Myth of Maintaining Your Address Flex in the Rear Knee

[saevel25]

On 10/6/2015 at 0:03 AM, mvmac said:

If Boy Wonder Jordan Spieth can't convince people this myth is wrong than no one can. ;)

[DrvFrShow]

Longest hitter on the LPGA tour. Watch the right knee during the backswing.

 

 

[mvmac]

 

[zero]

Very nice. I've noticed my right knee wanting to point inward, probably need to flare my right foot a bit more?

[iacas]

1 hour ago, zero said:

Very nice. I've noticed my right knee wanting to point inward, probably need to flare my right foot a bit more?

Could help. I don't know if I've ever seen a trail knee pointing inward much during the backswing.

[mvmac]

 

[natureboy]

5 hours ago, mvmac said:

 

This wasn't the best demonstration. On his 'flexed knee' rotation, he didn't allow his lead knee to flex with the rotation. Yeah that will stop the hips.

I'm not against straightening the trail leg on the b/s, it's likely a natural movement. Not sure that doing so allows either a deeper or more rotated trail hip. When I actually try with both styles I get more hip rotation and depth relative to the target line by holding more flex.

That does not mean I think holding trail leg flex is a better way to swing. Trail leg extension on the b/s may be very useful for other reasons, but I don't think it's because of what jgilmer was saying. It seems to me that Hogan's trail leg extension was more about driving to his lead side off the inside of his trail foot before the club reached the top to initiate a fluid transition.

Edited January 28, 2017 by natureboy

[mvmac]

34 minutes ago, natureboy said:

When I actually try with both styles I get more hip rotation and depth relative to the target line by holding more flex.

I'm confused by this. If you were to stand with my tailbone a few inches away from a wall and make a pivot allowing some freedom vs retaining the original flex, you'd be able to push into the wall with straightening the knee. Remember the trail also goes "up", on it's slant. Only way I can push into the wall would be to increase flex in the knee and that's not really a functional position.

And getting more rotation maintaining the address flex doesn't make any sense.

[iacas]

What Mike said.  It doesn't make any biomechanical sense that you can turn more with the same the flex versus extending the trail knee.

Your right ankle is essentially a fixed point. 

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

It seems to me that Hogan's trail leg extension was more about driving to his lead side off the inside of his trail foot before the club reached the top to initiate a fluid transition.

That also doesn't make biomechanical sense: you can't push forward off an extended knee. You could "lean" but that's it. (In truth the trail leg does little on the downswing in good golf swings - it regains a little flex passively and then gets pulled into extension again by the core and right hip rotating around and sliding a bit forward).

[natureboy]

On 1/27/2017 at 10:48 PM, mvmac said:

I'm confused by this. If you were to stand with my tailbone a few inches away from a wall and make a pivot allowing some freedom vs retaining the original flex, you'd be able to push into the wall with straightening the knee. Remember the trail also goes "up", on it's slant. Only way I can push into the wall would be to increase flex in the knee and that's not really a functional position.

And getting more rotation maintaining the address flex doesn't make any sense.

I'm not understanding your scenario. Diagrams?

Now I wasn't looking at shoulder turn which may be inter-related to amount of flexion between torso and legs. My trial was to see how much my trail hip rotated away from the target line with ~ retained flex vs. a mostly (not completely unflexed knee). Looked only at hip rotation and with the flex maintained the trail hip moved farther away ('deeper') from the target line, which makes sense if you think about the geometry.

On 1/28/2017 at 0:06 AM, iacas said:

Your right ankle is essentially a fixed point. 

That also doesn't make biomechanical sense: you can't push forward off an extended knee. You could "lean" but that's it. (In truth the trail leg does little on the downswing in good golf swings - it regains a little flex passively and then gets pulled into extension again by the core and right hip rotating around and sliding a bit forward).

The right ankle does have degrees of freedom - not a ton, but some.

