My Swing (Joe Hill)

[Joe Hill]

Well...... @Joe Hill, how'd it go?

On the plus side, I really felt comfortable with Leitz. I will likely go back, and consider him my "coach". Most importantly, I do not at all feel threatened that he thinks I'm doing things all wrong and that he will try to re-make my swing. He expressed more than once that he really liked my swing. Whether that is just a confidence booster or he meant it remains to be seen. I believe him to be sincere and honest. He is in the process of installing 3-d imaging, which will reveal much more about path, angles, etc., and I'm looking forward to a return trip after making some adjustments.

On the negative side, my distances have literally sucked the last several days, and they did yesterday as well. Video revealed club head ahead of the hands at impact as the cause. As a result, I obviously did not achieve one of my objectives. I will have to experiment and try to figure why I'm suddenly releasing early. All in all, I thought it was a very productive session. He is doing voice over and will e-mail the finished product to me. I will share all or part at that time and let you guys tear me up.

[Abu3baid]

No one wants to tear you up, we want to see you improve and enjoy the game!

[Joe Hill]

Session With James Leitz Report

All of my shots during the session were this, so posting anything further from the session is pointless.

It gave me the incentive I needed to keep the knees level, get better stacked on the right side at the top, and keep the left humerus better leveraged against the rib cage ( I know the club face is closed to it's arc here; working on it):

It resulted in much better release:

It's a little blurry, but this is right at impact even though you can't see the ball; no divot yet. Taken from this video:

This was a dead on target 130 yd + PW.

As soon as Leitz gets his 3-D video installed, I will return for another try.

[iacas]

Session With James Leitz Report

All of my shots during the session were this, so posting anything further from the session is pointless.

It gave me the incentive I needed to keep the knees level, get better stacked on the right side at the top, and keep the left humerus better leveraged against the rib cage ( I know the club face is closed to it's arc here; working on it):

It resulted in much better release:

This was a dead on target 130 yd + PW.

Wow, so you've lost 25 yards or so eh Joe?

Your video is pretty poor quality, but no, you've not drawn the line correctly. Your swing is virtually the same as it was the other day.

The circled area is the area of interest. Notice how much more dirt there is in the second frame (these are one frame apart in your crappy quality video). There's a black smudge at the front of the right frame where I've drawn the arrow.

So, basically, even with the line of the shaft drawn behind that arrow head, you're still flipping like crazy.

I'm off the crazy train @Joe Hill . You're full of beans. You should stick with Leitz. He might be a good instructor for you. Please give up on your ideas of teaching golf to others, though. You've just not got it in you.

[Joe Hill]

Wow, so you've lost 25 yards or so eh Joe?

Your video is pretty poor quality, but no, you've not drawn the line correctly. Your swing is virtually the same as it was the other day.

The circled area is the area of interest. Notice how much more dirt there is in the second frame (these are one frame apart in your crappy quality video). There's a black smudge at the front of the right frame where I've drawn the arrow.

So, basically, even with the line of the shaft drawn behind that arrow head, you're still flipping like crazy.

I'm off the crazy train @Joe Hill. You're full of beans. You should stick with Leitz. He might be a good instructor for you. Please give up on your ideas of teaching golf to others, though. You've just not got it in you.

And I think you are very rude. This is about developing a swing concept, not about Joe teaching golf. I know the concept works due to results. If I'm flipping and getting 130 yard PW, what will it be when I get that worked out? I'll know more when I get better swings on the 3-D camera. If it bugs you so much what I'm trying to do, then please, get off the crazy train.

[iacas]

And I think you are very rude.

What exactly was rude? The truth?

I pointed out some very basic issues with your understanding of anatomy and geometry. You've never addressed those points.

I've publicly doubted that you did NOT hit your PW 155 yards, and you've never addressed those doubts (and now you're down to 130 yards, which I still doubt).

I've just now, in the post above, demonstrated how you've mis-drawn the line to mislead yourself into thinking you're not still flipping when you clearly are, and your only response is that I'm rude.

I called this ride you're taking everyone on the crazy train, so I'll admit that could be seen as rude, but Joe, you're deluding yourself if you think that you're developing a swing concept, because your swing concept is so flawed at a basic level that you have no answer to the basic geometry/anatomy questions I've posed several times.

You say the concept works, but ignore the fact that:

a) your swing does not resemble your concept at all.

b) we've not seen one lick of any proof of these concepts working at all. Your trip to see James Leitz was supposed to provide SOME, and you couldn't even bother to tell us what your clubhead speed measured in a video.

