"Prove Me Wrong!" - Increasing Swing Speed

[Patch]

I was talking to my own PHD Athletic's person. lol.....She said if the OP were to ask his PHD friends to explain a human's genetic timing barrier they would or should tell him that each individual's timing barrier is different. 

In golf, the individual's timing barrier will dictate how fast, and how well they swing a golf club up to the limits of that individual.  Once they have reached their own genetic timing barrier, that's as fast, or as well as they can swing a club. When an individual reaches their own timing barrier, can happen at any age, depending on their own training regimine, and/or physical abilities as they change with age. On the other side of the coin, some golfers with never reach their own golf swing timiming barrier just out of laziness. . 

My own timing barrier has regressed due to a change in my physical make up. This is due to both getting older, coupled with injuries. 40-45 years ago I was 50-60 yards farther off the tee with my driver than I am now. I'd like to think without the injuries, I'd only be 30, or so yards shorter at my current age. 

Bottom, simpler line is that  some folks will never swing as fast as other folks, even after they have maxxed out their swing. .. 

Edited November 1, 2018 by iacas
removed about 12 lines of blank space

[Vinsk]

8 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

It is possible to measure and it is done all the time.  If you are measuring someone's performance as a teenager over a sustained period of time into adulthood there will be a bell curve to their performance where it hits and apex and then begins to declines.

 That apex is the mystery variable. You can’t know that was/is the maximum apex achievable. Better training can affect this enormously. 

A teenager with poor training or no training who is measured into his twenties and peaks could very likely increase swing speed if at age 30  he begins solid training both physically and with a great golf instructor.

[billchao]

20 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Hypothesis: Swing speed can only increase up to an given individuals physical peak at which point it will begin to incrementally decline. Any perceived gains in swing speed are the athlete shallowing the performance decline curve but the maximum speed that an athlete could have swung the club would be at their physical peak.  As the athlete gains experience in the game and improves their conditioning and technique an increase in performance can be experienced, but will never exceed what it would have produced at their physical peak because to improve at the game requires time...which also means that an athlete is moving away from their physical prime.  

I'm not even sure how you design an experiment for this and what the point would be. I would have swung the club faster at 25 if I started playing when I was 5 instead of 24? Where would you identify my physical peak to be? What if I was out of shape and overweight at 25 and I spent the last eight years working out? More importantly, how is this information even useful?

20 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I have an idea....measure your swing speed...then take 3 months off.  I guarantee you that you will not swing it as fast in the spring as you did before the golf season ended.

I take three (closer to four) months off every year. It's called winter. And because I'm involved with equipment stuff through the website (and because I'm a golf geek), I spend more time on a launch monitor (hell, I own one) than a typical golfer and I can tell you there is no noticeable difference in my swing speed measured at any time during the golf season. Any changes in swing speed falls well within the typical variation you'd see from swing to swing. Average swing speed varies regularly from session to session, as well. One or two mph in either direction is not statistically significant.

[Pretzel]

45 minutes ago, billchao said:

I take three (closer to four) months off every year. It's called winter. And because I'm involved with equipment stuff through the website (and because I'm a golf geek), I spend more time on a launch monitor (hell, I own one) than a typical golfer and I can tell you there is no noticeable difference in my swing speed measured at any time during the golf season. Any changes in swing speed falls well within the typical variation you'd see from swing to swing. Average swing speed varies regularly from session to session, as well. One or two mph in either direction is not statistically significant.

I too have a long winter, and I don't swing any slower in the spring. I usually hit it further when the season gets started, actually, but that's due to a combination of firmer conditions and grass that's still transitioning away from being dormant. My carry numbers remain the same.

For the first 10-20 swings after a several month break I swing it slower, yes, but that's the same as the first 10-20 swings of any given day when I haven't fully warmed up or loosened up yet. When the temperature dips below 45 I also lose a couple MPH because I'm wearing a sweatshirt instead of a t-shirt. 

I can even give examples of this too! Here's a link to my last round of golf in 2016 on November 20th: http://www.gamegolf.com/player/Pretzel/round/1584874

Average driving distance for this round of golf was 302 yards with one that was an outlier long (350) and one an outlier short (278). The rest hovered around the 290 range.

