John Erickson (Advanced Ball Striking) in 2022

[StuM]

Let me ask a question, and I am open to being corrected.  Above I am reading about Erikson saying something such as "Accelerate post contact".  That just seems non-sensical to me.  My understanding is that the ball is in contact with the club face for a small fraction of a second.  I googled and saw an estimate of 1/200th of a second.  Once the ball is off the club face, "Post Contact", any change in any factor would have not impact ball flight since the ball has already ceased contact with the club. 

My thought on the follow-through is that to get good follow-through you have to have good positioning PRIOR to contact with the ball.  The follow-through is more a result of what you did pre-contact and is not in and of itself effecting the ball post-contact.  Thus any "Accelerating Post Contact" would have no impact.  Maybe accelerating pre-contact may continue after contact but the change would need to be pre-contact to have any effect.

I hope I expressed this the way I am thinking it.  Are my thoughts valid or not?

[iacas]

1 hour ago, StuM said:

Let me ask a question, and I am open to being corrected.  Above I am reading about Erikson saying something such as "Accelerate post contact".  That just seems non-sensical to me.  My understanding is that the ball is in contact with the club face for a small fraction of a second.  I googled and saw an estimate of 1/200th of a second.  Once the ball is off the club face, "Post Contact", any change in any factor would have not impact ball flight since the ball has already ceased contact with the club.

Correct. Additionally, if you still had speed to spare that you could accelerate after impact… it's wasted speed. You should hit it as hard as you can and deliver as much speed at impact, not after the ball is gone.

1 hour ago, StuM said:

Are my thoughts valid or not?

Yes.

😉

(They are valid. Computer programmer humor just there…)

[phillyk]

If you are rotationally accelerating past impact, have you “transferred” energy to the ball efficiently? Not remotely. It makes zero sense. The body actually decelerates prior to impact in all great golfers.

Maybe feeling like you are clearing faster around impact helps. But it’s a feel. 

Use an axe to chop wood.  Are you accelerating your hands through impact? That would probably hurt. You accelerate early then let the axe head catch up late (which means hands decelerate) to create maximum speed. 

[Warlock]

I don't think John Erickson's ABS technique is about creating any extra clubhead speed through impact (ie. by accelerating the clubhead through the 0.5 msec impact period).  Some of his students say they are willing to forego a decrease in clubhead speed by using a heavier clubhead while accelerating and maintaining shaft flex through impact.  They are claiming that their technique will cause less dispersion of the ball for off-centre strikes which is superior to 'Swinging' (see video below). Although he does say that if you're a golfer who strikes the ball in clubface centre all day, then 'Swinging' can be very effective.

 

 

 

[iacas]

I feel they would be foregoing clubhead speed, but I also think it's just a feeling of accelerating after impact, and even John doesn't actually do so, unless he's specifically trying only to do that, not hit a golf shot.

Also, what the club does after impact doesn't matter as much as what it does during the impact interval. Even 1000 FPS is nowhere near enough to see what the club does while the ball is on the face, but I think they'd be pretty similar.

Plus, when talking about MOI and clubhead speed, contact location matters quite a bit.

Are those the same location? I don't know. I would say the one on the right is more toward the toe. It's also later into the shot (the ball has traveled farther).

[Vinsk]

On 8/24/2022 at 6:00 PM, Blades Balata said:

These comments are hilarious. Read Erickson's CV on wikipedia...TGM prodigy under Ben Doyle, junior golf phenom, college All American, eight years on Pro Tours worldwide, winner the Canadian Open over Bradley Hughes, has played in the final group, on the final day, with Greg Norman...etc.. In other words a REAL pro golfer.

Visit the practice range at a tour event. The difference between tour level and club pro ball striking is (strikingly?) obvious. Pro shots sound different, flight differently and are amazingly consistent.

I've stood on Mr. Erickson's teak wood deck and seen him hit ball after ball, alternating between bullet fades and frozen rope draws. Plus, any other shot you'd like to see. But if you prefer to get your golf instruction from a man with a badminton racket, it's your call.

