Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
outlaw1984

Shawn Clement or Stack and Tilt for a Beginner?

47 posts / 46859 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, iacas said:

Rush got better because he actually began practicing and hitting balls, which he'd never done before. Which other got better? Ray Romano?

 

That is the number one reason in my opinion why someone is a 18 or higher handicap vs a low double digit handicapper. It doesn't do you any good to take lessons and not practice. Romano got better, Rush, Phelps. What is with this website and guys hating on the most successful instructors? Jealousy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

12 minutes ago, 2turnswish said:

No not overselling at all. JJ is genius enough to know fundamentals are the building blocks of a reliable swing. So no matter where you might be starting, beginner or many years into the game with many swing faults, uncompensated, going back to square will set you right. Grip, the one that works for you, alignment, stance, posture, and finding the low point. These are tried and true and will be forever. From this base changes in ball flight can be made. He teaches different lies and adjustments, short game, and putting. A complete knowledge is there for any student. Again if a person cannot visualize the written or drawn text, then a competent instructor will help. Keep it simple, the best way. And tempo, tempo, tempo.

Went and researched new technical data on ball flight, Golftech, and after reading the words and looking at the diagrams of their version of "ball flight" rules, it as exactly as JJ said it was! It's not the opposite at all. Not sure why they drew such a conclusion? Their diagrams prove JJ and others right. We're always trying to reinvent the wheel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 2turnswish said:

Grip, the one that works for you, alignment, stance, posture, and finding the low point.

There's a lot more to a golf swing than that, of course.

1 hour ago, 2turnswish said:

Again if a person cannot visualize the written or drawn text, then a competent instructor will help.

I think it goes well beyond just that, and think good instruction helps prioritize and helps students improve far better than they can get just by trying to teach themselves.

1 hour ago, 2turnswish said:

And tempo, tempo, tempo.

Which tempo? Nick Price? Freddie Couples?

1 hour ago, MuniGrit said:

Romano got better, Rush, Phelps. What is with this website and guys hating on the most successful instructors? Jealousy?

Romano didn't get much better at all. Wasn't his goal to break 80 or something and then he never did it, or he did it from really short tees somewhere or something, weeks later?

Where's the hate? It's a discussion. I don't think Hank Haney's a great instructor, no. So you get to have an opinion, but I don't?

Jealousy? Not at all.

1 hour ago, 2turnswish said:

Went and researched new technical data on ball flight, Golftech, and after reading the words and looking at the diagrams of their version of "ball flight" rules, it as exactly as JJ said it was! It's not the opposite at all.

You sure about that?

Links and quotes… (the first has the relevant quote right there in the embed: "Unfortunately John Jacobs gets the ball flight laws wrong."

http://www.golfmagic.com/forum/golf-instruction/john-jacobs/43657

Recent technology has pretty well determined that : 1. The angle of the clubface determines ball flight direction. 2. Swing path determines the shape. Thus one can hit a draw with and open face. Jacobs seemed to have things the other way around. Comments?

http://adamkolloff.com/the-wong-ball-flight-laws/

For years players and teachers had it wrong. John Jacobs, one of the world’s top teachers from England, advocated that swing path had more influence than clubface in the ball’s starting direction. His theory was eloquently illustrated in one of the most influential golf books of all time, Practical Golf. Fortunately for him, there wasn’t enough advanced technology like we have today to test his widely accepted opinion.

http://forum.brianmanzellagolf.com/golfing-discussions/5612-john-jacobs-tom-watson-clubface-pull.html

John Jacobs was a very good teacher of golf. But HE DID influnence the BOGUS "Ball Flight Laws" that Gary Wiren and The Toski Flick combo promoted to the DETRIMENT of golf and golfers everywhere.

http://www.bettergolfcoach.com/newballflightlaws.htm

For almost the entire history of golf instruction, and certainly since the publication of John Jacobs’ Practical Golf in 1972, the ball flight laws have been set in stone. The PGA manual of golf, and generations of golf professionals have believed that, a well struck golf shot will start on the path that the club was swinging along, then change direction towards where the clubface was looking at impact.

Here's the problem… if you're going to base your entire teaching philosophy on ball flight, and you have what causes the ball flight almost entirely backward… doesn't that greatly inhibit your ability to teach properly?

Ball is starting a little right of the target and over-curving left. Fix using the "old" ball flight laws? Swing out more to the right!

1 hour ago, 2turnswish said:

It's not the opposite at all. Not sure why they drew such a conclusion? Their diagrams prove JJ and others right. We're always trying to reinvent the wheel. 

