Stack and tilt

[Marcos]

Does anyone here use this method?I have been seeing a lot of commercials on this and wondering if any of the people on this forum have tried this system and what they think of it.
Thank you

[LobWedge]

Does anyone here use this method?I have been seeing a lot of commercials on this and wondering if any of the people on this forum have tried this system and what they think of it.
Thank you

I do, to a certain extent. I find it works best with the mid and short irons, and is a bit tougher with the long irons and woods. A wider stance helps there, because you still need to make a bit more of a weight shift. My contact has definitely improved since making the switch.

When I first tried it, the whole idea seemed counter-intuitive, but the ball striking improvement was almost immediate, so I decided to stick with it.

[petah]

Can someone explaine exactly what is "stack and tilt? I too have seen the commercials and was wodnering what it was.

[LobWedge]

Can someone explaine exactly what is "stack and tilt? I too have seen the commercials and was wodnering what it was.

This is it in a nutshell.

http://www.golfdigest.com/instructio...ndtilt1_gd0706

[Rusty]

I went to a seminar that the 2 guys that developed the Stack and Tilt that was on at the same time as the Canadian Open. I also have thier DVD and I it appears to make the golf swing easier for the average golfer.
The message I took from them was that the most important part of golf was the abiliity to make contact with the ground in the same spot every time. This is made difficult due to the way the weight shift is in the normal golf swing and the S&T reduces or eliminates this. (Note; I said this is what I took from the seminar, I am not sure that is what they would say)
I have not had the time to put it into play yet, but I have started to do some of the basic moves they suggested as a way of "dipping your toe in" and it seems to help.
David Feherty was the MC at the seminar and he seemed to buy into the theory. The DVD is a little expensive in my mind, but they are thorough and it really is not that complicated.
If I was a single digit handicap, I would not think about going this way, but if you are a high handicap I would be all over it.

Rusty

[byerxa]

Interesting watching Sergio this weekend on TV. Looks like he almost has a S&T swing at times on shorter clubs. However the shots he made when using a more left side loaded swing were not very good Also interesting that Feherty is on the bandwagon. It seems as lot of pros who are/were great short game guys but struggle with ball striking (relative) are going to things like S&T or true 1-plane swings.

I think the consensus is getting stronger that S&T works on shorter irons and wedges, but not so well on longer clubs. Aaron Baddeley is a classic example - good ball striker on shorter clubs but not a very good driver of the ball. Watching Mike Weir at the PC last year he seemed to use a hybrid approach. More orthodox weight transfer on driver, more S&T on shorter clubs.

I tried some S&T swings and at first the feeling of reverse pivot was scary, but after a few shots I was able to hit some nice 7 irons. But I don't think I could ever go to it as that reverse pivot feeling freaks me out too much.

[LobWedge]

I think the consensus is getting stronger that S&T works on shorter irons and wedges, but not so well on longer clubs. Aaron Baddeley is a classic example - good ball striker on shorter clubs but not a very good driver of the ball. Watching Mike Weir at the PC last year he seemed to use a hybrid approach. More orthodox weight transfer on driver, more S&T on shorter clubs.

That's the exact approach I've taken. There's a tendency to hit more blocks/push fades with the longer clubs without some kind of weight shift.

[Marcos]

Interresting observations from all of you and it makes a bit of sense keeping the weight forward seeing as the ball is going forward also.Will give it a shot at my next practice.Thanks to all that chimed in.Keep them coming.

[sensfan63]

Interresting observations from all of you and it makes a bit of sense keeping the weight forward seeing as the ball is going forward also.Will give it a shot at my next practice.Thanks to all that chimed in.Keep them coming.

It should be called "Low and Short."

If you want to try this theory, just reverse pivot. That'll give you the idea. No power, maybe hit it straight, but lose the ability to spin the ball consistently.

Will Mackenzie, PGA Tour player who actually uses Stack and Tilt, was heard referring to it as Stack and Scramble.

[Marcos]

My son also calls it Stack and Chunk.If i am going to lose yards i sont think i want to go that route.I am short enough as it is(200yrds or so)off the tee.

[LobWedge]

It should be called "Low and Short."