Here's my first full round of golf in 2017 on May 15th where I was woefully unprepared for the U.S. Open Qualifier I played in: http://www.gamegolf.com/player/Pretzel/round/1584877

You can find an overview of my poor preparation (it happened immediately after finals week, I just played one practice round before the event) and performance in this thread: 

 

Average driving distance for this round of golf was 326 yards with one long outlier (385) and 2 "short outliers" (286, 296). Prior to this round of golf I had played a grand total of about 27 holes of golf between November and May with a bit more time spent on the range (mostly chipping and putting). My drives that day were long, but really wild because I was swinging hard on the 7,428 yard course (the longest I've played at, barring the U.S. Open Qualifying tees in 2016 that I played the day after the event at 7,504 yards). I had just gotten a new set of irons - literally, they were delivered on May 9th and I hadn't hit them but once at the range before the event (bad idea) - and I was still pretty nervous with the long irons. It was the first time I'd ever played a tournament with a set of full blades and it ended poorly for me since I needed more time to prepare and get used to the clubs before the tournament.

Turns out I would've been MUCH better off if I had just swung normally because my fairway accuracy was only 23% which sent my GIR down to 39%. Just a bad day overall, but definitely not me hitting it shorter/swinging slower even though I played incredibly minimal golf in the time between November 20th and May 15th.

Edited November 2, 2018 by Pretzel
Fixed yardage for the event based on previous post. Added link to thread about the event mentioned.

[billchao]

3 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

For the first 10-20 swings after a several month break I swing it slower, yes, but that's the same as the first 10-20 swings of any given day when I haven't fully warmed up or loosened up yet. When the temperature dips below 45 I also lose a couple MPH because I'm wearing a sweatshirt instead of a t-shirt. 

Yea, for me the micro stuff has more effect: how hard I worked my body during the week, the temperature or how many layers I'm wearing, that kind of stuff. I can swing slower during a session in the middle of the golf season when I'm fully in golf condition than in a random warm weather day in March simply from outside factors. I don't put any weight in those differences.

It would have to be a really long study in order to get any useful information or trends, like 10 seasons worth of my sessions in spring, summer, and fall to see if there is any significance based on the time of year (and that's only if you consider one person to be enough data to begin with, which I wouldn't unless I was the subject of the study).

And again, what would be the point? I know that my scores tend to lower as the season progresses, but that's largely independent of fluctuations in swing speed. If the OP's hypothesis is true and I swing faster in the spring, the information is trivial since it can't be applied to improve my game. I tend to score better in late summer and early fall because my game is in a groove. I wouldn't care if I was swinging slightly slower during that time.

[Pretzel]

2 minutes ago, billchao said:

And again, what would be the point? I know that my scores tend to lower as the season progresses, but that's largely independent of fluctuations in swing speed. If the OP's hypothesis is true and I swing faster in the spring, the information is trivial since it can't be applied to improve my game. I tend to score better in late summer and early fall because my game is in a groove. I wouldn't care if I was swinging slightly slower during that time.

I believe the hypothesis was the opposite, in fact, in that you swing slower in the spring compared to the fall.

21 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I have an idea....measure your swing speed...then take 3 months off.  I guarantee you that you will not swing it as fast in the spring as you did before the golf season ended.  But after you have played a few rounds in the spring and got some range time in your body will acclimate to golf again and you will regain much of the speed that you lost from your period of not playing...but only to a point...and even though you don't realize it you will likely lose a tick simply because you are getting older.

[billchao]

59 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

I believe the hypothesis was the opposite, in fact, in that you swing slower in the spring compared to the fall.

Doesn't change the larger portion of my point, but yea that's a dumb miss there, my bad.

[Righty to Lefty]

On 11/1/2018 at 4:55 PM, iacas said:

1) What a stupid topic, all based on your gross misunderstanding of what I and others posted in the original discussion.

2) Complete bullshit. 3) Improvement in technique can result in an improvement (increase) in clubhead speed, even if a golfer is in worse physical shape/condition.

There, you've been proven wrong.

Beyond that, you're asking people to argue against a tautology. 4) You're basically saying "hypothetically, if a golfer could be given his best potential form at the stage at which he reaches his peak physical performance, he'll swing slower at any other point in time." No shit. But the fact remains that 5) golfers don't all reach their peak "technique" in golf at the same time as their peak physical form.

