Eureka Golf Swing

[CarlSpackler]

Rule #1 for interacting on the internet... Never read emotion in what someone else types. 

Rule #2 Never ask for advice or opinion unless you REALLY want it. 

Rule #3 Never offer up advice or an opinion unless it is asked for. Be prepared for said the asker to get upset when you don’t agree with them. 

Rule #4 Never post when intoxicated  

These are my rules of course. 

[GolfLug]

10 hours ago, iacas said:

The simple problem there is that it's not really all that helpful to say "swing out to the right" to a lot of people.

That would be instant death to me. As you have said my cue is the exact opposite - OTT and left. 

So yeah dynamic cues are hardly universal and straight up counterproductive for some.

[iacas]

4 hours ago, CarlSpackler said:

These are my rules of course. 

I don't see it that way. I'm just calmly sharing my opinions, which is what he asked for with the first sentence in the OP.

4 hours ago, GolfLug said:

That would be instant death to me. As you have said my cue is the exact opposite - OTT and left. 

So yeah dynamic cues are hardly universal and straight up counterproductive for some.

It would be. And he doesn't claim the swing is for everyone, but… it's not what I'm saying, either. I'm saying that his advice - in that video - is just "swing to the right." Well, cool. If the golf swing was that simple, just tell people things like "make your low point 4" past the front edge of the golf ball" or "swing faster" or "line the shaft up with your left shoulder at impact" or "get your hips about 40° open at impact."

The fact is most people can't "swing to the right." Their forearms rotate, or their left wrist is cupped, or they do ten other things that "prevent" them from being able to "swing out to the right" or "along this stick here."

So that's why I shared my opinion: the video doesn't really say much.

Still glad his videos helped @Bo the Golfer, and maybe he doesn't want to give too much away in the free videos, but…

[CarlSpackler]

24 minutes ago, iacas said:

I don't see it that way. I'm just calmly sharing my opinions, which is what he asked for with the first sentence in the OP.

My comment was not directed at you. The OP asked for opinions and didn’t seem very open to what was given and then started trashing the site. In other words, don’t ask for opinions and then get upset at everyone for not agreeing with yours. 

Edited July 11, 2019 by CarlSpackler

[iacas]

19 minutes ago, CarlSpackler said:

My comment was not directed at you. The OP asked for opinions and didn’t seem very open to what was given and then started trashing the site. In other words, don’t ask for opinions and then get upset at everyone for not agreeing with yours. 

Fair enough. 🙂

[garyt]

On 7/9/2019 at 2:43 AM, Bo the Golfer said:

Just looking for people's opinions on this. I stumbled upon Steve Johnston on YouTube and really liked his videos. The guy is pretty funny and has a simple way of explaining things. The Eureka swing seems mostly a take off of stack and tilt with an open stance but damn I hit the ball well following his advice. I've always had issues with getting my weight left and my hips open but with the open stance and 60% weight left that seems a thing of the past. Been about 6 weeks of range time with this and 2 rounds but my ball flight and shot direction are way better than ever. He just started selling videos online but for around $27 USD good luck finding a better deal. There's plenty of free info on his YouTube channel which has gotten me this far. 

 I like the guy also. Very engaging. It does seem he got his "Eureka" swing from Bill Owens "Triangulaid Swing".

English - Triangulaid

---

Since he discovered Triangulaid in 1991, Bill Owens has only one dream: Give to everybody the ability to play golf quickly and make our Planet the...

 

[lewisgl]

One thing that piques my interest with this swing is the slightly open stance, while keeping the shoulders fairly square to the target line at address.   Evidently a number of pros have a slightly open stance to help keep the club from being sucked inside early in the backswing (which seems to have some truth to it) and it might help one open up a little more in the downswing.   I recently discovered that my stance had gotten open and the left shoulder was pointing quite a bit to the left at address (pretty common issue evidently), so I squared the stance up and found the backswing to feel quite a bit different in doing that, but the contact improved in doing it with the feet somewhat closed to the target at address.   I am just wondering if opening the foot stance a little might be a good option vs closed.  

[MichiganF1]

Hello to everyone, new poster here.  Wanted to share my thoughts about this method...maybe not just this method, but the overall effect of an open stance on early extension.

I'm 57, 5 hncp, rather thick chested and inflexible, and have struggled with early extension and flipping for many years.  Really, I'm a 10 hncp ballstriker and a 2 inside 25 yards.

I have watched a few "senior" themed instruction videos to address EE, and they're almost all some theme of  - closed stance, get a deep shoulder turn, swing out to the right, and accept early extension.  None of this worked for me...my driver especially was wildly inconsistent.