Can you shed some light on the above?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The rest of this conversation, having nothing to do with Shawn Clement or S&T or anything related, really, has been moved here:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

23 hours ago, MuniGrit said:

Nobody has been able to help Barkley. He helped the other 2.

Over the years, being on the Hank Haney Golf Ranch during the '90's-early 00's, and being taught by some of his right hand men, I will say that Hank can look at a swing and form a laundry list of issues/what needs work. But his instruction techniques? Meh. Didn't work for me. His instructors said little to nothing, they'd move you into a position, they would ignore basics ... He had a lot of detractors in the DFW area where he was based for a long time. Hank is a great marketer, good eye, but instruction? If you can find one of his guys that actually knows how to teach the golf swing ... good luck. "Swing out to the right; Your body will do the rest." Heard that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 minutes ago, Mr. Desmond said:

Over the years, being on the Hank Haney Golf Ranch during the '90's-early 00's, and being taught by some of his right hand men, I will say that Hank can look at a swing and form a laundry list of issues/what needs work. But his instruction techniques? Meh. Didn't work for me. His instructors said little to nothing, they'd move you into a position, they would ignore basics ... He had a lot of detractors in the DFW area where he was based for a long time. Hank is a great marketer, good eye, but instruction? If you can find one of his guys that actually knows how to teach the golf swing ... good luck. "Swing out to the right; Your body will do the rest." Heard that. 

Not a fan of Haney either, believe he strayed from JJ's fundamentals, which isn't unusual for students. I placed my swing right on JJ and now shoot par golf for my appropriate yardage. Age 66 and only started serious golf 4 years ago, had huge faults, JJ's swing thoughts and principles corrected everyone. I also liked Byron Nelson's book and Tommy Armour's. My best to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know who Clement was, I recognized the name as some golf guru, I googled him just now, he has a lot of work out there.  The website "wisdom in golf" smells kinda pretentious.  So I have to take a pass on Clement. 

Stack and Tilt is IMO the most important book since Hogan's 5.  I wish I had read that when I was a kid, I wouldn't be working in a cubical now.  Just the part on what controls ball flight, face vs club head direction, is worth the price.  What's the number one fundamental of golf?  Answered.  Without that, forgetaboutit.  With that, all else falls in place.  Plus now, with YouTube, you can watch Mike hit balls and copy his moves.  Its a great base to start from. 

Andy and Mike were The Golf Machine students when on the mini tours, with bad effect, they have learned at the feet of the great O'Grady, and have taken one of his 29 swings that have the best effect for Amateurs and published Stack and Tilt.  Great way to start the game I would think, you can put your own spin on it as time goes on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

8 minutes ago, Secretmove said:

I didn't know who Clement was, I recognized the name as some golf guru, I googled him just now, he has a lot of work out there.  The website "wisdom in golf" smells kinda pretentious.  So I have to take a pass on Clement. 

 

I agree with the other part of your message (I do work with a S&T instructor, have the book and videos and expect this is a good way to start for beginners) but Clement's teaching is not bad, just not good for me and (I think) my body type. It's a lot more of an up-and-down arm swing that can work with people that have a good rythm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a skinny kid and if possible too flexible, I was doing the only swing out there, arms straight up, sway to sway.  But I had "good rhythm".....what ever that is.  Huge flip, huge early extension, way steep, toe first divot, but good rhythm, once or twice every 5 years I would putt the lights out and all the ducks and stars align, and I'd win a tournament.  The rest of the time I couldn't break 80.  Or 85 or what ever age appropriate snowman. 

So, compare that to a guy drives 8 hours, gets out of his car takes two practice swings and shoots 65 on an impossible course set up to humiliate pros.  (John Daiy)    Malaska says every sport is based on rhythm, timing or whatever you want to call it.  I say eliminate all possible rhythm dependent moves.    If you're sway to sway, that's timing.  if you lift your arms, you have to time the....whatever the opposite of that is.  At least SnT eliminates those two main timing variables. 

Off topic: have you seen some of those Clay Ballard videos?  Is he Jimmy's son?  I still have the hideous flip, and I have to fight the right arm shooting out, seems he's got lots of  answers that make sense, i'm working on some of his videos, I've never heard of getting the hands low at p6 and raising up to P7, but I can see Tiger doing that for sure, shallowing the low spot in the swing.   

Also, I think ones height/build has EVERYTHING to do with what ever swing model you choose.  A tall guy can Stack and not weight shift, produce the same club head speed as the sway sway, and be much more consistent a ball striker.  On the other hand, Charlie Wie was a shorter guy looks like, probably 5 10 or something.  So looks Mike Bennett.    A tall guy should not try to swing like Hogan.  Mac yes, Hogan no.  What was Hogan, about 5'9" or something? 