Please, just enjoy golf as a dude hoping to break 90, or maybe 80, or whatever. Find an instructor, work on your swing, and enjoy being outside in good company.

[Phil McGleno]

I hope Im quoting this right but Joe Youve flipped SNOT out of this one.-Stop kiddin yerself. Same as your swing from the trip you made to see Lietz.[quote name="Joe Hill" url="/t/74788/my-swing-joe-hill/54#post_1001601"] It resulted in much better release: [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/content/type/61/id/99385/] [/URL] It's a little blurry, but this is right at impact even though you can't see the ball; no divot yet. Taken from this video: This was a dead on target 130 yd + PW. [/quote]

[Vinsk]

And[COLOR=FF00AA] I think you are very rude[/COLOR]. This is about developing a swing concept, not about Joe teaching golf. I know the concept works due to results. If I'm flipping and getting 130 yard PW, what will it be when I get that worked out? I'll know more when I get better swings on the 3-D camera. If it bugs you so much what I'm trying to do, then please, get off the crazy train.

Joe, Erik is not being rude. You've got to understand something here. I've been interested in your progress and your thoughts. All of us here welcome your ideas but the conversation has to flow both ways. You've ignored some basic requests and still offer no physical evidence of what you're claiming. Leitz uses TrackMan. So, you fire a PW, then look at the monitor and show us the results! Bam! It's that simple. Just telling us you hit a PW "dead on target 130yds" well....come on. Certainly more believable than 150yds but with the swing I'm looking at... Not likely. Have you seen my swing video? Far from good, but I'm 6''3 and 240lbs and that swing gets me a 130yd PW when I flush it. Also keep in mind, Erik (Iacas) is not just a weekend golfer challenging your concepts.. He's a damn GOLF PROFESSIONAL! Ok? So I'll ride this train a little longer....but we'd all like to see a nice video showing: Club Club head speed Ball speed Distance Flight path Just to start with.

[Abu3baid]

Joe, Erik is not being rude. You've got to understand something here. I've been interested in your progress and your thoughts. All of us here welcome your ideas but the conversation has to flow both ways. You've ignored some basic requests and still offer no physical evidence of what you're claiming.

Leitz uses TrackMan. So, you fire a PW, then look at the monitor and show us the results! Bam! It's that simple. Just telling us you hit a PW "dead on target 130yds" well....come on. Certainly more believable than 150yds but with the swing I'm looking at... Not likely.

Have you seen my swing video? Far from good, but I'm 6''3 and 240lbs and that swing gets me a 130yd PW when I flush it.

Also keep in mind, Erik (Iacas) is not just a weekend golfer challenging your concepts.. He's a damn GOLF PROFESSIONAL! Ok? So I'll ride this train a little longer....but we'd all like to see a nice video showing:

Club

Club head speed

Ball speed

Distance

Flight path

Just to start with.

I think these are fair requests as well Joe, don't you?

[Joe Hill]

I think these are fair requests as well Joe, don't you?

I think those a very fair requests Abu3baid. I've already spent one c-note, half a day and half a tank of gas attempting to fulfill that request. I failed. It is senseless to post bad swings, serving no purpose. I will try again and again until I get what I consider a good swing recorded. I've tried to make clear that I am a lousy model for the swing. I wish I had a better model, but I'm all I have. I'm 65, not in good shape, and am just coming off a 6 year sedentary period, only recently taking up this endeavor again. The results when I do execute as planned, confirm to me the concept is valid, and I fully understand members here wanting some documented evidence. Patience with this old fart is all I can suggest. What I will not do is defend myself against inane accusations of knowing nothing about geometry, anatomy, or physics, or respond to admonitions to "sit down and shut up". When I get a good swing recorded, I'll post it as requested.

