Right Sided Swing (Gary Edwin) Discussion

[mackingchicken]

This should help answer your question.

1) A lot of the people seem to look like this:

2) Generally not a fan of "one size fits all, everyone-must-swing-this-way" "methods".

Sorry a bit confused on what your saying? Are you saying no one swing works for everyone?

Just asking about it becuase the right sided swing is what my new teacher does and teaches. Yesterday it felt very foreign and still does, but it has seemed to stop my head moving and it has kept my spine angle the same throughout the swing. I am thinking of using this backswing (To keep head straight, club on single plane, and spine angle consistant) with a more traditional follow through. So getting weight forward.

Any thoughts on that?

[Golfingdad]

Sorry a bit confused on what your saying? Are you saying no one swing works for everyone?

Just asking about it becuase the right sided swing is what my new teacher does and teaches. Yesterday it felt very foreign and still does, but it has seemed to stop my head moving and it has kept my spine angle the same throughout the swing. I am thinking of using this backswing (To keep head straight, club on single plane, and spine angle consistant) with a more traditional follow through. So getting weight forward.

Any thoughts on that?

To the bold:  Why???  If you like the teacher and are continuing to go back to him, then that should mean that you trust him.  So why would you already be thinking that you are going to only implement his swing for part of your swing and then do something different for the rest?  You either trust in his teachings or you don't.

For the record, I am with Erik that one-size-fits-all swings don't make any sense, but hey, who knows, maybe this one will fit you.

[mackingchicken]

Becuase during the lesson he really only implemented it into my backswing, then the rest of the swing is meant to fall into place, and I told him I prefer following through more and he said its fine.

I just want oppinions on what people think of the right sided swing.

[mackingchicken]

This is my teacher

[Golfingdad]

This is my teacher

Honestly, I don't like it.  To be fair, I have no sound, so I don't know what he's saying ... but it looks like he's promoting a very minimal shoulder turn.  The swing looks very "armsy" and his left arm bends quite a bit, and it looks like that couldn't be a very powerful swing either.

[mackingchicken]

Honestly, I don't like it.  To be fair, I have no sound, so I don't know what he's saying ... but it looks like he's promoting a very minimal shoulder turn.  The swing looks very "armsy" and his left arm bends quite a bit, and it looks like that couldn't be a very powerful swing either.

It doesnt look powerfull and it is fairly armsy, but he was smacking it yesterday, far and straight. Hes all about it being a really consistant swing. something you can easily re create over and over again.

[Abu3baid]

It doesnt look powerfull and it is fairly armsy, but he was smacking it yesterday, far and straight. Hes all about it being a really consistant swing. something you can easily re create over and over again.

I think the worst part of the video is that other than telling you he doesn't want you swaying he doesn't say anything else that adds to anyone's knowledge base..  Basically he says, let me show you and he proceeds to hit a ball.. nice one!

[mackingchicken]

I think the worst part of the video is that other than telling you he doesn't want you swaying he doesn't say anything else that adds to anyone's knowledge base..  Basically he says, let me show you and he proceeds to hit a ball.. nice one!

Haha hes better in person, and not swaying in the backswing is a big part of the right sided swing anyways. Keep everything centred and coiled during backswing making only movement's that are necessary. This keeps head dead still and spine angle still, making solid immpact simple.

After reading a lot of threads and vids on it, it seems people only dont like it because it is a bit different and not every tour pro is using it.

[mackingchicken]

Maybe a better explanation of it.

Im beginning to like the swing. At first I really didn't, but it seems to be growing on me after some research on it.

[MS256]

Maybe a better explanation of it.

Im beginning to like the swing. At first I really didn't, but it seems to be growing on me after some research on it.

My two cents FWIW. If you like it and if you like your instructor go for it and follow his instructions. Whatever swing you decide to try to learn don't worry about what anybody else thinks of it and certainly don't try to change anyone's mind about the swing they are trying to use.

People learning a full turn rotational swing will tell you that you aren't turning enough and that you will have no power that way. If they are correct smile at them and hit the ball in the fairway. If they are wrong smile at them and knock it past them.

P.S. It makes me smile to watch instructors demonstrating the mechanics of a swing they are not teaching. Every single time they demonstrate the worst possible mechanics to make the other swings look awful.

[ProgolferLiu]

Some folks I've spoken to out here in the SF Bay Area seem to think Gary's swing already has the golfer preset the secondary axis tilt. What are your thoughts on this? On paper, it does makes some sense to me, but I have yet to experiment with it.

[jclark]

Maybe a better explanation of it. Im beginning to like the swing. At first I really didn't, but it seems to be growing on me after some research on it.

It looks like an all arm swing. I can see how this swing will really limit MY distance. If you are athletic enough and get the timing down then good for you. I say use what works for you, but just because this will work for you doesn't mean nothing else out there will.

[highcut28]

i ve had 2 serious goes at this weird swing over a few years.

it has some appealing ideas but its so compact that it has no flow

its not a swing, more a hit.

i dont think Hogan swung anything like this.

It buggered my  left hip, which has thankfully recovered.

the other thing is the teachers of this swing have u doing the most silly drills !!

And ive noticed from watching a few aussie tournaments on TV that there is  hardly anyone really good using this technique.

i think its not for most people.

btw i ve gone for the complete opposite type of swing trying to emulate Fred Couples, and thats much more fun :)

[lewisgl]

Should be able to generate pretty fast arms speed with this swing.

It looks like an all arm swing. I can see how this swing will really limit MY distance. If you are athletic enough and get the timing down then good for you. I say use what works for you, but just because this will work for you doesn't mean nothing else out there will.

