in the downswing that really matters. This line if you will, is between the SAP and TSP that you mentioned above and is approximately when your hands are on their way down and at belt high. if the club shaft is pointing towards the ball, then you are in a good position to strike the ball. Mind you to reach this position everything needs to be inside the two plains (SAP & TSP) see attached file. (sorry only video I had was of me which I can tell you is not a perfect swing by any means, but it is effective to a certain degree.)

CAll it the attack plane (AP). (file is small but you can stretch it out to get a better picture)

Usually this AP will be the same from the position on the downsing that I mentioned above, to the shaft line at impact ,and on the line when the hands are about chest high post impact. See attached file for reference


If your usually in or pretty close to this line or plane, you'll do ok. I think if we look at both the Hardy way, the 2 plane way and the Norman way, you'll see that the majority of them will all hit this AP. Any thoughts.

To see a really good, on plane motion (AP), check this out: http://www.nike.com/nikegolf/swingportrait/

[BC MIST]

To be honest, there is really only one position in the downswing that really matters. This line if you will, is between the SAP and TSP that you mentioned above and is approximately when your hands are on their way down and at belt high. if the club shaft is pointing towards the ball, then you are in a good position to strike the ball. Mind you to reach this position everything needs to be inside the two plains (SAP & TSP) see attached file. (sorry only video I had was of me which I can tell you is not a perfect swing by any means, but it is effective to a certain degree.)

CAll it the attack plane (AP). (file is small but you can stretch it out to get a better picture)

Usually this AP will be the same from the position on the downsing that I mentioned above, to the shaft line at impact ,and on the line when the hands are about chest high post impact. See attached file for reference


If your usually in or pretty close to this line or plane, you'll do ok. I think if we look at both the Hardy way, the 2 plane way and the Norman way, you'll see that the majority of them will all hit this AP. Any thoughts.

Always. The very significant part of your post, I bolded above. While you describe were the butt of the shaft is pointing at one particular point in the downswing, I would describe it another, equally correct way. As you swing down, when the club head gets below the grip end, the club shaft is pointing to the target line extended, and it stays on the target line to impact and down the line extended to the left, until the head moves above the grip. This is the ultimate and most desireable ON PLANE position. Attach a $4 laser pointer to the shaft and follow the beam. Keep it on the target line and you will be on the correct path to superior ball striking.

What is interesting about this is the path of the hands as they come through. One would think that if the shaft points down the target line, that the hands would also go down the line. ABSOLUTELY FALSE!!!! The worst piece of instruction ever, is to tell someone to swing down the line. What really squares up the club face is the hands moving around the body, left of the target line.

I understand what you mean by the attack plane. At impact most golfers are in a single AXIS position, that is, there is a straight line up the shaft through the right forearm. This plane is a little higher than the shaft axis plane and will produce a straight shot. Returning to the shaft axis plane that I described above will likely produce a PURE DRAW, a shot that begins right of the target line and gently curves back to the target line. Swinging on the shaft axis plane or on your attack plane is GOOD. Swinging above your AP, is not.

One disadvantage of your conventional swing over my single axis swing, is how YOU get to the attack plane at impact. You start with the club shaft and the right arm forming an obtuse angle at address. I start with the shaft and my right arm forming a straight angle. The only way for your obtuse angle at address to get to the straight angle at impact, is for the upper body to literally back up, away from the target line. I don't have to do this. This upper body movement is a motion that can yield greater inconsistency for some.

REGARDLESS: The most important issue is in getting the club shaft to point AT the target line extended in both directions. Seldom heard or talked about because it is not sensational, nor is it easily diagrammed or visible on video, but so essential.

[rhh7]

"What I would like then, are opinions on what you consider to be the ideal planes, what parts of the golfer follow those planes and of what importance they are."

I happen to love Furyk's swing, and I think the ideal swing has the hands above the plane going back, then dropping down on the downswing into the "slot". See also "Gravity Golf" by David Lee.

[Sphere Hunter]

One disadvantage of your conventional swing over my single axis swing, is how YOU get to the attack plane at impact. You start with the club shaft and the right arm forming an obtuse angle at address. I start with the shaft and my right arm forming a straight angle. The only way for your obtuse angle at address to get to the straight angle at impact, is for the upper body to literally back up, away from the target line. I don't have to do this. This upper body movement is a motion that can yield greater inconsistency for some.

Hmmm. If the player sets up with the obtuse angle at address but has his hands slightly further ahead of the ball at impact this isn't true. It's just a matter of your shoulders rotating ever so slightly past the square position they started in, to create that striaght line. This makes sense to me but I'm not sure it's correct.

In thinking about though, I wonder if this is why I personally tend NOT to hit push draws (BCmist, you know my shot pattern). Maybe, with a single axis swing, it would be easier to get to impact in a more similar position to set up which, since your shoulders aren't pointed a little left (if you're right handed) would make it easier to start your shot on the line of your set-up. Does this make sense?

So which is it? Do the shoulders go past the original position to create the straight line or does the body relocate further from the ball during the swing? Help me out BC.

BTW, that video of Tiger swinging is amazing.

[byerxa]

BTW, that video of Tiger swinging is amazing.

Tiger is gumby who can bench press 300 lbs. The most flexible yet one of the strongest - deadly combo. If he would just suck it up and give up 10 yards in driving distance, he would have no weakness.

I watched some of his last US am win the other day, and his swing back then was shorter (never seemed to get the club to parallel) and a little more like it is now (I think). Very interesting to see these three stages of his career - up to and including the '97 Masters win, the Tiger Slam stretch, and now the current domination. All we need is for him to adopt a single axis swing in the next stage - we'd never hear the end of it from BC

[BC MIST]

Hmmm. If the player sets up with the obtuse angle at address but has his hands slightly further ahead of the ball at impact this isn't true.

Stand in front of a mirror with your LEFT(SH is left handed) hand on the club. Obtuse angle. Now push the hand forward as far as you can. Does the angle become straight? For me it does not. Then, I rotated my shoulders more than normal and the angle still remained obtuse.

In thinking about though, I wonder if this is why I personally tend NOT to hit push draws (BCmist, you know my shot pattern). Maybe, with a single axis swing, it would be easier to get to impact in a more similar position to set up which, since your shoulders aren't pointed a little left (if you're right handed) would make it easier to start your shot on the line of your set-up. Does this make sense?

Yes and is another very subtle reason why a single axis swing ususally results in straighter shots.

