Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 4357 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

For some reason I hit the ball crisper when I exaggerate my knee flex.  I do it at address and maintain it all the way through.  I only do this when I'm working on a particular drill, but it always amazes me how well the shots come off.  I'm 5'10" and a 2 degree flat lie angle too (long arms).  Any ideas?

Driver:  Callaway Diablo Octane 9.5*
3W:  Callaway GBB II 12.5*, 5W:  Callaway Diablo 18* Neutral
3H:  Callaway Razr X, 4H:  Callaway Razr X
5-PW:  Callaway X Tour
GW:  Callaway X Tour 54*, SW:  Callaway X Tour 58*
Putter:  Callaway ITrax, Scotty Cameron Studio Design 2, Ping Anser 4


  • 1 year later...
Posted

It seems like when I look up something I notice in my swing it's usually an old thread, and in this case a short one. Not sure what to make of that. Haha!

I noticed lately when hitting balls in the yard that my knee flex at address had become less and less. The last couple of days I flexed my knees just a little bit more at address and it seemed to make a huge difference in my ball striking and my head is staying much more still than normal for me.

I'm not even sure if the flex I added is enough for somebody else to notice but I can feel it and to be honest it feels slightly uncomfortable compared to the way I was doing it before, but I'll take uncomfortable if it means better ball striking.

Too early to tell if any of that means anything long term but as soon as these vortexes leave I'm looking forward to finding out.


Posted

More knee flex often leads to a more upright trunk - hence your 2 deg flat clubs.

Anatomically, this puts less load on the mid-back muscles and sets the shoulder blades a bit lower, two things very often dysfunctional in our seated society.  That could well help your feel, awareness and thus tempo.  Hard to say more without seeing actual video.

You'll see a lot of modern Tour pros stand pretty close to the ball, requiring more trunk flexion.  These guys for the most part have the ability to handle that where a lot of regular joe's are not prepared for that load, lose posture, and you can guess what happens from there.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted

More knee flex often leads to a more upright trunk - hence your 2 deg flat clubs.

Anatomically, this puts less load on the mid-back muscles and sets the shoulder blades a bit lower, two things very often dysfunctional in our seated society.  That could well help your feel, awareness and thus tempo.  Hard to say more without seeing actual video.

You'll see a lot of modern Tour pros stand pretty close to the ball, requiring more trunk flexion.  These guys for the most part have the ability to handle that where a lot of regular joe's are not prepared for that load, lose posture, and you can guess what happens from there.

Wouldn't call this guy a modern golf swing, but his hands are nearly inside his legs :-P . He has a lot of knee bed, and he isn't that much upright in his back. Just saying, your generalization is pretty much dead wrong.

Probably the most freakish athlete on tour, Dustin Johnson Has his hands hanging just under his neck line, very good position. Lower back is NOT CURVED, but straight, he does not tuck the hips back and up. His upper back is slightly rounded, shoulders ARE NOT drawn back. His head is down so he is looking at the ball centered in his eyes, NOT chin up looking down the bridge of his nose.

Actually most golfers can handle a proper posture. If you are talking about an arched lower back, shoulders drawn back, and head up. That posture has been debunked already here on this forum. Golfers need as I described with Dustin Johnson, relaxed at address is the best way to describe it.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Actually, you'll see Furyk's posture and spinal rhythm sets him up for his unconventional swing - it's neither modern nor old school - it's just his.  Standing close to the ball with a flexed trunk sets him up to do what he does.  Without objective data on knee bend I'm not sure what you mean by "a lot."  We happen to actually quantify this and correlate with functional and spinal testing, so I've got the data right in my hands.

The question is from an individual trying to figure out if knee flex might help him hit his 2 deg flat clubs better.  The answer depends on what an the individual can handle from a flexion standpoint - increased knee flex regularly correlates to a more upright trunk.  For most people we see, that helps them handle the centrifugal force from the standpoint of scapular rhythm, and thus a key part of posture maintenance.  It's a line of reasoning for this person and also helps others understand why many folks who play for a living might have different club and body set-ups.

