Golfers Are Consistent - A Golfer's Good and Bad Swings Look the Same and Are Repeatable

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

That is a great story. You should tell that story more often. As an aside....regarding your teaching of a college team. You were talking about how there is no objective standard regarding golf teaching. The only way a person comes to respect someone like Leadbetter or Harmon is by their association with great players; following their teaching becomes, on some level, an act of faith. Your work with a college team is, I hope, something you are studying and using as proof of your methods.

You can PM me if you want about that (it's OT for this topic), but I don't know how much that applies. I only get to instruct them a little bit, and they're just division III golfers. None are going to go on and play professionally or anything. I also already have far more experience teaching thousands of other golfers. Nor do I want to teach Tour players.

That said, some of the golfers have made some pretty remarkable changes to their swings. Again, though, OT for here.

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

Another fascinating observation here. Never thought of it until now, but it happened to me. I started golfing with the ball forward, as in the Hogan's Five Lessons book. After a while, I discovered that I hit the ball more solidly and further if I moved it back in my stance. Years later, however, I began to wonder why I was hitting too many hooks and having too much difficulty hitting a driver, so I moved the ball forward again, and worked on some other things in the swing. Moving the ball forward was one of the changes that coincided with me moving down into the single digits.

Yup. Like I said, it's fine as a "cheater" thing, even to get you through a round where you're struggling, but it limits your ceiling.

[mvmac]

11 hours ago, Big Lex said:

Compensation = more things to do, so more sources of variability. The confusing part, I guess for me, is that those compensations don't show up too starkly in the macro sense. They are there, and they introduce variability, but still on the macro level, the swing looks very consistent.

Right on the macro level the swing looks exactly the same. The better the player the better the mechanics tend to be, the less micro compensations they need to get the sweetspot on the ball. Not saying that all good swings look the same because we know they don't but most of them share commonalities (5 Keys).

[Big Lex]

10 hours ago, mvmac said:

Right on the macro level the swing looks exactly the same. The better the player the better the mechanics tend to be, the less micro compensations they need to get the sweetspot on the ball.

Got it.

There should be some way to see the micro variations. (Not saying it's something we NEED to see....we work on the macro things when working on our swing...I'm just saying that theoretically it must be possible to see these variations). 

Not in ordinary video. But with something super hi resolution like Swingvision, I'm guessing that we would see, perhaps, that the face of the club rotates more through the hitting zone for a poor player than for a good player. The good player has proper club face alignment at impact more often because his club face tends to be properly aligned with respect to the arc or path of the club head through the whole hitting zone. So if on one swing he catches the ball a bit earlier than on another swing, he still gets good ball flight. A chopper, however, has perhaps a mismatch of the face angle relative to the arc or path, such that unless the hit is timed perfectly, the ball will go off with a lot of sidespin and will start more severely off line.

Quote

Not saying that all good swings look the same because we know they don't but most of them share commonalities (5 Keys).

Right. But I'm guessing if we looked at Swingvision for many pros and analyzed the micro level, we'd find lots of similarities, such as the relationship between the club face angle and the path or arc of the club at any point in time, or the relationship between the club face direction and the target line for a certain distance or time before the ball is struck. Players would fall into "groups" where the "micro" of the faders all looked similar, and the micro for the drawers was all the same but different from the faders....Maybe?

Edited March 25, 2016 by Big Lex

[mvmac]

32 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

There should be some way to see the micro variations. (Not saying it's something we NEED to see....we work on the macro things when working on our swing...I'm just saying that theoretically it must be possible to see these variations). 

That's where 3D mapping and pressure matts can help with charting the stuff we can't see with video. Even then I'm not sure we'll "see" much difference between a good shot and a bad shot for the average golfer. With enough data/players you will see "good player" characteristics and "bad player" characteristics start to emerge (which has happened).

37 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

But I'm guessing if we looked at Swingvision for many pros and analyzed the micro level, we'd find lots of similarities, such as the relationship between the club face angle and the path or arc of the club at any point in time, or the relationship between the club face direction and the target line for a certain distance or time before the ball is struck.

Swingvision is still a "macro" look at the swing. I agree you'll find similarities coming into impact, players start lining things up once they get around A6 and it's a big part of Key #4.

[Big Lex]

33 minutes ago, mvmac said:

Swingvision is still a "macro" look at the swing. I agree you'll find similarities coming into impact, players start lining things up once they get around A6 and it's a big part of Key #4.