So which is it? Do the shoulders go past the original position to create the straight line or does the body relocate further from the ball during the swing?

I still believe that it is the latter.

[BC MIST]

I happen to love Furyk's swing, and I think the ideal swing has the hands above the plane going back, then dropping down on the downswing into the "slot". See also "Gravity Golf" by David Lee.

I enjoy Furyk's play and the uniqueness of his swing, however, if you and I swing back the way he does we would not break 100. Furyk has 'world class' timing and is able to compensate for his backswing fault by returning the club to an acceptable position. If you are on the Ottawa Golf forum, you are not likely to have this kind of ability.

I understand Lee's concept of Gravity Golf, however, you ability to time the huge plane shift better be superior. Also, to observe gravity's contribution to the golf swing, drop a ball from shoulder height and watch it fall. Powerful isn't it?

A golf swing with the least amount of "moving" parts results in increased consistency.

[golfin-buddy]

I enjoy Furyk's play and the uniqueness of his swing, however, if you and I swing back the way he does we would not break 100. Furyk has 'world class' timing and is able to compensate for his backswing fault by returning the club to an acceptable position. If you are on the Ottawa Golf forum, you are not likely to have this kind of ability.

I understand Lee's concept of Gravity Golf, however, you ability to time the huge plane shift better be superior. Also, to observe gravity's contribution to the golf swing, drop a ball from shoulder height and watch it fall. Powerful isn't it?

A golf swing with the least amount of "moving" parts results in increased consistency.

I could not agree more on this statement (in bold). Timing and great flexibility is what makes him a world class striker. That and he hits balls everyday. If he was an amateur who played once a week and practiced every month or so, he would not break a 100.

Even though the basis of this comment (underlined) is right, I feel that with the increased consistency factor, you might be loosing alot of power. I understand that most players would give up distance for accuracy but I personnaly would rather be 300 yards in the rought with a wedge in hand then 250 in the fairway with a 7 iron. My chances of getting up and in from 80-100yds is way better then from 150-170.
I think this is why there are no tour players using the single axis swing. The game isn't about hitting fairways anymore, it's about hitting greens. Wedge in hand from a hundred in makes that alot more possible.

The idea is to develop a swing that has both rotation and lag and be simple enough to get the job done. If you look at the pictures I posted above, you'll see that the two planes are not that far apart and my swing starts by a slight drop of the hands, then with some hip rotation to get some speed going. Leg drive is a term I don't use very often, I prefer clearing the front hip. As far as simple goes, I believe that if you keep your hands in front of you through out the swing, not alot can go wrong. (keeping in mind that the hands are not over active) Getting stuck or in a blocking position is simply your body outracing your hands\arms. If you keep everything working together, then no problem.

After watching that video of the Single Axis with Moe Norman, I noticed one thing in particular. His release is extremely pronounced. If he doesn't flip, and I mean flip his hands hard through impact, then your looking at a huge block. This is where I think amateurs will get lost in the process. The majority of us just don't have that good of hands. If he was just clearing his hips out of the way, just a little bit more, he wouldn't have to flip his hands so much and still be swinging on plane, down the line.

Again, Moe Norman was probably the greatest ballstriker of his time, but so is Furyk right now. Does it mean that his swing is good for the masses? I don't know, depends on the player. BC, your a low to scratch hdcp player, which tells me that you have great hands and are capable of such a move. I believe that if you practiced enough with the right instructor with the motion I speak of, with your talent, you would be just as good as you are now, but with one difference... you'd have alot more wedges in your hand . I just don't think that can be said about the 20 + handicaper who doesn't have the talent and know how of the lower hscp player.

To be continued

BTW I just had a student who I have been seeing for 3 years now go from the Natural style golf swing to the conventional and has picked up 13 mph on his clubhead speed with a 6 iron!!! We are mixing some of the two principles and he hits it bloody straight too!

This is all interesting stuff, great thread. BC, I would love to see a video of your swing, I'm sure it would bring me more insight on the subject.

[BC MIST]

.Even though the basis of this comment (underlined) is right, I feel that with the increased consistency factor, you might be loosing alot of power. I understand that most players would give up distance for accuracy but I personnaly would rather be 300 yards in the rought with a wedge in hand then 250 in the fairway with a 7 iron. My chances of getting up and in from 80-100yds is way better then from 150-170.
I think this is why there are no tour players using the single axis swing. The game isn't about hitting fairways anymore, it's about hitting greens. Wedge in hand from a hundred in makes that alot more possible.

After watching that video of the Single Axis with Moe Norman, I noticed one thing in particular. His release is extremely pronounced. If he doesn't flip, and I mean flip his hands hard through impact, then your looking at a huge block. This is where I think amateurs will get lost in the process. The majority of us just don't have that good of hands. If he was just clearing his hips out of the way, just a little bit more, he wouldn't have to flip his hands so much and still be swinging on plane, down the line.

Again, Moe Norman was probably the greatest ballstriker of his time, but so is Furyk right now. Does it mean that his swing is good for the masses? I don't know, depends on the player. BC, your a low to scratch hdcp player, which tells me that you have great hands and are capable of such a move. I believe that if you practiced enough with the right instructor with the motion I speak of, with your talent, you would be just as good as you are now, but with one difference... you'd have alot more wedges in your hand . I just don't think that can be said about the 20 + handicaper who doesn't have the talent and know how of the lower hscp player.

In your post there is a presumption that I feel is NOT true and that is that those who use a single axis swing LOSE DISTANCE. It is a myth perpetuated by many, including a few local CPGA instructors that I have discussed this with and MAY be a way of showing a lack of understanding of the swing’s characteristics.

While the fundamentals are unique, a little, there are really only a few differences that may result in straighter shots:
- A wide stance. This limits some unnecessary lower body rotation
- A lower hand palm grip.
- A straight line up the club shaft through the right forearm, hence the term single axis
- Facing the ball at impact.


The truly important feature of TGGS (Moe’s swing) is that the club shaft is on or under the shaft axis plane coming down. This would be the equivalent to your attack plane, as the single axis position is higher than a conventional setup. The wrist and other leverage angles still move in the same manner, but the body faces the ball, or as close to doing this as one’s flexibility allows, and this helps keep the club head coming into the ball from the inside. Less lower body rotation, clearing the hips, means greater consistency. IF you believe that club head speed comes from the lower body, you would believe that less lower body rotation means lower club head speed. I don’t. Most of the club head speed comes from the movement of the upper body leverage angles, so IMO, the lower body’s motion forward to a STABLE position, allows the leverage angles to do their thing. I have seen mathematical PROOF that the lower body supplies the power: I have seen mathematical PROOF that the upper body does. A never ending debate.