6) I know 50-year-olds who swing faster now than they did when they were 25.

1. There is no such thing as a stupid topic. We are all trying to move towards the same goal of improvement in the game and I view things from a different perspective due to my experiences studying athletic performance in college and playing it both right and left handed.  I don't care if the 99% of the thread feels that I am wrong.  The one person that reads what I am saying and says "I see exactly what he is saying..or damn I never thought about it that way...or I don't believe him, let me go do some research and testing" is who I'm looking for. 

In college we always researched what we thought were " stupid topics" thinking that we already knew the answer only to find out we were wrong. What if no one ever disputed the old ball flight laws...those people who did were initially berated in these very same types of forums until people begin to look into it deeper and realize that the old ball flight laws were not only wrong but, way wrong.  I have done something in golf that very few can say.  I played to a low single digit handicap both right and left handed and I have never had a golf lesson in my life. I am not supremely gifted at golf, but it was not luck how I got to this point in my golf experience.  I dug into all information not just on playing the game, but the science of the game, and how all of my previous studies on athletic performance could be relevant to steepen my learning curve to find improvement at as fast a pace as possible. 

2. I will never say someone's statements are "complete bullshit" and I learned that lesson a long time ago. Will the "complete bullshit" statement still be said when the person responding has a P.H.D. in the study of athletic performance?  

3. No it cannot...an improvement in technique will improve an athletes ability to shallow their performance decline curve along with fitness and lifestyle changes but father time is undefeated and comes with a built in decrease in performance. A golfer in worse physical condition will not recover previously lost speed because inherent in improving technique is and improvement in the condition of the muscles need to have improved the golfers technique.  In order for an athlete to improve performance the muscles needed to perform the sport must be at a higher level of fitness capacity.  Another example of this is when an athlete is injured...the objective of rehab is to regain lost performance.  If the athlete comes off an injury and performs at a higher speed, did they increase their swing speed...no they did not....they conditioned the specific muscles needed for the sport to a level they were not at previously at and recovered performance they were already capable of, yet had not attained. Inactivity, injury, or time will all result in decrease in performance even if this decrease is minimal and not easily noticed. This will never exceed the athlete's max speed which would have occurred at their physical peak. 

4. That is exactly why I said that the goal in all sports is to marry up the athletes knowledge and understanding of the game along with entering their physical prime.  This is the exact reason why talent must be recognized early in life otherwise it will be "wasted." In any sport if you took your knowledge of the game at this exact moment and rewound the clock 10 years....you would be better at golf..period...no need to expound on that. 

5. Completely agree and that is exactly why I disagreed with the assertion in the other thread about a correlation in swing speed and handicap.  Your assertion that better golfers swing it faster is disproved by your own comments made above in section 4) and 5). Good golf can be played at any given time along ones performance curve but max athletic performance only occurs once. If my handicap can decrease at any point along the curve, but swing speed is only maxed out once, then swing speed is not the reason why a golfer has a lower handicap. Knowledge of the game will likely increase as time passes while physical ability will increase to a peak, then decrease. Where those graphs intersect will be that athletes "golf peak." Distance is an advantage between Pros because their knowledge of the game and technique are very similar.  Among amateur golfers if two golfers have the same handicap but one swing it at 120 and the other at 100 mph. The lower speed golfer is getting more out of their game and likely has more knowledge and experience with the game, but the higher swing speed has more potential that may or may not be realized.  

6. I would be very interested in seeing the evidence of a golfer that has played the game for 25 years managing to delay their peak physical performance until the age of 50. 

[Righty to Lefty]

On 11/1/2018 at 5:34 PM, DaveP043 said:

It is impossible to differentiate between pure physical ability versus skill and mechanics when discussing swing speed.  Both are important.  Take a novice at his absolute physical peak, and he'll never actually achieve his potential maximum swing speed, he won't have the skill to do that.  Muscles don't become coordinated, the brain becomes more skilled at sending the right impulses at the right time.  Coordination isn't muscular, its neural.

And nobody has ever said that speed is synonymous with lower handicaps.  Never.  There is a strong statistical correlation between the two, yes, but there are outliers, scatter in the data.  Even for an individual player, most who improve in scoring are also improving in speed.  Better mechanics means more speed AND more control and consistency.  Again, there are outliers, those who increase work to speed and lose accuracy, but those are exceptions, not the rule.   Speed (distance) is an important tool, but its only one of the tools necessary to score well.

