Stack and Tilt??? Is it a hoax????

[iacas]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

And I didn't even mention the awful swing sequence of Aaron Baddeley because I can't recall him ever actually swinging that way. It's meant to illustrate the differences or perhaps the feelings, but real swings with real results might have been better. The wonder of the internet is that once it's out there, it's repeatedly taken out of context.

As you now know, if you didn't already, we agree on the awful swing sequence. But you're smart enough not to take it out of context, but you seem to when it's convenient for you. :-)

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Just like Nick Faldo's youtube drill that mmvac added. Nick's obviously exaggerating the weight forward and the weight back, and perhaps his drill is meant to reinforce what he's feeling at impact even though it isn't likely his actual impact position. Then when he could alleviate all confustion - by adding a slow motion FO view of that nice crisp iron shot at the end - the video switches to the DTL view. This of course does nothing to illustrate what his drill was supposed to reinforce. Was the switch done on purpose during editing? Maybe his impact looks closer to S&T; than he's comfortable with?!? I suspect mine does.

The thing with Nick Faldo is that we have context. He repeatedly teaches things that are, in the opinions of many, incorrect. Unlike the GD article from four to five years, it's possible to judge Faldo's videos in the context with a little effort because Nick keeps providing it. Just as it's possible to understand M&A; within context because they, too, keep providing information.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

And I didn't even mention the awful swing sequence of Aaron Baddeley because I can't recall him ever actually swinging that way. It's meant to illustrate the differences or perhaps the feelings, but real swings with real results might have been better. The wonder of the internet is that once it's out there, it's repeatedly taken out of context.

As you now know, if you didn't already, we agree on the awful swing sequence. But you're smart enough not to take it out of context, but you seem to when it's convenient for you. :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Just like Nick Faldo's youtube drill that mmvac added. Nick's obviously exaggerating the weight forward and the weight back, and perhaps his drill is meant to reinforce what he's feeling at impact even though it isn't likely his actual impact position. Then when he could alleviate all confustion - by adding a slow motion FO view of that nice crisp iron shot at the end - the video switches to the DTL view. This of course does nothing to illustrate what his drill was supposed to reinforce. Was the switch done on purpose during editing? Maybe his impact looks closer to S&T; than he's comfortable with?!? I suspect mine does.

The thing with Nick Faldo is that we have context. He repeatedly teaches things that are, in the opinions of many, incorrect. Unlike the GD article from four to five years, it's possible to judge Faldo's videos in the context with a little effort because Nick keeps providing it. Just as it's possible to understand M&A; within context because they, too, keep providing information.

I didn't mean to dispute the Faldo video as evidence of his flawed opinions and teaching in general, just saying he was providing a drill. There's no evidence he hits a ball that way. The second piece of his drill actually is the important bit (imho). I stated quite a while ago in an S&T; thread that Faldo's best ever play was when his swing was very S&T; in appearance. Maybe that's his problem with it - taking what was, adding TGM terminology and releasing it as a new swing, when it clearly isn't. Hey, I'm just throwing this out there to flesh out why people have such animosity for it. For me any issue I take is those early presentations and the comments by certain zealots. I certainly don't take issue with the current substance of the method (i.e the important bits). Some other people I suspect are on the same page but grew tired long ago of being stereotyped as a "hater". It turns people off.

[uttexas]

Not a hoax. "The Stack and Tilt Golf Swing" by Mike Bennett and Andy Plummer is likely the best full swing golf instruction book of the past several decades. The book describes fundamentals of playing good golf, basic golf swing physics/geometry, the ball flight laws, and a swing pattern that will hit the ball the farthest, the most accurately, the most consistently. Examples of the swing pattern are shown in pictures of the best professional golfers. The book also describes drills to work on swing elements. The part of the book that I often refer back to is the section dealing with specific swing component corrections for particular ball flight patterns. Many people's exposure to s&t; is the tv commercial. Some of the commercial production portrays the s&t; as something wildly different from what the best golfers have been doing--which couldn't be farther from the truth. My advise would be to buy the book $10-15. If what you read in the book interests you, evolvr would be the most efficient and economical method of improving your swing.