You say Moe flips his hands and by inference, this is necessary for a single axis swing. I have super slo mo shots of Moe swinging and he delays the unhinging as late as anyone I have ever seen, including Hogan. His hands are in the middle of his body AND the club is still parallel to the ground. In about 3/100ths of a second from there, his wrists unhinge, so that at impact, his hands are AHEAD of the ball, his left wrist is flat as a pancake and his right wrist is bent. It is a position similar to the one you see of Hogan in 5 Fundamentals. If Moe flipped, he COULD NOT achieve this perfect impact position. Yes, there is a release, but the release is completed well AFTER impact. MOE did NOT flip.

My SA swing has differs from the norm in that I start every full swing from a preset position. This is my top of the backswing position that I am in BEFORE I begin swinging. From there I just turn to the top and go. The other fundamental that I stress comes from Mark Evershed’s TGS fundamentals. I try on every shot to keep my left wrist flat and my right wrist bent for the entire swing. By doing this I can swing as hard as an old fart of 61 can, without hooking. There is no flipping in my swing.

This kind of swing motion has helped me maintain a reasonable level of play, not because I hit the ball perfect every time, but because I hit very few really bad shots. This, to me, is one “secret” to better play. Consistency. Keeping the ball in play. It does help to have a reasonable short game and putting stroke. At my age I will never hit the ball long and I don’t try. 100 mph is about all I can muster, but by keeping it in play, good scores can still result. I understand how Corey Pavin feels.

I constantly work on perfecting a handful of simple fundamentals:
- downswing on the shaft axis plane
-hit the INSIDE quadrant of the ball (causes the first)
-left wrist flat, right wrist bent
-face the ball at impact
Soooo simple.

Here is a link to some articles on the swing of Ben Hogan that you may be interested in. Of particular interest are the two on the swing plane. IMO, there are very well done
http://www.golftoday.co.uk/proshop/f...s_hogan_1.html

[golfin-buddy]

In your post there is a presumption that I feel is NOT true and that is that those who use a single axis swing LOSE DISTANCE. It is a myth perpetuated by many, including a few local CPGA instructors that I have discussed this with and MAY be a way of showing a lack of understanding of the swing’s characteristics.

While the fundamentals are unique, a little, there are really only a few differences that may result in straighter shots:
- A wide stance. This limits some unnecessary lower body rotation
- A lower hand palm grip.
- A straight line up the club shaft through the right forearm, hence the term single axis
- Facing the ball at impact.


The truly important feature of TGGS (Moe’s swing) is that the club shaft is on or under the shaft axis plane coming down. This would be the equivalent to your attack plane, as the single axis position is higher than a conventional setup. The wrist and other leverage angles still move in the same manner, but the body faces the ball, or as close to doing this as one’s flexibility allows, and this helps keep the club head coming into the ball from the inside. Less lower body rotation, clearing the hips, means greater consistency. IF you believe that club head speed comes from the lower body, you would believe that less lower body rotation means lower club head speed. I don’t. Most of the club head speed comes from the movement of the upper body leverage angles, so IMO, the lower body’s motion forward to a STABLE position, allows the leverage angles to do their thing. I have seen mathematical PROOF that the lower body supplies the power: I have seen mathematical PROOF that the upper body does. A never ending debate.

You say Moe flips his hands and by inference, this is necessary for a single axis swing. I have super slo mo shots of Moe swinging and he delays the unhinging as late as anyone I have ever seen, including Hogan. His hands are in the middle of his body AND the club is still parallel to the ground. In about 3/100ths of a second from there, his wrists unhinge, so that at impact, his hands are AHEAD of the ball, his left wrist is flat as a pancake and his right wrist is bent. It is a position similar to the one you see of Hogan in 5 Fundamentals. If Moe flipped, he COULD NOT achieve this perfect impact position. Yes, there is a release, but the release is completed well AFTER impact. MOE did NOT flip.

My SA swing has differs from the norm in that I start every full swing from a preset position. This is my top of the backswing position that I am in BEFORE I begin swinging. From there I just turn to the top and go. The other fundamental that I stress comes from Mark Evershed’s TGS fundamentals. I try on every shot to keep my left wrist flat and my right wrist bent for the entire swing. By doing this I can swing as hard as an old fart of 61 can, without hooking. There is no flipping in my swing.

This kind of swing motion has helped me maintain a reasonable level of play, not because I hit the ball perfect every time, but because I hit very few really bad shots. This, to me, is one “secret” to better play. Consistency. Keeping the ball in play. It does help to have a reasonable short game and putting stroke. At my age I will never hit the ball long and I don’t try. 100 mph is about all I can muster, but by keeping it in play, good scores can still result. I understand how Corey Pavin feels.

I constantly work on perfecting a handful of simple fundamentals:
- downswing on the shaft axis plane
-hit the INSIDE quadrant of the ball (causes the first)
-left wrist flat, right wrist bent
-face the ball at impact
Soooo simple.

Here is a link to some articles on the swing of Ben Hogan that you may be interested in. Of particular interest are the two on the swing plane. IMO, there are very well done
http://www.golftoday.co.uk/proshop/f...s_hogan_1.html

I believe that using body rotation to create lag is the key to higher swing speed. If you look at most golfers, the transition is where all the power is stored and ready to unleash. The moment where the backswing becomes the forward swing, when the lower body (hips) start to uncoil even before the backswing has ended, that is where the lag is created. Let's first understand what lag means. It's not just the angle that your hands have with the club. That is the result of the seperation of the backsing to front swing. Even though this looks like it's happening in the SA swing, it stops when the hips are parallel to the target line, forcing the hands to "save" the shot. I think that you should have to release the golf club, not with your wrists and hands, but with your body.

The fundamentals that you speak of in the SA swing:

"I constantly work on perfecting a handful of simple fundamentals:
- downswing on the shaft axis plane
-hit the INSIDE quadrant of the ball (causes the first)
-left wrist flat, right wrist bent
-face the ball at impact
Soooo simple."

I agree specifically with the highlighted.

I think that "downswing on the shaft axis plane" could equal the concept of coming from the inside in the traditional swing.