So, opening my stance and swinging out instantly improved my ballstriking through the bag.  Not really sure why, but I believe a closed stance facilitates EE - if I close up, it's not difficult to straighten my back, be on my toes, and stay balanced.  Moving the left foot back with the butt moving forward results in a totally unbalanced (falling forward) position which can't be maintained, so the body doesn't do it (EE).

Yes, my backswing is shorter, but I'm making better strikes and haven't lost distance.  

Does this make any sense?

 

[Redrock804]

Found this topic researching a little about the open stance. Unfortunate that it go so "off topic" here. A few things to bring it back to life. I do extensive reading and watching of golf swings. I love watching people and the different way they swing, a hobby if you would. One thing I have noticed over the years is there are small clips and hints in some videos that talk about some of the great golfers using an open stance. The main reason I found this was researching the swing of Rory. I was watching a clip of him with Taylormade and M&M golf. I noticed how open his stance looked to target and they showed him play a draw. He does this a lot. Rickie is another one, watch his 2018 masters replay, he has an open stance. Fred Couples, Bubba, (Obviously not a model swing but does well) even Lee. They all can be seen with open stance swings. For years I thought this was simply what they did to hit a fade, like the commentators would say. News flash, 90% of what they say when describing what a player is doing, is wrong! Anyway, I spent some time a few years in a row at TPC Sawgrass and on some Web.com ranges and noticed the open stance most of the best ball strikers I like had. Even more, they were drawing the ball... For me, the open stance is a go to, you will see much tighter dispersion and most likely experience a more solid strike. The only thing I can stress from experience is to not allow other parts of your swing to go unchecked, you still need good turn and a stable base. You will have to experiment with aim points and path to get your desired shot shape, thats part of golf with any swing. As far as the comments that some swings work for some but not others, this is true. For me I had to separate feel is not always real. But if many of the top players in the sport and better players at your club have an open stance, I would argue it is something to pay attention to. I see many armatures and high handicaps (what I use to be, still looking to improve from my 7) who aim very closed. Most of the better players I see are def more natural to open. Anyway, love the topic, love the discussions (when they stay on topic) and hope everyone can do some research that will improve your game! Maybe you will uncover another part of the swing that leads you into a new topic. Haha.  

[Zippo]

@Redrock804I have a request for you - Paragraphs. Your post is very difficult to read without them. Thanks.

[iacas]

I generally play with a slightly open stance. I guard against getting a little closed.

[mchepp]

@Bo the Golfer I don't think you should take what @iacas said negatively. To be fair there is some missing context for his comment regarding swinging out to the right. As a golfer, this theory of swinging out to the right is potentially very damaging. For me personally it has been more than decade of ridding myself of doing "too" much of it. Like anything, if overdone it is damaging and can cause many years of golfing frustration.

Ten years later I still struggle with blocks, especially with my driver. Really all built on the concept of swinging out the right.

It should also be said, what he is promoting is similar to many very good swings. Lee Trevino for example did what he promotes. Sans the Trevino flair maybe. Do what works for you.

[Deegee54]

Eureka swing works - end of.

As a senior golfer who has travelled from 6 hc down to 13.8 in  5 years, ive tried every thing. Jim Hardy 1 plane, Stack and Tilt, Golfing machine all with limited results. Stumbled across this guys channel and tried a few buckets of range balls. It just plane works. Every shot a baby draw and now actually hitting the sweetspot far more often.

For those that say 'its not for me' have obviously a golf game that is perfect and needs no help.  I was the same with shrimp once - 'those things, cant stand them [whilst never actually tried them]

 

Invested in his Paid chanel at £60, which is the price of a lesson, and am totally convinced that hes got something.  5 medal rounds in and now playing of 11.7! - not bad for a 68yo with 2 replaced knees and fused L4/5

[iacas]

As always, glad it works for you @Deegee54. And I realize you probably searched for "Eureka Golf Swing" and found this thread and wanted to share your happiness with others… but also please realize a lot of people tend to do this sort of thing, but then we rarely see them again and they don't post in other topics, and the almost assumption is that "oh, it stopped working" or something, eventually, and so we get a lot of posts like this from people who have one or two posts only.

Again, glad it "works" for you.

To continue the "discussion" some asked for but didn't want to have earlier… here's a few videos and some quick thoughts on them:

Two main reasons, he says, are:

• The left aim
• What the left arm and hand do in relation to the target

He says the difference between feet line and shoulder line "want to right itself" through impact - i.e. that the shoulders want to get open at impact, too. Hmmmm.

At about 4:42, he says he wants his left arm going "along the target line" but wants his clubhead going out along the yellow stick… to "sustain the line of compression" and the ball starts straight? But if the path is right, it will draw or hook, and we know there's really no such thing as a straight line at this point in the golf swing, so there's really no "sustaining the line of compression." It just doesn't happen. Even in his own videos (note the orange stick pointing "stage right" but the hands and arms going "stage left"):

Now, before I go farther, feel ain't real and the only way to teach everyone is by feels… but this video didn't strike me as "this is a feel." It struck me as "this is what you do." Except… you don't. He doesn't.

