Natural Golf Method

[redneck]

Has anyone ever heard of this or use it, I started reading about it yesterday at golfing4ever.com and it looks really interesting. I'm a 100-105 stroke golfer but am looking for a way to simplify my swing to get more consistent results. I tried this out yesterday with some practice swings and it feels very good but I am interested to hear from someone that already uses it......

[alice]

There was an issue of Golf Magazine in the last year or so which featured Moe Norman on the cover and talked about how to swing using the Narual Swing. That swing is like all others, you get better the more you pracise. I don't think that this method is your short cut to lower scores.

[Curious George]

Theres a forum member here, NatGolfer (he just posted under the instruction section, in the thread "Casting/over the top) who obviously is a natural golf practitioner. He also has a great game, from what I read. Email him, I'm sure he'll share any info he has.

[el tigre]

Here's the link to another thread on this forum about it:

http://www.ottawagolf.com/forum/show...t=natural+golf

Included in this thread is ANOTHER link from the previous Ottawa Golf bulletin board where natgolfer goes into a lot of detail about it. No use having him repeat the same stuff over and over.

Steve Hall teaches the Natural Golf method, but he is no longer at Raceview. He also teaches the conventional golf swing, and I can tell you from personal experience that he is an excellent instructor. Don't know where he is now - perhaps someone else on this forum knows his wherabouts.

[natgolfer]

alice said, "That swing is like all others, you get better the more you pracise. I don't think that this method is your short cut to lower scores."

While there are similarities in all conventional golf swing methods, a single axis swing is very different because you grip it differently, setup differently, are in a different position at impact and the biggest difference of all is that your shots will be different-STRAIGHTER.

Practice does not make perfect-perfect practice makes perfect and from watching 100's(1000's) of conventional golfers over the years practicing, they are very good at perfecting their conventional golf faults.

While no conventional method is a short cut to lower scores, SA will enable a golfer to play better, faster than CG, and is easier on the back. It's easier to learn, but it is not easy. "To gain a fine golf swing, a man must work." (Paul Bertholy/Moe Norman)

The SA swing will remain the exception because most of the golfing world and equipment is CG and there are no significant players on Tour using it. Perhaps in time because it takes 20 years to become an overnight success.

Perhaps gbower can give some details of his experience with single axis. Of note is that he has gone from a 80 to 85 shooter to a 69 to 80 shooter, in just over a year. I believe he has shot par(72) then 69(3 under) and just recently, 70. I think this golfer would say that SA IS a "short cut to lower scores."

[gbower]

As natgolfer said it's not a shortcut but for me it seemed to work very quickly. I asked how the grip was and then practiced that at home and then tried to hit some balls at the range and was amazed at how much straighter they were going than my old swing. After working on the swing all last winter indoors and then trying to apply that to my game when the season started I've found that my hard work has paid off. My bad shots are still there but no where near as frequent or as bad and my good shots are much better than I ever had. I've brought my handicap down about 4 since this time last year. Sure a stroke or two may be the work I've done on the short game but the other 2 or 3 are from my change to SA. Keeping the ball in play sure helps. My shots are much straighter and contrary to what some people will say about losing distance, it just isn't true.
I know someone is teaching it at the driving range in Barrhaven near Stonebridge, I think it's John Ollson.

[redneck]

And as it so happens I live in Barrhaven and practice at the driving range you mention . I will definitely look into it.

[alice]

When I said that the swing is like all others, I was pertaining to the fact that no matter which swing you use you still have to hold the club swing it and hit the ball. There is alot of FEEL in this game. My thought is that having played this game for 30 years
(37 now) is that you improve with practise whether it's on the range, on the course or in your back yard making practise swings.

[Gangrel]

I took lessons from the city of ottawa recreation thing a few years ago, and ended up with Gerald Manale as an instructor. He taught us "single axis, palm hammer grip", which seems to be a variation on Moe Norman's NG. Now, I can't speak for improvment, because I only really started playing golf after taking the course, but I believe in the theory.

Even with the lessons tho, practice makes perfect..... This is my second summer of playing golf full time (well, at least once every few weeks) and after a horrid start to my summer, I've noticed I seem to be coming around the last few games. I still have some mis, and my short game either seems to be stellar, or crap (dontcha love golf?) but the gist seems to be going.

I am very close to breaking 100 (which was my goal this summer) so hopefully I can. Then of course, it's onto breaking 90.

If I remember correctly, Gerald mentioned that Bob's Discount Golf in Nepean offers lessons as well in the single axis golf, so you may want to look there......


Sorry for the long winded post, just killing some time at work at the end of the day!

[natgolfer]

alice said, When I said that the swing is like all others, I was pertaining to the fact that no matter which swing you use you still have to hold the club swing it and hit the ball. There is alot of FEEL in this game. My thought is that having played this game for 30 years(37 now) is that you improve with practise whether it's on the range, on the course or in your back yard making practise swings.

alice, It is obvious that you "hold the club, swing it and hit the ball." What you may not understand yet, is that with a single axis swing, you hold it DIFFERENTLY, setup DIFFERENTLY and you swing it DIFFERENTLY. It is these differences that cause a straighter ball flight. This is not a Leadbetter swing versus a MacLean swing versus a Smith swing, which are all the "same" because they grip the club in the fingers, this is a single axis swing. It's different. It is not as different as pitching a ball overhand versus underhand, but it's DIFFERENT. Perhaps a better analogy is comparing the arc of a putt using a long putter and that of one of conventional length. The long putter arc stays closer to the target line or is larger than the arc of a shorter, conventional putter.