"hit the INSIDE quadrant of the ball (causes the first)". Like you said , a result of coming from the inside.
"-left wrist flat, right wrist bent" Absolutely... this is exactly what I think it should be.
"-face the ball at impact" I agree with this only with the upper body. the lower body should be at a 45* angle, continuing it's turn all the way to finish with the belt buckle pointing at the target. I think that you should release the club with the body not with the hands.

The feeling should be, like you said, to have a "left wrist flat, right wrist bent" throughout the swing all the way to when your belt buckle faces the target. Then your hands can "release" Now and I said, this is the feeling that I am trying to achieve (and that I'll teach), it is not however what really happens, but the feeling of holding on to the angle, stops the flipping through impact and forces you to continue your turn and release the club with your body.

I think the concepts of the SA swing are good, because they pretty much mirror the regular swing. I just don't agree with the lower body action. It doesn't create enough body lag. Take a look at the link I put for Tigers swing. look at the face on view. "-left wrist flat, right wrist bent" .

The important thing I want you guys to look at is the change of direction or transition. Look at how his lower body begins the downsing while his backswing hasn't finished yet. This is very important to create the speed that he does.


This is what I meant by lack of power. All things being equal (golfer, strenght, ability and technique being exactly the same) the traditional (or whatever you want to call it) will produce more speed then the SA swing. Unfortunately, we will never know because golf is too bloody complicated for anyone to master two swings!?!

Cheers!

[BC MIST]

I believe that using body rotation to create lag is the key to higher swing speed. If you look at most golfers, the transition is where all the power is stored and ready to unleash. The moment where the backswing becomes the forward swing, when the lower body (hips) start to uncoil even before the backswing has ended, that is where the lag is created. Let's first understand what lag means. It's not just the angle that your hands have with the club. That is the result of the seperation of the backsing to front swing. Even though this looks like it's happening in the SA swing, it stops when the hips are parallel to the target line, forcing the hands to "save" the shot. I think that you should have to release the golf club, not with your wrists and hands, but with your body. .....

This is what I meant by lack of power. All things being equal (golfer, strenght, ability and technique being exactly the same) the traditional (or whatever you want to call it) will produce more speed then the SA swing. Unfortunately, we will never know because golf is too bloody complicated for anyone to master two swings!?!

My question is what do you really mean by LAG? LAG means that the club head trails the hands in its journey to the ball. The longer you can maintain this lag, to a point, the higher will be the club head speed and the straighter the shot is likely to be. Some feel that LAG is decreasing the angle between the left arm and the club shaft (increasing the wrist “kock”). This can happen and if it helps to maintain the small left arm/club shaft angle, it may be beneficial. If the left wrist remains FLAT at the top, the average person can achieve a left arm club shaft angle of about 90*. Those who are highly flexible, a little more. Looking at golfers like Sergio, Ben Hogan and Moe Norman, the angle APPEARS to be very small as they more deeper into their downswing. This is an illusion because of their FLATTER downswing plane. The falter the downswing, the more this 90* angle appears to be an acute angle. This is based on PERSPECTIVE, the idea that two parallel train tracks “APPEAR” to converge, when they do not. So keeping the hands ahead of the club head is the only LAG that is essential.

In any golf swing the downswing begins with the lower body moving forward BEFORE the arms have finished going back. It is NOT something that needs to be created/taught, it is something our subconscious causes to happen. My SA downswing starts 5 video frames before the backswing is finished. Regardless of swing method, radial acceleration stops, (the beginning of the straightening of the wrist cock angles) about the time our hips are parallel to the target line. You suggest that it stops later, when the hips are more open. It really does not matter when, because with both methods, when my hands are in front of my right thigh and if the club shaft is horizontal(this is call the 6/100ths position) I am in perfect position. Moe achieved this, Hogan did, Garcia and the rest of the Tour pros do as well. The position of the hips is NOT a prerequisite for achieving the 6/100ths position.

Your second error, IMO, is your statement that the hands have to save the shot. Why? If the good swingers all get to the 6/100ths position, why does anything have to be saved, SA or traditional? And even if anyone HAD to do this, HOW do they do this? By flipping the hands. Look at Moe’s impact position. There is NO flipping. Look at Hogan’s on page 103 of “Five fundamentals.” Again there is no flipping. This is a myth that should not be perpetuated. Heck, even in my peashooter SA swing, my hands are ahead of the ball at impact. There is NO flipping.

On we go. You say that the club should be released. I don’t understand this. The club never GETS released. What does get released are the several leverage angles created in the backswing. The right arm, the left arm/club shaft angle, the wrists, the left upper arm to left shoulder. These are your LEVERAGE angles that GET straightened at or just after impact by inertia, the outward movement of this whole package, and they produce club head speed. We all know that if a golfer straightens these angle too soon, he loses distance and direction and if he delays them until late in the downswing he hits the ball longer and straighter, regardless of what the hips do. What further proof does one need that the upper body creates the speed.!! The golfer should NEVER and I mean NEVER, consciously release anything during a full swing. It just happens.

It is obvious that I disagree with the bolded part of your statement, both theoretically and practically. By the latter, I mean that I played 35 years with a conventional swing and now 11 years with an SA swing. I hope that you agree that this is sufficient experience to be able to come to the conclusion that the SA swing is NO shorter than a traditional one and that the SA IS STRAIGHTER than the traditional. I recognize that “individual results may vary” but the proof is in the pudding. It is not opinion, it is not theory, it is fact.

While you still believe, like most, that the traditional swing is better, I believe that it is not, for the following reasons:
1. the right hand grip is in the fingers. Hit a few 25 yard shots with the right hand only on the club, with the grip across the fingers. Do the same but with the grip DIAGONALLY across the palm. If the huge increase in ease and accuracy in hitting these shots does not convince, nothing will. This is the motion the right hand follows in all swings, not just the little ones.
2. Approaching impact, knees, hips, torso are ALL in different planes, making timing more difficult.
3. To go from an obtuse angle at address(right arm and club shaft) to a straight angle at impact, the upper body has to back up. Tough to time.
4. The right arm, ‘circular” rotation through impact, because of the finger grip, takes place over a shorter distance than the palm grip, decreasing the chances of a square hit.

All of these are subtle, but factors in achieving consistency. I recognize that most golfers current mindset is to hit everything longer. However, golf will always be a game of accuracy because if you can’t put it where you need to put it, you will never score. An SA swing will achieve greater accuracy and comparable distance, so to me it was a no-brainer. I took some grief when converting, but I am glad that I dared to be different. I work hard on getting better and still screw up like everyone else, at times. But averaging 12/14 fairways versus 9 of 14 and 14/18 greens instead of 11, over 2000+ or so games, (I keep track of these things) tells me that having an open mind was beneficial.