Yes it was said more than once and that is how I got off on a tangent in the other thread so you can check it out and see for yourself. I know that you were also active in that thread DaveP043.  Stop Lying About Your Distance - It's Pissing Me Off (Rant Thread).    

[Righty to Lefty]

On 11/2/2018 at 5:07 AM, billchao said:

I'm not even sure how you design an experiment for this and what the point would be. I would have swung the club faster at 25 if I started playing when I was 5 instead of 24? Where would you identify my physical peak to be? What if I was out of shape and overweight at 25 and I spent the last eight years working out? More importantly, how is this information even useful?

I take three (closer to four) months off every year. It's called winter. And because I'm involved with equipment stuff through the website (and because I'm a golf geek), I spend more time on a launch monitor (hell, I own one) than a typical golfer and I can tell you there is no noticeable difference in my swing speed measured at any time during the golf season. Any changes in swing speed falls well within the typical variation you'd see from swing to swing. Average swing speed varies regularly from session to session, as well. One or two mph in either direction is not statistically significant.

I said all along that the performance decline curve is shallowed by playing, fitness, and lifestyle but you are still losing performance due to the aging process even if you don't notice it.  For instance...you eat an extra 10 calories per day than you burn.  Did you notice it or feel like you over ate that day? No you didn't but over a year that is 3.6 pounds gained, and over 10 years that is 36 pounds.  You may not notice it from day to day but over time the trend will be revealed. Your off season program shallows your performance decline because of he amount time spent on launch monitors in the off season keeps your golf specific muscles conditioned. 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

1. There is no such thing as a stupid topic.

Sure there is. See my next paragraph for why this is one.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

In college we always researched what we thought were " stupid topics" thinking that we already knew the answer only to find out we were wrong.

This is why the topic is stupid: you're asking people to prove something you've set up in a way that it can't be disproven. I told you that a guy reached a higher swing speed at age 50 than he obtained at 25, and you said something about how they "delayed" their peak physical performance until age 50. They did no such thing. They were in peak physical form at age 25, capable of producing their highest swing speed, but they produced a higher swing speed later on in life because they improved their technique substantially.

That's why the topic is stupid. You're defining something based on the result. It's circular, or tautological, or something.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

2. I will never say someone's statements are "complete bullshit" and I learned that lesson a long time ago. Will the "complete bullshit" statement still be said when the person responding has a P.H.D. in the study of athletic performance?

Yep. You said "No one who has played the game for any length of time past their physical peak will say that they swung it faster the older they got.

That statement is complete BS. A Ph.D. likely wouldn't ever say something like that, and if they did, they'd deserve to be called out on it.

But once again, you're defining "physical peak" as the moment they swing the fastest, not when everyone else would define their peak physical form.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

3. No it cannot...an improvement in technique will improve an athletes ability to shallow their performance decline curve along with fitness and lifestyle changes but father time is undefeated and comes with a built in decrease in performance.

That's in response to this (from me):

3) Improvement in technique can result in an improvement (increase) in clubhead speed, even if a golfer is in worse physical shape/condition.

The problem you have here is that you're simply wrong. People increase their clubhead speed past their physical prime all the time. ALL. THE. TIME. I see it almost daily.

The thing you don't seem to get is that you're measuring it against some mythical "peak performance period" or something, but you don't seem to understand that a golfer can have poor technique and swing more slowly and then improve that technique and swing more quickly.

You're so blind to this fact you make statements like "no one".

Again: the only way in which your theory is true is if you define "peak performance" based on the result. That's just you asking people to disprove a tautology or something.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

5. Completely agree and that is exactly why I disagreed with the assertion in the other thread about a correlation in swing speed and handicap. 

You can't "disagree" with a fact. There IS a correlation between swing speed and handicap.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Your assertion that better golfers swing it faster is disproved by your own comments made above in section 4) and 5).

No, it's not. Do you understand how statistics work? Not everyone is exactly right on the line - in fact very few are exactly on the line - but with enough samples you get a correlation. Besides, the 50 year old had a significantly lower handicap than he did when he was 25. He would have fit the correlation.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

6. I would be very interested in seeing the evidence of a golfer that has played the game for 25 years managing to delay their peak physical performance until the age of 50. 