[Phil McGleno]

Your swings are going to be almost identical to what youre doing now.-Do you disagree with the lines drawn above-The red ones? Your shaft was not along your black line. Youre not hitting your PW 150 yards. You probably dont hit your 7I 150 yards.- I guess this thread can sit quietly until you film proof of your swing when you "execute as planned" huh?[quote name="Joe Hill" url="/t/74788/my-swing-joe-hill/54#post_1001942"]I think those a very fair requests Abu3baid. I've already spent one c-note, half a day and half a tank of gas attempting to fulfill that request. I failed. It is senseless to post bad swings, serving no purpose. I will try again and again until I get what I consider a good swing recorded. I've tried to make clear that I am a lousy model for the swing. I wish I had a better model, but I'm all I have. I'm 65, not in good shape, and am just coming off a 6 year sedentary period, only recently taking up this endeavor again. The results when I do execute as planned, confirm to me the concept is valid, and I fully understand members here wanting some documented evidence. Patience with this old fart is all I can suggest. What I will not do is defend myself against inane accusations of knowing nothing about geometry, anatomy, or physics, or respond to admonitions to "sit down and shut up". When I get a good swing recorded, I'll post it as requested.[/quote]

[iacas]

What I will not do is defend myself against inane accusations of knowing nothing about geometry, anatomy, or physics, or respond to admonitions to "sit down and shut up". When I get a good swing recorded, I'll post it as requested.

Inane? I documented pretty clearly where you've failed to address some basic geometry and anatomy. How bending the right elbow disrupts your triangle, for example.

And nobody's told you to "sit down and shut up" - that's a complete fabrication. I don't particularly like people who fib, @Joe Hill . I searched through the thread for the words "sit down" and came up with nothing except your post. Asking you questions and asking for proof is, IMO, the opposite of "sit down and shut up." Telling you openly what is wrong with your understanding of basic geometry/anatomy is also the opposite. If I wanted to ignore you, I would, as I will begin to do so once again, after responding to this post of yours, which is so far out of line with reality I feel it warrants a response.

Hate is not the opposite of love - apathy is. You've earned my apathy, Joe.

Oh, and your swing hasn't changed in the past month. The swing you took to James Leitz is the same one you've been making. When you hit balls out of the rough behind your house, you can get away with the massive flip you've got. Probably even catch a flier, though I still have a hard time believing even 130. Someone swinging as you demonstrate in your movie would likely not hit his driver 150 yards, let alone a PW.

[Joe Hill]

Your swings are going to be almost identical to what youre doing now.-Do you disagree with the lines drawn above-The red ones? Your shaft was not along your black line.

Youre not hitting your PW 150 yards. You probably dont hit your 7I 150 yards.- I guess this thread can sit quietly until you film proof of your swing when you "execute as planned" huh?

I thought I made it clear the 150 and 144 swings were very much the exception. 130+ to me is phenomenal in itself, being a life time 120 pw player, and considering the length of back swing.

No I do not totally agree with the lines drawn. The dark area in front of the ball location at impact is not the divot; it is the shadow of the club head. Watch the video after the divot dirt settles and you will see. How can there be a shadow from the club head from the ball forward if the club head is way out in front as indicated? (the sun was setting directly to the left). I do however, in the same frame, see the paler color of my left leg, indicating the shaft moving in front of it, so I'm not sure. The next few frames of follow through show the club well extended, still in front of my arms and torso, with no sign of a flip.

And yes, I'd just as soon leave it be until I get a good swing recorded properly.

[Joe Hill]

Inane? I documented pretty clearly where you've failed to address some basic geometry and anatomy. How bending the right elbow disrupts your triangle, for example.

And nobody's told you to "sit down and shut up" - that's a complete fabrication. I don't particularly like people who fib, @Joe Hill. I searched through the thread for the words "sit down" and came up with nothing except your post. Asking you questions and asking for proof is, IMO, the opposite of "sit down and shut up." Telling you openly what is wrong with your understanding of basic geometry/anatomy is also the opposite. If I wanted to ignore you, I would, as I will begin to do so once again, after responding to this post of yours, which is so far out of line with reality I feel it warrants a response.

Hate is not the opposite of love - apathy is. You've earned my apathy, Joe.

Oh, and your swing hasn't changed in the past month. The swing you took to James Leitz is the same one you've been making. When you hit balls out of the rough behind your house, you can get away with the massive flip you've got. Probably even catch a flier, though I still have a hard time believing even 130. Someone swinging as you demonstrate in your movie would likely not hit his driver 150 yards, let alone a PW.

" Please, just enjoy golf as a dude hoping to break 90, or maybe 80, or whatever. Find an instructor, work on your swing, and enjoy being outside in good company." Translated: Sit down and shut up.

Me dishonest? Sorry. When you ignore the part of my swing where I showed the various angles I was doing, then post a critique of the top where I had already indicated it had errors, and base my concept on that, I consider it dishonest and a false narrative. When you purposefully omit context of my quotes, "when I execute according to plan", I consider that dishonest, and a false narrative. This suggests to me you have interest in nothing but discrediting me.

