So... how long before EVERYONE starts Stacking and Tilting?

[deronsizemore]

I'm not entirely sure what the point of this thread is.

No point really, just discussion. My assumption is that most of the amateur golfing world probably looks at Stack and Tilt like they look at The Hammer infomercials; just another gimmick to reduce your slice, reduce your handicap, etc. Anytime someone makes the argument FOR stack and tilt, the very first argument is "well who is using it and how many tournaments have they won?" I realize all players use it in different ways; some using more parts than others. My assumption is that if Tiger embraces this "radical"

theory behind stack and tilt, that every amateur golfer alive will be saying "Tiger's doing it, so I'm going to do it." And when someone says "So who's using the swing?" the answer becomes "The number one player in the world."

[MJP]

I'd say all professionals use a majority of what stack and tilt teaches, even if they don't know it.

[pavespawn]

If Tiger said, during an interview, anything at all about SnT there would be a flood of people buying the DVDs. Probably to a point that they would be back ordered. Even if he never won a tournament again which is preposterous.

[Shanks A Million]

I'm not going go read through the whole thread or go nutso into S&T minutia...

I agree, that's what turned me off to it. Had the commercial said something like this, I'd be more sold:

"Do you struggle with golf? Have you ever thought that maybe what you've been taught was based on someone else's perception of what the swing should be? Why do swing coaches teach one grip, one stance, and one swing when the best players in the world swing with different grips, different stances, and different swings? Swing coaches Mike Bennet and Andy Plummer have developed a new method of teaching, in which the fundamental aspects of a good golf swing; the physical laws that determine ballflight, and the body's sequence of movements common to all good players are laid out clearly and factually, not as a one size fits all approach."

[Cornbread]

. The only thing S&T has now is an official name, but most of the qualities of what it promotes is what the great players have done for the last 60 years.

Just marketing hype. Funny that once again the top finishers and winner of the PGA didn't have "a traditional swing" as taught by most so-called experts.

I'd say all professionals use a majority of what stack and tilt teaches, even if they don't know it.

WHAT ?

So which has been around longer? Golf and Golf swings, or a named and marketed concept for these basic swing concepts?

[pavespawn]

Marketing hype or not, the principles that they cover work. And they work in short order. After reading the book and watching some videos I can see portions of the swing that I had stumbled upon in the past but had never put them all together. And I have said before I am not a fan of "marketing hype." Even if all of this was basic swing concepts (which some are) this program lays them out very well. I had seen the commercials a million times and I finally just went out and copied what I saw. Crisp clean contact with the ball, more stability in my swing, the ability to put a high draw on the ball for once. I know some folks do not need it or believe in it, but this is definitely a valid method.

[Fourputt]

You seem like an otherwise open minded person. So because your friend didn't improve with it, probably because he didn't do it right in the first place, you're not even willing to try if it meant you could possibly improve?

I'm 63 years old, and I've had my self taught swing, such as it is for 40 years. I know it like you know an old and dear friend. We have our occasional disagreements, but all in all we are comfortable together. I'm not about to mess with something which has kept me at a consistent handicap for more than 20 years now. My ego doesn't need a single digit handicap to be satisfied, and I don't have the time or the interest or the energy to make a swing change properly. Besides you guys all say that I'm probably using many of its techniques already without even knowing it so, in the words of Alfred E. Newman, "What, me worry?".

So no, I'm not willing to try a swing change because I don't see any need to try one.

[iacas]

Just marketing hype.

Not at all. 95% of golfers who take lessons don't improve. I'd be shocked if 10% or more of our students hadn't improved - most rather significantly. It's not marketing - and it's not just a pattern to hit a golf ball. It's changing the way the game is taught.

Funny that once again the top finishers and winner of the PGA didn't have "a traditional swing" as taught by most so-called experts.

What does that even mean?

So which has been around longer? Golf and Golf swings, or a named and marketed concept for these basic swing concepts?

Way to completely miss the point of the post to which you were responding.

And Rich, if you're happy hitting the ball the way you are now, keep on keepin' on. I've got no problem with someone who enjoys playing golf at his current level.

[max power]

Bottom line is the frequently running commercials that call it the "revolutionary" golf swing are a big mistake. Makes it sound gimmicky. Should call it evolutionary, or focus on the fact that it's a new approach to teaching all the classic elements of a good swing.

[clam fist]

At least it looks better than the Symple Swing.

[iacas]

Bottom line is the frequently running commercials that call it the "revolutionary" golf swing are a big mistake. Makes it sound gimmicky. Should call it evolutionary, or focus on the fact that it's a new approach to teaching all the classic elements of a good swing.

Well, the commercials are from Medicus, not from Mike and Andy.

I'm not a marketing genius by any stretch, but as a golfer and an instructor, the commercial is... not my favorite.

[Pk88]

sales and trading?

[Stretch]

S&T; is so last Friday. If you're not "Perfectly Connected" these days, you're nobody.

Plus those guys have their own SWAT team.

[Shanks A Million]

S&T is so last Friday. If you're not "Perfectly Connected" these days, you're nobody.

Yeah, "learn to drive the ball 325 yards, no matter how far you're hitting it now!" Holy crap, are they serious? So, a 90 year old woman they can teach to hit it 325 yards? That's amazing. Who actually falls for that crap?

[Gordon McTavish]

S&T; is so last Friday. If you're not "Perfectly Connected" these days, you're nobody.

"Here’s the exact same swing I personally taught to PGA Touring Pro, Nathan Green – helping him win the RBC Canadian Open…"

"into arrow-straight launches that sail 30, 50, even 70 yards further than you have ever hit before" Sign me up now please! Nathan Green's stats: Driving Accuracy Percentage Nathan Green average = 61.27% PGA Tour Average = 63.44% Driving Distance Nathan Green average = 278.3 PGA Tour Average = 286.9 Greens in Regulation Percentage Nathan Green average = 61.43% PGA Tour average = 65.37% Uh, maybe not...