They didn't delay their peak physical performance until the age of 50. Not unless you're using the result to define the term, in which case this entire topic is, again, pointless.

He was not in peak physical shape at 50. He was at 25. Yet he swung faster at 50 than 25. And his handicap was significantly lower (he was scratch).

[billchao]

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I said all along that the performance decline curve is shallowed by playing, fitness, and lifestyle but you are still losing performance due to the aging process even if you don't notice it. 

But this is a purely academic idea and has no application to my real life performance. If I'm slowly declining due to age but gaining performance due to fitness and training and having never played close to my peak potential, I can net gain in performance over time, which a lot of people experience. The fact that I'm never going to be as good as I theoretically could have been at my peak is irrelevant. 

A lot of people do not achieve peak performance in golf at the time they were in their athletic prime simply from not starting early enough, and golf requires a good amount of learning to be good at.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

For instance...you eat an extra 10 calories per day than you burn.  Did you notice it or feel like you over ate that day? No you didn't but over a year that is 3.6 pounds gained, and over 10 years that is 36 pounds.  You may not notice it from day to day but over time the trend will be revealed.

You're making a lot of assumptions or oversimplifying individual human behavior. Will I notice 10 extra calories a day? No. But I will definitely notice 3.6 pounds gained in a year.

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Your off season program shallows your performance decline because of he amount time spent on launch monitors in the off season keeps your golf specific muscles conditioned. 

Again you're making assumptions. I never said I have an off season program, or that I swing on launch monitors during the winter.

I wrote this:

On 11/1/2018 at 10:07 PM, billchao said:

I take three (closer to four) months off every year. It's called winter. And because I'm involved with equipment stuff through the website (and because I'm a golf geek), I spend more time on a launch monitor (hell, I own one) than a typical golfer and I can tell you there is no noticeable difference in my swing speed measured at any time during the golf season.

I fit the criteria of your "experiment" precisely and given that I own a launch monitor, have my own data on this subject. My experience does not align with your hypothesis.

[phillyk]

This topic is weird. OK, take every one of us at age 25 and put us in prime flexibility, muscle tone, strength, and whatever and then give us our own perfect swings to complement it, people would all have different max swing speeds because of genetics. Put us at age 50 and do the same thing, and sure swing speeds will have likely gone down. Age, sucks, yeah. Duh.

Reality, no one is ever in top physical shape and hitting it super far, except for maybe the guys and ladies on the World Long Drive Tour. Tiger Woods, though, after back surgery and hip surgies etc, came back and was swinging up to 129mph and carrying the ball further than ever at age 42.

Technology, technique, and physique are all important in creating speed. Combining the 3 would be great at an earlier age, but I wonder how much that drop off really is by age 50. I’d guess its not much. People may not change much physically, but technology and technique can improve significantly and increase swing speed. 

Edited November 4, 2018 by phillyk

[ChetlovesMer]

On ‎11‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 2:09 AM, Righty to Lefty said:

Prove me wrong: 

Hypothesis: Swing speed can only increase up to an given individuals physical peak at which point it will begin to incrementally decline. Any perceived gains in swing speed are the athlete shallowing the performance decline curve but the maximum speed that an athlete could have swung the club would be at their physical peak.  As the athlete gains experience in the game and improves their conditioning and technique an increase in performance can be experienced, but will never exceed what it would have produced at their physical peak because to improve at the game requires time...which also means that an athlete is moving away from their physical prime.  

PROVE ME WRONG!!

Dude, You gotta stop. 

For at least a week now I've been trying to figure out what the point is you are trying to make. 
From your hypothesis - which by the way by the strictest definition isn't a hypothesis at all it's just a meaningless statement - the best I can tell you are trying to say: We will all eventually get old and nobody can swing a club faster than they can swing it. To which AGAIN I say fine. But what's your f-ing point?!?!

15 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

1. There is no such thing as a stupid topic. We are all trying to move towards the same goal of improvement in the game and I view things from a different perspective due to my experiences studying athletic performance in college and playing it both right and left handed.  I don't care if the 99% of the thread feels that I am wrong.  The one person that reads what I am saying and says "I see exactly what he is saying..or damn I never thought about it that way...or I don't believe him, let me go do some research and testing" is who I'm looking for. 