I am not trying to covert anyone. Golfers will always do whatever they want. I just like trying to destroy the myths out there.

[golfin-buddy]

My question is what do you really mean by LAG? LAG means that the club head trails the hands in its journey to the ball. The longer you can maintain this lag, to a point, the higher will be the club head speed and the straighter the shot is likely to be. Some feel that LAG is decreasing the angle between the left arm and the club shaft (increasing the wrist “kock”). This can happen and if it helps to maintain the small left arm/club shaft angle, it may be beneficial. If the left wrist remains FLAT at the top, the average person can achieve a left arm club shaft angle of about 90*. Those who are highly flexible, a little more. Looking at golfers like Sergio, Ben Hogan and Moe Norman, the angle APPEARS to be very small as they more deeper into their downswing. This is an illusion because of their FLATTER downswing plane. The falter the downswing, the more this 90* angle appears to be an acute angle. This is based on PERSPECTIVE, the idea that two parallel train tracks “APPEAR” to converge, when they do not. So keeping the hands ahead of the club head is the only LAG that is essential.

In any golf swing the downswing begins with the lower body moving forward BEFORE the arms have finished going back. It is NOT something that needs to be created/taught, it is something our subconscious causes to happen. My SA downswing starts 5 video frames before the backswing is finished. Regardless of swing method, radial acceleration stops, (the beginning of the straightening of the wrist cock angles) about the time our hips are parallel to the target line. You suggest that it stops later, when the hips are more open. It really does not matter when, because with both methods, when my hands are in front of my right thigh and if the club shaft is horizontal(this is call the 6/100ths position) I am in perfect position. Moe achieved this, Hogan did, Garcia and the rest of the Tour pros do as well. The position of the hips is NOT a prerequisite for achieving the 6/100ths position.

Your second error, IMO, is your statement that the hands have to save the shot. Why? If the good swingers all get to the 6/100ths position, why does anything have to be saved, SA or traditional? And even if anyone HAD to do this, HOW do they do this? By flipping the hands. Look at Moe’s impact position. There is NO flipping. Look at Hogan’s on page 103 of “Five fundamentals.” Again there is no flipping. This is a myth that should not be perpetuated. Heck, even in my peashooter SA swing, my hands are ahead of the ball at impact. There is NO flipping.

On we go. You say that the club should be released. I don’t understand this. The club never GETS released. What does get released are the several leverage angles created in the backswing. The right arm, the left arm/club shaft angle, the wrists, the left upper arm to left shoulder. These are your LEVERAGE angles that GET straightened at or just after impact by inertia, the outward movement of this whole package, and they produce club head speed. We all know that if a golfer straightens these angle too soon, he loses distance and direction and if he delays them until late in the downswing he hits the ball longer and straighter, regardless of what the hips do. What further proof does one need that the upper body creates the speed.!! The golfer should NEVER and I mean NEVER, consciously release anything during a full swing. It just happens.

It is obvious that I disagree with the bolded part of your statement, both theoretically and practically. By the latter, I mean that I played 35 years with a conventional swing and now 11 years with an SA swing. I hope that you agree that this is sufficient experience to be able to come to the conclusion that the SA swing is NO shorter than a traditional one and that the SA IS STRAIGHTER than the traditional. I recognize that “individual results may vary” but the proof is in the pudding. It is not opinion, it is not theory, it is fact.

While you still believe, like most, that the traditional swing is better, I believe that it is not, for the following reasons:
1. the right hand grip is in the fingers. Hit a few 25 yard shots with the right hand only on the club, with the grip across the fingers. Do the same but with the grip DIAGONALLY across the palm. If the huge increase in ease and accuracy in hitting these shots does not convince, nothing will. This is the motion the right hand follows in all swings, not just the little ones.
2. Approaching impact, knees, hips, torso are ALL in different planes, making timing more difficult.
3. To go from an obtuse angle at address(right arm and club shaft) to a straight angle at impact, the upper body has to back up. Tough to time.
4. The right arm, ‘circular” rotation through impact, because of the finger grip, takes place over a shorter distance than the palm grip, decreasing the chances of a square hit.

All of these are subtle, but factors in achieving consistency. I recognize that most golfers current mindset is to hit everything longer. However, golf will always be a game of accuracy because if you can’t put it where you need to put it, you will never score. An SA swing will achieve greater accuracy and comparable distance, so to me it was a no-brainer. I took some grief when converting, but I am glad that I dared to be different. I work hard on getting better and still screw up like everyone else, at times. But averaging 12/14 fairways versus 9 of 14 and 14/18 greens instead of 11, over 2000+ or so games, (I keep track of these things) tells me that having an open mind was beneficial.

I am not trying to covert anyone. Golfers will always do whatever they want. I just like trying to destroy the myths out there.

Hi BC, I just wrote a very long reply to your post but just had my CPU crash on me and lost everything I just wrote (took me 1 hour) .


Here's the cliffs note version.

I have read a little more on the JD website and have to say that it is some interesting stuff. the only thing that bothers me about the method is that it "seems" like the body rotation is stopped at one point in the downswing. I believe that if your body continues it's rotation through out the entire motion then there will be no "flip" and the release can happen using the body and not the hands.

I believe that an efficient golf swing is one that can use the entire assets that the golfer has (including his body) to make a full rotation with fluidity. The motion, (Moe's swing) that you speak of just looks like it restricts the the rotation through impact leaving the arms no choice but to make the clubhead release hard using his hands. Yes his impact position is ideal, just don't think that the majority of golfers out there can achieve this.

Please understand that I am basing everything I'm saying on the Moe video. If this is not the typical case (or the model) please tell me. I just see the JD pictures as being very close to "traditional" with slight variances. The one thing taht really sticks out is the angle of the clubshaft parallel to the rigth forearm (flatter plane). I'm not saying this is wrong by any means. It seams to me that the body rotation is not restricted at all and that he finishes great.

MY next question for you is...

What about body types? (ectomorph, endomorph etc..) Can all body types achieve this position at the top of the swing. This swing makes you come from the inside (big time) and some body types cannot achieve this while keeping a full rotation going. I know personally that my body type ( shorter, wide shoulders, thicker chested, rounded shoulders) would have a hard time reaching this position. Although I'll be honest with you, I still am.

