or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Practice Range › Instruction and Playing Tips › Why arent more people copying Moe Norman's swing?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why arent more people copying Moe Norman's swing? - Page 6

post #91 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

I've seen some videos on Moe, and read the book Moe and Me but never actually saw him play in an event.  He seemed to be heralded as a great ball striker and would put on shows at the range where he worked but because of his mental limitations he couldn't handle the pressure of the PGA Tour.

 

I might accept he was Top 10, but #1 seems to be a reach.  If his ball striking was as good as @soon_tourpro claims, then it really begs the question why more people haven't tried to duplicate it.

I'd never even heard of the guy until I found this website.  I just tried to go find some info on youtube, and the only thing of interest was a 10 minute video where he plops down about 25-30 shots from maybe 75 yards?  All really close to the hole (with a generous backstop, but still) and maybe the furthest one was 15-18' away.  Regardless, it was pretty impressive.

 

And other than reading a couple of paragraphs on wikipedia about him, that's about all I know.

 

Oh, and I had heard the old story about the eccentric guy whose caddy told him the hole called for a driver and a 9 iron and he hit the 9 iron first ... but I didn't know that story belonged to Moe Norman.

post #92 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS256 View Post
 


It is hard to figure out just where the myth of Moe Norman leaves off and the facts start.

 

I always figured by all accounts he was a great ball striker that couldn't putt. Since I only know one guy that ever played with Moe I decided to bring up the subject one day with him. I expected him to say something like "Yeah he could really hit the ball" but instead all I got was a disgusted look and "Don't believe half of the shit you hear. He was a damned nut."

 

Well...That ended that conversation.

 

What I think I know. Like a lot of guys that played back then what he said he was doing during his swing doesn't always match up with what the videos show he was actually doing.

I've seen some videos on Moe, and read the book Moe and Me but never actually saw him play in an event.  He seemed to be heralded as a great ball striker and would put on shows at the range where he worked but because of his mental limitations he couldn't handle the pressure of the PGA Tour.

 

I might accept he was Top 10, but #1 seems to be a reach.  If his ball striking was as good as @soon_tourpro claims, then it really begs the question why more people haven't tried to duplicate it.

 

I think simply because it was Moe's swing and no one else's. Yes his mechanics perfectly adhered to the laws that govern us all, but ultimately, I think his consistency came mostly from his ability to produce it over and over again without ever really thinking about it. 

 

To learn that swing would require one to think about it and spend years adopting it. That kind of goes against the whole reason it worked so well for Moe. It was his home grown move, and he could just do it without trying. 

 

But Moe's swing has all five keys. And you could put him next to any successful pro and find commonalities between them still. So, his swing is still certainly worth studying and learning from. 

post #93 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by soon_tourpro View Post
 

None was better, not Hogan nor anyone else Nicklaus or Eldrick not even close.

if you want to be ignorant go ahead but all the angels knows Moe knew the secret.

Moe was the best everyone else played for second.

 

No.

post #94 of 128

Check me if I'm wrong, but there is a lot more to winning in golf than just ball striking.  We here it all the time in pro tournaments where they talk about a player who is not in contention as being a great ball striker.  It would be similar to saying someone was the world's best lag putter, second to none. It doesn't tell the rest of the story. 

 

I'm sure Moe Norman was good at what he did with his unique swing.  But he is certainly not one of the best tournament winning professional golfers of all time.

post #95 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by boogielicious View Post
 

Check me if I'm wrong, but there is a lot more to winning in golf than just ball striking.  We here it all the time in pro tournaments where they talk about a player who is not in contention as being a great ball striker.  It would be similar to saying someone was the world's best lag putter, second to none. It doesn't tell the rest of the story. 

 

I'm sure Moe Norman was good at what he did with his unique swing.  But he is certainly not one of the best tournament winning professional golfers of all time.

 

We're probably talking subtle gradations here.  The best ball-striker in the field is how much better than the next 4 best?  How about the 50th best?  Two greens per round?  Two feet in average proximity to the hole?  Since all golfers have strengths and weaknesses, it's not abnormal to suggest that a guy whose game isn't good enough to win, still possesses one subset of skills among the best, or the best, of all of his peers.  But, I would expect it to be minimal, not significant, if he is unable to translate that into some form of success.

