Instructional Video Critique Topic

[Phil McGleno]

So in this topic post a YouTube video and then critique it. To keep it simple every first response to a video should include:

• A letter grade (A, B, C, D, F, with plus or minus allowed)
• Three things you liked (if possible).
• Three things you didn't like (if possible).

We should try not to have too many going at once-Post a video and let a few responses come in before you post a different video.

I was going to start us off but I will let someone else.

[Vinsk]

Like: Nothing. But I’m honest in saying I’m far from a swing guru.

Dislike:

1. ‘ The modern swing creates too much spin.’ This has to be one of the most asinine statements out there.

2. ‘Shallowing the swing and swinging inside to out reduces spin.’ So…tour players don’t swing their drivers that way? 
 

3. ‘One has to make two swings if they hit up on the driver.’ No. They just change ball position.

[iacas]

I'll bite.

Grade: D

Likes:

• It's short.
• His watermark logo is good.
• The background is nice.

Dislikes:

• It's a bunch of bullshit. Spin is created by spin loft. You can hit down on a driver and reduce spin if you deliver less dynamic loft, too. Doesn't mean it's a good way to hit a driver.
• Swinging out will shallow out the path… and help you to hit up on the ball slightly, as the low point moves back a bit.
• Swinging out will also lead to a more glancing blow and more "spin" because you're adding the right-to-left spin. Spin loft occurs in all three dimensions. Swinging out = "sidespin."

[mchepp]

Oh, I really like this thread. Here is my video proposal (admittedly a SH!T ton better than the first)

Likes

1. Conversational about a player struggling with something in their swing (something I struggle with)
2. Used shots to see how the player progressed
3. Simple training aid everyone has around the house.

Dislikes

1. Only a few swings. Maybe a time lapse or something to show after they worked on it for a while
2. A little long
3. Not enough to tell players who this video is for

[ncates00]

Maybe I’m slightly out of turn by posting so soon, but I really like this one (others may or may not). I, for one, have struggled with moving my pelvis toward the ball and then having to jump up and backward to bail out of it. The feeling of controlling the center of my pelvis has been very helpful for solid striking, and it’s also a pretty simple thought as well; really simplifies the swing, for me at least. 

Likes:

- easy to follow the GEARS model representations

- well spoken 

- shows “what not to do” as well as “what to do” and even offers variations of both

Dislikes:

- I would have liked to have seen specific drills or feelings they used to help the student. 

- maybe a bit long, but this is a bit nitpicky

Grade: A- 

 

[iacas]

On 6/11/2021 at 8:42 PM, mchepp said:

Oh, I really like this thread. Here is my video proposal (admittedly a SH!T ton better than the first)

Likes

1. Conversational about a player struggling with something in their swing (something I struggle with)
2. Used shots to see how the player progressed
3. Simple training aid everyone has around the house.

Dislikes

1. Only a few swings. Maybe a time lapse or something to show after they worked on it for a while
2. A little long
3. Not enough to tell players who this video is for

Grade: B

Likes:

1. Good use of a little training aid (a spoon)
2. Detailed information that didn't treat us like dummies.
3. Proper understanding of ball flight and anatomy.

Dislikes:

1. Scott never really talked to the proper camera. 🙂
2. No slow mo of his swing showing the moves they were talking about. No exaggeration or slow-motion work, either.
3. Don't like the spoon drill itself for keeping the right arm pinned to the side. Easily done improperly/overdone.

[iacas]

On 6/14/2021 at 9:10 PM, ncates00 said:

 

Grade: A-

Likes:

1. Addresses a very common issue - setup has the weight back in the heels.
2. Pane of glass is a good viewing angle.
3. The message is pretty clear. I like the closeup of the hips at 6:00.

Dislikes:

1. GEARS is great and all, but show people what this looks like without the amorphous blobs. Show real-world pictures of people, even if by using yourselves.
2. On the same track, how about some real-world drills or demos.
3. Show the instructors more. Even if it's picture-in-picture. This feels a bit too much like we're living in the Matrix.

I generally like AMG videos, so the Dislikes aren't all that strong.

 

[The Flush]

On 6/14/2021 at 9:10 PM, ncates00 said:

Maybe I’m slightly out of turn by posting so soon, but I really like this one (others may or may not). I, for one, have struggled with moving my pelvis toward the ball and then having to jump up and backward to bail out of it. The feeling of controlling the center of my pelvis has been very helpful for solid striking, and it’s also a pretty simple thought as well; really simplifies the swing, for me at least. 

Likes:

- easy to follow the GEARS model representations

- well spoken 

- shows “what not to do” as well as “what to do” and even offers variations of both

Dislikes:

- I would have liked to have seen specific drills or feelings they used to help the student. 

- maybe a bit long, but this is a bit nitpicky

Grade: A- 

 

Grade: A-

Likes:

Gears clearly shows difference between the pros and the am.

They explain what the am needs to do to correct the problem, at least with set up.

The changes appear to have worked for this (already single digit) golfer.

Dislikes:

It would be nice to see video of the actual student overlayed with gears.

It would be nice to see the student working on making the changes.

I would like to see them work on this with a bogey golfer instead of a single digit cap.

[The Flush]

 

Grade: A

Likes:

It is a very simple drill with no training aids.

It worked for me as a bogey golfer to improve my ball striking. That is why it gets an A grade.

It can be used on the course. I got my first eagle using this drill as my on course swing, although I had a problem with hitting the ball over the green as I was getting more distance than with my normal swing.