My swing is way too upright right know and I am trying to flatten it out, I just know that I'll never be able to get all the way where the SA swing would want it.
See the attached picture of my top of backswing from where it is now (red) and where I'd like it to be(yellow).

Would this be closer to what your speaking of? It will flatten my attack angle and this is what I'm tring to achieve

This thread has been good, I always like learning other concepts. I can tell you that I have gone away from the conventional two plane, really upright swing a few years ago. I like a little flatter swing for most people, just depends on their body and flexibility.

Now wait a second , this doesn't mean that I agree completely with your method, just that the similarities are close and that some concepts are good, just not for everyone.

Final thought:

I have not, and will never be stuck on one specific ideal swing. Everyone is different. Everybody has different assets, finding the right way to make everything work together and efficiently is the only goal I have.

[rhh7]

I noticed on tv today that both Wi and Stryker had what I consider a one-plane swing...neither did very well...I do believe that this method is more strenuous and puts a greater strain on the back than the so-called two plane swing.

Also, I believe with all my heart that Furyk is great because of his loop, NOT in spite of his loop.

[BC MIST]

I noticed on tv today that both Wi and Stryker had what I consider a one-plane swing...neither did very well...I do believe that this method is more strenuous and puts a greater strain on the back than the so-called two plane swing.

Also, I believe with all my heart that Furyk is great because of his loop, NOT in spite of his loop.

Keep in mind that they are playing a very difficult golf course and one cannot always relate the score of one round to one's swing method. Wi has hit a lot of fairways and greens and his high score of Saturday was caused by the short putts that he missed and nerves.

The relation of an upright swing to potential back problems is the opposite to what you stated. An upright swing is OFF PLANE and to compensate for that fault, the golfer has to use excessive leg drive, and in so doing, more stress is put on the back. Furyk has perfected his fault, i.e., the loop compensation, and would be a hacker like us if he did not make the loop.

If you watched the "final four" in the Accenture Match play last week, how many had classic ONE PLANE swings? Only Stenson was slightly high than ideal on the back swing but he was very close and the rest were one plane. In the Honda, Wi, Mark Wilson, Boo Weekly, all have one plane swing and Steve Stricker has both flattened and shortened his swing, and since last season, has played much better. Even Johnny Miller made reference to the increasing numbers of similar type golf swings that are now appearing on Tour.

What needs to be understood is that the ON PLANE position creates a simpler, more efficient, scientifically correct, inside path to the ball. Those who suffer from paralysis by INCORRECT analysis, would say that these guys are coming too much from the inside. They have yet to realize that the ideal path IS from the inside. http://www.golfbetterproductions.com/comparison.asp The link is to John Dunigan's website and shows the ideal mid downswing position where the shaft covers the right forearm, creating the inside path. To these add Ben Hogan and Moe Norman, the two best ball strikers, ever. There is a reason for this.

[john dunigan]

BC,

The club design dictates as small a shift from its designed angle for most simplicity.

You are right on the money. Of course this has been the heart of what I believe for well over 20 years, so I'm a little biased. I will say that there are many ways to get it done, but it seems sensible to use the club the way it was designed.

JD

[golfin-buddy]

[quote=rhh7;163198]I noticed on tv today that both Wi and Stryker had what I consider a one-plane swing...neither did very well...I do believe that this method is more strenuous and puts a greater strain on the back than the so-called two plane swing.quote]


I have to agree with BC on this.

A one plane swing is technically more efficient. Most players coming out on tour are getting closer to this, even Tiger. (with the lead arm on the same plane as the shaft angle. or a lower, flatter plane)

There are just less moving parts and not as many compensation moves to get down to the ball "on plane". In the 2 planer, you have to make a huge drop of the hands to get it started on plane, otherwise, it's over the top. Acknowledging that not everybody can achieve this arm position (one plane) because of body types and flexibility is important.

I'm not saying that I agree with BC's supper flat shaft with right arm plane, (for a midget like me, the club would almost be parallel to the ground ) but a litttle flatter plane would help the majority of us golfers.

My 2 cents anyway

[ironmaster15213]

Very interesting thread, especially for me since I have changed my swing recently to a one plane swing due to a bad left knee . My thoughts are that you do lost a little club head speed but it's not nearly as much as people say (maybe 3 to 5%). I never totally release my right wrist lever during the swing, never a flip, try to think about keeping the left palm facing downward right after impact around knee high, I should be able to drop the club straight down if a open my left hand, so I know I'm not over rotating my left hand. Now I might be a little different cause I try to keep my legs very quite on the back swing but will lead the upper body with a rotating action on the down swing causeing my hands to lead the club around to the inside and then up a little. I'm really interested in any other tips, I really use the B.C. method of trying to hit the inside quadrant of the ball on the way down, It's kind of like saying to your brain I'm not going to make any subtle movements so it's up to you to get me there and wa la the brain does it pretty well with no thought on my part.

[BC MIST]

A one plane swing is technically more efficient. Most players coming out on tour are getting closer to this, even Tiger. (with the lead arm on the same plane as the shaft angle. or a lower, flatter plane)
There are just less moving parts and not as many compensation moves to get down to the ball "on plane". In the 2 planer, you have to make a huge drop of the hands to get it started on plane, otherwise, it's over the top. Acknowledging that not everybody can achieve this arm position (one plane) because of body types and flexibility is important.
My 2 cents anyway

A few responses to your comments:
(1) It appears that you think that John Dunigan teaches a single axis swing. He does not. Among other things he has his right elbow ON the shaft axis plane throughout the swing and he wants the downswing started by a push back and down to get the club shaft on the proper plane or inside path to the ball. Also, his left arm is parallel to the turned shoulder plane at the top, i.e., single plane. This is NOT the same as single axis even though a single axis swing will accomplish the same thing. A single axis swing is different at setup in that there is a STRAIGHT line up the shaft AND the right forearm when looking down the line. Your swing has an obtuse angle in this position, at address.
(2) You are obviously convinced that a huge amount of lower body rotation is necessary for maximum distance. To see the benefits of a different concept, like John’s, you have to be willing to consider that a huge lower body rotation is not only non-essential, but can lead to greater inconsistency. This is not to suggest that the lower body fails to rotate or stops rotating. Just not as much. A fast move with the hips, subconsciously causes the arms to move fast. A fast move of the arms subconsciously causes the body to move fast. Choose your thought.
(3) In John’s downswing swing he wants the arms to start BACK with minimal lower body rotation, to get the shaft ON PLANE. When most golfers start with a lot of lower body rotation the arms come out, and the shaft does not cover the right forearm half way down. This necessitates the golfers BLOCKING the shot coming through, to hit it straight. Furyk and the pre Haney, Tiger, are examples.
(4) You see Moe Norman’s “restriction” of the lower body rotation as a fault. I see it as one reason why he was so good.
(5) There should be no conscious release. It just happens.