You've managed to take 1 picture with a driver and 1 with a short iron of the Tour's most unconventional swing.  Hardly much of an analysis, no offense.  It's really apples to oranges in more ways than 1.

My comments never talk about an arched lower back or pulling the shoulders down.  I hope we both agree deliberate manipulation pre-shot would probably lead to poor results most of the time.

I'm sorry but if you think most golfers can handle proper posture within the dynamics of the golf swing, that's simply incorrect.  Thousands of real people measured in 3-D analysis say otherwise.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted
What the heck is spinal rhythm? Honest question here, what is it and how do you measure/quantify it? Are there ideal models? Is it something that can be worked on? Can you dance to it?

Yours in earnest, Jason.
Call me Ernest, or EJ or Ernie.

PSA - "If you find yourself in a hole, STOP DIGGING!"

My Whackin' Sticks: :cleveland: 330cc 2003 Launcher 10.5*  :tmade: RBZ HL 3w  :nickent: 3DX DC 3H, 3DX RC 4H  :callaway: X-22 5-AW  :nike:SV tour 56* SW :mizuno: MP-T11 60* LW :bridgestone: customized TD-03 putter :tmade:Penta TP3   :aimpoint:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Actually, you'll see Furyk's posture and spinal rhythm sets him up for his unconventional swing - it's neither modern nor old school - it's just his.  Standing close to the ball with a flexed trunk sets him up to do what he does.  Without objective data on knee bend I'm not sure what you mean by "a lot."  We happen to actually quantify this and correlate with functional and spinal testing, so I've got the data right in my hands.

The question is from an individual trying to figure out if knee flex might help him hit his 2 deg flat clubs better.  The answer depends on what an the individual can handle from a flexion standpoint - increased knee flex regularly correlates to a more upright trunk.  For most people we see, that helps them handle the centrifugal force from the standpoint of scapular rhythm, and thus a key part of posture maintenance.  It's a line of reasoning for this person and also helps others understand why many folks who play for a living might have different club and body set-ups.

You've managed to take 1 picture with a driver and 1 with a short iron of the Tour's most unconventional swing.  Hardly much of an analysis, no offense.  It's really apples to oranges in more ways than 1.

My comments never talk about an arched lower back or pulling the shoulders down.  I hope we both agree deliberate manipulation pre-shot would probably lead to poor results most of the time.

I'm sorry but if you think most golfers can handle proper posture within the dynamics of the golf swing, that's simply incorrect.  Thousands of real people measured in 3-D analysis say otherwise.

Umm Furyk is like Dustin Johnson. Flat lower back, arched upper back. He is just leaned over a tad more with his hands closer to his body because of his very upright swing.

Ok how about publishing that data instead of just holding on to it. You can throw around scientific phrases all you want, but we wont buy it unless you can prove it.

Even if he has a more upright spinal trunk he might not need flatter clubs. The knee flex changes greatly through out the swing. At impact it might be totally different than at address. Many golfers who have straighter knees at address will end up with much more knee flex as impact. Look at Tiger, he is like Dustin Johnson, but has tremendous knee flex and squatting down into impact. Nothing like address. So couldn't it be said that any sort of address position doesn't always correlate to impact. Also posture doesn't need to be maintained in the golf swing. Many golfers hunch their upper backs even more in the swing. Look at Rory, he looks like he's doing an abdominal crunch going into impact.

Umm not really, its calling your generalizations BS unless you can prove otherwise, and you haven't.

What the heck is spinal rhythm? Honest question here, what is it and how do you measure/quantify it? Are there ideal models? Is it something that can be worked on? Can you dance to it?

Spinal Rhythm?