The net result of these DIFFERENCES, is that the right arm releases through the ball at impact, a little DIFFERENTLY, ie., with slightly less rotation, and the release finishes a little farther down the target line, thereby increasing the probability of square contact.

It is a swing technique, like all others, that requires practice to move towards perfection. It will not suddenly drop your score by 20 strokes, but, all other things being equal, it will improve your ball striking, because it's just easier to return the club head to the ball squarely.

There is alot of FEEL in this game. I know what this means, but I am unsure of your point. Today at Greensmere I had a 40 yard wedge to #16 and I aimed at a pile of goose poop at the front of the green and the ball landed about 4" in front of it and similarily, on 18 I aimed a 20 yard wedge shot at a tiny clump of grass from a ball mark and actually hit it. This is FEEL, or your subconscious mind telling your golf muscles how hard to hit the ball. BUT, the single axis technique that I used made the result easier to achieve, because there is just less flipping, through the ball.

[alice]

Like I said, when that issue of Golf Magazine with Moe Norman came out. I like many I assume went out and tried to hit it like Moe. I do understand that both swings are different. You may be holding the club differently, setting up to the ball differently & swinging the club differently but you are still holding onto the club. You are setting up to the ball and you are swinging the club albeit on a different axis. No matter what method you will need to practise so you can rely on swing when you need to. I do agree that it is easier to get back to square beacause you are swing on only one axis.

[Graeme Wilson]

Hi,

I just found this discussion on the web. I'm in B.C. and have been taking lessons from Tony Vogel - I made his website for lessons (works for me!) his site is www.naturalgolf.ca I have found the system very easy to learn and feel like I'm improving steadily. You do need lessons though, I floundered for a while before going for it, but have no regrets. The Natural Golf videos are good, but let's face it, you can't learn the game from videos. Right now, I'm working through a player development program with Tony and am really excited about next season. Feel free to email me at gwilson@desconnect.com

[natgolfer]

Natural Golf is Great

Yup!!!

[sensfan63]

Natgolfer: From what i've seen of natural golfers, the ball flight has definitely been a lower-than-average trajectory (for good players). Couple that with the right-to-left movement of a natural golfer's ball, and my question is this:

Given that a typical tour event's setup would include firm-and-fast greens, would it not be extra-difficult for a natural golfer to EXCEL on a professional tour?

Thanks,

sensfan63

[natgolfer]

Natgolfer: From what i've seen of natural golfers, the ball flight has definitely been a lower-than-average trajectory (for good players). Couple that with the right-to-left movement of a natural golfer's ball, and my question is this:
Given that a typical tour event's setup would include firm-and-fast greens, would it not be extra-difficult for a natural golfer to EXCEL on a professional tour?

I have been asked many questions about the single axis method, but never this one. Based on what I know and what I have experienced, here is my best take on the question. Feel free to add more if you wish.

Firstly, because a single axis swing is flatter than the average CG swing, it seems logical that the shallower arc that the club head follows into impact would produce a lower ball flight. However, there is an ideal position that the golfer should strive for on the downswing, and that is the "on plane" position. When the hands are just past hip high, the club shaft should coincide with the right forearm, looked at from the down the line view. This is true for both the CG swing and an SA swing. While both techniques start from a different position, at impact they should end up in the same position, therefore trajectory would be the same for both. Personally, when I converted from an upright CG swing to a flatter SA swing, my ball flight went up. My driver-on-order loft will be 7 degrees, but my ball flight is not low.

Secondly, when a golfer converts to SA and if he used the sme clubs with no adjustment in length, the ball flight should be lower. As his right hand is placed on the club lower than with the Vardon grip, he is them playing with clubs that are effectively shorter, as the wrist axis is closer to the club head(the fulcrum of the lever is farther down the shaft) Therefore, the ball flight will be lower. But, to accomodate this hand being farther down the shaft, SA clubs are made longer, so the effective length is the same as before conversion. Again personally, my right hand is a full 2" farther down the shaft, so I made all of my clubs 2" longer than normal. I have converted clubs for a number of golfers who are now playing SA, and I simply measure how much farther that right hand is down the shaft and then make the clubs that much longer. For most golfers, it's just over an inch. This extra lengh actually tends to increase ball flight a little.

Ideally, there is more right arm extension through impact in the SA swing because of the palm grip, so if anything, the overall ball trajectory would be slightly higher, although this would be almost imperceptible.

If a golfer hits the ball low, regardless of technique used, IMO, it is because of the individual swing characteristics of the golfer and not the method. Having said that, if any golfer hits the ball too low, then the head lofts or the stiffness/torque should be changed to increase ball flight. Golf clubs should be fitted to the golfer and not the other way around. For example, I switched from an SK Fiber Pure Energy shaft to an SK Fiber Lite Revolution shaft in my 8*Nemesis, and the ball flight lowered about 20%.

In conclusion, I don't believe that the SA method causes lower shots and would not prevent a highly talented SA golfer from being successful on Tour. The few times that I have seen Moe Norman, the absolute best ball striker ever, his driver flight was quite high.

Golfers with a flatter arc through the ball, regardless of method, will have a more difficult time hitting shots out of the rough because of this. A more upright, Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus, fading type of swing, is better out of long grass, than a Ben Hogan, Jonathan Kaye, flatter swing.