Are most amateur golfers being mislead on how to swing?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

Must we discuss face conditions relative to the target line.

As Mike said, his numbers were relative to the target line.

Originally Posted by Patrick57

Last point, the new laws diagram seems to display that a push fade does not happen. On the in to out plane there's the pull hook, push hook and straight push. A draw has also not been

displayed as a possibility.

Seriously? For the purposes of that diagram, draw = hook and fade = slice.

Originally Posted by Patrick57

Why do I hear shouting when I read your replies? Maybe its just me.

It must be. Might be something to think about while you're in the Penalty Box again. Your continued talk about the "rudeness" of others has gotten old. Enough. You said you were going to respond to the golf-related stuff, then you keep throwing this stuff in there. I'm perfectly calm. My students aren't learning bad stuff from you, and if you continue to fail to "believe" facts, it's no skin off my nose.

Originally Posted by Patrick57

The biggest difference is how you are aligning the face. I mentioned in the last post how I do this in a less confusing and more natural manner.

It's less confusing and more natural to you. Clearly, since you cannot properly explain yourself, it's not "less confusing" to others.

Using the target line is a perfectly natural and very simple way of talking about alignments. Clubface 2° right of target line (open), path 4° right (in to out) of target line = ball that pushes (just over 2° right of target) and draws.

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I have enough technology for what I want to do. I only need some string and a super high speed camera. I've got them. I also have some balls and clubs.

You can't measure the 3D path of the golf ball and you're not even going to easily be able to measure the clubface angle, but okay. Good luck.

[evan01]

You are right on. I just came home from 6 days at innisbrook. Played 11 rounds in 5 days it gave me a great deal of playing time to see where the  mistakes where coming from . My playing partners are some very good golfers  when I connected and when I didn't they let me know. Tempo was my key to squaring the club head  getting great length and straight shots. I would swing with the tempo of Couples 1 time and the drive would go 270-280 next drive I swing out of my shoes totry and hit it  just as long and would end up 210-225, 25 yards left or right.humbling game!

[TheGeekGolfer]

I've read this whole post from start to finish, it's been interesting.  However, there is a fair amount of rudeness on both sides of the postings.  That being said, it is something that is commonly misunderstood in online forums.  It's very hard to convey many subtle facial cues that might cut the rudeness of a reply without resorting to a 'smiley'.  It's my experience that (and I've been guilty of it) if you want to see rudeness, you do tend to see it.  Sometimes a statement of fact, can come across as rude.

@Patrick57 - No, it's not 'just you'

@iacas - Your posts do come across as rude, mainly because (imho), you don't tend to acknowledge anything the other poster says and usually just pick apart their posting.  Which turns off many people that might have something to contribute.  In fact, I stayed out of this post mainly for that reason.

Let's give Patrick57 some credit, he has come around to reading about the 'new' description of the ball flight laws.  In the last two pages of postings it appears he's trying to equate them to how he has learned/played golf the last X-number of years.

[mvmac]

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

I've read this whole post from start to finish, it's been interesting.  However, there is a fair amount of rudeness on both sides of the postings.  That being said, it is something that is commonly misunderstood in online forums.  It's very hard to convey many subtle facial cues that might cut the rudeness of a reply without resorting to a 'smiley'.  It's my experience that (and I've been guilty of it) if you want to see rudeness, you do tend to see it.  Sometimes a statement of fact, can come across as rude.

@Patrick57 - No, it's not 'just you'

@iacas - Your posts do come across as rude, mainly because (imho), you don't tend to acknowledge anything the other poster says and usually just pick apart their posting.  Which turns off many people that might have something to contribute.  In fact, I stayed out of this post mainly for that reason.

Let's give Patrick57 some credit, he has come around to reading about the 'new' description of the ball flight laws.  In the last two pages of postings it appears he's trying to equate them to how he has learned/played golf the last X-number of years.

In Erik's defense, Patrick's tone initially wasn't great and did some name calling.  It didn't get any better when he was in the wrong on the ball flight law info.  If you're going to start a thread saying that you know how to make golfers better, Patrick originally talked about fluidity and back swing restriction, but then doesn't know what determines the balls initial start line, you better be prepared we're going to call you on it.  And even after we presented the correct information multiple times, Patrick continued his negative tone and disagreed with physics.  Yes he's coming around but not trying very hard to work with what we are saying.  Evident by the last few posts and saying it makes him bored.  He didn't think the diagram had an example of a draw... gets kind of frustrating.