Yes it is. When they analyze swings on TV with Swingvision, it's a macro analysis. What I meant thought was that the high resolution recording in Swingvision could potentially be used to allow you to measure the rotation of the club face relative to the line. There are so many frames and the image so clear that you can see in great detail what the club face is doing if you want to.

We've come a long way from stroboscopic images

 

[mvmac]

Jordan Spieth, 2015 on the left and yesterday on the right. Commentators didn't like his swing on the right 

[mvmac]

Pure swing from Robert Rock  #golfishard

 

[Groucho Valentine]

Thats what he gets for trying to hit a 2iron. 

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Groucho Valentine said:

Thats what he gets for trying to hit a 2iron. 

As you know, Robert Rock can hit a 2-iron…

[billchao]

3 hours ago, mvmac said:

Pure swing from Robert Rock  #golfishard

 

In my best golf announcer voice:

He just doesn't quite seem confident at setup, maybe he's not sure of the shot being in between clubs. Then he just gets a little quick in transition which gets him a little laid-off so he tries to save the shot right before impact by turning his hands over and he just doesn't quite get the clubface down to the ball.

 

 

 

 

[Jack Watson]

IMO video can't show the difference.  Iacas is right.

[rpsetser]

My guess is that the swing on the left is the "good" swing.  I say this timidly because they are SO close.  The reasoning is that in the very first picture, the golfer seems to be more balanced.  Just looking at the pictures, in the one on the right, he looks like his weight is out on his toes more at address, instead of in the balls/center of the foot.

[mvmac]

Spot the differences  #youcant

 

[JonMA1]

Regardless of how similar a swings look at real time, or whether the overall swing is poor or good (closer or further from the 5SK's), most of us experience extended periods of better and worse results.

So isn't it safe to assume something is changing?

I'm not talking about relatively inconsistent contact which obviously occurs more frequently than the 1 shank in 1000 swings of a tour pro.

I mean weeks at a time when ball striking is noticeably better or worse than normal.

I guess I'm trying to determine how the knowledge that my overall swing hasn't changed much in the last few years can help determine the hard-to-notice changes that seem to make the most impact - at least short term - on my scoring.

Spoiler

@mvmac and @iacas, this is an honest question and not an argument. No one is more aware of how little a poor swing changes - regardless of good results.

 I'm really trying to learn and improve. (And you guys know I'm trying to change the big picture.)

 

[iacas]

@JonMA1, something is changing, yes, but it's something small. The swing will still likely look pretty much the same. Sometimes your timing is good, sometimes it's bad.

Bad golfers often get "more consistent" when they play a lot more. Like Rush Limbaugh on The Haney Project. His swing looked the same… he just got better at timing it because he actually practiced and spent more time playing.

[JonMA1]

14 minutes ago, iacas said:

@JonMA1, something is changing, yes, but it's something small. The swing will still likely look pretty much the same. Sometimes your timing is good, sometimes it's bad.

Bad golfers often get "more consistent" when they play a lot more. Like Rush Limbaugh on The Haney Project. His swing looked the same… he just got better at timing it because he actually practiced and spent more time playing.

That makes sense. We can hit good shots with our poor swing, but the poor swing requires so much more effort and practice to do so when compared to a better swing. Maybe it's also easier to lose whatever small change we lucked into while the swing was producing better results?

 @Phil McGleno has this quote on his signature:

"The expert golfer has maximum time to make minimal compensations. The poorer player has minimal time to make maximum compensations."

I've always wondered if it means a better swing is just simpler (less complex), or "tighter".... less things that can go wrong. A poor swing is overly complicated and often requires some awkward correction at the last moment. To use a Faherty quote, "an octopus falling out of a tree" (he used it to describe Furyk's swing, but I think it applies when looking at mine on video).

Maybe I'm way off base and this is a dumb question, but while trying to improve the swing one key/priority at a time, should I really try to keep the rest of the swing less complicated?

[JGus]

On 2/18/2015 at 11:28 AM, iacas said:

We hear from a lot of people that golfers are really just looking for "consistency."

What many fail to realize is that they're already consistent golfers. They make the same swings, time after time, and because golf has such precise requirements, they get wholly different results. A quarter inch here or a few degrees there are all that's necessary to turn a blistered flag-seeking 7-iron into one that results in a drop and a penalty stroke.

-------------------------------

Golf simply has such a small margin - it requires such absolute precision - that players already are making consistent, repeatable swings.

-------------------------------

Your goal should not be to have a "repeatable, consistent" swing. You already have that!