Might not limit your distance much at all as one should be able to generate good speed with this swing.  Probably takes less athleticism than doing a lot of movement with the lower body.  Of course this isn't the only way to skin a cat, but definitely worth looking into, and I am.

[jughouse]

It's really not a one-swing-fits-all swing, it's just a very different approach to the more traditional swings. But as it's so simple and with less moving parts, I can see why one might - incorrectly - come to that conclusion.

I think I finally cracked this swing.

I used to play off 8, got lessons off Gary and Peter Cote and my handicap blew out to 26 or worse. Hated the swing, resented the lessons for years, and took comfort by laughing at how ugly the RSS swing can be.

But something clicked with it and I'm killing it again, down to 7 with loads more room to improve.

And with that said, I would now ONLY recommend the RSS to anyone who's new to the game...It is so, so, SO much easier to hit it straight consistently once you understand what's going on, and now that I do understand and am comfortable with it, I'm finding distance I never thought possible. 

 

So a bit of (personal) insight - I think the 'problem' with this swing that most people have is:

a) Students don't get enough lessons about it and because it is such a different swing to 'normal', they get confused as to what they should be doing when they stop the coaching. 

b) This isn't helped by Gary's communication skills - I struggled to understand what he was saying / meaning and it's only now that I can see what he was getting at.

This is possibly made worse by his physical manipulation of students into 'positions' when he's coaching. I used to see it all the time on the GC - in myself included - plenty of students with weird top of the swing positions that looked awkward and felt awkward. 

c) This communication issue is, I believe (and I'm totally going out on a limb here because I know it's his favourite), best highlighted by the hitting of the bag drill. This was a major source of my misunderstanding and I developed a hip-rotationless, very abbreviated follow through, swing for a while, which attracted a lot of negative comments and bad play...It has IMO the ability to convey the wrong swing thought at impact and beyond.

And you can see this in some of his students; they collapse so quickly after impact, if they even get that far, which looks unnatural - you only need to look at Pampling to see how fluid it can be. 

 

Anyway, just my two cents worth but I can't say enough good things about the swing now that I have cracked it (albeit 16 years later!)

Edited January 31, 2017 by jughouse

[iacas]

3 hours ago, jughouse said:

But as it's so simple and with less moving parts

Which parts that move in a normal golf swing don't move in this one?

[jughouse]

With the RSS there is no large, conscious or pronounced weight shift from a balanced address position to a right side loaded position at the top of the back-swing.

Instead, you set up slightly left side loaded at address with your right leg angled in (the reverse ‘k’) and the ball far forward in your stance to form what feels like an aggressive ‘hitting position’ - this is the swing thought I like most because it lets me focus only on what I need to i.e. swinging the arms.

The shape of this set up, and the nature of the swing itself, means there just isn’t a big weight shift - you simply take the club back by leading with the arms and the hips turn VERY passively behind them, so passively you hardly notice what’s going there and your weight shifts only marginally, from slightly left side loaded at address to balanced at the top of the swing and that's about it.

Same on the downswing - because your lower body is passive you don't need to worry about beginning the down-swing with the hips, or getting the timing between the upper and the upper body right because you just don't need to, you simply swing with your arms knowing that the right side of your body will passively follow through behind them.

Less moving parts because it allows you to focus only on the arms. 

That's not to call it just an 'arm' swing because it's much more sophisticated than that - there is body movement, it's just very subtle as described - and it's also the wrong swing thought; one which I adopted that gave me so much trouble in the first place.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, jughouse said:

With the RSS there is no large, conscious or pronounced weight shift from a balanced address position to a right side loaded position at the top of the back-swing.

Most swings these days are with a pretty centered pivot. There's no "pronounced weight shift" in the regular swing either.

3 hours ago, jughouse said:

Instead, you set up slightly left side loaded at address with your right leg angled in (the reverse ‘k’) and the ball far forward in your stance to form what feels like an aggressive ‘hitting position’ - this is the swing thought I like most because it lets me focus only on what I need to i.e. swinging the arms.

That's no different than what I teach.

3 hours ago, jughouse said:

The shape of this set up, and the nature of the swing itself, means there just isn’t a big weight shift - you simply take the club back by leading with the arms and the hips turn VERY passively behind them, so passively you hardly notice what’s going there and your weight shifts only marginally, from slightly left side loaded at address to balanced at the top of the swing and that's about it.

I think you'd be surprised to see where the pressure goes. But again, this sounds pretty much like the modern golf swing, with the weight (not pressure) close to 50/50 at the top. A little back (largely due to the arms moving to that side of the body).

3 hours ago, jughouse said:

Same on the downswing - because your lower body is passive you don't need to worry about beginning the down-swing with the hips, or getting the timing between the upper and the upper body right because you just don't need to, you simply swing with your arms knowing that the right side of your body will passively follow through behind them.

I doubt that's an accurate description of what happens. Do you have a video of a good RSS from FO and DL views? I've seen no good golf swings where the lower body doesn't peak first and thus "lead the way." The kinematic sequence would be goofy as heck.

3 hours ago, jughouse said:

Less moving parts because it allows you to focus only on the arms.

The same body parts are all still moving, though. You seem to believe that they move a bit less, but I'm thinking that might be more of a feeling or you might have some misconceptions about the modern golf swing.

---

I quickly found this video:

If that's a good example, I don't see that as being anywhere near as powerful. I would agree that the parts move less (I don't really agree that there are truly "fewer moving parts"). That looks like a good control swing, but also one where you're going to give up a fair amount of clubhead speed.