 

If Moe Norman was as demonstrably better at ball-striking (a very significant part of the game, even compared to lag putting I would say) than the greatest of the greats by such a wide margin, it stands to reason that he would have at least had a good amount of success against his peers (which wasn't comprised of the greatest of each era).  

 

For him to possess ball-striking leagues above the all time greats, and still have modest success on tour, he would have to have deficiencies to the same extreme as his strengths.  

post #96 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by bplewis24 View Post
 

We're probably talking subtle gradations here.  The best ball-striker in the field is how much better than the next 4 best?  How about the 50th best?  Two greens per round?  Two feet in average proximity to the hole?

 

I don't think you appreciate how much two feet matters, or two GIR matters.

 

Tiger was first on the PGA Tour at about 30' from a range, Camilo Villegas was 130th at 33'. That difference accounted for 2+ shots per round from their approach shots (going completely from memory here, but that stuff matters a LOT).

 

The best ball striker of all time would have to have my wife's short game and putting NOT to win fairly often. (which you go on to say…).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bplewis24 View Post
 

If Moe Norman was as demonstrably better at ball-striking (a very significant part of the game, even compared to lag putting I would say) than the greatest of the greats by such a wide margin, it stands to reason that he would have at least had a good amount of success against his peers (which wasn't comprised of the greatest of each era). For him to possess ball-striking leagues above the all time greats, and still have modest success on tour, he would have to have deficiencies to the same extreme as his strengths.  

 

Or more extreme, but yes.

post #97 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 

 

Tiger was first on the PGA Tour at about 30' from a range, Camilo Villegas was 130th at 33'. 

 

Cripes!  That even drives the point home further.

post #98 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by bplewis24 View Post
 

Cripes!  That even drives the point home further.

 

Not really. Tiger is a phenomenally better ball striker. It resulted in massive amounts of strokes gained, just from those three feet. Those were median values, btw, IIRC.

post #99 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS256 View Post
 


It is hard to figure out just where the myth of Moe Norman leaves off and the facts start.

 

I always figured by all accounts he was a great ball striker that couldn't putt. Since I only know one guy that ever played with Moe I decided to bring up the subject one day with him. I expected him to say something like "Yeah he could really hit the ball" but instead all I got was a disgusted look and "Don't believe half of the shit you hear. He was a damned nut."

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

He seemed to be heralded as a great ball striker and would put on shows at the range where he worked but because of his mental limitations he couldn't handle the pressure of the PGA Tour.

 

I might accept he was Top 10, but #1 seems to be a reach.  If his ball striking was as good as @soon_tourpro claims, then it really begs the question why more people haven't tried to duplicate it.


As a Canadian and to throw a couple of things into the conversation, all lot of Moe Norman's mental limitations / "madness" was mostly due to the fact that his social issues and difficulties apparently stemmed from Aspergers syndrome.  From when he was born to the 50s and 60s when he was in his prime to compete, there wasn't much knowledge (if any really) on diseases / syndromes like Aspergers.  So, back then, it would be easy to label him as a crazy man.  Interestingly enough though, you can argue the social deficiencies of Aspergers hindered his ability to perform at the highest level with the highest amount of pressure BUT, those same lack of normal social abilities spawned a bit of his loner personality that allowed him put aside the endless amounts of hrs to obsess over hitting the ball perfectly.  Basically, being the "stupid monkey" that Erik always talks about.  Catch 22 really and something to think about and consider when looking back Moe.

 

As for best ball striker ever, that's a stretch.  Top 10 ever, sure. Top 5, maybe....

post #100 of 128

I love watching videos of Moe - I wish I could've seen him live.  In my opinion and based on what I've seen, Moe was fairly delusional about his own swing and what he was doing in it.  Personally, I feel like he found a swing that he practiced a ton and made work for him but it's probably not the best move for a regular golfer.  Some people do teach it - but I think it hasn't caught on more because there are better ways to approach the swing for most people and, to some degree, because of Moe's own incorrect explanations of what he's doing.      

post #101 of 128

I wonder why more people aren't copying Calvin Peete's swing. Or maybe even Orville Moody's. Can anyone prove Moe Norman was more accurate than those guys? Did they not keep stats like fairway percentage or greens in regulation back in the 1960s? 