Dr. Balata 

Ya know, it’s such a damn shame when guys like you come on and make valueless comments like this. Those of us who aren’t experts in golf mechanics or physics for that matter, but would like to learn more, really lose out when a good discussion gets side tracked with a rebuttal of zero value.

@iacas is an expert in golf mechanics, among other things. I can tell you that he much prefers debates where someone challenges his opinions/research rather than just going along aimlessly.

But when you simply make silly comments like ‘ I’ve watched him hit balls off a teak wood deck’ you bring nothing. Erik made some points regarding what John is saying and explained how John’s statements are not entirely accurate. He also gave credit to John as well.

So you think the comments are hilarious because John’s a good ball striker and he obviously must be a solid instructor? Come on.

If you don’t agree with Erik ( @iacas) could you give us your input as to why? I’m afraid that believing someone who can hit balls off a teakwood deck validates everything they say won’t fly. Nor does dismissing an instructor who uses a badminton racket hold much weight either.

We love discussions here. It’s a great way to learn new things. How about you give us some good counterpoints to Erik’s points and see where it goes? Cheers.

[StuM]

32 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I’ve watched him hit balls off a teak wood deck

I've been curious, Who hits balls off a wood deck?  I would think that would affect the club much differently then grass which will have some give to it.

[billchao]

5 minutes ago, StuM said:

I've been curious, Who hits balls off a wood deck?  I would think that would affect the club much differently then grass which will have some give to it.

You have to strike the ball really well from that tight of a lie.

[Big Lex]

Can someone explain or offer an educated opinion on whether "hitting vs. swinging" is really a thing? I know how this was presented in TGM and how Erickson makes the distinction. I just am curious if it's real, golf mechanics-wise, not swing feel-wise or intent-wise, if that makes sense. 

[GolfLug]

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

Can someone explain or offer an educated opinion on whether "hitting vs. swinging" is really a thing? I know how this was presented in TGM and how Erickson makes the distinction. I just am curious if it's real, golf mechanics-wise, not swing feel-wise or intent-wise, if that makes sense. 

Sure.. a hammer throw is 100% swinging and hammering a nail is about 70%- 90% hitting. @iacas explained in a previous post, a golf 'swing' is a combination of both or somewhere in between and that too varies depending on where you are in the swing (A4 to A6). 

For my sanity I try to keep it a bit simple.... if you end up instinctively or deliberately locking or stiffening wrist leading up to impact (I don't care if you bow or cup) then an unnecessary hit element has crept in somewhere along in the 'swing'.  

Edited August 26, 2022 by GolfLug

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

Ya know, it’s such a damn shame when guys like you come on and make valueless comments like this. Those of us who aren’t experts in golf mechanics or physics for that matter, but would like to learn more, really lose out when a good discussion gets side tracked with a rebuttal of zero value.

Relax, Kevin. 😉

But… as my response to him said… I don't really care how good a player he is, I care about the accuracy/validity of what he's saying he does or that you (golfers) should do.

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

So you think the comments are hilarious because John’s a good ball striker and he obviously must be a solid instructor? Come on.

Kevin, we've moved on. 😄

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

If you don’t agree with Erik ( @iacas) could you give us your input as to why? I’m afraid that believing someone who can hit balls off a teakwood deck validates everything they say won’t fly.

Yes, please.

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

We love discussions here. It’s a great way to learn new things. How about you give us some good counterpoints to Erik’s points and see where it goes? Cheers.

We do.

Tell me why I'm wrong, or how. Instant opportunity to upgrade my knowledge.

1 hour ago, StuM said:

I've been curious, Who hits balls off a wood deck?  I would think that would affect the club much differently then grass which will have some give to it.

Like @billchao said, you've gotta hit it pretty well without too much downward AoA or you'll know in a hurry.

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

Can someone explain or offer an educated opinion on whether "hitting vs. swinging" is really a thing? I know how this was presented in TGM and how Erickson makes the distinction. I just am curious if it's real, golf mechanics-wise, not swing feel-wise or intent-wise, if that makes sense. 

Explained a bit above. It's a bit more of a "feel" thing than anything, as "hitters" and "swingers" still use the same muscles in the same sequence, with small differences.