If you want to try this theory, just reverse pivot. That'll give you the idea. No power, maybe hit it straight, but lose the ability to spin the ball consistently.

Will Mackenzie, PGA Tour player who actually uses Stack and Tilt, was heard referring to it as Stack and Scramble.

Not in my experience. I've been making cleaner contact, and the ball has been going further.

[sensfan63]

Not in my experience. I've been making cleaner contact, and the ball has been going further.

You are most likely experiencing what a lot of players do when they start Stack and Tilt. They stop the all-too-common lateral shift and start rotating a lot better. As they continue to "perfect" the stack and tilt, they get closer and closer to what Bennett and Plummer teach...which moves way from perfect rotation and into deflecting the ball.

You seem to be an uncommon case, one who hasn't quite grasped the Stack and Tilt but is "stuck" - the best thing that could possibly happen to you - at the "good rotation" phase. That's awesome, but don't go any further !!!

[Sparkplug]

"Stack and Chunk", LOL LOL LOL that is a good one.

Tried it last fall, all alone on the course. I liked the fact that it sort of eliminated the weight shift that I always had/ have problems with.

Had good results and wanted further instruction on it. Lost a smidge of distance with the irons and could not get the hang of their driving method. I am slightly above average in driving distance (260) and can work the ball with my existing driving method so I found it difficult to switch.

I don't get the Golf channel so that I where I presume the commercials are. Will have google again.

Went to KH's this winter and nobody taught it and when asked was looked at like I was from another planet.

But I do agree if you cannot finish the swing the way you are supposed to its chunk city.

Back to a "classic type swing"

[Crackberry]

I wish you luck in finding someone who can teach this swing appropriately, but if you do, you'll see how it all makes sense.

When I spoke with Plummer & Bennett - the 'originators' - there was alot of similarities to Mac O'Grady's MORAD approach as well as Homer Kelley's Golfing Machine. You won't find Mac publishing ANY info and if you read Mr. Kelley's book, you'll have a much better understanding of where you're going.

Think of it this way: you are trying to get into an ideal impact position: hands ahead, club delofted, and weight on your front foot. This happens with every great player. If you're supposed to end up in this spot, why make an unnecessary move to make it more difficult to get into this place? Look at Grant Waite, Elkington, Ames, Immelman... those guys are as close as it gets to this idea without being on the info-mercial.

For those of you who have considered the shifting of the weight as a conscious move, I would recommend giving this a good look.

[goley]

If you want to hit the ball the farthest... stack and tilt is not the way to do it. For some people you will find that it may get you more consistent contact which will in turn lead to better distance....... but if stack and tilt is as good as it is supposed to be than dont you think that other sports would resemble the stack and tilt pattern. Does a boxer lean into his opponent to hit him or a pitcher/quaterback leaning forward in the back swing motion... or does he wind up and get behind so there can have a weigth shift forward. Imagine going to a fair where there was a game where a rubber type ball sat atop a rubber peg like the kind used in t-ball. The object of the game was to hit the ball the farthest, once with the back of you left hand, once with the palm of your right hand and once with both hands together. I bet that not one persons,using any of the three methods, would lean therir body into the ball during their backswing. Everyone would allow their body weight to get behind the ball in order to transfer the weight to generate some power. Or at least the winner and most of the people would get behind it. A look at the guys that are doing the stack and tilt they aren't usually long ball hitters and generally are the type to launch it low with lots of spin. Take a look at any of the greats and you will see that everyone get behind the ball in the backswing. The funny thing that I see is that the guys that try to stack and tilt are usually reverse pivoting and the pros using it dont look nearly as exaggerated as you see the "Golf Digest" mags.

[BC MIST]

The funny thing that I see is that the guys that try to stack and tilt are usually reverse pivoting and the pros using it dont look nearly as exaggerated as you see the "Golf Digest" mags.

Do you consider that by having more weight on the front foot at the top of the backswing, that the golfer has reversed pivoted?

[goley]

If the weight never leaves the front foot and the spine is tilted toward the target, I would consider that a reversed pivot.

[BC MIST]

If the weight never leaves the front foot and the spine is tilted toward the target, I would consider that a reversed pivot.