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
What the heck is spinal rhythm? Honest question here, what is it and how do you measure/quantify it? Are there ideal models? Is it something that can be worked on? Can you dance to it?


spinal rhythm is the ability to move 1 part without disturbing positioning of another.  Easy to dance to - you'll see it in a clean toe-touch or deep squat where the spine gradually rounds or arches.  Many folks with dysfunction will move a whole part of the spine (like 10 vertebrae) all together in one chunk.  That's a good recipe to not be able to handle the centrifugal forces in the swing.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted

spinal rhythm is the ability to move 1 part without disturbing positioning of another.  Easy to dance to - you'll see it in a clean toe-touch or deep squat where the spine gradually rounds or arches.  Many folks with dysfunction will move a whole part of the spine (like 10 vertebrae) all together in one chunk.  That's a good recipe to not be able to handle the centrifugal forces in the swing.

So are you talking just about a very small proportion of the golfing population or what. I doubt majority of people are in capable of spinal rhythm. Cause what I then said was true that Majority of golfers can handle a typical golf posture.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Saevil - not sure why you're interested in acting like this but be my guest.  I fully agree set-up and impact can have very different positions.  Again, it depends on what the individual can handle.  I'm offering a possible line of explanation as to why a person had the results they had.  I never said it was the only way, but I hope we agree little more than generalizations can be done over the internet with no pictures, etc.  All you've done is be negative without being helpful.  That's your right but I just don't see the point.

Depending on the course and definition (TPI, NG 360, etc.) you'll see between 64-90% of amateurs classify as loss of posture.  That's amongst well over 10,000 reports collected by trained personnel.  The PGA Tour does a bit better but the sample size obviously smaller.  So even going with the most conservative estimates, it's a high %.  Sure you can dismiss in whatever way you please, but I've sen it so many times with my own eyes it's a good approximation at worst.

The certification bodies own the data of their practitioners who do the tests.  I've tried time and again to get them to publish in peer-reviewed journals but it's a whole other story.

What you may see as an abdominal crunch with Rory is not.  It's a posterior pelvic tilt.  The difference is one is 99.9% guaranteed to involve the glute max and hip rotators while the other is doubtfully so at best.  That tilt is actually a dead giveaway for maintenance of posture in the presence of massive centrifugal force.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted

So are you talking just about a very small proportion of the golfing population or what. I doubt majority of people are in capable of spinal rhythm. Cause what I then said was true that Majority of golfers can handle a typical golf posture.

To be honest it's not relegated to golfers.  We see it actually more prominently with our runners.  Quite a few people have some where a couple blocks move at a time.  It's rarely a case of perfect but what the person can get away with for the given task.  You see a ton of desk jockeys, plumbers, and roofers struggle with this but a lot of other people do just fine with it.

We might be thinking of different things here - many golfers can set up in a golf posture, sure.  But I don't know why anyone would apply that static test to a dynamic activity.  Once angular momentum and centrifugal force mount, the vertebrae need to work at least somewhat independently in order to keep the swing axis intact.  That's obviously a much taller order than simple static set-up.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted

To be honest it's not relegated to golfers.  We see it actually more prominently with our runners.  Quite a few people have some where a couple blocks move at a time.  It's rarely a case of perfect but what the person can get away with for the given task.  You see a ton of desk jockeys, plumbers, and roofers struggle with this but a lot of other people do just fine with it.

We might be thinking of different things here - many golfers can set up in a golf posture, sure.  But I don't know why anyone would apply that static test to a dynamic activity.  Once angular momentum and centrifugal force mount, the vertebrae need to work at least somewhat independently in order to keep the swing axis intact.  That's obviously a much taller order than simple static set-up.

Well that is for certain. The golf swing is just a crazy motion that we all enjoy performing for some insane reason :-D

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

To be honest it's not relegated to golfers.  We see it actually more prominently with our runners.  Quite a few people have some where a couple blocks move at a time.  It's rarely a case of perfect but what the person can get away with for the given task.  You see a ton of desk jockeys, plumbers, and roofers struggle with this but a lot of other people do just fine with it.

We might be thinking of different things here - many golfers can set up in a golf posture, sure.  But I don't know why anyone would apply that static test to a dynamic activity.  Once angular momentum and centrifugal force mount, the vertebrae need to work at least somewhat independently in order to keep the swing axis intact.  That's obviously a much taller order than simple static set-up.


