Did Trevino just describe Stack & Tilt?

[zipazoid]

I just watched this vid of Lee Buck, obviously back in the day based on how young he looked, and the first two minutes of the vid he describes how to impart backspin on the ball. What he described sounds a lot like stack & tilt.

Thoughts?

[dak4n6]

Yup, I would call that S&T;, although I am not intimate with all the technical details of S&T.;

Lee was one of the best 'trappers' of the ball. He had immaculate lower body action.

[iacas]

No. What makes you say that? 80% of your weight staying left? In S&T; it's not even above 55%.

Middle of your stance is pretty standard ball position with a wedge for any swing.

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by iacas

No. What makes you say that? 80% of your weight staying left? In S&T; it's not even above 55%.

Middle of your stance is pretty standard ball position with a wedge for any swing.

Just asking. I ask to learn.

[mvmac]

Few things.  Trevino isn't doing exactly what he's feeling with regards to the weight.  It's a centered pivot, head stays very steady and the left shoulder moves down and back.  He's demonstrating a different kind of pattern for flighting the ball med-low, useful for wedges and something you could do with equipment from that time.  S&T; pattern is designed to hit high draws.  High draws patterns will tend to have a relatively shallow angle of attack.  Good example would be Tom Lehman, not a "S&T; swing" but a high draw player.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

Just asking. I ask to learn.

And I was asking what made you ask. :) Just the "80% weight forward" bit? Which is way more than S&T; want?

Or was there something else? :)

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by mvmac

Few things.  Trevino isn't doing exactly what he's feeling with regards to the weight.  It's a centered pivot, head stays very steady and the left shoulder moves down and back.  He's demonstrating a different kind of pattern for flighting the ball med-low, useful for wedges and something you could do with equipment from that time.  S&T; pattern is designed to hit high draws.  High draws patterns will tend to have a relatively shallow angle of attack.  Good example would be Tom Lehman, not a "S&T; swing" but a high draw player.

Thanks Mike.

As to you, Erik, since you seem to want to know why I asked, here's what happened. I watched the vid. When Lee said 75%-80% of the weight on the left and keep it there thru the swing I thought oh, isn't that stack & tilt? See, I don't know the details of S&T; so I thought, 'Hey I know...I can post this on TST & I'll be told whether it is or isn't, and along the way I'll learn something.' So thanks for explaining that it's not S&T.;

So why did I ask? That's why.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

As to you, Erik, since you seem to want to know why I asked, here's what happened. I watched the vid. When Lee said 75%-80% of the weight on the left and keep it there thru the swing I thought oh, isn't that stack & tilt? See, I don't know the details of S&T; so I thought, 'Hey I know...I can post this on TST & I'll be told whether it is or isn't, and along the way I'll learn something.' So thanks for explaining that it's not S&T.;

So why did I ask? That's why.

The reason why I asked why you asked is because I was curious if that was still your perception of S&T.; It appears to be that your perception is "75-80% weight forward and stays there," which means that they aren't getting their message out very well. :)

And as you probably know, we've moved well beyond the S&T; swing, but for a lot of people it's still a pattern and a swing worth a little study because it's fairly simple to understand quickly (as every single-swing method tends to be).

Also note that Lee could beat down on the ball a bit more than most without hitting draws because his baseline (and his stance) was rotated so far left that it was almost impossible for him to hit a draw or a hook.

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by iacas

And as you probably know, we've moved well beyond the S&T; swing,

Explain. Are you saying S&T; isn't the thing anymore? What do you mean by 'moved well beyond'...?

Again, I'm just trying to learn. Figured I'd ask the experts.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

Explain. Are you saying S&T; isn't the thing anymore? What do you mean by 'moved well beyond'...?

While S&T; is good, and most golfers could stand to incorporate some S&T; components to improve, for two+ years now we've moved beyond S&T; as it is limiting (as all single-swing patterns or methods will end up being) in both its approach and scope. We'll still teach S&T; to those who request it, and while we've never really "taught" S&T; exclusively, we've taught it a LOT less the past two+ years. You came to our 5 Simple Keys® free lesson day, and you've been on this site, so I'm surprised you haven't picked up on this. We take our name ("Golf Evolution") seriously and are constantly exploring better ways to instruct, more accurate information, and so on.