I didn't say Hogan's trail leg / knee was 'extended' as in straight. It straightens a bit during transition which is consistent with a gentle 'push off' the  inside of the trail foot a bit like Nicklaus' 'sprinter in the blocks' image / analogy. Jack's move was probably more 'sprinter like than Hogan. With Hogan, I agree there was also likely some 'tipping' / 'leaning' / 'falling' onto the lead leg as well that he termed 'enough lateral movement to get to the lead side' and others call a 'bump'.

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, natureboy said:

I'm not understanding your scenario. Diagrams?

It was pretty well explained IMO. You don't get more rotation by maintaining the flex in your trail knee.

4 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Now I wasn't looking at shoulder turn which may be inter-related to amount of flexion between torso and legs. My trial was to see how much my trail hip rotated away from the target line with ~ retained flex vs. a mostly (not completely unflexed knee). Looked only at hip rotation and with the flex maintained the trail hip moved farther away ('deeper') from the target line, which makes sense if you think about the geometry.

I don't know what you're talking about. Your ankle is in a relatively fixed place. For your right hip to move away from that point in space, the right leg has to lengthen. It does so with the knee extending.

3 minutes ago, natureboy said:

The right ankle does have degrees of freedom - not a ton, but some.

Kevin, do you realize how dumb things like this sound? No shit your right ankle can move. The point is that your right foot, your right ankle, is effectively fixed in space. It doesn't move away from the target line an appreciable amount, etc.

The rest of your post is not particularly relevant.

[natureboy]

On 2/3/2017 at 10:17 PM, iacas said:

It was pretty well explained IMO. You don't get more rotation by maintaining the flex in your trail knee.

I don't know what you're talking about. Your ankle is in a relatively fixed place. For your right hip to move away from that point in space, the right leg has to lengthen. It does so with the knee extending.

With the ankle relatively fixed in place and a point of rotation (if you load rightward anyway), the thigh is essentially the radius of the circle. Think about it. The closer to horizontal the trail thigh is, the larger the effective radius around the trail ankle. It's very basic geometry. Pushing the trail hip back with a more extended trail leg will definitely raise it higher than rotating with a flexed knee, but not necessarily more angular rotation.

Trail leg extension may help you make a 'better' turn or a better swing, but not due to more degrees of hip rotation around the relatively fixed point of the ankle...unless maybe you let the pressure in the trail foot shift way back behind the heel. That sounds imbalanced.

On 1/27/2017 at 10:48 PM, mvmac said:

I'm confused by this. If you were to stand with my tailbone a few inches away from a wall and make a pivot allowing some freedom vs retaining the original flex, you'd be able to push into the wall with straightening the knee. Remember the trail also goes "up", on it's slant. Only way I can push into the wall would be to increase flex in the knee and that's not really a functional position.

Why would you need to push into the wall in this scenario? Does being able to apply backwards pressure help a golf swing if you can just make a big turn with your hips rotating past a point on that wall? I haven't encountered the need to hip check anyone in my backswing, yet so I don't see the benefit of your scenario vs. just being able to rotate the hips past that point on the wall on which you would be pushing.

Edited February 21, 2017 by natureboy

[mvmac]

@natureboy, you can do whatever you want, I don't care. If you can turn your hips fully and not change the address flex in the knee, good for you. Film it because I think it's extremely difficult.

I can come up with a long list of HOF players and major winners that lose some flex in the trail leg during the backswing.

Maintaining address flex has zero advantages over losing a few degrees of flex.

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

I haven't encountered the need to hip check anyone in my backswing

You're exaggerating what I'm saying. I said push not "thrust" back.

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

Why would you need to push into the wall in this scenario?

The pressure loads into your trail heel. You don't "need" to do it, it just happens (when you turn your hips properly).

From pics 1-2 is their right glute getting closer or staying the same distance from the "wall" (I didn't draw the lines btw). It's clearly getting closer, it would be "pushing" into the wall, like I said. 

 

What do you think is happening here? Is Rory maintaining his address knee flex? Heck no. 

 

[iacas]

13 hours ago, natureboy said:

With the ankle relatively fixed in place and a point of rotation (if you load rightward anyway), the thigh is essentially the radius of the circle.

