Mac O'Grady Swings

[MuniGrit]

4 hours ago, iacas said:

Why not just follow or strive to achieve five? Which backswing is better at A2?

Maybe it doesn't even matter.

Both golfers got into a good position at A5, 6, and 7.

Golfer on the left was the better player in my opinion.

[mvmac]

17 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

I heard Mac was one of the best ballstriker that ever lived

I've heard the same thing, by people that saw him in person but his career or stats didn't back that up.

If it were true he would have a career similar to Boo Weekley, Charles Howell, Keegan Bradely or Jason Dufner.

Not trying to hate on Mac, I'd take his career right now, just looking at it objectively. 

17 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

Just curious: please tell me one example where Mac was wrong comparing to one of these high-tech discoveries. A concrete example without too much talking.. It will help me to understand your way of thinking.

Things he got wrong.
- Correct ball flight laws. Ball starts in the direction of the face and curves away from the path, Mac was into the "old" ball flight laws.
- Accumulator release. It's not 4,1,2,3. There is a little "press" of the lead arm into the body in transition, the pivot and body "lead" the way early. Then the arms, wrists and forearms are "releasing" gradually from there. If you start the downswing by releasing the arms you potentially give up speed and can mess up the thrust sequence. Want the COM (center of mass) to move perpendicular to the mid-hands point to create the most amount of force applied to the club.
- Release points (or how to achieve them). Good players actually "spear" the club away from the top and then "pull" the grip towards them coming into impact. Not a lot of "holding the wrist angles" going on. You don't want or can't add radial deviation.
- P1-2, early wrist set/arm fold. It can work but it's a lot of timing/effort to get the rates correct. REALLY tough to play golf and swing fast doing it. Easier to go more "one-piece" with the trail elbow higher, potentially creates more speed, stretch shorten cycle.
- All the pressure points in the grip. Not really how you apply pressure or torque to the grip/club.
- Pitch elbow. Not needed, just a vanity thing. If anything it's possibly easier to achieve having the trail arm more neutral or slightly internal on the backswing. When you stretch a muscle it'll "counter" in the opposite direction. In other words if you go pitch elbow from 3-4, it's tough to maintain the condition coming down. Mac actually was kinda neutral at 4 but tried to get guys super pitch.
- The CP pattern for playing golf on a golf course, using it to hit shots longer than a 9-iron.
- Tracing baseline, most players load the shaft "off-plane" at 3 going back and get it "on-plane" or a little outside the ball at 5.
- There is probably more movement away from the target and "up" than he originally thought. COM shift.

Big things he got right.
- Foot flares
- Knee linkage
- COM moves forward and down in transition/early downswing. He didn't say COM, he called it COGs, separated them into lower and upper, which there is no such thing but it's just how he segmented the body.
- Strong grip, long left thumb.
- Eye stuff.
- Posture stuff.
- General motions of the torso to make a good pivot. Lateral bending with rotation and some extension.
- Trying to break the swing into patterns. Not the actual patterns he came up with but the idea or the attempt because there are certain patterns that fit certain golfers.
- To hit it high you need to have a shallow AoA, to hit it low you need to be steeper with the AoA.

17 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

Yes, but I wanted to learn why he prefers to start this way. I do not buy the argument of binocular vision here.

Not sure how conscious it was. It's just a way to create a little movement before you take it back. One thing about golf is that the ball isn't moving so having a pressure bounce creates a little flow.

[Jack Watson]

There’s too many functional ways to swing to get stuck on a one dimensional approach imho.

As an instructor you should be able to move folks in a positive direction from wherever they are not try to pigeonhole them into a certain thing.

[Yff Theos]

5 hours ago, mvmac said:

I've heard the same thing, by people that saw him in person but his career or stats didn't back that up.

If it were true he would have a career similar to Boo Weekley, Charles Howell, Keegan Bradely or Jason Dufner.

Not trying to hate on Mac, I'd take his career right now, just looking at it objectively. 

Well, I believe in all legendary talks there is a seed of truth but right, I am more interested in Mac as inventor and instructor than him as a player.

 

5 hours ago, mvmac said:

- Correct ball flight laws. Ball starts in the direction of the face and curves away from the path, Mac was into the "old" ball flight laws.

OK.