Regardless of the swing method used (MORAD, S&T, traditional or even single axis,) all have the weight favouring the front foot at and through impact. Therefore, "the weight never leaves the front foot," is not a reverse pivot? Rather, when a golfer has the weight on the front foot at the top of the backswing and falls back on the downswing, as many higher handicappers do, so that the weight shifts to the back foot, he has truly REVERSED pivoted. This undesirable motion causes both fat, thin, crooked and short shots, whereas having the weight on the front foot at impact causes good shots, regardless of whether it started there or not.

[Crackberry]

If the weight never leaves the front foot and the spine is tilted toward the target, I would consider that a reversed pivot.

A reverse pivot can only happen if the lead hip does not stay over the lead leg. If the hips slide away from the target in order to "transfer the weight" and "load up the back leg", the spine tilts towards the target and you're looking at a reverse pivot.

[Crackberry]

Imagine going to a fair where there was a game where a rubber type ball sat atop a rubber peg like the kind used in t-ball. The object of the game was to hit the ball the farthest, once with the back of you left hand, once with the palm of your right hand and once with both hands together. I bet that not one persons,using any of the three methods, would lean therir body into the ball during their backswing. Everyone would allow their body weight to get behind the ball in order to transfer the weight to generate some power.

If the goal of this magical fair game was to hit the ball as far as possible, sports science would claim that the back of the lead hand hitting the ball would get the best results, so long as the lead arm is being catapulted off chest, using the body's ideal kinetic link/chain. The other sport references you make are great and they make sense, but keep in mind that golf is product of geometry AND physics. Do you think a car can drive faster on a windy road or a round track? A baseball pitcher and a quarterback require lateral motion because the object they are moving is in their hand. Golf requires loading of the shaft which is between the players hand and the clubhead (which hits the ball). Think of a hammer throw: if the athlete keeps his turn tight, there is more energy created and more distance can be generated.

[BC MIST]

Golf requires loading of the shaft which is between the players hand and the clubhead (which hits the ball).

If the shaft requires loading on the backswing, then logically, it must unload on the downswing and so loading and unloading are opposite motions. BUT, while the shaft bends backward in the 12:6 plane on the backswing, it bends forward in the 3:9 plane, AND the club head is actually slowing down. In fact, for all but the strongest golfers who release very late, the shaft is actually bending forward, BEFORE impact. Why then, is loading necessary? If loading was really important, then the greater the load, the greater the distance, meaning that we should all play with the most flexible shafts available.

My own experiments with exceptionally soft to extremely stiff shafts, show zero difference in club head speed, indicating that "loading" is of no importance, except for creating feel.

[Crackberry]

Why then, is loading necessary? If loading was really important, then the greater the load, the greater the distance, meaning that we should all play with the most flexible shafts available.
.

Perhaps loading is not the correct term. My idea in loading is the changing characteristics of the shaft due to stresses causes by forces resulting from the clubshaft lag and/or drag pressure. The stresses occur for the positive on the downswing until the opposed reaction occurs, which, if proper club face and shaft conditions are not met, occurs early, prior to impact.

When you refer to load in reference to shaft flex, we must also consider that the ultimate shaft performance is a result of a shaft able to withstand pressures and stresses, where a shaft too weak for a player cannot be directly related to the ball's travel distance. Clubhead speed Plus impact characteristics equal ball speed, which then is a determinant in distance. The Smash Factor on the launch monitor is a great indicator. When you say 'the greater the load, the greater the distance', this can be very accurate with a different, more specific term than 'load'. Tension maybe? A good player can make a senior flex shaft bend and flex around his back but this is not going to add distance to everybody.

[BC MIST]

Perhaps loading is not the correct term. My idea in loading is the changing characteristics of the shaft due to stresses causes by forces resulting from the clubshaft lag and/or drag pressure. The stresses occur for the positive on the downswing until the opposed reaction occurs, which, if proper club face and shaft conditions are not met, occurs early, prior to impact.