That doesn't make any sense. Nobody's rotating around their knee. The lateral (horizontal) distance from any part of the foot (fixed position) to the right hip is effectively zero. There's no rotation of the right hip around the ankle. That's not the dimension in which the hips rotate.

13 hours ago, natureboy said:

The closer to horizontal the trail thigh is, the larger the effective radius around the trail ankle.

Most people set up with their hip pretty close to "over" their knee. There's not really a "radius" there.

The simple geometry that you're seemingly not understanding is that the distance from the ankle to the hip increases in the backswing as you rotate your hips, and that extra distance comes from extending the trail knee. The trail hip not only goes up, but it goes around a little, too. That's extra distance. With your trail foot on the ground, its position is fixed, and the extra distance the hip moves (up, back) comes largely from the extension of the trail knee.

13 hours ago, natureboy said:

It's very basic geometry.

I'm a smart guy. I don't know why on earth you're talking about the trail thigh creating a radius.

What I've described is not only also simple geometry, it's anatomically correct and how the body works.

You said you can create more rotation with the trail knee maintaining its address flex. Post a video. Prove it.

13 hours ago, natureboy said:

Pushing the trail hip back with a more extended trail leg will definitely raise it higher than rotating with a flexed knee, but not necessarily more angular rotation.

The trail hip rotating also moves it farther away from the trail ankle (and closer to the front ankle). That's how a circle works…

If the red dot is his right hip at A1, and the blue dot at A4, even if he rotated his hips level (he doesn't), the blue dot has moved farther away from the red dot. That increased length has to come from something.

I suppose Tiger could increase the flex in his trail knee to lower his right hip during the backswing… to counter-act the rotation he's going to get, but that would just be goofy.

That's why I said this:

On 2/3/2017 at 10:17 PM, iacas said:

Your ankle is in a relatively fixed place. For your right hip to move away from that point in space, the right leg has to lengthen. It does so with the knee extending.

Simple.

Another simple demonstration? Tie a string to your belt loop, and have someone tuck the other end under your right foot. To turn properly you're going to pull on that string.

13 hours ago, natureboy said:

Trail leg extension may help you make a 'better' turn or a better swing, but not due to more degrees of hip rotation around the relatively fixed point of the ankle...unless maybe you let the pressure in the trail foot shift way back behind the heel. That sounds imbalanced.

None of that is accurate.

Again…

You said you can create more rotation with the trail knee maintaining its address flex. Post a video. Let's see it. It should be in the context of a golf swing.

11 hours ago, mvmac said:

@natureboy, you can do whatever you want, I don't care. If you can turn your hips fully and not change the address flex in the knee, good for you. Film it because I think it's extremely difficult.

Yup.

11 hours ago, mvmac said:

@natureboyI can come up with a long list of HOF players and major winners that lose some flex in the trail leg during the backswing.

Maintaining address flex has zero advantages over losing a few degrees of flex.

Yup.

[iacas]

On 2/21/2017 at 0:34 PM, iacas said:

You said you can create more rotation with the trail knee maintaining its address flex. Post a video. Let's see it. It should be in the context of a golf swing.

@mvmac and I talked and we're going to require this of you as a condition of your membership. Too much talk, too little sense, not a single video, Member Swing thread, photo(s), or anything.

Post a video demonstrating this.

[natureboy]

As viewed from above, Hogan and Palmer have both made an effective rotation of the trail hip away from the target line. This is large effected by the knee / shin moving away from the toes to a more vertical position as the inside of the trail foot is pressured. Palmer may be extending somewhat, but based on the pic below still from his younger days, I doubt Jack is much.

To the extent that the trail leg retains flex for that amount of turn away from the ball-target line the trial hip will be further from the target line on an arc as viewed from directly above (more effective degrees of rotation), while more trial leg extension will elevate the hip relative to the ground. I don't have an opinion on which is better.