 I would say Sean Foley took Stack and Tilt and sold that to Justin Rose as a base line, then later he added ground pressure science.  Seems to be working ok. 

Another off topic, and perhaps this has been explored in another thread, the right side swing of Peter Senior and Rod Pampling.  If I could choose now a model for me as a kid, it would be Rod Pampling.  The Australians, is seems,  are big on no weight shift back and using ground pressure.  That's an interesting model, but I don't know if its too advanced for a beginner. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

13 minutes ago, Secretmove said:

I would say Sean Foley took Stack and Tilt and sold that to Justin Rose as a base line, then later he added ground pressure science. Seems to be working ok.

I wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2019 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
  • Posts

    • Day 170.  I got home way too late, but remembered the challenge so I'm doing some of UGP's stretches.  Probably good given how little I moved today.  (Incidentally, earlier today I saw my future golf room for the first time, better than the previous one!  Ten days until setup!)
    • Almost always putt. Either with my putter or a club from PW-7 iron using the same putting stroke depending the pin location and grass condition. 
    • Yeah you must’ve missed that. It was posted earlier by @fredf then reposted by @Missouri Swede.
    • This is good stuff and interesting to hear from someone that plays on such big greens. I have never had that luxury/challenge, depending on the green. I find it so interesting that some people love partial shots (could be full swing but reduced power), and others don't want any part of it. For me, in that same situation of 100 yards with back edge at 110, this is how I would take it. Full shots are 80-85 yards for 53o, 95-100 yards for PW, 110 yards for 9I. I would almost always take a 9I into this green, unless there is serious trouble long. A 85-95% 9 iron is going to leave me on the green almost all of the time, barring L-R miss. If I hit it super pure, or I have some extra adrenaline pumping, I'm over for sure, but close. If it is sloping toward the back, then its a pitching wedge, and an almost certain downhill putt, but that's the nature of the beast. I use a Garmin approach S20, which is fairly basic, but has done a really good job of telling me center, front and back of the greens when I have played. When I know the pin layout for the day, I do cater to that, but if I have any doubt, or it is scary at all, I play for the center
    • I have gone through the replies and the main claim is 'Serious misconduct'. I get that but it seems like a grey area. open to interpretation.  I can't find any section of the rules that describe the scenario that i provided and the rules are very specific in terms of objects, balls hit, touched, where participants stand, act etc. There are other reasons the said example could count as legitimate play. Perhaps Player B is putting away from the hole because he wants an easier uphill putt to finish the hole. Also if  Player B's ball is directly opposite Player A's ball and putts it pass the hole and just pass his partners mark it is an over hit and the putt coming back is going to show the line for the next putt. Misconduct or inherent part of the game. Have we lost the freedom to decide on the direction of the next stroke. NB. The 4BBB I am referring to would be part of a Team Stableford competion. So there is no conceding putts involved.   Ahhh I have found some clarity. Point 7.  1.2a/1 - Meaning of Serious Misconduct The phrase “serious misconduct” in Rule 1.2a is intended to cover player misconduct that is so far removed from the expected norm in golf that the most severe sanction of removing a player from the competition is justified. This includes dishonesty, deliberately interfering with another player’s rights, or endangering the safety of others. The Committee must determine if the misconduct is serious considering all the circumstances. Even if the Committee determines that the misconduct is serious, it may take the view that it is more appropriate to warn the player that a repeat of the misconduct or similar misconduct will result in disqualification, instead of disqualifying him or her in the first instance. Examples of actions by a player that are likely to be considered serious misconduct include: Deliberately causing serious damage to a putting green. Disagreeing with the course setup and taking it on himself or herself to move tee-markers or boundary stakes. Throwing a club towards another player or spectator. Deliberately distracting other players while they are making strokes. Removing loose impediments or movable obstructions to disadvantage another player after that other player has asked him or her to leave them in place. Repeatedly refusing to lift a ball at rest when it interferes with another player in stroke play. Deliberately playing away from the hole and then towards the hole to assist the player’s partner (such as helping the player’s partner learn the break on the putting green). Deliberately not playing in accordance with the Rules and potentially gaining a significant advantage by doing so, despite incurring a penalty for a breach of the relevant Rule. Repeatedly using vulgar or offensive language. Using a handicap that has been established for the purpose of providing an unfair advantage or using the round being played to establish such a handicap. Examples of actions by a player that, although involving misconduct, are unlikely to be considered serious misconduct include: Slamming a club to the ground, damaging the club and causing minor damage to the turf. Throwing a club towards a golf bag that unintentionally hits another person. Carelessly distracting another player making a stroke.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Robert  D McCabe
      Robert D McCabe
      (57 years old)

×
×
  • 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...