Damn, I never thought about it that way... Because why would I? … I gotta be honest here, brother. You may be a perfectly nice person and possibly even a really good golfer. But you are simply not making a point. You are just arguing for the sake of arguing. 

Again, if you are trying to say we are all going to get old one day. To that I say ONCE AGAIN, what's you f-ing point?

If you are trying to say it's better to be younger. AGAIN, what's your point?
If you truly believe you can't get better as you get older, than once again, I feel very sorry for you. 

 

[ChetlovesMer]

15 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

 Another example of this is when an athlete is injured...the objective of rehab is to regain lost performance.  If the athlete comes off an injury and performs at a higher speed, did they increase their swing speed...no they did not....

Okay now I'm just getting snarky "If an athlete comes off an injury and performs at a higher speed, did they increase their swing speed....." Um, you just said they perform at a higher speed, so yeah I guess they increased their swing speed. Did I miss something? 

15 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

6. I would be very interested in seeing the evidence of a golfer that has played the game for 25 years managing to delay their peak physical performance until the age of 50. 

At this exact moment I'm 48 years old. My swing speed is higher than it's ever been. My handicap is lower than it's ever been. I've been playing the game for 25 years. 

Let me guess, you are going to say that I didn't maximize my potential when I was younger and ONCE AGAIN, I'll say what's your point? Nobody ever maximizes their potential. At any time at any point in their life. Besides, who knows, maybe I did. Maybe I'm maximizing it now. 

 

Oh and by the way, when you get a moment look up the definition of hypothesis. 

Lastly, I'm seriously thinking your just trolling us. If you are, congratulations you've done a masterful job. 

[Vinsk]

14 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Dude, You gotta stop. 

For at least a week now I've been trying to figure out what the point is you are trying to make. 
From your hypothesis - which by the way by the strictest definition isn't a hypothesis at all it's just a meaningless statement - the best I can tell you are trying to say: We will all eventually get old and nobody can swing a club faster than they can swing it. To which AGAIN I say fine. But what's your f-ing point?!?!

I'll tell you what happened to @Righty to Lefty; A little knowledge is dangerous. I think he was the 'Beaker' of a group of PhD's who were discussing/experimenting with a concept he didn't quite understand but was very enthralled by what they were saying. He was enamored with the thought of them being 'PhD's' and took their words for gold. Unfortunately he wasn't able to grasp what they were saying and is probably misrepresenting what they said. If these PhD's were to read this they'd probably say 'whoa, whoa..that's not what we're saying'.

9 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

At this exact moment I'm 48 years old. My swing speed is higher than it's ever been. My handicap is lower than it's ever been. I've been playing the game for 25 years. 

I can't prove this for me as I never had my swing speed measured in my 20's. It just wasn't something done much for weekend golfers in my experience. But I certainly believe my swing speed is faster now than back then. Now maybe equipment plays a factor, but I've hit many more 300+ yd drives in my 40's than I ever did in my 20's. My max bench in college was 435. I'm certain I can't do near that now. I'm 49.

[Righty to Lefty]

On ‎11‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 4:24 AM, Vinsk said:

I'll tell you what happened to @Righty to Lefty; A little knowledge is dangerous. I think he was the 'Beaker' of a group of PhD's who were discussing/experimenting with a concept he didn't quite understand but was very enthralled by what they were saying. He was enamored with the thought of them being 'PhD's' and took their words for gold. Unfortunately he wasn't able to grasp what they were saying and is probably misrepresenting what they said. If these PhD's were to read this they'd probably say 'whoa, whoa..that's not what we're saying'.

I can't prove this for me as I never had my swing speed measured in my 20's. It just wasn't something done much for weekend golfers in my experience. But I certainly believe my swing speed is faster now than back then. Now maybe equipment plays a factor, but I've hit many more 300+ yd drives in my 40's than I ever did in my 20's. My max bench in college was 435. I'm certain I can't do near that now. I'm 49.