I do not share your apathy. I do question your objectivity.

If I knew nothing of anatomy, how do I come up with terms such as humerus leverage; leading arm leverage; trailing knee keyed for the return (it's the aimer, like a gun scope); directional muscle training (not yet used in this forum)? These are all concepts which use the skeletal structure to advantage in order to not have to worry about sequencing and timing, or what the lower body is doing. I also believe in directional training of the muscles. Muscles can be built, and they can also be built to favor certain directions imo.

I'm aware of the triangle alteration due to right arm flex. How much, etc, is still up for experimentation for me. When I turn my head and look down at my arms at the top however, I see the same forearm triangle as at address. When I look at my videos, I indeed see the triangle maintaining it's relative form throughout the swing. My elbows remain down (is Ballard wrong about that? I think he' s dead right), and the mass of both arms are in line with the direction of travel at least from half way down through impact. That in itself is a fundamental concept of physics. Do you hammer with the flat part of the hammer? You can, but you will work much harder to do so. Keeping the mass of the hammer in line with the strike is the way the hammer is designed for a reason. I see the same principle at work by keeping the mass of the arms in line with the hit.

[iacas]

"Please, just enjoy golf as a dude hoping to break 90, or maybe 80, or whatever. Find an instructor, work on your swing, and enjoy being outside in good company." Translated: Sit down and shut up.

I disagree entirely with your translation.

Me dishonest? Sorry. When you ignore the part of my swing where I showed the various angles I was doing, then post a critique of the top where I had already indicated it had errors,

It didn't just have "errors" Joe - it flew directly in the face of everything you were talking about. It ignored the fact that ANY bending of the right arm immediately disrupts the triangle, and casts serious doubt on your claims that you can hit the ball far with your "no-elbow-bend-no-wrist-bend" golf swing. I maintain that you cannot, and you've yet to offer a shred of evidence that you can.

and base my concept on that, I consider it dishonest and a false narrative. When you purposefully omit context of my quotes, "when I execute according to plan", I consider that dishonest, and a false narrative. This suggests to me you have interest in nothing but discrediting me.

Joe, at this point, your refusal to answer or acknowledge the problems with your theory have done all the discrediting you necessary. I continue to maintain that when you execute according to plan, your swing will not be capable of hitting a driver 150 yards, let alone a PW.

And why are we talking about dishonesty? I don't believe I've called you dishonest. I've simply pointed out that you've refused to answer questions, refused to share any sort of actual proof, and refused to accept the truth when presented (like the massive flip in your recent PW video).

I do not share your apathy. I do question your objectivity.

Go ahead. I welcome it. I question your grasp of reality, geometry, and anatomy, and I've been clear in that.

My objectivity? What have I said that indicates that I'm not being objective? What actual hard proof have you issued that I've ignored? The only thing you've offered thus far are tales of wonderment and a video about which I posted several questions you've still refused to answer.

If I knew nothing of anatomy, how do I come up with terms such as humerus leverage; leading arm leverage; trailing knee keyed for the return (it's the aimer, like a gun scope); directional muscle training (not yet used in this forum)?

Joe, you didn't even know which bone was the radius and which was the ulna. I don't believe I said you knew nothing about anatomy, just that you made so many basic mistakes it seems as if you lack a basic understanding. It's on you to offer the proof, not on me to assume you're some anatomy wiz, especially after seeing countless basic errors.

Directional muscle training? A term you made up? Of course it's not been used, you made it up. Please, tell us, how does a term you created demonstrate that you understand anatomy at a complex level?

These are all concepts which use the skeletal structure to advantage in order to not have to worry about sequencing and timing, or what the lower body is doing. I also believe in directional training of the muscles. Muscles can be built, and they can also be built to favor certain directions imo.

Please back your opinions with facts.

Also note that I don't disagree with the idea that muscles can be trained to work in one direction or another (depending on definitions of things, because the counter-argument could be that muscles can only really ever apply their forces by shortening, which is always in the same direction given a person's anatomy, the attachment points of the muscles, etc. — your quads can do very little to make your leg move in a direction other than the direction in which they're built to move your leg, after all). But that has little to nothing to do with your video or what you claim your "swing model" (my words) is.

Also, I doubt very much that you're ever going to build a golf swing where nobody has to worry about "sequencing, timing, or what the lower body is doing." I don't think you can build any athletic maneuver that doesn't worry about those things. Even table tennis players work on footwork. Bowlers. Dart throwers might not, but then again, some may not call throwing darts terribly athletic… :)

I'm aware of the triangle alteration due to right arm flex. How much, etc, is still up for experimentation for me. When I turn my head and look down at my arms at the top however, I see the same forearm triangle as at address.