[luu5]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

Must we discuss face conditions relative to the target line. It's unnatural to address a ball on a path and set the club to another line. It would also cut out the confusion as to how much the face is actually closed at impact. When I close my face 2° then my intention is to have the face closed 2° to the path at impact and not target. My target is 5 yds right and I shape the ball back to the middle, the desired goal.

To me this sounds as it should. You hit in-to-out, aiming right, pointing the club left (to the path) between the target and goal. Ball starts right of target but left of path, and keeps curving left.

And you should have read the legend, the broken lines do not mean impossible shots, they just mean the face alignment.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by TheGeekGolfer

@iacas - Your posts do come across as rude, mainly because (imho), you don't tend to acknowledge anything the other poster says and usually just pick apart their posting.  Which turns off many people that might have something to contribute.  In fact, I stayed out of this post mainly for that reason.

Let's give Patrick57 some credit, he has come around to reading about the 'new' description of the ball flight laws.  In the last two pages of postings it appears he's trying to equate them to how he has learned/played golf the last X-number of years.

Personally, I think Erik has really toned it down over the last year or so. These types of thread crop up all the time and the back and forth gets old very quickly. He's exercising remarkable restraint under such blatant provocation. It is hard to give Patrick57 any sort of credit bearing in mind he is arguing with facts.

At least the usual TSTers that defend this sort of stupidity ad nauseam have stayed away from this thread. Hopefully, they've now left the Flat Earth Society.

[iacas]

At this point comments about "rudeness" are off-topic and will stop.

Frankly, we spent way, way too much time on the "ball flight laws" crap yet again. I'm not sure why some kinds of discussions continue to devolve into that. On one side, you have people ignoring simple realities. I sometimes wish they'd say "Yeah, okay, I may have that wrong. But the original topic is more about ..." On the other hand we (Mike and I, primarily) can do better to not push it so much, or to recognize when to cut bait and move on. I apologize for our role in that. We should be smarter about this type of thing.

If anyone wants to help get this back to the original topic, here it is again:

Originally Posted by Patrick57

A typical amateur golfer tries to emulate the textbook swings of top professionals. Among other endless criteria, he generally tells himself that he's got to get the club parallel at the top of the back swing; shift his weight at impact without moving his head or altering his spine angle; and end up perfectly balanced on his target foot after a smooth follow through.

However, a top professional has a rather lengthy and complicated regime for his swing which, for him, is an imperative for successfully reproducing the miracle shots required for his trade. This regime involves: one to two hours of stretching and exercise before going to the range/course; working for 2-6 hours on various elements of his game with his coach/caddy/video feedback equipment; and then putting this all together playing nine or eighteen holes of golf.

This is a normal non-tournament day for the average modern professional and only the cream of the crop manage to put it together well enough to make a living on one of the tours. I could go on and on but my main point is that there's a swing for pros and therefore there must be a less structured and more individual swing for amateurs. We all walk, run, jump, swim, drive, ride a bicycle etc and although we do these similarly there are no strict directives on how to do them.

I coach this game and, in my opinion, the main mistake that golfers are making is trying to emulate the pros. And it's not their fault! All the magazines, books, videos, golf channels and most teaching pros insist there is only the pro's way. The logic is... they do it best, so they are doing it correctly. Well so are professionals in other sports but I don't see amateur skiers taking corners at 70 mph cutting the snow with a half inch edge of their skis; or tennis players busting a gut trying to place a 100+ mph service in the correct part of the court; or driving a car with slick tyres into a sharp bend at over 150 mph and applying the brakes at the last second in order to glide round the inside of another driver with the same goal. I say different levels for differing skill standards.

I recently took up tennis and decided to follow a training video to improve my service and quickly realised that the hours of precise practice and timing just weren't possible for me. I'm miles away from hitting the ball at professional levels because my consistency and control suffer when I do. I play tennis and golf to my capabilities, the same way as I do every other physical action. So why does an amateur golfer feel he has to try to swing like a pro? Mainly because that is the way they have been instructed and the pros look really good the way they are doing it. And we've all had those days, rather seldom may I add, where our golf swing just knitted together and the results were way above our norm, only to return another day back to square one.