5 hours ago, mvmac said:

- Accumulator release. It's not 4,1,2,3. There is a little "press" of the lead arm into the body in transition, the pivot and body "lead" the way early. Then the arms, wrists and forearms are "releasing" gradually from there. If you start the downswing by releasing the arms you potentially give up speed and can mess up the thrust sequence. Want the COM (center of mass) to move perpendicular to the mid-hands point to create the most amount of force applied to the club.

Interesting. Did Mac really categorized himself as 4-barrel hitter ? In triple-barrel patterns the sequence is 1-2-3.

And I try to understand the bold. Can you explain what do you mean ? Thanks.

5 hours ago, mvmac said:

P1-2, early wrist set/arm fold. It can work but it's a lot of timing/effort to get the rates correct. REALLY tough to play golf and swing fast doing it. Easier to go more "one-piece" with the trail elbow higher, potentially creates more speed, stretch shorten cycle.

Well, perhaps easier but imho more dangerous with more room for subsequent errors as, for instance, too low takeaway. I understood why Mac wants to do it that way thatnks to McCord videos.

 

6 hours ago, mvmac said:

- All the pressure points in the grip. Not really how you apply pressure or torque to the grip/club.

Agreed.

6 hours ago, mvmac said:

- Pitch elbow. Not needed, just a vanity thing. If anything it's possibly easier to achieve having the trail arm more neutral or slightly internal on the backswing. When you stretch a muscle it'll "counter" in the opposite direction. In other words if you go pitch elbow from 3-4, it's tough to maintain the condition coming down. Mac actually was kinda neutral at 4 but tried to get guys super pitch.

Agreed, I think. Pitch from 3-4 to 6-7 can be just a fairy tale. Nevertheless, I am not a fan of going punch or push from 4.

 

6 hours ago, mvmac said:

- The CP pattern for playing golf on a golf course, using it to hit shots longer than a 9-iron.

Not familiar with CP/CF that much to confirm it.

 

6 hours ago, mvmac said:

- Tracing baseline, most players load the shaft "off-plane" at 3 going back and get it "on-plane" or a little outside the ball at 5.

Yes, that can be the biggest error of all you mentioned. But I believe it is TGM error that Mac could just "adopt".

6 hours ago, mvmac said:

- There is probably more movement away from the target and "up" than he originally thought. COM shift.

I cannot comment it.

 

6 hours ago, mvmac said:

Big things he got right.
- Foot flares
- Knee linkage
- COM moves forward and down in transition/early downswing. He didn't say COM, he called it COGs, separated them into lower and upper, which there is no such thing but it's just how he segmented the body.
- Strong grip, long left thumb.
- Eye stuff.
- Posture stuff.
- General motions of the torso to make a good pivot. Lateral bending with rotation and some extension.
- Trying to break the swing into patterns. Not the actual patterns he came up with but the idea or the attempt because there are certain patterns that fit certain golfers.
- To hit it high you need to have a shallow AoA, to hit it low you need to be steeper with the AoA.

A great list. I would add the contribution to the (1) length of backswing without overswinging and (2) importance of the tempo.

 

Thanks for this post, Mike.

[Yff Theos]

And one thing more: you wrote Mac got it right with

18 hours ago, mvmac said:

- Knee linkage

as I adviced on the other forum, it is a very overlooked but important thing: to have level knees at address which can be achieved ONLY with a slightly closed feet stance.  Knees movement affect hips movement. It seems people are totally ignorant in this sphere which is not good. In anticipation of some comments: I know that many greats played with open feet and I would have not tried to change that, but obviously pay attention to this fact with a beginner.

[iacas]

36 minutes ago, Yff Theos said:

as I adviced on the other forum, it is a very overlooked but important thing: to have level knees at address which can be achieved ONLY with a slightly closed feet stance.

That doesn't make any sense - I can have "level knees" pointing my feet any direction - and that's not what Mike meant by the knee linkage. He meant the way the trail knee extends and the lead knee flexes in the backswing.

I play better golf from a slightly open stance. Very few PGA Tour players have a closed stance at setup. Again, not a "one swing model" type of thing.

36 minutes ago, Yff Theos said:

It seems people are totally ignorant in this sphere which is not good.

I don't know who you're including in "people" but no, while many might be ignorant here, I'm not, Mike's not, Dave's not, and a lot lot lot of the people we know aren't ignorant here.