I don't really understand what either of you are talking about, but that's okay. I do know that my coaches used the words "tuck your tail" so many times I couldn't begin to count them all...In more than one sport.

It's a key to maximum power and I don't see that golf is an exception. The problem in golf is that most of us have a hard time drawing that line between "tucking our tail" and "humping the goat" because we lose too much of our spine angle too soon.


Posted

Some interesting stuff here guys. The only thing in common with DJ and Furyk is a large bank balance AND they both have a very good idea where they're going to hit the ball!

festivus- checked out your website- very impressive.


Posted

Saevil - yes I appreciate your thoughts and believe you've a ton of knowledge.  Apologies if this got off track.  I was offering a possible explanation for why this person was seeing the results they were seeing.  I think without anything more than his post a generalization is the best one could do.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted

I don't really understand what either of you are talking about, but that's okay. I do know that my coaches used the words "tuck your tail" so many times I couldn't begin to count them all...In more than one sport.

It's a key to maximum power and I don't see that golf is an exception. The problem in golf is that most of us have a hard time drawing that line between "tucking our tail" and "humping the goat" because we lose too much of our spine angle too soon.


Yes, a terrific point.  The tuck (or tilt) is something reflexive IMHO.  It's a response to the centrifugal force generated in the swing.  It's one of several things that are different between address and impact.  I can't see any way where a conscious effort to try to tuck would be a good thing.  This is where the right advice ends up leading to the opposite result (humping the goat aka early extension).

Here's a quick video from world-famous therapist Gray Cook that might help you get the gist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehu40pr_ITs

The key piece is to realize you can improve your ability to make this happen.  Pick your term: spinal rhythm, core sequence, core stability, etc.  Virtually anyone barring developmental defect had this in order to roll over, crawl, stand up, and walk.  You had it at one point!

There are many methods and systems out there which can help.  I have zero commercial interest but can direct you to a couple simple ideas and exercises if you like.  The ultimate goal is to help that tuck happen on its own, without thinking about it.  10-15 minutes in a day with minimal equipment should make some of those changes well within reach.  Just let me know if it's something you're interested in and I'll try to help.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted

Some interesting stuff here guys. The only thing in common with DJ and Furyk is a large bank balance AND they both have a very good idea where they're going to hit the ball!

festivus- checked out your website- very impressive.


Thanks - I think they do actually have things in common from a biomechanical standpoint.  My point to saevil was the comparison is difficult with 2 vastly different lie angles.  Also one exception does not discount a generalization, especially from 2 of the most extreme cases on Tour.

Max Prokopy

University of Virginia


Posted
Yes, a terrific point.  The tuck (or tilt) is something reflexive IMHO.  It's a response to the centrifugal force generated in the swing.  It's one of several things that are different between address and impact.  I can't see any way where a conscious effort to try to tuck would be a good thing.  This is where the right advice ends up leading to the opposite result (humping the goat aka early extension).  Here's a quick video from world-famous therapist Gray Cook that might help you get the gist: [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehu40pr_ITs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehu40pr_ITs[/URL] The key piece is to realize you can improve your ability to make this happen.  Pick your term: spinal rhythm, core sequence, core stability, etc.  Virtually anyone barring developmental defect had this in order to roll over, crawl, stand up, and walk.  You had it at one point!   There are many methods and systems out there which can help.  I have zero commercial interest but can direct you to a couple simple ideas and exercises if you like.  The ultimate goal is to help that tuck happen on its own, without thinking about it.  10-15 minutes in a day with minimal equipment should make some of those changes well within reach.  Just let me know if it's something you're interested in and I'll try to help.

I listened to a couple of the vids and the guy sounds like he knows his stuff.. What kind ion excersise do you recommend to help with better core stability? Your help is appreciated!

:adams: / :tmade: / :edel: / :aimpoint: / :ecco: / :bushnell: / :gamegolf: / 

Eyad

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 4357 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.