There must be a more consistent alternative. When anyone comes to my school for a golf lesson, I always ask two very important questions before I start... How much time do you intend to spend practicing each week? Do you intend to adopt a stretching routine before each practice session and for how long? These questions put me in a better position to advise my students on how they will be able to swing and I can also clear up the myth of why they shouldn't or can't adopt a pro-like swing. Most people want to play for hours on end but devote less than one hour per month on practice. On the same breath, a couple of minutes of stretching each day is well above average.

I have devised an easy drill that proves why this textbook swing is more athletic than golfers are led to believe. (Up to this point they have been so obsessed with looking ''correct'' at the end of the back swing that they were ignoring natural swing fundamentals. Typical errors include: lifting the club to this position; weight over the target foot; straightening of the off target leg; over rotation of the hips and many more.) Performing my drill, my students manage to experience back swing restriction for the first time. The fittest of my students have trouble stretching further than a three quarter length back swing.

Putting it simply, how can a regular golfer who hasn't, and normally doesn't want to, put in the practice hours or essential stretching required, be expected to accomplish the very atheletically challenging conditions achieved by the top athletes of the sport. My biggest problem when I coach this game is unfortunately all too common. This textbook swing is so deeply imprinted in every golfer's mind that a much more natural swing with important qualities like fluidity or back swing restricion is a rarity. I used to lose students when I told them they weren't fit enough for a complete backswing. Most of them had the same visual impression of how to swing properly and didn't realise there should be natural restriction.

These days most of my new students are promptly introduced to this natural condition with my aforementioned drill. Let's get down to this simple drill and for most of you it's time to feel this backswing restriction for the first time! I prefer to introduce this drill to my students without a golf club because with one they do the 'same old - same old' and don't feel the natural back swing restriction that I am trying to portray. I use a carpet beater when I introduce this drill. (A tennis/squash/badmington racket does the same job.)

At ground level, I place a cushion against the wall and procede to hit it one handed - my dominant hand - with a forehand action and don't think about golf but naturally striking the cushion. You should feel little or no backswing restriction at this point and you should notice that you don't take the racket back as far as the conventional parallel position at the top of the advised golf swing. Within a few swings you should feel that this is a very natural task for you that belongs to other motor skills in your repetoire that have been mastered.

You are now ready to feel natural backswing restriction! It's time to use the other hand but we don't want this hand to interfere with what I describe as your own natural swing. This hand has to be put in place as a non-interfering passenger. Lie the four fingers of this hand on the back of the hand holding the racket and fold the palm snugly above the adjacent thumb. Now repeat the forehand action. I expect most of you won't get your hands much higher than your hips on the back swing. This drill makes you experience tighter restriction than the conventional grip but the important thing is to feel this natural condition. At this point everybody is surprised at how fit you have to be for a full back swing

A golf swing without restriction is always unnatural and almost always wrong.

I repeat...

A golf swing without restriction is always unnatural and almost always wrong.

[soon_tourpro]

What amateur?

If its a weekend player or a junior 20 year old kid, there are different requirements.

However, how long does a practice regimen take to implement a new swing?

3 weeks to a lifetime.

A pro swing, is also different depending on who you look at, Phil Michelson, Bubba watson or Luke Donald or Tiger Woods?

Or Jim the octopus in the backswing?

One thing they all do the same is Pro impact.

Once the swing you have reach that criteria, you need to know your own tempo and go play.

The Pro players have no clue what to do to become better either.

Tiger Woods ask swing gurus to make his game better.

I advice to look for options depending on if its a 14 handicap or if its a +2 handicap pro player both will understand instruction differently, one due to him having pro impact the other dont have that.
So asking the high handicap player to do a proper set up they ask why where the low handicap go, ok.

The set up makes this happen I then explain, it sets this take away move up that once you reach this point in the back swing, you will feel this in the right leg and buttock, and then you move the lower body first into the downswing which you will feel this and have this for evidence..
The high handicap golfer might not be able to do that, maybe they did watch sean foley explain something, and what about stack and tilt they might ask me, and I go, Jack Nicklaus won 18 majors, he came up second 18 times also, he did it this way, the golfer ok I buy that argument, so once they chain up and let the lower body leads, they might need to narrow their stance to make sure the hips moves freely, and soon they are hitting the ball pretty good with a better impact.

Once the impact happens, then we might do more but until the golfer have that, no need to do changes.

Without any order;
1. tempo

2. loose griptouch without increasing pressure before impact (Hitimpulse)

3. set up and stance as in the classic era with left foot flared out.