36 minutes ago, Yff Theos said:

I know that many greats played with open feet and I would have not tried to change that, but obviously pay attention to this fact with a beginner.

Again, no… there is no one swing model, even for beginners, that works well. You're going down the wrong road.

BTW, I rarely ever talk about the knees. Telling someone to extend one knee and flex the other typically doesn't work. There are better ways to get the proper knee action(s) in the backswing than talking about the knees, usually.

[Yff Theos]

22 minutes ago, iacas said:

That doesn't make any sense - I can have "level knees" pointing my feet any direction

It surely makes sense. At least to McCord and me,lol. You misunderstood what I meant to say: you can have level knees only with a slightly closed feet in relation to the target because of primary tilt. Try it yourself.

 

24 minutes ago, iacas said:

I don't know who you're including in "people" but no, while many might be ignorant here, I'm not, Mike's not, Dave's not, and a lot lot lot of the people we know aren't ignorant here.

I meant people who ridicule other types of feet position than parallel to the target, definitely not you and your colleagues. Why such a bizarre idea? I learn here and enjoying my time. You are a very knowledgable man, perhaps your ego is too big though :)

[iacas]

19 minutes ago, Yff Theos said:

It surely makes sense. At least to McCord and me,lol. You misunderstood what I meant to say: you can have level knees only with a slightly closed feet in relation to the target because of primary tilt. Try it yourself.

It's still not true. I can have level knees a LOT of ways.

I did try it myself. I went so far as to use rubber bands to strap a carpenter's level around my knees.

Even if you did have your closed feet, you could orient your entire stance well left or well right of the target line.

19 minutes ago, Yff Theos said:

I meant people who ridicule other types of feet position than parallel to the target, definitely not you and your colleagues. Why such a bizarre idea? I learn here and enjoying my time. You are a very knowledgable man, perhaps your ego is too big though :)

Yeah, that's not it at all.

You're acting like Mac has all the answers, and really, you're cheaping out. You're doing the simplest, easiest thing possible. You're just going to say "here's my model swing" and set your student up next to that, then go through the video until you get a mis-match, and then you'll correct that.

It's instruction by numbers, just like paint-by-numbers. It requires no actual skill. No ability to prioritize. No ability to think.

It's something students could do on their own. They don't even need you. Just show them what their swing should look like and say "here you go, make it look like that."

It's dumb.

But you persist, and then you argue that your knees can only be level with the rear foot retracted slightly? No.

Here are two sets of level knees. Fred Couples sure as hell ain't aiming right with his feet.

Here's a modern great driver of the ball and the game's greatest player of all time:

Guess what? Level knees in Adam Scott, and nowhere near level knees for Tiger Woods!

Oh my!

Don't be a paint-by-numbers instructor. You won't add value to any lessons. It's a cheap, lazy, stupid way to go about being a "golf instructor."

Think. Engage your brain. Put in the time and effort to become an actual golf instructor.

[Yff Theos]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

It's still not true. I can have level knees a LOT of ways.

I did try it myself. I went so far as to use rubber bands to strap a carpenter's level around my knees.

Even if you did have your closed feet, you could orient your entire stance well left or well right of the target line.

Yeah, that's not it at all.

You're acting like Mac has all the answers, and really, you're cheating out. You're doing the simplest, easiest thing possible. You're just going to say "here's my model swing" and set your student up next to that, then go through the video until you get a mis-match, and then you'll correct that.

It's instruction by numbers, just like paint-by-numbers. It requires no actual skill. No ability to prioritize. No ability to think.

It's something students could do on their own. They don't even need you. Just show them what their swing should look like and say "here you go, make it look like that."

It's dumb.

But you persist, and then you argue that your knees can only be level with the rear foot retracted slightly? No.

Here are two sets of level knees. Fred Couples sure as hell ain't aiming right with his feet.

Here's a modern great driver of the ball and the game's greatest player of all time:

Guess what? Level knees in Adam Scott, and nowhere near level knees for Tiger Woods!

Oh my!

Don't be a paint-by-numbers instructor. You won't add value to any lessons. It's a cheap, lazy, stupid way to go about being a "golf instructor."

Think. Engage your brain. Put in the time and effort to become an actual golf instructor.