Your goal is to make your swing better!

 

I've read @iacas original post numerous times, and am actually struggling with this thought because on one hand I agree, but on the other I disagree.  I agree on the side that if a golfer has a consistent and repeatable swing that only small margins of errors (a quarter inch or a few degrees) is all it takes to have a good or bad shot.

Before I say why I disagree, at least when it comes to my swing, let me first say that I agree that the goal is to make my swing better, which is what I am trying to do.

The part I disagree with is accepting, at this moment in time, that I have a consistent and repeatable swing just because I have played as long as I have, so yes I would be one of those students that would make this statement.  And I would make this statement today because I don't think it is those small margins of errors described in the post that cause me grief in my swing today, but the major differences compared to other swings.  Such as arms lifting up rather than turning around with my shoulders, my weight not shifting forward on every swing, starting some swings by dropping my right elbow instead of sliding/turning at the waist first.

I don't consider these types of things the macro inconsistencies, but more major issues preventing a consistent and repeatable swing, which to me means being in the same positions (relatively) on most swings.

My main struggle, even after lessons, is being able to execute the same swing twice.  I know some are going to say that I do and don't realize it and to a certain extent you are probably right, but what I am talking about is being in the same positions throughout the swing, consistently, which I know I am not doing and is what I am working on.

From what I feel, some swings I rotate properly, my right elbow drops or moves across my chest, and the left arm feels like it is swinging out, but other swings I don't rotate, my left arm stays really close to my body and I hit off of the toe.  Nothing feels the same as before.  I can make solid contact with my 3-wood of the deck, but when I am on a tee box I recently began topping it every time, same ball position, so there is something more than a small change from swing to swing, at least in my mind anyways.

I closed at a 9.5 HI last year and struggled to break 90 the past 4 rounds because every time I setup to the ball I feel like I forget how to swing, can't remember how to take the club back, body forgets what to do to start the downswing, I'm just a mess!

So not trying to argue the point of the post, I just think the margins defining what a consistent and repeatable swing is may not be this simplistic.  Or maybe I just needed to rant a little since I started struggling again...

[iacas]

23 hours ago, JGus said:

The part I disagree with is accepting, at this moment in time, that I have a consistent and repeatable swing just because I have played as long as I have, so yes I would be one of those students that would make this statement.

And you'd be wrong, and here's what I mean by that:

• I could hand you any club and have you swing it, and your buddies would all identify you every time from 200 yards away.
• If I could erase the ball from the video, you wouldn't be able to tell me what the result of that swing was, and all swings would look virtually identical.

23 hours ago, JGus said:

And I would make this statement today because I don't think it is those small margins of errors described in the post that cause me grief in my swing today, but the major differences compared to other swings.  Such as arms lifting up rather than turning around with my shoulders, my weight not shifting forward on every swing, starting some swings by dropping my right elbow instead of sliding/turning at the waist first.

I doubt your swing changes nearly as much as you think it does, day to day, month to month, or swing to swing.

If you're actively "experimenting" with different things, then sure, you're probably doing things differently over time. But that's not what this topic's about, people actively doing things. It's about golfers who just play golf but still complain about their lack of consistency.

23 hours ago, JGus said:

My main struggle, even after lessons, is being able to execute the same swing twice.

I doubt it. I think that if I recorded your swings and erased the ball as I did in the OP, it'd look awfully similar.

23 hours ago, JGus said:

I know some are going to say that I do and don't realize it and to a certain extent you are probably right, but what I am talking about is being in the same positions throughout the swing, consistently, which I know I am not doing and is what I am working on.

I don't think you are in the different positions you seem to think you are. I'd wager on that, unless again you're either actively experimenting or literally trying to do something different.

23 hours ago, JGus said:

From what I feel, some swings I rotate properly, my right elbow drops or moves across my chest, and the left arm feels like it is swinging out, but other swings I don't rotate, my left arm stays really close to my body and I hit off of the toe.

Feel ain't real, as you know.

23 hours ago, JGus said:

So not trying to argue the point of the post, I just think the margins defining what a consistent and repeatable swing is may not be this simplistic.  Or maybe I just needed to rant a little since I started struggling again...

Your swing will look virtually identical every time.

The worse the player, the larger the differences… but they're always "small" differences relative to the overall change required to improve (i.e. hands being 2" different in one swing versus another would be a HUGE change for a PGA Tour player, but relative to the change required for a 90-shooting guy, would be a very very small difference).