He talks about getting "left" but I'd be curious how far "left" he is here… and what the path and face numbers would read on a launch monitor relative to the target line.

Is the "body" getting open here? What would his shoulders or ribs measure on GEARS at either of these? Why are his hands rolling over so hard with so much wrist throw (which isn't necessarily a bad thing)?

At 2:50 he begins "measuring" angles on a 2D video of a 3D world (Adam Scott)… and… dude, no:

Not only can we see a lot more of Adam's left side (his left butt cheek, his left shoulder)… he's trying to apply a 3D measurement to a 2D image (or vice versa). Stuff doesn't work this way.

At 6:14 he says his hips are 48° open… but this is an absolute failure because… the camera height would change things quite a bit. Where you draw the line matters quite a bit. It's a bit like Sergio Garcia and the lag stuff - it appears to be a smaller angle (more "lag") because of the 2D nature of "video".

So, no, you cannot even reasonably accurately measure how "open" the hips are in this way. The HEIGHT of the left hip relative to the right would change things dramatically (and so too would the camera height):

I had to post about this video, and I wrote: "Oh my. You CANNOT accurately measure the angles you're "measuring" in this way."

You cannot. No. Video is HORRIBLE for this type of stuff. Comparing one video to another shot from the SAME location can provide some information, but it's not "measuring."

BTW, PGA Tour players are often about 40° open with the hips, 22° or so open with the chest… and just a little open (like 5°) with the shoulders at impact.

Finally, because I'm a glutton for punishment I guess… I watched this one:

And then I skipped it, because it's clear that in a 3:00 video or whatever, it's not a "full tutorial" at all.

---

Look… @Deegee54 or anyone else…

• I teach things that aren't "real" as well. Everyone does. You have to, to the student in front of you.
• Feel ain't real.
• This guy isn't discussing feels.
• This guy is "measuring" things in ways that you cannot measure things.
• This guy says things that are provably false.

I don't like being lied to. Feel ain't real, often, but it's real to the golfer, but this guy isn't just talking about feels. You're not talking about feels when you draw lines and "measure" things.

I don't like being lied to.

If he's helped you play better golf, then like some feel, it's real for you, and good for you.

But it's not for me, nor would I suspect it's for many people here. We have a lot of golfers here who want to know what ACTUALLY happens, and they realize that they might feel something that isn't actually happening, but they don't like being told you're "measuring" something when you're not. They don't like heavy salesman-like techniques that are more lie than truth, or reality.

This guy's welcome to come on here and engage in an honest discussion. Hell, I'll volunteer up to six hours of GEARS time with me at Golf Evolution to have him swing and measure some things. I suspect he'll avail himself of neither, the latter because he doesn't live in the U.S., and the former because…  he thinks he's "measuring" by drawing lines on a 2D video. But he's welcome all the same, so long as he doesn't take facts personally, like so many "try my great golf swing" charlatans.

[Phil McGleno]

Well, bye @Deegee54, ha ha ha.-No, but seriously, glad it works for you even if it is just a bunch of BS.-There are worse moves you can make at the golf ball than what that guy is actually doing-Not what he says he is doing.

[Deegee54]

Yes,  I obviously typed in Eureka Golf and searched.  

One reason I don't like having discussions etc over new things is the complete negativety of the 'experts'  here (or similar) 

Everyone says it won't work here,  he's talking nonsense there or it BS about this and that. 

It would be far better if instead of seeing a 'glass half empty'  to actually try the concept.  Go on a range and hit a bucket.  That's what I initially did and was pleasantly surprised. I don't know the ins and out of Jargon like many do. 

I'm a retired sports therapist.  When new techniques were talked about we'd discuss and try it. If it showed a better outcome than the current treatment,  then we'd introduce the new one. 

Mention new golf swings on here and it's like the Devil is present and needs purging. 

 

For me it's  feet aim left with open hips,  shoulder line matches target line and then the club and right forearm trace the outside line.. Its very pivot driven with weight kept towards target all the time. 

It works hugely for me.  One huge difference is where the ball strikes the club face.  It used to be close to the hosel (a few sh@nks) but now the strike has moved half inch to the centre. 

[billchao]

1 hour ago, Deegee54 said:

One reason I don't like having discussions etc over new things is the complete negativety of the 'experts'  here (or similar) 

We like to have discussions here. That means openly offering opposing points of view. If you think refuting a claim is negativity then I don’t think this is the right place for you.

1 hour ago, Deegee54 said:

Everyone says it won't work here,  he's talking nonsense there or it BS about this and that. 