When you refer to load in reference to shaft flex, we must also consider that the ultimate shaft performance is a result of a shaft able to withstand pressures and stresses, where a shaft too weak for a player cannot be directly related to the ball's travel distance. Clubhead speed Plus impact characteristics equal ball speed, which then is a determinant in distance. The Smash Factor on the launch monitor is a great indicator. When you say 'the greater the load, the greater the distance', this can be very accurate with a different, more specific term than 'load'. Tension maybe? A good player can make a senior flex shaft bend and flex around his back but this is not going to add distance to everybody.

The Smash Factor on a launch monitor is just the Ball Speed divided by the Club Head Speed. To increase the ball speed without changing the club head speed, it is obvious that the golfer has to swing better, making contact on the optimal point on the club face, with the correct effective loft. Other important factors in increasing ball speed are, of course, the coefficient of restitution/characteristic time and the mass of the club head. There is a formula for Smash factor involving all of these, somewhere.

However, while the flex of the shaft has some influence on trajectory, part of the SF, it has a little influence on accuracy and even less on distance. According to Tom Wishon, the greatest influences the shaft has on a stroke are feel and total weight. Because we swing differently, the feel of any one shaft will be liked by some and disliked by others, making it essential that one finds a shaft with a feel that one likes, regardless of its performance.

In doing my testing of various flexes, I used the video camera and agree, that putting a huge bend on a flexible shaft looks very pro like, but means very little. When I said 'the greater the load, the greater the distance' above, I did not mean to suggest that I believed this, even if another word is substituted for load. Club head speed comes for a player's innate ability to swing fast, the quality of the swing that he has learned, and his ability to repeat this motion, and frankly, it matters little whether it is Stack & Tilt, or any other of the gazillion methods that have been thrust upon us.

[Crackberry]

Club head speed comes for a player's innate ability to swing fast, the quality of the swing that he has learned, and his ability to repeat this motion, and frankly, it matters little whether it is Stack & Tilt, or any other of the gazillion methods that have been thrust upon us.

Nicely put.

[leftylucas]

After watching the DVDs last night I found the concept of their teachings to be very interesting. Although they seem to contradict the "classic" method of the golf swing, their techniques are used to get you in the appropriate positions to hit the ball soundly, repeatedly, appropriate distance and using the curvature you require for a specific shot. Snapshots are of the strokes of great players are used to show where one needs to be to accomplish this. The way they get you there is very different but they look very effective especially with someone who has difficulty with weight shift, downswing and impact. I will give it a shot, if anything it has given me a better understanding of why I am strugling with certain aspects of my swing. If it can correct these then I will be pleased as punch next season.

[leftylucas]

I am now looking for a local teacher who can help me transition to this swing. Any one out there know who is familiar with it? I seem to have easily grasped the takeaway to the top as my current swing is short and promotes an onplane approach. Looking in the mirror my body positions are all correct and it seems pretty natural to me. The downswing to impact is more difficult. To say there is no weight shift backwards is true but there is the continuous weight shift forward which is important. Without some one looking on I am unsure if I am on the right track except for the virtual results on the sim where I was striking the ball well and accurately with my irons and the distance seemed to be about 1 to 1.5 clubs longer than my conventional swing.

[stevek]

Started using this method last couple of years and found a real improvement with my irons and woods/hybrids. I totally lost the ability to hit Driver anymore, though. I've gone through three trying to get it back.

The driver was so bad that on a business/golf trip last November (At Champion's Gate, Orlando) I didn't even bring my driver. No fear, however, as I was hitting my TM #2 Hubrid consistantly straight (220-240)

Don't know if I will ever bring my driver golfing again. I am getting used to having three wedges.

[Marcos]

If i could hit a hybrid 220 yards and straight I would not need a driver either.Drivers are overrated LOL.

[byerxa]

Started using this method last couple of years and found a real improvement with my irons and woods/hybrids. I totally lost the ability to hit Driver anymore, though. I've gone through three trying to get it back.

Seems to be the common theme on S&T. Look at Baddeley - he is not a very good driver of the ball (relative). After watching Weir at the PC I realized he was using a more conventional swing with the longer clubs, more S&T with the shorted clubs.

[stevek]

I was just gripping and ripping the driver with a little more success but no consistancy. Might try to work out a new swing just for the driver - can't wait for the driving ranges to open.