Jump to content
RussUK

"Playing From a Position" à la Jim Venetos

264 posts / 41632 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Another fact to add @JimVenetosGolf: Tiger Woods had a handicap of 9.4 average for the entire year of 2008. Please argue how that’s not ‘consistent’ golf. 
 

In fact....your claim of pros being ‘inconsistent’ is altogether quite ridiculous. Do you follow these guys? Are you really aware of just how good they are?

All those guys with their incorrect, inefficient traditional method.🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 4/25/2019 at 11:18 PM, Pretzel said:

Your swing has no turn to the hips or shoulders. Do you know where "power", or more accurately clubhead speed, comes from in the golf swing?

The answer is in using the entire body to create tension and "lag" in multiple areas that can be used to snap each piece into place faster than if there was no tension.

The hips being ahead of the shoulders creates tension in your abs, lats, traps, and obliques - tension that can be used to help "pull" your collarbone to rotate faster than it could on its own. Your arms folding across your body puts more tension on the lats and traps, as well as increasing tension in the rhomboids, triceps, deltoids, teres major, and rotator cuff muscles (supraspinatus, infraspinatus, teres minor, and subscapularis) primarily on the side of the leading arm (left side for right-handed golfers). All this allows the arms to rotate faster than they would otherwise. When you hinge your wrists you put tension into primarily the flexor carpi ulnaris, helping to pull the wrist straight again and rotate the clubhead faster than your hands alone can move. 

Back down below the hips, your legs can increase the speed of the forward hip rotation with the tension applied to the gluteal muscles in combination with using the quads to snap the leg into a straightened position. The gluteus maximus pulls the lead thigh backwards, while the quads pull the lead leg straight (pulls the whole leg behind you, dragging the hips from in front) and the quads of the rear leg push it straight (with the hip flexors moving the thigh towards your front) as a means of using the trail leg to "push" the hips faster. This is made possible by a squatting motion at the top of the downswing and an extension of the legs (alongside those thick glutes pulling the front thigh back and the hip flexors pulling the rear thigh forwards).

All of this tension is introduced to the various muscle groups during the normal/"traditional" backswing, which serves the purpose of storing energy much like what would happen if you stretched a spring or an elastic band. Unlike a spring or elastic band, however, our muscles can also contract on their own and actively pull instead of only passively pulling in response to being stretched.

The swing you teach, @Jim Venetos, does not store as much energy during the backswing as a traditional golf swing. You do not move your legs or hips at all during the backswing, and only barely move the shoulders. All that energy that is stored during the backswing of a normal golf swing is lost entirely, and the muscles used during the downswing do not have as much leverage to be able to rotate your body and club through the ball as quickly.

Here's a comparison of how much/where energy is stored at the top of the backswing for your swing versus a traditional swing:

Jim Venetos vs Rory McIlroy.jpg

Note that in purple I'm specifically referencing the amount of arm rotation relative to the shoulders. You both have about the same angle between your shoulders and your arms. McIlroy has more energy from his arms being rotated further behind the ball, however, but this is covered in the other points.

Here's a comparison of those two swings again, except this time at impact and including context from the motion of the downswing:

Jim Venetos vs Rory McIlroy at Impact.jpg

You're only swinging with your arms and a little bit of your shoulders. Rory McIlroy, and others with a traditional golf swing, can utilize the gigantic muscles in their abdomen, hips, and thighs to maximize the power of the golf swing.

You remove the motion of half the body in the golf swing. This can simplify the swing, as you intended it to, but it will never result in increased power because you're not utilizing all the muscle groups that you could otherwise use to increase swing speed.

Why don't you go ahead and share those clubhead speed numbers achieved by you and your students? I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is and propose the following bet:

We both create an video of 3 driver shots in a row on a launch monitor, attempting to fulfill the following goals:

  • Power
    • The swing speed on all 3 shots should be 120 mph or higher
  • Accuracy
    • The difference in carry distance between the longest and shortest shots should be no more than 20 yards
      • This filters out big mishits that result from swinging beyond your abilities
    • The horizontal distance between the furthest left and furthest right shots should be no more than 35 yards
      • This is the width of an average fairway
      • This filters out uncontrolled hooks and slices that result from swinging beyond your abilities
  • Video
    • No cuts or editing that would make it possible to edit separate swings into a single attempt
    • Video must visually show the speed, carry distance, and horizontal dispersion for each shot
      • This can be shown in a single graph at the end of the 3 shots or individually for each shot
    • I will post my video on YouTube and publicly share it in this thread
    • Your video can be of either you or one of your students, so long as the person in your video uses your swing technique
      • If you would rather not post it publicly, you are more than welcome to post it as a private YouTube video and send the link to access that video in a PM directly to myself and a second site moderator/staff member
      • The second site moderator/staff member should be sent the video just so they can verify the results - I will be honest about what I see, but this can give you extra assurance that I have honest intentions
      • If it is a video of a student, you're welcome to protect their anonymity by placing a black block over their head/face so long as we can still see their swing mechanics
    • Both videos must be created within 2 weeks of you accepting the bet
      • This gives you time to record it yourself or find a student willing to help you
    • Unlimited attempts are allowed, so long as each attempt is 3 swings in a row