I don't disagree with the premise of the thread, but all else equal and with feet nearly perpendicular to the target line, the less you extend the deeper / further from the target line the trail hip will be. I'm not saying that's better, just more effective degrees of rotation as viewed from above.

Rory has a great swing, but so did the guys below. If he extended it was by a very small amount. Both approaches seem to have worked very well.

One thing I thought about that might be different in our descriptions is that I expect you turn out your trail foot a lot more than me. Given the inherent limitation in how much one can turn around the ankle the more your trail foot is turned out the more that trail leg extension can work to push the trail hip toward the target as it also pushes it up away from the ankle. I turn my trail foot out similar to Nicklaus and Palmer in the pics above (significantly less than the lead foot).

But at your full turn position with the same angle in your shins, if you were to add flex in the leg your hip would be further away from the ankle. Not saying it's better. But the length of the thigh is what it is. It doesn't change length. Anyone who thinks about it a little bit can deduce that for a given orientation of the shin bone, more knee flex leads to a horizontal thigh, which means the hip that it's attached to is farther from the foot.

I'm not saying that it's a better position, but just in terms of rotation moving the trail hip further from the ankle isn't the same thing as moving it farther from the ball target line. As data / science oriented guys I would think you'd want to be precise about why your methods work or are better. Could a higher hip position be beneficial? Very possibly. It could be that going higher as well as around helps with balance or something else.

On 2/21/2017 at 1:17 AM, mvmac said:

Maintaining address flex has zero advantages over losing a few degrees of flex.

The above is an assertion, not a fact…even if no great golfer has exactly maintained their address position flex. The question is maintaining a lot of flex or allowing a lot of or actively seeking extension in the trail leg. I don't think there's a universal law on this.

I don't care about your arbitrary requirement to jump through hoops for your amusements. Enjoy deleting my last post .

[iacas]

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

But at your full turn position with the same angle in your shins, if you were to add flex in the leg your hip would be further away from the ankle. Not saying it's better. But the length of the thigh is what it is. It doesn't change length. Anyone who thinks about it a little bit can deduce that for a given orientation of the shin bone, more knee flex leads to a horizontal thigh, which means the hip that it's attached to is farther from the foot.

This photo and the text above illustrate pretty well exactly why I and the entire moderation team is now done with you. The image fails on two levels:

• The center image is not representative of an actual good golf swing.
• The right hip is closer to the right foot in the center image, yet you maintain that it's farther away.

Whether the second thing is done intentionally or accidentally I don't know. I don't care to know. But it's very representative of how you argue, and why you're now going to be prevented from arguing.

You pervert arguments to the point where we're no longer discussing the golf swing. You get basic facts or concepts wrong (like when arguing about course rating, misunderstanding the radius vs. diameter in faulting the rating process for higher handicappers). You focus on some small thing - which often isn't even something anyone else has said - and lose sight of the forest or the big picture.

You're not here to help golfers. You're here to "win" an argument, a goal that as yet is unmet, and you have to post absolute crap like the above to try to do it.

I had a bit of free time this morning. So I responded to your last post in some detail. It, as one would expect, contains a number of typical @natureboy traits: cherry picking a photo while ignoring the concept, failure to understand basic points, perversion of the statements of others, putting words in the mouths of others, use of vague words like "a lot" (often in combination with the "putting words in the mouths of others), and hyper-focus on some small largely negligible point.

Nobody else should waste their time to read the below, or open the spoiler and read that. It will not shed light on anything, it will not help you with your golf swing, and you will not glean any useful information. It exists simply as my last effort at illustrating to @natureboy a small part of the reason why we're tired of him… even though as I post it I know with certainty it too will fail.

Spoiler

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

As viewed from above, Hogan and Palmer have both made an effective rotation of the trail hip away from the target line. This is large effected by the knee / shin moving away from the toes to a more vertical position as the inside of the trail foot is pressured. Palmer may be extending somewhat, but based on the pic below still from his younger days, I doubt Jack is much.

Way to cherry pick a photo. Here's another one. Try this on for size:

Jack re-flexed his knee(s) early in his transition. That's what your photo shows. Other photos and videos clearly show Jack's trail knee extending throughout the backswing.