 

All we seem to have on Moe is lots of anecdotal testimony, much of it from people who watched him hit balls on the range.  I know he only played briefly on the PGA tour, but he also played lots of years on the Canadian tour. Aren't there some kinds of stats from those years that could give a better clue as to how accurate he was when actually playing? Does anyone know of any actual three or four round tournaments he played where he didn't miss a fairway, for example? 

 

I don't doubt that Moe was very accurate, and I think his story is a fascinating one, and I think it's a good thing he's gone from relative obscurity to getting some of the attention he deserves. But Calvin Peete actually has the stats and data to back up the kind of claims being made about Moe, and no one seems to be talking much about him. 

post #102 of 128

I was a fan of Calvin Peete's.  He had a cool name, was fun to watch and I liked that hat.  He also started playing in his 20s, which probably is the reason for all the "Is it too late for me to become a PGA pro" threads on this forum.

 

post #103 of 128
Moe Norman would often walk along the golf course mumbling phrases that were basically incoherent. He did not like one on one communication. He preferred to be left alone and in fact led a rather reclusive life.

He had a very difficult time adhering to the stringent rules that are strictly enforced in a PGA tournament. This is one if the reasons he didn't really have a phenomenal golf career as far as winning tournaments.

He was an anomaly as one put it. Comparing him to Hogan or Woods in regards to accomplishments is rather silly. That's like saying you want to copy one of those long drive champs because Palmer Nicklaus nor Woods can hit it that far!

Moe's swing was unique but it worked for him. His build, tempo, flexibility and mindset. It can be imitated but not replicated. His swing has just become a silly propaganda tool for some people to try and make some cash. It's like that new diet that takes no calorie counting and lose 20lbs in 2 days.

It's not any easier than any other swing theory. You'll go out and hit some balls and think you've made an amazing discovery. In a short time you'll realize all the same faults that we all experience in the conventional swing will start to creep in. Why? Because you're not Moe Norman.

The fact that all the best golfers in the world save a handful are of the basic conventional golf swing technique has to give us some clue that it's effective. Golf is a difficult sport to be real good at..consistently. There are no short cuts or secrets, and I feel that is really what the people are trying to sell. It works so well in the weight loss market, they figure they can turn a dime in golf. My 2 cents. I hope I didn't offend anyone.
post #104 of 128
I have never heard so much bull from people that have no direct knowledge of Moe's swing.
I studied his videos and went out the next morning and literally hit the most solid golf shots of my life! I also hit my shots much higher than ever.

And, don't even get me started on how straight they were. I purposely hit two drives off of one tee just to see how close they came together. How about 12" apart?

The swing is so simple and I adapted immediately. I no longer stand over the ball with a dozen swing thoughts. I only have one.....tempo.

The man was autistic which, in most cases, includes genius. This genius is what enabled him to invent his swing. One of the brilliant parts of the swing was to eliminate the first move that Hogan made which was taking the club back 14" before taking the club upwards. Instead, he set the club 14" behind the ball at address and simply took the club up from the start.

It is a flat swing and therefore does not take divots. I use the same tee throughout the entire round. I shot 42/42 the first time I used it and 76 the next time. It just keeps getting better.

He had 7 double eagles during Canadian tournaments which gives you an idea of its accuracy. I have had 6 hole in ones with previous swings and believe I will have more with this swing.

I just can't encourage you enough to try this swing.
post #105 of 128
Congratulations! Sounds like you should get set for Q-school and get going making some good bank on the PGA Tour! Why not? Get your putting mastered and you should have no problem! Awesome!
post #106 of 128

Question if anybody wants to indulge. From what little I know, breaking down the nuts and bolts MN's strength was hitting it straight (without curve) with an unusual repeatability, with repeatability being the more significant 'talent'. So really, was his repeatability somewhat or significantly more facilitated by his 'simple' mechanics or due to his unique personality? 

 

Also, honestly I am having a hard time seeing with his move he got home with short/mid irons in regulation on tour length holes with tour level regularity even back then. If not, how did he score? 

post #107 of 128

Based on the book I read, Moe spent a huge amount of time on the range, he basically lived there so it seems like he found his swing in the dirt just as Hogan did.

post #108 of 128

Entertaining thought.  However, if you aren't scoring in the mid 60's on your local course you can forget Q school.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Instruction and Playing Tips
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Practice Range › Instruction and Playing Tips › Why arent more people copying Moe Norman's swing?