I will give you very generous terms for this bet as well. The terms of the bet's payouts can be seen below, with all situations assuming that all video requirements are met unless stated otherwise:

  • I pay you $40 if
    • You meet the power, accuracy, and video requirements - it doesn't matter what my video looks like
    • I fail to produce a video that meets the video requirements
  • I pay you $20 if
    • You meet the power requirement - even if you fail the accuracy requirements - and I cannot meet the power requirement myself
  • I pay you $10 if
    • You meet the power requirement - even if you fail the accuracy requirements - and I meet the power requirement but fail the accuracy requirements
  • You pay me $40 if
    • I meet all requirements and you fail the power requirement
  • Nobody pays anybody if
    • Anything else happens

The only way for you to lose money is if I am 100% successful in meeting both power and accuracy requirements and you are unable to back up your bold claims about not losing power to a traditional swing. If you truly believe what you teach, put your money where you mouth is and take this bet with me. I have the advantage of youth, which is why I'm letting you have favorable terms for the bet AND letting you pick any person who uses your swing methods.

When it comes to the power of your swing method, this is all I have to say:

Put up or shut up

Hey @Pretzel...I had to go and revisit this post. Yesterday I got an email from Jim after having commenting on one of his videos on YouTube. It was in regards to him discussing how to eliminate the ‘flip.’ Having slowed his video and taking a still I believed his impact position was ‘borderline flipping.’ I even conceded that some great golf shots can be done with this method but that his impact position was not ideal. These were the images I sent:B499358F-561C-4E2D-843A-7932E08935B5.thumb.jpeg.d3eb32601008c93b140d60b1e822ee31.jpegC56DF2B7-3743-496A-8088-023EED7BC339.thumb.jpeg.60a61ed4e493eaaa5dfd0844076b8023.jpegUnfortunately this was his response: It’s not a flip or even a borderline flip. You shouldn’t comment on things you don’t understand.
 

I then tried to engage him in a discussion regarding his comments that pros aren’t consistent ( Tiger had a + 9.4hcp for the entire year of 2008) and that it’s a myth that the spine rotates..it only flexes..and why he gets so defensive when asked to prove his claims. It’s just golf and and a worthy discussion.

Silence. I suppose you haven’t heard from him? I also figure you won’t. @JimVenetosGolf apparently has a philosophy similar to Scientology where questioning simply isn’t accepted. I know more than you and if you won’t accept my concepts you’re just wrong. If you ask for proof....forget it. You’re not worth my time. Disappointed with his attitude. I can’t believe he wouldn’t welcome a challenge to prove his methods on power. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 6/4/2020 at 7:47 PM, Double Mocha Man said:

It almost sounds like a religion...

It is rather cult-like, yes.

9 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

These were the images I sent:B499358F-561C-4E2D-843A-7932E08935B5.thumb.jpeg.d3eb32601008c93b140d60b1e822ee31.jpegC56DF2B7-3743-496A-8088-023EED7BC339.thumb.jpeg.60a61ed4e493eaaa5dfd0844076b8023.jpegUnfortunately this was his response: It’s not a flip or even a borderline flip. You shouldn’t comment on things you don’t understand.

I’m not seeing a flip in that image, but he could have spent a minute or two explaining why it’s not a flip instead of being a jerk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, billchao said:

I’m not seeing a flip in that image, but he could have spent a minute or two explaining why it’s not a flip instead of being a jerk.

That’s the point. I admitted it wasn’t a flip. I did say it was borderline in that his lead wrist isn’t really straight nor is his trail wrist bent back.

He says his set up puts his impact into a position of power at impact including lead arm leading the club. While it does ( the picture @Pretzel posted shows a poorly positioned trail wrist) he certainly isn’t doing it like Tiger for example.

But yeah...a jerk response. But I’ve learned this is what Jim does: If he’s confronted by anyone of knowledge...he makes some condescending remark about stillness and his years of experience then disappears. If he knows you’re not an instructor he just acts as though you’re not worth a discussion. It’s a super philosophy. To this day he won’t post any TrackMan stats, data,  or show his students performing at a high level. If asked ....a snarky comment and he’s gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

5 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I did say it was borderline in that his lead wrist isn’t really straight nor is his trail wrist bent back.

That’s not how I define a flip at all.

 Is the shaft behind the trail shoulder (or where the shoulder “should” be)?

No.