If you read through the thread and this is what you got out of it, I don’t know what to tell you, man. Every other post says people are glad it works for whoever posted about it.

1 hour ago, Deegee54 said:

It would be far better if instead of seeing a 'glass half empty'  to actually try the concept.  Go on a range and hit a bucket.

That’s unnecessary. There are plenty of people here who are qualified to discuss golf swing theory by analysis. That’s kind of the whole idea behind swing analysis in the first place.

1 hour ago, Deegee54 said:

I'm a retired sports therapist.  When new techniques were talked about we'd discuss and try it. If it showed a better outcome than the current treatment,  then we'd introduce the new one. 

I’m willing to bet that sports therapy techniques are vetted much better than golf swing theories. Seems like something you’d need to have qualifications and certifications for, published in medical journals and all that. You wouldn’t try a treatment some random person suggested to you, would you?

Anybody can come up with golf swing concepts and post them online. That doesn’t make them qualified to know what they’re talking about. 

1 hour ago, Deegee54 said:

Mention new golf swings on here and it's like the Devil is present and needs purging. 

I think you’re reading tone in things that aren’t there. Think of this as golf’s version of peer review.

1 hour ago, Deegee54 said:

For me it's  feet aim left with open hips,  shoulder line matches target line and then the club and right forearm trace the outside line.. Its very pivot driven with weight kept towards target all the time. 

It works hugely for me.  One huge difference is where the ball strikes the club face.  It used to be close to the hosel (a few sh@nks) but now the strike has moved half inch to the centre. 

I’m glad it works for you.

For those of us who are interested in this sort of thing, we have to ask, why does it work? Without knowing your swing at all I can only assume, and my assumption would be that since most people tend to aim too far right (for a righty), you’re likely to be one of them, so simply opening your stance frees your body up to swing more out at the ball.

It’s also entirely possible that you’re not doing what you think you are. If you aren’t observing with video, how can you be sure? Feel ain’t real.

[ChetlovesMer]

1 hour ago, Deegee54 said:

Yes,  I obviously typed in Eureka Golf and searched.  

One reason I don't like having discussions etc over new things is the complete negativety of the 'experts'  here (or similar) 

Everyone says it won't work here,  he's talking nonsense there or it BS about this and that. 

It would be far better if instead of seeing a 'glass half empty'  to actually try the concept.  Go on a range and hit a bucket.  That's what I initially did and was pleasantly surprised. I don't know the ins and out of Jargon like many do. 

I'm a retired sports therapist.  When new techniques were talked about we'd discuss and try it. If it showed a better outcome than the current treatment,  then we'd introduce the new one. 

Mention new golf swings on here and it's like the Devil is present and needs purging. 

 

For me it's  feet aim left with open hips,  shoulder line matches target line and then the club and right forearm trace the outside line.. Its very pivot driven with weight kept towards target all the time. 

It works hugely for me.  One huge difference is where the ball strikes the club face.  It used to be close to the hosel (a few sh@nks) but now the strike has moved half inch to the centre. 

Hey I'll chime in, because in this case I think I'm uniquely qualified. 

Let me start by saying I have no natural golf ability what so ever. As a matter of fact, I think God played a cruel trick on me by making me enjoy a game so much that I have no natural skill at. Having said that (and as many of you know) I get lessons from @iacas. With his help I no longer suck at golf.... well, sometimes... but that's a different story. 

Okay, here's my point. Once I found a tip on "the internet" it was a Youtube video that promised more length off the tee. (Doesn't matter which one.) I started incorporating that tip into my swing. Initially it worked great. My tee shots were in fact longer. (Not just a guess, I was able to track them with Arccos.) This worked great for me. Life was coming up roses. Okay, fast forward 4 weeks. Suddenly I can't get off the tee at all. The more I tried to fix it the worse it got. 

Here was my problem. Yes, what the Youtube video showed me was correct, and effective. But when I started to get squirrely, without the helpful eye of a quality coach. I was forced to make a correction on my own. Which led to another correction. Which led to another .... and so on... You get the idea. By time I got back to @iacas he was like "WTF?"  

So, I told him the story and he laughed and started fixing me all over again. 

So, getting to the point now I swear. Here it is. You can learn from Youtube videos. Absolutely. But you don't get the feedback you get from a real swing coach. You might be fixing stuff that causing other issues. Or compensating. If you don't really know what your problem is you can get totally off the rails. OR ... Maybe you fix the correct problem and then you develop a new problem. It can be difficult to know if you have developed a new problem or went back to an old problem. 

So, my advice is get a real swing coach. Even if it's one where you are only sending him/her videos. At least that way they can diagnose what your real problem is and help you fix it. Also, if you want to incorporate something you learn on-line, you will then have somebody to discuss it with and see if it makes sense with the other stuff you are doing. 
 

Anyway, there's my 2 cents.