You now what ? You are rude. I did not deserve to be offended this way, I guess. Being sometimes slow and addicted to a hero does not mean I am a troll or persona non grata.

I will answer in your style then: if you were as intelligent as you think you are, you'll deduct that the "level knees" idea concerns target view, not face on one (which would be dumb, I agree). A straight correlation "level knees" with "trail foot slightly retracted" should be enough, don't you think?

Have a good night, Erik.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Yff Theos said:

You now what ? You are rude.

I’m not. I’m simply telling you things you don’t want to hear.

I care about the quality of instruction in the world. Bad instruction hurts good instructors.

Take care and good luck.

P.S. Level knees would be level from either angle. And if you adjust the camera up or down slightly from DL the apparent level of the knees changes.

And if you meant parallel to the target line… that’s not “level.”

Either way, paint by numbers.

[mvmac]

@Yff Theos, Erik and I are just trying to help. If you want to discuss then we're fine doing that but we're going to counter anyone trying to put Mac on a pedestal. I've been through it dude.

You've watched some recordings from his clinics in the late 80's. Clinics that are now ancient information, even to Mac. The McCord clinics are before Mac figured out the trail knee extends somewhat on the backswing. Think about that, the Mac of today would disagree with the Mac of the late 80's. Even the hours of recordings we have from schools in the mid-00's is now old information. 

Golf instruction has evolved well past TGM and Mac. Sure it's fun to talk about MORAD but let's not delude ourselves into thinking it's "golf science" or the best information out there. Mac is now trying to learn from the PhDs and 3D ball flight guys.

21 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

Interesting. Did Mac really categorized himself as 4-barrel hitter ? In triple-barrel patterns the sequence is 1-2-3.

With the videos I have, yes, but whose knows, next week he could have changed it. He uses schools/students to experiment with ideas. 

Even if it's 1-2-3 it would still be wrong.

21 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

And I try to understand the bold. Can you explain what do you mean ? Thanks.

I'd rather not do it in this thread since this is a Mac thread. 

21 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

Well, perhaps easier but imho more dangerous with more room for subsequent errors as, for instance, too low takeaway.

Worked for Jack, Palmer, Hogan, Snead, Nelson, Tiger, Norman. They didn't take it back too low. If you pivot correctly that doesn't happen.

Honestly, think of how many guys are in the HOF that have a early set takeaway, very, very few. Dealing with all the rates early in the takeaway is much harder and can lead to more errors.

21 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

Not familiar with CP/CF that much to confirm it.

Like I've said, Mac played with CF fades. Guys he taught couldn't play in tournaments going CP.

9 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

as I adviced on the other forum, it is a very overlooked but important thing: to have level knees at address which can be achieved ONLY with a slightly closed feet stance.  Knees movement affect hips movement. It seems people are totally ignorant in this sphere which is not good. In anticipation of some comments: I know that many greats played with open feet and I would have not tried to change that, but obviously pay attention to this fact with a beginner.

@iacas is correct, when I say knee linkage I'm referring to the knees changing flex.

I honestly don't know what you mean by level knees.

If the only way you can have level knees is to have the stance closed then Mac didn't have level knees when he played CF fades in competition. Grant Waite was the only player to get a pass to go CF.

8 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

You are a very knowledgable man, perhaps your ego is too big though :)

I can easily say it's not, he's just honest. Erik is one of the top golf theory guys in the business and has the math and science to back it up.

7 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

Being sometimes slow and addicted to a hero

If you want to keep him being your hero, don't get to know him. The Mac stories are awesome but everyone gets kicked out of the circle eventually, even George Hunt.

7 hours ago, Yff Theos said:

does not mean I am a troll

Erik never called you a troll, he's just trying to get you to think critically, outside of the TGM/MORAD box.

[iacas]

What @mvmac said.

Not what you want to hear, but it's the truth.

[colin007]

On 12/7/2017 at 9:28 PM, mvmac said:

- To hit it high you need to have a shallow AoA, to hit it low you need to be steeper with the AoA.

I might need to make a thread about this....

[mvmac]

10 hours ago, colin007 said:

I might need to make a thread about this....

Spoiler

 

 

[Secretmove]

Ok, I too think O'Grady's great swing is basically the foundation for the modern swing, kind of like Hogan's, but for taller guys.  So freaking perfect, the impact positon, OMFG.   