I suspect you knew what you were doing with that picture, and it's intellectually dishonest to pretend that the picture is representative of his trail knee action throughout the backswing. This, along with several other reasons, are why you've earned the special requirement to post an actual video in order to cut through the verbiage.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

To the extent that the trail leg retains flex for that amount of turn away from the ball-target line the trial hip will be further from the target line on an arc as viewed from directly above (more effective degrees of rotation), while more trial leg extension will elevate the hip relative to the ground. I don't have an opinion on which is better.

The simple geometry that you continue to fail to understand is that the right hip moves away from the right ankle in all three dimensions. I've tried to get you to understand this here:

On 2/21/2017 at 0:34 PM, iacas said:

If the red dot is his right hip at A1, and the blue dot at A4, even if he rotated his hips level (he doesn't), the blue dot has moved farther away from the red dot. That increased length has to come from something.

Consider a 3D coordinate system. Let's put the right hip at address at 0,0 and the right ankle at some point further down the Y plane (we're viewing face-on, and so Y is vertical, X is horizontal, Z is toward/away the viewpoint).

Moving the right hip along its arc - which is not horizontal to the ground, but is on a slight tilt - some 30° to 50° moves the right hip in three dimensions: back (Z axis), up (Y axis), and forward (X axis).

The origin of this cartesian coordinate system is the right hip at A1.

It moves up (very slightly), away (more so), and forward/targetward (slightly - I could have made this smaller too but the "box" became tougher to conceptualize).

The right ankle is somewhere in the direction of the blue arrow.

Now, here's the point I've made several times, but which has thus far managed to avoid being picked up: unless any of those arrows reverse their direction, the right hip is gaining distance from the right ankle. Even if you eliminate two of the red arrows and move the right hip in any one dimension, the line connecting the "right hip" to the "right ankle" has to increase in length. Not much, in some cases, but it increases in length.

This is why maintaining the trail knee flex often leads to swaying. People have a sense that they need to do something to build up momentum or to "store energy" or something, so they move their right hip LEFT (FO view) along the X axis. This moves the right hip CLOSER to the right ankle, so since they don't often increase flex (to shorten the distance), it also tends to go up slightly, basically moving from the origin in a small arc of its own around the right ankle/origin radius.

But go back to the cartesian coordinate system. It's pretty simple to understand, is it not? If the red arrows move right, up, or back (as illustrated), they are moving farther away from the point at which the blue arrow points (the right ankle).

And here's the thing… nobody's said this distance increase is large. It's not always apparent in a 2D photo with lines drawn on it. But if you simply consider the cartesian coordinates… it becomes pretty clear that the length from the right ankle increases.

Again, very little, but that's all anyone needs.

Do some math: if the right knee is flexed 20° (which is a pretty large amount), and the thigh and shin measure 18" apiece. If those two segments form a straight line, obviously the max length they'll form is 36". Well, at 160°, the max length is about 35.5". Remember, too, this is at full extension.

Increase both segments to 20" (that's a pretty tall dude!) and you're looking at 40" and you're looking at about 39.4" - an extension of about 0.6". This is why you cannot see things in pictures. This is why considering this in two dimensions is pointless, and considering it in three is necessary. This is why the cartesian coordinate diagram above is relatively important.

No, I have not talked about the shin portion effectively rotating (plantar flexion of the ankle against the ground). The reasons for this? This motion is likewise very small. In many it amounts to a few degrees. It doesn't significantly move the hip in any dimension, never mind downward - if the right shin is leaning toward the ball the hip will move upward as the shin moves closer to vertical if the right knee remains fixed. But we're talking about basically negligible amounts here.

Keegan extends early but then stops, but even he extends only 16° or so (limitations to 2D - this is an approximation, though a reasonable one). Since he's extending less than the 20° above, and since his joints are not 20" long, most likely… we're still only talking about an increase in length of under an inch.