You suggest in a lower post that my club shaft is very flat. It is certainly flatter than what yours would likely be based on the upright backswing that you have. I have drawn while lines showing where your shoulder plane is (same as your line,) where the shaft axis plane likely would be and a line that drawn where your right arm would likely be. Half way down your club shaft would coincide with the shaft axis plane, covering the right forearm. From that position, I believe, you would hit the ball farther and with a PURE draw.

From your pic it is obvious that you are very flexible as shown by the apparent full shoulder turn and minimal hip turn. My 61 year old body envies this kind of . I hope that you don’t hold back the hips on the backswing on purpose. If so, you will likely end up with lower back problem a result. This “X” factor, made infamous by jim MacLean, is bogus, IMO.

I have also added a downswing shot of my swing. At the top my hands were on the upper, shoulder plane, and very soon after I started down, you can see that my hands, instead of going out as many golfers do, have moved backwards toward the camera. This puts me on the proper shaft plane, almost immediately and continues to impact.

IMO, any body type can achieve the single plane position. Geoff Ogilvy is tall achieves this position. So does a much stockier Chad Campbell, Mark Wilson(winner of the Honda, today) Moe Norman did and so on. On the Dunigan website compare Trevino to Faldo. Faldo’s on plane position is more vertical than Trevino’s, but they are both cover the forearm coming down. Trevino is 5’7’, while Faldo is 6’3”.

The positions that you want to get into to flatten your swing are excellent. When you achieve this, your ball striking will be more consistent, I predict. My 11 year struggle is going from an upright backswing to a much flatter one. My subconscious still wants to swing too upright. I will probably take this fight to my grave.

[golfin-buddy]

A few responses to your comments:
(1) It appears that you think that John Dunigan teaches a single axis swing. He does not. Among other things he has his right elbow ON the shaft axis plane throughout the swing and he wants the downswing started by a push back and down to get the club shaft on the proper plane or inside path to the ball. Also, his left arm is parallel to the turned shoulder plane at the top, i.e., single plane. This is NOT the same as single axis even though a single axis swing will accomplish the same thing. A single axis swing is different at setup in that there is a STRAIGHT line up the shaft AND the right forearm when looking down the line. Your swing has an obtuse angle in this position, at address.
(2) You are obviously convinced that a huge amount of lower body rotation is necessary for maximum distance. To see the benefits of a different concept, like John’s, you have to be willing to consider that a huge lower body rotation is not only non-essential, but can lead to greater inconsistency. This is not to suggest that the lower body fails to rotate or stops rotating. Just not as much. A fast move with the hips, subconsciously causes the arms to move fast. A fast move of the arms subconsciously causes the body to move fast. Choose your thought.
(3) In John’s downswing swing he wants the arms to start BACK with minimal lower body rotation, to get the shaft ON PLANE. When most golfers start with a lot of lower body rotation the arms come out, and the shaft does not cover the right forearm half way down. This necessitates the golfers BLOCKING the shot coming through, to hit it straight. Furyk and the pre Haney, Tiger, are examples.
(4) You see Moe Norman’s “restriction” of the lower body rotation as a fault. I see it as one reason why he was so good.
(5) There should be no conscious release. It just happens.


From your pic it is obvious that you are very flexible as shown by the apparent full shoulder turn and minimal hip turn. My 61 year old body envies this kind of . I hope that you don’t hold back the hips on the backswing on purpose. If so, you will likely end up with lower back problem a result. This “X” factor, made infamous by jim MacLean, is bogus, IMO.


IMO, any body type can achieve the single plane position. Geoff Ogilvy is tall achieves this position. So does a much stockier Chad Campbell, Mark Wilson(winner of the Honda, today) Moe Norman did and so on. On the Dunigan website compare Trevino to Faldo. Faldo’s on plane position is more vertical than Trevino’s, but they are both cover the forearm coming down. Trevino is 5’7’, while Faldo is 6’3”.

The positions that you want to get into to flatten your swing are excellent. When you achieve this, your ball striking will be more consistent, I predict. My 11 year struggle is going from an upright backswing to a much flatter one. My subconscious still wants to swing too upright. I will probably take this fight to my grave.

I have looked at a few pro swings on Swing Vision (you Tube, very cool) http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...y=swing+vision

I have never noticed this before, but almost every singe swing has that right arm and shaft equal to one another at the position you mentioned in the FAldo-Trevino swings, even Furyk. Even Kevin Stadler!!! Check it out, very cool. I am starting to believe that his position is obviously correct. (best swings in the world, even Tiger, Phil, Retief, Furyk)

AS far as the "Huge" hip action, just wanted to make sure thatyou understood that I do not believe that this is necessarry to create power, just that the lower body is essential, in a reaction to the upper body, to keep on turning all the way through for maximum speed. What I saw in Norman was his hips stop at parallel to the target on the way down. That I did not like. What I like to see is that the hands stay in front of the body(within the shoulders) all the way through. the lower body reacts to this, making it possible. Leading with the hips will cause blocls and flips because the swing will not be connected, absolutely, could not agree with you more. When I worte the original post, I was under the impression that everything you were saying was based on Moe's swing, which is still one of the best I have ever seen, but not one that I would teach to the masses.

I agree that the release just happens... for you and me and the other 4% of the world who can shoot in the 70s, but not the 100 shooter. If they knew how to do this properly, they would not be shooting in the 100s. Some things need to be learned, and for the majority of golfers out there (75-80%) they need to learn how to do this. Golfers who shoot in the 70's, usually have natural athletic ability and talent to better understand these concepts and apply them, but the majority cannot. I can just imagine most people reading this and going .
Knowing it and applying it requires some natural ability.

In conclusion, flatter is most definetely better then too upright, no question. But there is a happy median, which both you and I have illustrated with the yellow (white) position that I'm trying to get to. Flatter then that and I'll get in trouble.