4. Lower body leads as in the classic swing.

5. swings in and out and the ball gets in the way achiving pro impact.

6. Pivoting properly.

7. Implementing proper focus to target in every shot before any practice and shot made.

8. etc...

I am currently implementing changes to a +2 professional golfer who is making changes to his setup, to his downswing and his pivot, and I expect the work be done in 3 weeks.

so he can go play with the new swing.

Now, I also have a 14 handicap who wants to learn this.

His goal to have a reliable consistent swing.

The pro wants to save his back due to injury with the modern golf swing and to make the tour.

Different level of the game and swing obviously.

I start with setup, do this one until it works.

Works might been 1 session, 3 sessions or months.

Unless he is able to do that, I dont continue to add anything.

Once that is taken care of we add the desired things until he can kill the ball the way he want.

I also teach people mobility exersizes one I always recomend is Intu-flow that allows you to skip stretching.

That with a crossfit based workout keeps the fitness level for a pro as well for an amatur at good condition.

However if tis a weekend player I dont teach those due to them dont do the drills.

Regarding swing theory, I dont give it much credit due to it will create back, neck, knee, foot and other injuries down the road. Either it be the current modern PGA swing, the Leadbetter muscle thing, the Jim Mclean x-factor, the stack and tilt, the sean foley tilt, or the Hank haney stuff, all those will create for the pro as well for the amateur injuries due to the compression and twist in their back and when they start going for more distance due to the downward angle at impact especially with the driver then all hell break loose.

Try copy fred couples swing, once you do it you find its impossible to do without wrecking your back that is why you see him swing so smooth, any tension and he cant play golf.
(dont try it please)

A full free flowing motion going all out without impedance is what the golf swing should be about.

IMHO. ;)

[TheGeekGolfer]

Originally Posted by iacas

At this point comments about "rudeness" are off-topic and will stop.

Frankly, we spent way, way too much time on the "ball flight laws" crap yet again. I'm not sure why some kinds of discussions continue to devolve into that. On one side, you have people ignoring simple realities. I sometimes wish they'd say "Yeah, okay, I may have that wrong. But the original topic is more about ..." On the other hand we (Mike and I, primarily) can do better to not push it so much, or to recognize when to cut bait and move on. I apologize for our role in that. We should be smarter about this type of thing.

If anyone wants to help get this back to the original topic, here it is again:

Sounds good, challenge accepted.  I'll try to add more to this thread later today or this weekend as time permits.

[The JollyGolfer]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

These days most of my new students are promptly introduced to this natural condition with my aforementioned drill. Let's get down to this simple drill and for most of you it's time to feel this backswing restriction for the first time! I prefer to introduce this drill to my students without a golf club because with one they do the 'same old - same old' and don't feel the natural back swing restriction that I am trying to portray. I use a carpet beater when I introduce this drill. (A tennis/squash/badmington racket does the same job.)

At ground level, I place a cushion against the wall and procede to hit it one handed - my dominant hand - with a forehand action and don't think about golf but naturally striking the cushion. You should feel little or no backswing restriction at this point and you should notice that you don't take the racket back as far as the conventional parallel position at the top of the advised golf swing. Within a few swings you should feel that this is a very natural task for you that belongs to other motor skills in your repetoire that have been mastered.

You are now ready to feel natural backswing restriction! It's time to use the other hand but we don't want this hand to interfere with what I describe as your own natural swing. This hand has to be put in place as a non-interfering passenger. Lie the four fingers of this hand on the back of the hand holding the racket and fold the palm snugly above the adjacent thumb. Now repeat the forehand action. I expect most of you won't get your hands much higher than your hips on the back swing. This drill makes you experience tighter restriction than the conventional grip but the important thing is to feel this natural condition. At this point everybody is surprised at how fit you have to be for a full back swing

A golf swing without restriction is always unnatural and almost always wrong.

I repeat...

A golf swing without restriction is always unnatural and almost always wrong.

I just got back from the range where they have an impact bag and I tried this drill. I brought my tennis racket with me and gave it a go. The OP is right, my usual swing was reduced quite a bit with the restriction. I then tried this restricted swing with the ball and hit really solid shots. I did however lose the restriction again so I would hit the bag like I saw on the video of the OP and then immediately go to the ball and again I was hitting the ball very solidly.

A few people joined me and asked what I was up to. I explained and they gave it a go and they also had success and fun with this drill. They thought I was some kind of guru but I told them about this post and they said they would be checking it out when they got home.