Keegan, I'll note, doesn't turn much. That's fine if you can be flexible enough to get to 90° or so… but even Keegan extends 16°. That's not a negligible amount of extension - it can be an almost invisible amount of "distance increase from the right ankle to the right hip."

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

I don't disagree with the premise of the thread, but all else equal and with feet nearly perpendicular to the target line, the less you extend the deeper / further from the target line the trail hip will be. I'm not saying that's better, just more effective degrees of rotation as viewed from above.

That's not really rotation. Rotation is in the three dimensions of the cartesian coordinate system above. For a golfer to move his right hip only along the Z axis, it's possible, but why? the left hip won't work in the same dimension - it'll work toward the ball, and because it can't grow in size, will also work left along the X axis.

That doesn't happen, and is ultimately pointless to discuss.

Furthermore, as I pointed out above in the cartesian coordinate system, even if the trail hip moves only along the Z axis… the trail knee will need to extend to achieve this unless it also ultimately drops, and it doesn't drop in a golf swing. You said:

On 1/27/2017 at 10:14 PM, natureboy said:

When I actually try with both styles I get more hip rotation and depth relative to the target line by holding more flex.

No, you don't, not in the context of a golf swing, and this is why, after years of putting up with your pure bullshit, @mvmac, myself, and other moderators decided to put the onus on you to finally put up or shut up. Do something extreme - set up with your knees super bent, turn your hips as much as you can keeping the same knee flex in your trail knee. Then extend your trail knee and… you'll find that you can turn even more.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

Rory has a great swing, but so did the guys below. If he extended it was by a very small amount. Both approaches seem to have worked very well.

I already addressed your abuse of the Nicklaus picture.

What's Jack doing there? Basically he's leveling his hip turn by increasing the flex in his knees. This also pulls his butt and his right hip forward slightly. Look at where the tree above his left thigh intersects his body if you don't like the lines - his whole lower body and hips move toward the golf ball slightly (and his right hip drops because of the regaining of flex in the trail knee).

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

One thing I thought about that might be different in our descriptions is that I expect you turn out your trail foot a lot more than me.

That's relatively unimportant.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

Given the inherent limitation in how much one can turn around the ankle the more your trail foot is turned out the more that trail leg extension can work to push the trail hip toward the target as it also pushes it up away from the ankle. I turn my trail foot out similar to Nicklaus and Palmer in the pics above (significantly less than the lead foot).

I say it's relatively unimportant because we're talking about things in the context of a golf swing. Two true statements I can make within that context:

1. You can turn your hips farther with your right foot turned out.
2. You can turn your hips more by extending your trail knee.

If you wanted to limit the hip turn the most, you'd square up or turn your right toes in, and keep knee flex. Hopefully you're flexible like Anthony Kim:

Also worth noting… I wouldn't really call that a big shoulder (torso) turn.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

But at your full turn position with the same angle in your shins, if you were to add flex in the leg your hip would be further away from the ankle.

No, it wouldn't. Not in three dimensions.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

But the length of the thigh is what it is. It doesn't change length

Same with the shin. These dimensions, as I noted above, basically create a triangle. Decreasing the angle also decreases the distance of the opposite side of the triangle.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

Anyone who thinks about it a little bit can deduce that for a given orientation of the shin bone, more knee flex leads to a horizontal thigh, which means the hip that it's attached to is farther from the foot.

This image and your argument now encapsulate exactly what everyone hates about your arguments.

If you consider these images, the one you would say is "farthest from the foot" is the middle one, but it's very clearly the CLOSEST to the foot. Draw and measure a line from the right hip in that picture to the ankle (where the green line intersects the blue rectangle). The longest line is on the right - with the knee the most extended.

You're going on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on while completely failing to understand the basic facts of the matter. Rotation is not simply moving the hip along the Z axis, or "behind" or "deeper".  And look at how much the right hip has DROPPED in the image you've presented. That does not happen in the context of a golf swing.

