I wanted to respond to this separately so that my response wasn't skipped as being more of a response to Rupert.
The backswing is important in supplying power. You build it up, load it in the clubhead, then bring it back to the ball. If we could preset all our positions and just swing at the ball and have only a minimal loss of power, we'd all be playing with a no backswing swing. After all, if you can preset your shoulder turn, why not go the whole 9? Just take all of the bad moving parts of the backswing out completely.
I believe we gain three things from the backswing:
- The ability to do a little X-Factor Stretch in transition.
- A sense of starting point and thus impact point - specifically, the length of the club and where the ground is with that length club.
Golf Magazine ran a "no backswing" swing a few years ago. It makes some sense, and we'll pause at the top of our backswings when practicing. You give up a bit of those three things above, which is fine in practice since you can isolate a downswing piece more easily, or a feeling or position at the top.
So, I just wanted to point out that there is a "no backswing" camp out there. Pay attention to step 3 in the link I added and you'll see that they try to still give you items 1 and 2 from my list.
Logman, it seems like this whole thing boils down to a "feel vs real" argument. You claim you have "no wrist action at all." I'm willing to bet that if you put your swing on video, your wrists are probably doing something. The fact that you feel "no wrist action at all" is not the same as your wrists having no action at all. The captured image of the guy demonstrating the MGS says it all: the guy is clearly not doing what he thinks/is saying he is doing. In fact, to my uneducated eye, it looks like a conventional swing to me.
The second F is a curse word. :)