[Blades Balata]

“Good players ≠ Good teachers”

True, and “Observation ≠ Understanding.” And, “Understanding” does not necessarily guarantee quality instruction. Motion capture, 3D graphs, launch monitors etc. show us (more or less accurately) “what happened”. The connection between the data and “how it happened” and “how to change it” relies greatly on individual interpretation.

Erickson’s students succeed because: By intensive study and personal exposure to ball striking greats, combined with years of trial and error, he developed an effective swing model and teaching method which has consistently improved his student’s ball striking.

The “modules” (drills) present components of his technique in a sequence which develops the strength and coordination necessary for the next module. Progress is monitored through online video. There is no social promotion. It takes work, commitment and realistic perspective on the rate of improvement. It’s a serious program, delivered with a high degree of professional commitment.

________________________________

I went back and re-read this thread and had a "deja vu"moment, all over again…I was in the last stall at the range (I prefer that one, you're not forced to look at alternative approaches) Two guys set up directly behind me. I didn't look around, but I heard them clearly. One is hitting it thin, fat, shanks, tops and an occasional weak slice. The other guy is striping it, the shaft whoosh is supersonic, ball goes out and up a mile, straight. It falls on the yardage sign with a two yard fade. This goes on awhile. They're chatting, obviously friends, the starter calls them to the tee. As they're leaving I hear the hacker say to the player:

"You're not clearing your hips." 

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

True, and “Observation ≠ Understanding.”

Where did I say anything about "observation" only?

16 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

And, “Understanding” does not necessarily guarantee quality instruction. Motion capture, 3D graphs, launch monitors etc. show us (more or less accurately) “what happened”.

They do, and they also tell us what doesn't happen, despite any "feels" someone may have.

16 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

Erickson’s students succeed because: By intensive study and personal exposure to ball striking greats, combined with years of trial and error, he developed an effective swing model and teaching method which has consistently improved his student’s ball striking.

I can say the same thing about other instructors.

We're not here to debate whether students can get better teaching what he teaches. We're discussing whether what he teaches actually occurs, if it's "best," etc.

Do his hips actually accelerate after impact, unlike virtually every other great player ever? I doubt it. Does the "feel" work sometimes? Of course. I've used a similar feel, even if it isn't "real."

16 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

The “modules” (drills) present components of his technique in a sequence which develops the strength and coordination necessary for the next module. Progress is monitored through online video. There is no social promotion. It takes work, commitment and realistic perspective on the rate of improvement. It’s a serious program, delivered with a high degree of professional commitment.

You're saying a whole lot of nothing here. Cool. We'll stipulate that it works for some players. Many, even. That's not what's being discussed.

16 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

I went back and re-read this thread and had a "deja vu"moment, all over again…I was in the last stall at the range (I prefer that one, you're not forced to look at alternative approaches) Two guys set up directly behind me. I didn't look around, but I heard them clearly. One is hitting it thin, fat, shanks, tops and an occasional weak slice. The other guy is striping it, the shaft whoosh is supersonic, ball goes out and up a mile, straight. It falls on the yardage sign with a two yard fade. This goes on awhile. They're chatting, obviously friends, the starter calls them to the tee. As they're leaving I hear the hacker say to the player:

"You're not clearing your hips." 

Good story, but again… doesn't really say anything. Doesn't address anything. Just marketing.

---

You came in to say "he's a great player" and "players who do his stuff become better ball strikers."

Cool. We'll stipulate to that. You can have those, free. I know, and I'll believe you.

But then what? What — of what he says he does — does he actually do? What is a "feel" and what is "real"? In a full swing, does the clubhead lag behind the whole downswing, and even if he can do that, should he? Should others? What are the tradeoffs?

---

You're invited to come along when/if he visits me to get on GEARS. Let's throw your swing on there, too.

[StuM]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

Like @billchao said, you've gotta hit it pretty well without too much downward AoA or you'll know in a hurry.

 

4 hours ago, billchao said:

You have to strike the ball really well from that tight of a lie.

Got it, I will stick to grass and mats as I am not ready for the shockwave after hitting hard into the wood.  Maybe some day when I am much better.