So, to summarize… you're not even really discussing the golf swing anymore. You've had to go to such extremes just to try to "win" some point that you've rendered your argument irrelevant. And yet you keep posting and keep posting…

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

I'm not saying that it's a better position, but just in terms of rotation moving the trail hip further from the ankle isn't the same thing as moving it farther from the ball target line.

No. Again, it's closer to the ankle, not part of a golf swing, and rotation is more than just moving along the Z axis.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

As data / science oriented guys I would think you'd want to be precise about why your methods work or are better.

Here's something you've seemingly never understood: we've done and gotten all of this data. We have measurements from many golfers. We've traveled and worked with folks and helped them capture data, and looked at the data they've captured from others. We don't always list these things, but it'd be ridiculous to do that. The "bibliography" of sorts just for this might be a few hundred entries long.

We present things AFTER we have the data and science, but the data/science is always there.

Extending the trail knee allows the right hip to move farther from the right ankle in three dimensions, making it easier to rotate it on its inclined plane and roughly about the center of the pelvic girdle.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

Could a higher hip position be beneficial? Very possibly. It could be that going higher as well as around helps with balance or something else.

It's simply a matter of, as I just typed, the hips rotating on their inclined plane.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

The above is an assertion, not a fact…even if no great golfer has exactly maintained their address position flex.

Then what are the advantages? You've yet to list one.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

The question is maintaining a lot of flex or allowing a lot of or actively seeking extension in the trail leg. I don't think there's a universal law on this.

It's not about "allowing a lot." That's another of your tactics… to use vague words and/or put them into the mouths of others.

11 hours ago, natureboy said:

I don't care about your arbitrary requirement to jump through hoops for your amusements. Enjoy deleting my last post .

I gave you twenty warning points last night. It was made clear to you what you had to do, and you failed to do so, flaunting the requirement in several posts.

The entire moderation team - @mvmac, @RandallT, @boogielicious, @jamo, @billchao, @nevets88, @mchepp, others - and myself have simply gotten sick and tired of your entire persona here. You're constantly and never-endingly arguing stuff to the point where you bastardize things so much you're no longer even talking about the golf swing, and you fail to comprehend or respond to what's written to you in response.

You have two real choices once your current suspension is over:

• You can ignore these warnings, continue to be a belligerent arguer, and receive a final 50-point warning that will result in your permanent ban.
• You can avoid behaving in the manner that infuriates the entire moderation team. That will likely mean limiting the topics in which you post quite a bit, because though you fancy yourself to be capable of discussing the golf swing from a theoretical perspective, you've proven that you are not.

Now, I want to be very clear about something. You're not being warned or "handled" because you disagree. You're being handled here because you contribute nothing positive. You're belligerent. You don't help people. You don't demonstrate anything. You pervert and distort topics in order to make a point that often has little or nothing to do with how people actually play golf. You're on a mission to "win" an argument, not to further the understanding. You speak as if you know and fail to ask questions, despite the holes in your logic and posts being constantly exposed as gaping. You quite often fail to read what's written, take a beat, and try to understand it.

P.S. This requirement is anything but arbitrary. The list of reasons are long, the surface of which was only scratched in this post. Arbitrary would have been to say something like "to continue posting here you must dress up in a purple outfit and post a photo of yourself diving from a diving board into a pool of jello." Asking you to post a video illustrating your point is the opposite of arbitrary.

[Phil McGleno]

@iacas-Tho it is nice to be able to take your time and type out what you mean to say this is one of the downsides to a forum too-You have to respond to a whole bunch of crap and a person can get all of their thoughts out uninterrupted.

If you were been sitting in a room with @natureboy and he started drawing that entirely stupid picture with the lines you could have cut him off and spared all of us the pain of having to watch him so badly miss the point.

I bet @natureboy is still going to look at the response-And I bet he is still not going to see where he went wrong. But that is because he is just that way and he is unable to see how stupid his own posts are and how little they actually deal with golf swings.

His stick drawing is exactly why you asked for a video-Even though he posted it after you asked. His errors and flaws and stupid thoughts would have been even more evident if he had actually tried to make a vid.