Dislikes:

It would be nice to see a student work through this drill. I had to experiment a bit to figure it out. 

Although Cheney says you can or maybe should use this short follow through as you swing, his own swing has a full follow through.  He should explain how to get to that full follow through.

I would like to see him apply this to driver if it can be.

[iacas]

On 6/20/2021 at 8:45 AM, The Flush said:

 

Grade: B+

Likes:

• Simple, good drill that I use fairly often.
• Clear audio, picture.
• Good use of Tour players (well, at least one) to show this.

Dislikes:

• I didn't love the explanation if you were struggling to get the drill right. He just kept telling you about the drill, and how it would improve contact.
• Could have used some slow-mo, but it would have shown him fighting off the wrists a bit more, I think.
• Would have loved to show advanced versions, like where you can manipulate the path a bit by how much the arms come off the chest, etc.

[iacas]

Very, very quick video.

Thoughts? Some questions/comments:

• Do you think 60° to 120° is a lot?
• Is there a benefit in reducing that number/rotation?
• Is this something you "do" or something that "happens"?
• What are some other PGA Tour player numbers? What do you think?

[Wanzo]

18 hours ago, iacas said:

• Do you think 60° to 120° is a lot?
• Is there a benefit in reducing that number/rotation?
• Is this something you "do" or something that "happens"?
• What are some other PGA Tour player numbers? What do you think?

-60-120 sounds like a lot but I have no idea how it compares.  
 

-I would think it benefits face control to reduce it.  Or maybe the shallow the shaft/sasho stuff making it easier to close is relevant to discussion but either way that amount of closure happens?

-I think it happens.   
 

-my guess is others have less with more body rotation.  But it’s a straight up guess.

 

[Vinsk]

• When I watch FO swings on my V1 app from various pros, they all seem to be similar those positions regarding club face.
• I don’t know if doing anything with this is beneficial but rather correcting body movements to create this ? 
   
• I believe it’s something that’s supposed to happen but many amateurs try to force it. Usually it’s another mechanic that’s faulty but they try to manipulate the forearms/wrists to release.
• Don’t know numbers but videos I just watched all have very close to 60*/120* to me.

[boogielicious]

On 10/21/2021 at 12:01 AM, iacas said:

Very, very quick video.

Thoughts? Some questions/comments:

• Do you think 60° to 120° is a lot?
• Is there a benefit in reducing that number/rotation?
• Is this something you "do" or something that "happens"?
• What are some other PGA Tour player numbers? What do you think?

• I don’t know enough about it to answer intelligently, but it seems a bit different  than what my instructors want me to do. An example is the long arc drill where we try to slow down release or wrist turnover through to A9 and keep palmar flexion a bit longer. This would keep the face open longer.
• For me, it may be because it would help my face to path be more consistent at impact. It seems to be a timing scenario if you let the face rotate freely.
• I think it should be ‘happens’ but training it with gate drills for start line may help.
• if I use my ‘spirit animal’ PGA Pro example, from my Evolvr instructor, I would say the number would be a lot less. It’s hard to tell from the image below, but it looks like Zack’s face is more closed at A6.

So basically, I will do what my instructor tells me I should do.😀

[Vinsk]

@boogielicious But isn’t Zach a bit more extreme with his strong grip and rotation to get the club square? He’s quite a draw bias player isn’t he?

[boogielicious]

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

@boogielicious But isn’t Zach a bit more extreme with his strong grip and rotation to get the club square? He’s quite a draw bias player isn’t he?

The example was for me to ‘try’ to attain his A9 position with weight forward, chest high and wrists not turning over. I’m not as flexible as Zack and won’t likely ever get there, but we rehearse past our ability to move in that direction.

[billchao]

On 10/21/2021 at 12:01 AM, iacas said:

Do you think 60° to 120° is a lot?

My gut says no, but I don't have any numbers backing that up. They used to teach toe up to toe up, which would be 90° to 180° from A6 to A8, which is considered too high of a rate of closure. RoC of 60° is 33% less than that, so that's what I'm going with.

On 10/21/2021 at 12:01 AM, iacas said:

Is there a benefit in reducing that number/rotation?

I think I remember an article with Sasho Mackenzie saying that there isn't evidence that PGA Tour players with faster RoC are less accurate than players with slower RoC, so I'm going with no.

RoC is related to clubhead speed, so I would think if a player were to reduce RoC at the cost of clubhead speed, that would actually be a detriment.

On 10/21/2021 at 12:01 AM, iacas said:

Is this something you "do" or something that "happens"?

Both. As I said, swing speed affects RoC. So does the swing plane. Both of those are more passive, I think, so more in the category of something that "happens".

You can also twist the club in your hands with wrist flexion (revving feel). That's something you can do more or less of.

On 10/21/2021 at 12:01 AM, iacas said:

What are some other PGA Tour player numbers? What do you think?

John Rahm is #1, Dustin Johnson is #2, Rory moved up to #8 with his win last week. Oh wait, that's OWGR.

I don't really know, but I'm going to guess 60° is about average.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, billchao said:

My gut says no, but I don't have any numbers backing that up. They used to teach toe up to toe up, which would be 90° to 180° from A6 to A8, which is considered too high of a rate of closure. RoC of 60° is 33% less than that, so that's what I'm going with.

No, toe up to toe up is 90 to 90. This is the same 180°.

1 hour ago, billchao said:

RoC is related to clubhead speed, so I would think if a player were to reduce RoC at the cost of clubhead speed, that would actually be a detriment.

That’s only really true when you measure it in a time based system. This is a distance based system.