Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

"Four Magic Moves" by Joe Dante


Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
Posted
Discuss "Four Magic Moves" by Joe Dante here.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
The unfortunate title prevented me from reading it until recommendations by others made it hard to ignore.

Clarity, brevity, truth. Its impact on my swing has been second only to Hogan's Five Fundamentals.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
I was very pleased with this book. The section on COAM was eye-opening, and the rest of the book was clearly and concisely written. Although I was initially put off by the title, my iron play has improved greatly after integrating Dante's recommendations into my swing.

Posted
It wouldn't make sense if I posted them, but they relate to the backswing, top, downswing, and impact. The book also covers details on the grip, stance, etc...

You can read an abridged version of the book here: http://www.golf-swing-magic.com/index.html

This guy also sells the book, or his own version of it which I don't know if I would recommend. I bought mine from Amazon for about $7

Posted
Discuss "Four Magic Moves" by Joe Dante here.

"Four Magic Moves" teaches the early backward wrist break - when I first tried this so called "magic move" I said

"you gotta be kidding me". I gotta tell ya, after I kept practicing this one early move in the golf swing the golf club began to feel much lighter as I swung...could it be that I am now swinging on plane? Anyway, this one move made an incredible difference in my golf swing. If you're gonna try this golf system out make sure you practice the moves over and over and let them sink in...your first inclination (like mine) will probably be to discard it as rubbish...stay with it and you may be in for a pleasant surprise. --John
  • Thumbs Up 1

Posted

STR8 Dymo 10.5
Dymo 3W
Mid Rescue 3
MP-33 4-PW
Eidolon 52* GW LW, SW Titleist Bullseye Putter


Posted
I was very pleased with this book. The section on COAM was eye-opening, and the rest of the book was clearly and concisely written. Although I was initially put off by the title, my iron play has improved greatly after integrating Dante's recommendations into my swing.

Yes, Four Magic Moves by Joe Dante is one of the few golf instructional books out there that give justice to COAM (Conservation Of Angular Momentum) and the importance of this principal in the golf swing.

I was recently discussing the golf swing with a physics professor and he said there are really only 2 physical principals that impact the golf swing (he denoted gravity as being negligible in the golf swing)... those 2 principals being COAM and Torque. COAM being the conservation of angular momentum...the principal that states angular momentum of an object remains constant as long as no external force or moment acts on that object. If the object (club head) is brought closer to the axis (formed by the golfer's stable spine), it speeds up. If the club head is moved further out, it slows down. In a golf swing, as the player rotates the club, the hands move farther from the body or axis and slow down. This reduction in momentum feeds into the much lighter club and increases the speed of the club head in the last part of the stroke, in a whiplash type of effect, increasing the force of impact on the ball. The other principal being Torque: Torque = F X L "F" being Force and "L" being length of the lever in our case the length of the golf club shaft. F or Force can be further broken down using Newton's equation of Force=ma (mass X acceleration) So we now have Torque = mass x acceleration x length Mass being the mass of the clubhead, acceleration being the acceleration of the clubhead. It is Torque or the twisting action of the golf club that gives real leverage in the golf swing. Hit 'em Long & Straight! --John

Posted
Maybe I need to look into his definition/discussion a bit more, but there is not any conservation of angular momentum of the clubhead in a full golf swing. Your body acts like an engine to supply external torque to accelerate the club. COAM is for a free falling pendulum.

I haven't seen his argument though...maybe he has some qualitative aspects correct.

R7 TP 8.5* Fuji Speeder x-stiff (heavy,low,fade set)
975F 3W 13.5*
FX Tour Grind Nickel 3-PW +1/2", Rifle 6.5
Vokey SW 52*
CG10 LW 60* 3 dot (14* bounce) Tracy putter 35" (hit R but putt L)+ 1 club TBD...Past home courses: Unicorn GC (Stoneham, MA), Forest Creek GC (Round Rock, TX)Ball: Use...


Posted
Sorry but f = ma and it doesn't matter whether the acceleration is provided by gravity, or your core muscles.

Posted
can you please clear up for me how torque = leverage ? I thought these are totally independant of each other and the only way to supply more power is by either more torque or more leverage ?

I did'nt go to school long enough for the modern golf swing.

Posted
can you please clear up for me how torque = leverage ? I thought these are totally independant of each other and the only way to supply more power is by either more torque or more leverage ?