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by iacas

If anyone wants to help get this back to the original topic, here it is again:

Yes, are amateurs being mislead on how to improve their swings?

I was making a point yesterday to someone about how amateurs have considerably more interest in equipment than learning to play the game. I remember Seve once saying, I can probably hit the ball better with a broken branch than most people can with the best of equipment. He was basically saying, learn to swing before you start adding two tapes to the grip, or change the lie by 1° or go for the aldila longthumper shaft instead of the fujikura whipitbetter version.

We can't buy a sets of sticks that's going to make a bad golfer into a good one but we can learn to use what we already have a lot better.

[GaijinGolfer]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

Yes, are amateurs being mislead on how to improve their swings?

I was making a point yesterday to someone about how amateurs have considerably more interest in equipment than learning to play the game. I remember Seve once saying, I can probably hit the ball better with a broken branch than most people can with the best of equipment. He was basically saying, learn to swing before you start adding two tapes to the grip, or change the lie by 1° or go for the aldila longthumper shaft instead of the fujikura whipitbetter version.

We can't buy a sets of sticks that's going to make a bad golfer into a good one but we can learn to use what we already have a lot better.

Agree.  People would rather go out and spend $300 on a new driver that claims to give them 10 more yards than to spend the same amount of money on lessons that would teach them now to hit the clubs they already have properly.

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by TitleistWI

Agree.  People would rather go out and spend $300 on a new driver that claims to give them 10 more yards than to spend the same amount of money on lessons that would teach them now to hit the clubs they already have properly.

That's about 10 good lessons worth right there. How much is a half hour with the pro in your parts. That question is for everyone.

E.g. Germany/Austria average 25 Euros.

[newtogolf]

It's a wash because there are a lot of bad instructors and a lot of bad students.  Students who may be fortunate enough to have a decent instructor but don't practice at all or practice what they're told aren't going to see the results they expect.  Many people don't have the time to put into practice and playing so they prefer the quick fix.  New golf equipment that promises longer and straighter shots is always going to be an easier sell.

Originally Posted by TitleistWI

Agree.  People would rather go out and spend $300 on a new driver that claims to give them 10 more yards than to spend the same amount of money on lessons that would teach them now to hit the clubs they already have properly.

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

It's a wash because there are a lot of bad instructors and a lot of bad students. they prefer the quick fix.  New golf equipment that promises longer and straighter shots is always going to be an easier sell.

I would ask around to find a good instructor but I get your point. The big companies have got it well sussed. I mean even Nike got into the golf market with a good campaign. If you can't afford a multi million dollar advertising campaign, forget it. But it doesn't make it right.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

We can't buy a sets of sticks that's going to make a bad golfer into a good one but we can learn to use what we already have a lot better.

Yes, you tried to create a discussion about equipment here with one of your "alternative" personas.

Equipment isn't really the topic here. If it's unclear what the topic is, perhaps you can re-state your opinion or question so that people can discuss it.

(Cost of instruction is also not the topic.)

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by iacas

Yes, you tried to create a discussion about equipment here with one of your "alternative" personas.

Equipment isn't really the topic here. If it's unclear what the topic is, perhaps you can re-state your opinion or question so that people can discuss it.

(Cost of instruction is also not the topic.)

I am of the opinion that the angle on equipment is relevant because there lies some of the misdirection. I feel I introduced this on theme in the below post comparing learning to swing with not trying to buy a swing.

Originally Posted by Patrick57

Yes, are amateurs being mislead on how to improve their swings?

I was making a point yesterday to someone about how amateurs have considerably more interest in equipment than learning to play the game. I remember Seve once saying, I can probably hit the ball better with a broken branch than most people can with the best of equipment. He was basically saying, learn to swing before you start adding two tapes to the grip, or change the lie by 1° or go for the aldila longthumper shaft instead of the fujikura whipitbetter version.

We can't buy a sets of sticks that's going to make a bad golfer into a good one but we can learn to use what we already have a lot better.

Are costs not relevant?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I am of the opinion that the angle on equipment is relevant because there lies some of the misdirection. I feel I introduced this on theme in the below post comparing learning to swing with not trying to buy a swing.

The title says "how to swing". Not "what to swing."

Originally Posted by Patrick57

Are costs not relevant?

The title is also now "how much" or "how to pay." It's "how to swing."

We've had threads on equipment vs. instruction. We've had threads on costs of lessons.