Question:  How tall is O'Grady?????   From the looks of it compared to his club, he looks about 6'2".  Anybody know? 

Also, I have an intuition.  You tube has a clip of him swinging and it says that's his college days.  That tells me right there, he just was one of those guys who started out of the womb with a perfect swing, I believe that, if he could produce that swing in college, that means he didn't "acquire" his great swing through study and research and digging the dirt, he just had "it" to start with, and has been rationalizing it and trying to make money on it by selling it as a cult item for decades.  That's my theory, until I learn different.  BTW,  I hate TGM, having wasted years trying to translate that, and O'Grady is riffing on that, mainly on being the guru on the mountain type guy.   I took lessons from Ben Doyle, an eccentric teacher of Clampett, who put TGM on the map along with O'G.  Homer Kelly couldn't break 80 and was a low level engineer at Boeing.  I burned my copy of the yellow book. 

Despite that swing, he was like 150 on tour in his days for driving accuracy.  Not good.  Putting was the same, bottom of the barrel.  Shows you what is necessary to be a top dog in the sport, its not the swing.  Repeatable swing and a titanic EGO is a better formula.  My theory is Patrick Reed thinks rather highly of himself, and on the competitive scale, he'd rank top testosterone dog of the pack.  In comparison, O'Grady is a rather beta type.  I've never met the guy, just IMO. 

Don't forget my question:  How tall is O'Grady?

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, Secretmove said:

Also, I have an intuition.  You tube has a clip of him swinging and it says that's his college days.  That tells me right there, he just was one of those guys who started out of the womb with a perfect swing, I believe that, if he could produce that swing in college, that means he didn't "acquire" his great swing through study and research and digging the dirt, he just had "it" to start with, and has been rationalizing it and trying to make money on it by selling it as a cult item for decades.

Given what we know about the importance of ballstriking… O'Grady's swing is vastly over-rated.

I, like most of the good instructors I know, have a pretty healthy Mac understanding/background, too.

[Yff Theos]

On 9.12.2017 at 3:02 AM, mvmac said:

If you want to discuss then we're fine doing that but we're going to counter anyone trying to put Mac on a pedestal.

I understand you will counter anyone trying to put anyone on a pedestal. Otherwise it would seem you are a Mac hater.

 

3 hours ago, Secretmove said:

Question:  How tall is O'Grady?????   From the looks of it compared to his club, he looks about 6'2".  Anybody know? 

183 cm according to the net sources.

 

3 hours ago, iacas said:

Given what we know about the importance of ballstriking… O'Grady's swing is vastly over-rated.

Slightly perhaps, yes, not vastly in any case.

 

On 9.12.2017 at 3:02 AM, mvmac said:

I honestly don't know what you mean by level knees.

After all these posts before yours you should have known. DTL view, knees  level in relation to the baseline. I am astonished someone can doubt it is of no importance.

[iacas]

Just now, Yff Theos said:

I understand you will counter anyone trying to put anyone on a pedestal. Otherwise it would seem you are a Mac hater.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

@mvmac is not a Mac hater. Farthest thing from it while not being an absolutely blinded-by-love Mac lover.

1 minute ago, Yff Theos said:

Slightly perhaps, yes, not vastly in any case.

I'm standing by "vastly over-rated." He barely got to the PGA Tour at a time when the fields were still relatively thin. The PGA Tour is a ballstriker's tour. Thus, you could pretty reasonably conclude he's nowhere near the top 100 ball strikers that ever lived (he was arguably not within the top 100 ball strikers in the world during the years he missed the PGA Tour…), while some would probably put him in the top five or ten.

That's "vastly overstated" IMO.

1 minute ago, Yff Theos said:

After all these posts before yours you should have known. DTL view, knees  level in relation to the baseline. I am astonished someone can doubt it is of no importance.

Your trail foot doesn't have to be back to have your knees parallel to the baseline. The word you used, "level," is a "horizontal" type word. It means two things are at equal heights. You meant to say "parallel" and then to add to what: "parallel to the baseline."

Anyway, kinda pointless. I think people should have a good setup, but obsessing over it is going too far: I can hit a good golf shot aiming my knees 10° left, 10° right, too bent, too upright… etc. Because of all the stuff that comes AFTER the setup.