FWIW @Jim Venetos knows I’m an instructor and still won’t answer my questions. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

FWIW @Jim Venetos knows I’m an instructor and still won’t answer my questions. 🙂

Right. He made silly little ‘stay still’ comments then disappeared. There have been several ‘debates’ in the comments on YouTube and from another site and anytime someone knowledgeable comes along he just says they don’t understand power in a golf swing then disappears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

Right. He made silly little ‘stay still’ comments then disappeared. There have been several ‘debates’ in the comments on YouTube and from another site and anytime someone knowledgeable comes along he just says they don’t understand power in a golf swing then disappears.

I’d love to see a JV guy and a Mike Austin guy get together and debate power in a golf swing 😃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I just had about a half hour conversation on the phone with Jim himself. Very interesting and I wish someone more knowledgeable could’ve been present as I’m a poor representative for this discussion. That being said some main points that I gathered:

1. I was wrong about the ‘borderline flip’ and admitted to that. So I apologize for posting on his YouTube comments about that.

2. Jim admitted he was wrong in saying the spine doesn’t twist. He just believes the spine is subjected to unnecessary stress when performing the traditional ‘90* shoulder turn.’

3. Jim wants amateurs to learn how to hit the ball with their lead side, with a shallow, circular and descending blow. He stated the weight shift performed by pros isn’t as much as people think it is. He believes the extra movements in arriving at the strike as described above is what causes so many amateurs to fail.

4. He said he has many students generating considerable power with this method including a +7 hcp who’s still an amateur but is making his way.....

5. Jim said he would post a video of his 118mph swing. I have to say he talked about his long drive competition and it was interesting. I’m inclined to believe he’s able to produce this speed. I don’t think he’s a freak of nature so being able to swing the club 118mph while keeping the lower body as still as he does..no or very minimal weight shift is impressive, and would make for a good discussion.

I wish I was better equipped for such a discussion. And I wish Jim would come back here and engage with those of you who are so knowledgeable. I gave @Jim Venetos a hard time...and I apologize for that. I can get snappy as many here know..even when I’m wrong...lol. 
 

But hey...it’s just golf and I love discussing damn near anything about it. Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I just had about a half hour conversation on the phone with Jim himself. Very interesting and I wish someone more knowledgeable could’ve been present as I’m a poor representative for this discussion. That being said some main points that I gathered:

1. I was wrong about the ‘borderline flip’ and admitted to that. So I apologize for posting on his YouTube comments about that.

2. Jim admitted he was wrong in saying the spine doesn’t twist. He just believes the spine is subjected to unnecessary stress when performing the traditional ‘90* shoulder turn.’

3. Jim wants amateurs to learn how to hit the ball with their lead side, with a shallow, circular and descending blow. He stated the weight shift performed by pros isn’t as much as people think it is. He believes the extra movements in arriving at the strike as described above is what causes so many amateurs to fail.

4. He said he has many students generating considerable power with this method including a +7 hcp who’s still an amateur but is making his way.....

5. Jim said he would post a video of his 118mph swing. I have to say he talked about his long drive competition and it was interesting. I’m inclined to believe he’s able to produce this speed. I don’t think he’s a freak of nature so being able to swing the club 118mph while keeping the lower body as still as he does..no or very minimal weight shift is impressive, and would make for a good discussion.

I wish I was better equipped for such a discussion. And I wish Jim would come back here and engage with those of you who are so knowledgeable. I gave @Jim Venetos a hard time...and I apologize for that. I can get snappy as many here know..even when I’m wrong...lol. 
 

But hey...it’s just golf and I love discussing damn near anything about it. Cheers.

This is so indicative of the big picture.  When you can actually converse with someone so many misgivings fall by the wayside.    Human interaction can be so beautiful and redeeming.  Stepping off of soapbox now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

5. Jim said he would post a video of his 118mph swing. I have to say he talked about his long drive competition and it was interesting. I’m inclined to believe he’s able to produce this speed. I don’t think he’s a freak of nature so being able to swing the club 118mph while keeping the lower body as still as he does..no or very minimal weight shift is impressive, and would make for a good discussion.

He may very well be able to. Heck, @david_wedzik swung ~80 sitting in a chair.

As you know, that doesn't mean he wouldn't generate more speed using more of his body to generate that speed.

@Jim Venetos has always been invited to answer questions, and to share actual facts and theories and to engage in a discussion here. Thus far, he's chosen instead to do different things with his posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

11 hours ago, Double Mocha Man said:

This is so indicative of the big picture.  When you can actually converse with someone so many misgivings fall by the wayside.    Human interaction can be so beautiful and redeeming.  Stepping off of soapbox now...