Leverage is a function of Torque. The longer the lever (i.e. the club shaft), the more leverage hence more Torque - this is why longer clubs hit the golf ball further than the shorter ones.

Torque can be thought of as the twisting action. If you were to remove a rusty lug nut from your car, the longer the wrench (lever) - the more leverage you have which yields more Torque being applied to the rusty nut. Remember the formula for Torque = F x L where "L" is the length of the lever and "F" is Force...so as you can see from the equation for Torque, Leverage is a function of Torque. The trick to effortless power in your golf swing is to allow these Forces to work in harmony. You must allow time in your golf swing for Torque and Angular Momentum to develop and deliver the most power at the right moment...the moment of impact. Don't rush the golf swing - let it happen! This is why Pros golf swings look so effortless...

Posted
Maybe I need to look into his definition/discussion a bit more, but there is not any conservation of angular momentum of the clubhead in a full golf swing. Your body acts like an engine to supply external torque to accelerate the club. COAM is for a free falling pendulum.

Yes, your body is the engine and the effort the golfer expends to swing the golf club is the "F" (Force) in our Torque equation; T = F x L (T=Torque,F=Force,L=Length of lever).

Now, the secret is to incorporate the late hit into the downswing because a beautiful happens, the late hit in the golfer's downswing has a nice way of actually lengthening the "L" or length of lever in our Torque equation without the golfer having to expend any more effort (or Force)...so you're essentially increasing the Torque exponentially without having to increase Force (aka: swing harder)... This is the secret to an effortless golf swing!
  • Thumbs Up 1

Posted
Yes, Four Magic Moves by Joe Dante is one of the few golf instructional books out there that give justice to COAM (Conservation Of Angular Momentum) and the importance of this principal in the golf swing.

I think you are mistaken with your thoughts on which is torque and which is force.

Torque = body uncoiling leverage = length of club so it is not the twisting action that gives leverage it is the length of the club. you mention mass of the clubhead also, if you increase the mass of the clubhead and apply the same torque would the speed not then decrease ? I also personally think the phenomaneon of the pro golfer looking like he is swinging easy is the fact that there is very little wasted effort and the understanding that power is generated from gradually from the start of the downswing not the start of the backswing.

Posted
I think you are mistaken with your thoughts on which is torque and which is force.

I'm simply using Newton's Law on Force, F=ma (Force = mass x acceleration) to further illustrate the components of Torque... T = FL (Torque = Force x Length).

By substituting Newton's equation on Force (F=ma) to the Torque equation (T=FL), we now have: T=maL (Torque = mass x acceleration x Length) In the golf swing, "m" is mass of the clubhead, "a" is acceleration of the clubhead, and "L" is length of lever in our case the length of golf club shaft. The mass of the clubhead and the force supplied by the golfer as he swings the golf club are all factors of Torque. Believe it or not there are actually times during the golf swing when there is zero Torque on the clubshaft...one time this happens is deep in the downswing when the club is vertical. This only happens if you hold the lag (also known as the late hit). Right after this "Torque Zero Point" a tremendous amount of energy is transferred to the clubhead resulting in an incredible amount of power delivered to the golf ball at impact. The reason all this energy is transferred to the clubhead from the hands is due to COAM (Conservation of Angular Momentum)..the hands slow down right before impact delivering the energy to the clubhead. Watch the pros hands right before impact, they are almost stopped yet the clubhead is whizzing by them...this is due to COAM. So far maximum power in your golf swing, take advantage of COAM and Torque by building the late hit into your golf swing...this worked for me with tremendous results! Hit 'em Long and Straight! --John

Posted
torque is not force x length ....... torque is supplyed by the golfer, the golfer gives the rotary force = torque. You do not want torque of the clubshaft at all this is a bad thing, it will take the clubface offline.

Maybe I am mis-interperating what you are saying

although I do not dis-agree with the release being the vital part of the swing, the reasoning you are giving for it there does not make sense. Also I dis-agree with the term "late hit" your not hitting it late you are releasing at the most optimum time.

Posted
torque is not force x length ....... torque is supplyed by the golfer, the golfer gives the rotary force = torque. You do not want torque of the clubshaft at all this is a bad thing, it will take the clubface offline.

Then maybe what my ol friend Archimedes said is wrong. :)

"The force applied to a lever, multiplied by its distance from the lever's fulcrum, is the torque." Archimedes once said after he discovered the laws of the lever: " Give me a place to stand and I will move the earth!"

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.