[phillyk]

4 hours ago, StuM said:

I've been curious, Who hits balls off a wood deck?  I would think that would affect the club much differently then grass which will have some give to it.

I’ll practice off one before I next go to Bandon Dunes. You have to really control impact point. 

 

4 hours ago, Big Lex said:

Can someone explain or offer an educated opinion on whether "hitting vs. swinging" is really a thing? I know how this was presented in TGM and how Erickson makes the distinction. I just am curious if it's real, golf mechanics-wise, not swing feel-wise or intent-wise, if that makes sense. 

World long drive are trying to hit it. Swinging it adds more control. In the spectrum, driver, we try to hit it and irons we try to swing it. 

[Blades Balata]

Icarus,

"Ya know, it’s such a damn shame when guys like you..."

Ya know, it’s such a real damn shame when guys like you don't have the site moderation to prevent snarky disrespect of a serious man, great golfer, and respected teacher.

_______________________________

"Where did I say anything about "observation" only?" + "They do, and they also tell us what doesn't happen, despite any "feels" someone may have."

Motion capture, 3D etc. allow us to observe. "Understanding" in this case is interpretive. Think: X-ray—Radiologist and second opinions. Once your GEARS system captures a swing, does it spit out a recommendation for curing the horrible slice of 50 y/o,  over-the-topper with an arthritic hip? Or do you interpret the data? And might another pro offer a different solution? A better one?

_______________________________ 

"You're saying a whole lot of nothing here."

True, I was writing it.

_______________________________

"Good story, but again… doesn't really say anything. Doesn't address anything. Just marketing."

Thanks. But ain't it the truth, golf seems to attract a lot more amateur "golf scientists" than quality ball strikers. 

_______________________________

"...does the clubhead lag behind the whole downswing...?)

Check the first pages of Cochran & Stobbs - if the club head isn't lagging the shaft, it's slowing down.  

 

[Vinsk]

40 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

snarky disrespect of a serious man, great golfer, and respected teacher.

Where is the snarky disrespect? He’s a really good golfer? A lot what he says can help a lot of people? Like has been written, not sure why you get so defensive in a discussion about some statements/ideas of John’s that don’t make sense logically. Great men can still be wrong. It’s how the learn and continue to learn. Thicken your skin and just try to discuss what’s being said rather than just comment on how great he is and is not to be questioned. FFS man.

[iacas]

51 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

Icarus,

That's not my name.

https://thesandtrap.com/how-to/mention-members/

51 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

"Ya know, it’s such a damn shame when guys like you..."

Please quote posts using the quote features. This attributes them to the proper person, etc.

51 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

Ya know, it’s such a real damn shame when guys like you don't have the site moderation to prevent snarky disrespect of a serious man, great golfer, and respected teacher.

Ummmm…

I replied to and admonished Kevin (@Vinsk) right there.

51 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

Or do you interpret the data?

The point is that the GEARS measures things, and when they contradict what someone "feels" that they do… then it begs the question(s). The questions you seemingly want to avoid answering.

51 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

"You're saying a whole lot of nothing here."

True, I was writing it.

And you accuse others of snark? Man, you know what was being "said" there.

Plus, "that poem really speaks to me" or "the Vietnam Veterans Memorial has a lot to say" are valid uses of the word. The poem and the wall aren't literally saying words out loud.

51 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

Thanks. But ain't it the truth, golf seems to attract a lot more amateur "golf scientists" than quality ball strikers.

You're still "writing" nothing. And I understand the science pretty well, as do others I call friends or acquaintances who have their Ph.D.s. They're far from "amateur 'golf scientists,'" whatever that is.

51 minutes ago, Blades Balata said:

"...does the clubhead lag behind the whole downswing...?)

Check the first pages of Cochran & Stobbs - if the club head isn't lagging the shaft, it's slowing down.

Not always true, no. The CG of the clubhead is behind the shaft, so it could still be moving to an inline condition (accelerating) and be in forward deflection. And a clubhead in lead deflection can still be traveling faster than the projection of the shaft in a straight line.

8 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Great men can still be wrong.

Plenty of really great players got the ball flight laws wrong for decades. Instructors, too.