[zipazoid]

Oh, I definitely picked up on that at the free lesson...you definitely weren't teaching S&T; (as I understand it).

I guess when you said "we've" moved beyond it, I assumed instructors in general, like it was a flavor of the month type of instruction that had been discredited or whatever.

We seem to misunderstand each other at times, Erik. We both do it, as you said I seem to 'haven't picked up on' things. It's not a lack of comprehension on my part. It's more a lack of time. I'm not a golf pro. I don't dissect the swing down into detail, but you do. I'm just asking the expert.

I was just wondering if Lee was teaching S&T;, since it was years before we heard of it...was Lee being a pioneer, as it were. I don't know what percentage of weight is pre-set to the left. I'm sure it's here on the site somewhere but I'm too lazy to research it. Was just wondering if what Lee was saying was S&T.; That's all.

[Mr. Desmond]

S&T; is not discredited -- it apparently works for some, and apparently touring pros emphasize some of it, all of it, etc., depending on what parts of it works for them, and to what extent.

I'm into the 8-9th viewing of 2.0, range time, and viewing Erik's and Mike's posts here - and after a year, it's showing consistency. I learn something each time I view the DVD's. Apparently, on the evolutionary scale, I'm several years behind. But that's okay...

[mvmac]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

Oh, I definitely picked up on that at the free lesson...you definitely weren't teaching S&T; (as I understand it).

I guess when you said "we've" moved beyond it, I assumed instructors in general, like it was a flavor of the month type of instruction that had been discredited or whatever.

"Moved beyond" meaning S&T; is a pattern, a way to swing a golf club. I feel some S&T; instructors can get too caught up in certain positions and don't think conceptually about the information.  5SK is a system of prioritization.  Jim Furyk and Matt Kuchar hit different positions but both do all 5 Keys, most of the time ;-)

That and continuing to do research, using the latest technology available to keep learning/busting myths

[iacas]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

I guess when you said "we've" moved beyond it, I assumed instructors in general, like it was a flavor of the month type of instruction that had been discredited or whatever.

No, I can't speak for whatever other people are doing. Just me, often Golf Evolution, and rarely but sometimes 5 Simple Keys® instructors.

Originally Posted by zipazoid

We seem to misunderstand each other at times, Erik. We both do it, as you said I seem to 'haven't picked up on' things. It's not a lack of comprehension on my part. It's more a lack of time. I'm not a golf pro. I don't dissect the swing down into detail, but you do. I'm just asking the expert.

I know you're not a pro. I'm just surprised that you haven't picked up on some things by hanging out here. Unless you hate S&T;, I'm under the impression most people will gather some things from all that we've written about it. Maybe you've not ventured into the "technique/instruction" threads as often as most people tend to.

Originally Posted by zipazoid

I was just wondering if Lee was teaching S&T;, since it was years before we heard of it...was Lee being a pioneer, as it were. I don't know what percentage of weight is pre-set to the left. I'm sure it's here on the site somewhere but I'm too lazy to research it. Was just wondering if what Lee was saying was S&T.; That's all.

Lee did a lot of great things. S&T; is just a classification system that then molds itself into one common set of swing characteristics to yield one swing pattern. Nicklaus had components, Palmer, Hogan, Jones, Snead... every great player has the components to varying degrees. Some were missing a few altogether, but most had them in some amount.

It's a good question. I just wondered where you were coming from so I could mold the answer to better satisfy what you wanted to know.

Originally Posted by mvmac

"Moved beyond" meaning S&T; is a pattern, a way to swing a golf club. I feel some S&T; instructors can get too caught up in certain positions and don't think conceptually about the information.  5SK is a system of prioritization.  Jim Furyk and Matt Kuchar hit different positions but both do all 5 Keys, most of the time ;-)

That and continuing to do research, using the latest technology available to keep learning/busting myths

Yes. We can teach more people better with 5SK than we can trying to teach S&T.; And to be perfectly blunt, even when if you had asked us if we were teaching S&T; and we'd replied in the affirmative, you'd discover we hadn't been teaching it precisely the way it's built. As soon as we understood it (really doesn't take long), we'd begun modifying pieces of it to better suit the variety of golfers out there.

Single patterns - methods, or "one way" of doing something - are inherently inflexible. As Mike said, 5SK encompasses all of the best golfers, and helps all of the less skilled players get better.