As for me personnally, I like to feel like everything from my belt down is in concrete on the backswing, creating the coil necessarry to release it into the downswing. I guess you might say that I'm "restricting" the turn, but really that is a result of keeping my right knee in the original position all the way through the backswing. (lower body in concrete) This help with the proper loading and gets me behind the ball from a face view. (also helps keep my spine angle slightly backwards) I do not make the first move with my hips, I actually try to feel like my back remains pointing at the target and let my hands and arms make the first move (a drop if you will) then I let everything go through, not restricting anything and finishing with 90% of my weight on my front foot and my chest and belt buckle pointing at the target and not to the right of it.

I don't think my back will be hurting because I actually don't feel anything in my back. The torque that I feel is mostly in my right leg (hamstring and lower quad just above the knee to the inside.) I actually have a bad back from hockey (fractured L3 vertabrae) but this puts no stress on that at all. Flexibility is a beautiful thing , I agree. I've actually found that if I do not "restrict my hips" (or put it in concrete) that I actually turn too much without any coil. I measured it at about 115-120* turn. (not good) this makes my swing extremely long and loose. BAll goes everywhere.

I hope that the people out there reading this, do not take any of the things we say and apply them to their personal swings. Our faults and fixes does not mean they are yours. Make sure you have someone who is trained (not saying CPGA, CGTF or any other... but CPGA is better ) take a look at your swing and have them make the assessment of your swing. I can vouch for myself and tell you that even though I teach this game, I do not teach myself. I have a collegue, who happens to be one of the best in this area, if not the best, make assessments and recommendations. BC, I'm sure that someone helps you out every once in a while too. Point being, if the best in the world all have teachers, then why the H@!! don't we.

[byerxa]

I agree that the release just happens... for you and me and the other 4% of the world who can shoot in the 70s, but not the 100 shooter.

I rarely shoot in the 70s, but as a reformed OTT swinger, I will 100% agree that the release happens naturally with the swing. With a typical OTT out to in move I had to really roll the forearms and wrists over to square the club face with the swing path. Sure I could hit draws, but they were manufactured pull draws. With a better on plane in to out swing it took me a while get rid of the excessive roll over action to prevent smother hooks.

I think the "excessive" hip action will add more power, but to pull it off you've got to be flexible and strong enough to keep the posture and balance together doing this. I think most people do not realize how much core strength it takes to hold a proper spine angle in balance through the whole swing. But this is crucial to form the foundation that can drive a powerful swing.

[john dunigan]

I reckon that faster hips could result in faster club head speed, but at what cost? Faster hips will always want to throw the club head out over the top which can cost both compression (distance) and control...

I posted some video clips on youtube.com recently. Please have a look and let me know what you think. The most recent is my own analysis of my swing and why I do what i do and teach what i teach.

JD

[Powerdraw]

but john in one of those clips you promote a hip turn swing left of target no? please expand on this...i know its for those rare 5% of us hacks but should an in-too out swing use this or not?

thank you.
J

[john dunigan]

That's exactly right if your club path is crossing the target line from inside to outside rather than inside out to the ball, you need to activate the hips to "square the path" In my experience, VERY few golfers need to do this, but i do find myself introducing this to many of my advancing students as they improve to the low single digits. Before you add hip action, I believe you should have virtually eliminated the over the top move, as this hip action will steepen the plane somewhat. My no hip swing is flatter and more under plane than my pro move.

Does that help?

JD

[byerxa]

I find as a typical mid-capper with moderate flexibility and strength it is a fine line between proper hip movement/weight transfer and getting into a swaying motion that blows everything up. I can't do "arms only" - in this case my weight actually tends to get driven back onto my right side. But I have to be careful not to try to "fire" my lower body as that causes all sorts of breakdowns as well. I do have to start the down swing with the lower body, but it is a subtle shifting towards the lead side.

I have tried to get more hip rotation like the pros, and when I do maintain my positions properly I can really wack the ball. But the other 20+ times I try it I fall apart and end up pulling the upper body around bringing the club over the top.

What is interesting is someone like VJ has to work on opposite things a typical hacker does. He puts a shaft in the ground behind him to prevent in from coming in too flat and low. Meanwhile Joe Bloes need something like the Inside Path to prevent the out-in move.

[john dunigan]

That's why my books are aimed at the 99.5 percent of golfers who will never have the problem of coming too much from the inside. I will say that for VJ it is my opinion that the flatness of his downswing is the reason we know his name. If he ever gets above that plane as he practices, he might not be the same player ever again. Again this is MY take, the reason why he appears to come too much from the inside is that he has too much lag--common in VERY good players--the hands are too much out in front and he has a little too much spine tilt to the right on the way down. were he to fix these issues, he'd never need that shaft drill again.

[byerxa]

Once you get a taste of hitting the ball well with a proper in-out move, it is addictive. Last year I developed major swing flaws originating from bad setup (posture, etc.) instigated by some back problems. Due to the bad setup I was being forced over the top and losing lots of power with weak pull slices (which I really, really hate). Of course not knowing the root cause I developed a Sergio lay off move in an attempt to correct the issues with my hand and arms alone. I knew I had to get the club lagged in from the inside to get the power and accuracy back, but my setup would not allow it.

[Powerdraw]

That's why my books are aimed at the 99.5 percent of golfers who will never have the problem of coming too much from the inside. I will say that for VJ it is my opinion that the flatness of his downswing is the reason we know his name. If he ever gets above that plane as he practices, he might not be the same player ever again. Again this is MY take, the reason why he appears to come too much from the inside is that he has too much lag--common in VERY good players--the hands are too much out in front and he has a little too much spine tilt to the right on the way down. were he to fix these issues, he'd never need that shaft drill again.

now john, a scenario for ya...

take me as an example, or an exception maybe if you will. i am not a low single digit handicapper. i shoot about 80-83. im very long but erratic with big dog and pay a price at times. i have a decent game around and close to the green and on the green. im a really good iron player on full shots, but less then full is iffy....but a good bunker player and trouble player.

i come from the inside on the ball, alot of pushs though...but i know my pivot is sucky as ive learned golf through golf my way as a kid watching with dasd on the tube nicklaus win a ton...

now, for 3years ive been a TGMer knowing full well that pivot training zone is part of the whole package-system even though the mind are in the hands. it sounds like your are discarding pivot training for 99.5% of us. i would like you to take my own case as a ginnypig thread on what you think i should do...sounds to me like i need some serious pivot training but if im not a low single, should i?

i'd like your take on 'my case' and thank you so much for participating on this forum, that is awesome!

jerome