That’s a pretty good soap box. Stay on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Affiliates

    SuperSpeed
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • Played in our club championship this past weekend.  Shot 89 both days from silver tees.  Not that great but an ok tournament score for me and better than I did last year. Played Tuesday and shot 83 off silver which was net 70, so 2 under my cap.  Played combo's Wednesday and had my best round in years with an 80, net 65 and got my first eagle since relocating after retiring.  Also got 3 birdies in the same round.  Played again Friday and shot 84, net 72 with a couple of birdies.  Leaving the driver out of the bag for the last few rounds has certainly helped in the penalty department.  I recently replaced my 3W and the new shaft in it is so stable I feel I can trust it so much more.  Have ordered a new driver shaft with a similar spec but slightly lighter than 3W shaft, so hopefully will be able to have a similar stability with the driver and a few extra yards in the fairway.
    • Find them quite tricky. Hit them like an iron or flatter like a wood? Also my G400 hybrid has no swing weight which helps swing speed but makes me nervous. Also it just dont have a good feeling to it. Proper Woods are so fun to hit. 
    • noticed that myself, never seen him do that half takeback like JT before in his routine... then today at Wyndham, wasn't doing it.  His fidgeting does seem to have gotten worse the last couple years, at least he's not grabbing the towel 10,000 times anymore 😂.   Curious what someone else with far more knowledge on the golf swing thinks though of the commentators remark today, I believe it was Trevor Immelman and Aaron Oberholser who both agreed that if he just switched to playing a cut off the tee, it would solve a lot of his issues.
    • This is a really deep question, possibly with no right answer. I think that usage and accuracy of equipment are the main components in deciding what you want, and price just follows suit. I kind of divide it into three categories: toy (not accurate or not simulators), recreational sim (more accurate, but comes with limitations on certain data and isn't as accurate as the final category), and professional sim. The toy category is comprised of sub 500 dollar options (the measuring device itself) that measure a couple of things. The OptiShot line is the prime example. It only measures the club going over an array of infrared sensors (2 lines of sensors). It can track face angle, speed (kind of), and perceived strike location based on which sensors are triggered at what time. It doesn't even require the use of a ball to get its data, so it can be quite inaccurate. The other options here would be Mevo or SC300, though neither of these truly offer sim capabilities but are more accurate than an OptiShot as they use ball data. The rec sims only have 2 that I can think of. The Mevo+ and the SkyTrak. They operate in very different ways, with the Mevo+ operating on radar and measuring mostly the ball for the first part of flight, and the SkyTrak operating on optics measuring the point of impact, both ball and club. These are both fairly robust devices for the price (probably around 3k each for a full sim) but both have drawbacks and it could be argued over which is better. From my small knowledge about launch monitors it seems that for indoor simulation the optic driven devices excel, but outdoors radar is king, i.e. SkyTrak for indoors and Mevo+ for outdoors. On to the big dogs, the professional sims. Once again there are really two choices at the moment, and like the previous category, one is radar driven where the other is optic driven. Trackman is the premium radar system available and comes in just under 20k USD on price. Big bucks for big performance. The GCQuad (or GC2+HMT) is king for optical launch monitors and can be had for around 12k USD, but with the putting analysis and head monitoring add on, it also comes in just under 20k. Same thing here, gotta pay to play. These prices don't include the bay (mat/projector/screen) so you can really spec them as you please. The GC2 without the HMT upgrade kind of splits the difference between recreational and professional launch monitors, and the price follows suit. A certified preowned unit can be had for around 5500 USD. It really does split the difference in the optical category, being a big step up from a SkyTrak, but comes up short to the GCQuad or if you were to add the HMT unit. I know this is a lot of info, although it's just the basics when it comes to launch monitors/sims. For the actual question: If I had a room with a tall enough ceiling in my house, I would probably go for the SkyTrak at first. One of the biggest reasons is that it has compatibility with "The Golf Club 2019" which is a video game that I have on home computer. That package comes at an up-charge, but between the official courses designed by the game developer, and the many recreated courses done by fans (even has Augusta in there), there are something like 180,000 courses to play. That's a big draw for me.  There is something to be said for course packages/subscriptions and which best fits your interest/needs. I might grow tired of the SkyTrak, or find it lacking in accuracy at some point and then it would be a GCQuad for me. Snce it would be indoors only, I would prefer an optical system.  There is plenty of info online, and plenty of reviews to go along with them. I have only used the GC2s that are in my local golf galaxy, so I don't experience with most of these, but this is most of the info I have gathered. I hope this helps in some way, and if you have any questions, I can try to answer them.
    • View this round on GAME GOLF  
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Cantankerish
      Cantankerish
      (46 years old)
    2. Dimes44
      Dimes44
      (37 years old)
    3. Donald Belcher
      Donald Belcher
      (84 years old)
    4. jimnm
      jimnm
      (41 years old)
    5. Zachase715
      Zachase715
      (28 years old)

×
×
  • 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...