No you don't. A triangle is formed by any three points, and if you bend your right elbow, your right arm (neither half) is in the same plane as the left arm. Make a line out of your left arm, and two out of your right arm. When bent, there is no plane that can contain any two of the lines entirely.

You can't choose three points on your left and right arm after bending your right arm to create a triangle, either, and then expect the plane of that triangle to contain the entire rest of the left arm or right arm segment.

These are not opinions. They are basic geometry. They're also not based on what you (think you) see when you "look down at [your] arms."

My elbows remain down (is Ballard wrong about that? I think he's dead right)

This has nothing to do with Ballard. To some degree, every player's elbow points down a bit. You keep bringing straw men in and fail to address the very basic things. You cannot bend your right arm and keep two of those lines in the same plane. Heck, try it with some straws or something.

Then we can have a real "straw man" argument. (I crack myself up sometimes…).

and the mass of both arms are in line with the direction of travel at least from half way down through impact. That in itself is a fundamental concept of physics. Do you hammer with the flat part of the hammer? You can, but you will work much harder to do so. Keeping the mass of the hammer in line with the strike is the way the hammer is designed for a reason. I see the same principle at work by keeping the mass of the arms in line with the hit.

The hammer travels in an arc, the hammer beside my desk has precisely no flat parts except the butt end of the handle, and no, I don't hammer with that part, and "the mass in line with the direction of travel" doesn't even say anything. I've got degrees in the sciences… if you want to actually talk about physics, be my guest, but don't come out with stuff like this.

I'm done, Joe.

Henceforth, ignore my posts, as I'll do to yours. You've made this personal, while I've tried to this point to stick to the information you've shared. Picking information apart is what we do - to our own stuff and to anyone else's. It's constant, not personal, and makes us who we are - Explorers.

Best wishes, and please enjoy playing golf, as I think you have a far more exciting future in that over whatever "this" is.

[Phil McGleno]

Joe youre confusin someone refuting what youve said with being rude and making personal attacks. If you can hit a PW 150 yards off a fairway lie without bending your elbows I'll tell you what-Ill buy you the biggest steak and the coldest beer tehre ever was. Stick to playing golf-I agree-No future for you in teaching it.----Translation not needed-I mean what I say and say what i mean.

[Vinsk]

@Joe Hill, I understand the complexity of golf. I understand the joy as well as the frustration. But I do stand by what I said in an earlier post that you apparently ignored. I'll say it again in so many words. Get out and play Joe. Seriously. Take a break from all this silly analyzing and pencil man models and go play. You're missing out on what this game is really all about. Play Joe. All work and no play makes "Joe" a dull boy.

[Lihu]

I thought I made it clear the 150 and 144 swings were very much the exception. 130+ to me is phenomenal in itself, being a life time 120 pw player, and considering the length of back swing.

No I do not totally agree with the lines drawn. The dark area in front of the ball location at impact is not the divot; it is the shadow of the club head. Watch the video after the divot dirt settles and you will see. How can there be a shadow from the club head from the ball forward if the club head is way out in front as indicated? (the sun was setting directly to the left). I do however, in the same frame, see the paler color of my left leg, indicating the shaft moving in front of it, so I'm not sure. The next few frames of follow through show the club well extended, still in front of my arms and torso, with no sign of a flip.

And yes, I'd just as soon leave it be until I get a good swing recorded properly.

Hi Joe, I think the main reason the responses to your posts appear antagonistic, is simply that you entitled your swing video "150 yard PW". Then after someone questioned that distance, you stated that you are taller and stronger than most golfers. You seemed to have established yourself by saying "I am one of the world's fastest golfers because I am taller and bigger than most of you, but please help me get better".

It came across as a bit arrogant, even if you did not intend for it to be.

If anyone says you are flipping on this site, and no one else disagrees with them, you should probably take that comment into consideration. When someone says something wrong about what you are doing or what you need to work on, they will be questioned and corrected as well by everyone else on this site. This is the neat thing about this site. Everyone is here to help those who want help, but they need to get the facts right first. For instance, if you really do swing a PW over 96mph, you could possibly require different advice than if you swing 68mph.

So, in order to help you they need to establish where you are first. No one intended to insult you or question your personal integrity.

Best wishes for a fun golfing future.