Knowledge is the key and that is why I play to a single digit handicap right and left handed.  The answers to your questions are right there in your own statements.  It is amazing how your bench press maxed out near your physical peak in college and you know that you could do nowhere near that number now....but why...could it be because you don't bench press anymore...yes...and because you are also getting older...yes.  Now if you put your focus back on bench press and getting back into bench pressing shape then you could recover much of that lost performance I assure you.  But you will never bench press 435 pounds again.  But even if you recovered performance up to say benching 370 that is still more than most and you could still compete amongst your peers.

But what if you never bench pressed in college and didn't bench press until you were in your 40's. As your technique improved and understanding of bench pressing got better you got up to benching 380 pounds when you started at say 300 pounds initially and you would make the statement " I've increased my bench press 10 pounds and bench press more than I ever have?" Now when I say " you actually recovered performance that you already had by focused effort on bench pressing and that you would have benched more at your physical peak" make sense?  You were born stronger than others but your didn't put focused effort into your talent until after your physical peak so you missed out on maximizing your talent but you are maximizing what you have left by focused effort.  That is all that I am saying.  

This is the exact same thing that would have happened with your golf if you put focused effort into to golf coming into your college years.  You would have hit it a ton in college but your losses in speed wouldn't be as dramatic if you continued to play the game into your late 40's but you wouldn't be hitting it as far as you did in college even though your handicap could continue to drop. You don't swing it faster than you would have in your 20's, you just play more golf than you work on your bench press these days! The debate that triggered this thread in the first place was the assertion made in another thread about swing speed in relation to handicap that I disagreed with.  If I were training you my words once I know your age would be "lets see how much or your previous performance we can recover and then see how long we can hold onto it for."  If you were in your teen years it would be "lets see just how high we can get your peak performance and then see how long we can hold onto that for." These two statements are not the same as one athlete is past their physical prime and the other is entering it.

You can say that it is semantics but it is not because of the point of reference given in each of the above examples.  

 

[boogielicious]

5 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Knowledge is the key and that is why I play to a single digit handicap right and left handed.  The answers to your questions are right there in your own statements.  It is amazing how your bench press maxed out near your physical peak in college and you know that you could do nowhere near that number now....but why...could it be because you don't bench press anymore...yes...and because you are also getting older...yes.  Now if you put your focus back on bench press and getting back into bench pressing shape then you could recover much of that lost performance I assure you.  But you will never bench press 435 pounds again.  But even if you recovered performance up to say benching 370 that is still more than most and you could still compete amongst your peers.

But what if you never bench pressed in college and didn't bench press until you were in your 40's. As your technique improved and understanding of bench pressing got better you got up to benching 380 pounds when you started at say 300 pounds initially and you would make the statement " I've increased my bench press 10 pounds and bench press more than I ever have?" Now when I say " you actually recovered performance that you already had by focused effort on bench pressing and that you would have benched more at your physical peak" make sense?  You were born stronger than others but your didn't put focused effort into your talent until after your physical peak so you missed out on maximizing your talent but you are maximizing what you have left by focused effort.  That is all that I am saying.  

This is the exact same thing that would have happened with your golf if you put focused effort into to golf coming into your college years.  You would have hit it a ton in college but your losses in speed wouldn't be as dramatic if you continued to play the game into your late 40's but you wouldn't be hitting it as far as you did in college even though your handicap could continue to drop. You don't swing it faster than you would have in your 20's, you just play more golf than you work on your bench press these days! The debate that triggered this thread in the first place was the assertion made in another thread about swing speed in relation to handicap that I disagreed with.  If I were training you my words once I know your age would be "lets see how much or your previous performance we can recover and then see how long we can hold onto it for."  If you were in your teen years it would be "lets see just how high we can get your peak performance and then see how long we can hold onto that for." These two statements are not the same as one athlete is past their physical prime and the other is entering it.

You can say that it is semantics but it is not because of the point of reference given in each of the above examples.  

 

My question is, "What is your point?" You seem to meander all over the place in your posts. Your off on different tangents with every post. Now we are talking about bench pressing.

Yes, our fast twitch muscle response slows down as we get older. Do you expect a Nobel Prize for that revelation? But you are wrong that a golfer cannot improve their swing speed with proper mechanics and training after their so-called physical peak. And you refuse to accept that. Even direct proof from very experienced golf instructors is not enough for you.

Please end this discussion. It is not value-added. Folks joined this site to get better at golf and you are saying, "Don't bother. You are too old."