cbrian

To me it didn't look like Romo was taking it very seriously. I thought he was about to roll his eyes when he was talking about the clubface turning over.

Thats a very good routine when just trying to maintain or dial in what you have now. However, I was referencing when you are actually trying to make swing changes (which again, might be wrong). But while we are at it, what do you struggle with? What would you want to work on if you were to take the lessons and why?

I've listened to Utley speak to other teaching pros and he said that what he teaches may sound or feel very "handsy" or "wristy," but if you look at the stroke, it doesn't appear that way. From, what I've seen, he just wants you to use the hands "enough" to make the stroke easier to accomplish. If you allow the hands to do a little, then the rest of your body doesn't have to do so much.

Don't take this the wrong way because I could be totally off base here, but it sounds like you don't know how to practice efficiently.

You can get some decent work done in 30 minutes, but it depends on how good he is as an instructor and how well he knows your game going into the lesson. However, I'd be a little concerned about the 3 times a week part (especially if you are talking about full swing lessons). You could maybe do supervised practice sessions and/or work on other aspects of your game, but thats still a lot of times to see one another in a month. The value would also depend on your goals and what needs to be addressed to get there.

Yep! I'd prioritize it this way: Either making sure weight is forward at impact or making sure he can get into a good finish AND making sure he gets the lead wrist correct. Progression with weight would be small swings with weight preset, and then move into bigger and bigger swings with less and less preset (still getting into finish). And for the clubface, accomplish palmer flexion and then move into start direction drills.

I'm going to agree with Erik and actually take it one step further. Two things are going to prevent the alignments that you are looking for. One of those, as Erik pointed out, is weight/pressure (which might be hard to do with the stance). The second is that the clubface is WIDE open. He needs more palmar flexion in the lead wrist (Dustin Johnson) from top down to remove the necessity to flip it closed. Personally, I'd start with a drill where he sets up with weight forward and feels the left wrist flex a bunch on the downstroke. You'd get the flat left wrist pretty quickly. Then, slowly, make it more dynamic from there.

Yeah, thats me. At first I couldn't put the username with the real name, but Mike helped me out. Hope all is well!

Awesome!! Very well put Dave. Also, I wanted to say that you'll end up on a lot of people's list of influences in the future, including mine.

Not really that as much as you can just see the right elbow. In the right picture, his left arm is given more freedom to keep moving away from the ball and therefore doesn't break down like the picture on the left. Thats what stretch was talking about.

Quote: Originally Posted by iacas Nah. I don't buy it. You can't call "the information" "stack and tilt" and application of information is to create an end result: a swing. Stack and Tilt is an inline, elbow-plane, centered pivot golf swing. The "information" is physics, geometry, biomechanics. It's TGM and MORAD. It's classification and categorization. The end result of which is a swing or a pattern or a method of swinging a golf club. But at the same time people have demonstrated the variations of the pattern since the name was created. If it is just "a swing" then how can you have variations? In my opinion, what is marketed is different than what is taught. What is marketed is a simplified pattern that is aimed at your average golfer. Basically what they thought would benefit the most golfers. What is taught varies from player to player. The result is the player's swing. I consider S&T; to be a condensed version of some of the information, but not so condensed that it can be locked down into one possible swing. I feel the player can take bits and pieces and create his or her own swing. Quote: I disagree that it's difficult to get the information out there without a label. Why couldn't it simply be "what Mike Bennett and Andy Plummer teach"? What's the name of the Haney method of swinging a golf club? He doesn't have one because he's never labeled it, even if he teaches the same thing to everyone. What about Leadbetter? Harmon, does he have a method? Hardy won't teach anyone a two-plane swing unless you really force him to, but he gets credit for having "two" models. I can stay open minded all day but it doesn't change the fact that S&T; is a swing. There's a video called "Charlie Wi hitting all the positions," and the site and domain name themselves say "swing." Lately people have tried to redefine it because they find themselves getting backed into corners a bit, but it is what it is: a swing. If you don't "hit all of the positions" you don't have a "Stack and Tilt Swing." You can be working towards it, and others who don't have an "S&T; Swing" can apply a piece or two from the ten words, for example, and that's good for them, perhaps, but it's a swing. If you wanted to list, what, all 24 components from TGM you could do that. There's not a lot of flexibility in the model, and frankly, that's a big part of the reason why we've "evolved" beyond a single-swing way of instruction. That is what it was until they started to take it to the public. Then, as I understand it, they were told they needed a name. And maybe I'm different because of how I learned the information and how to teach it. No need to go into that story, but, as you know, I didn't just get to copy what I had seen. I had to figure it out the hard way. However, I think that should be an example of how it can mean different things to different people. Ultimately I don't care... a definition doesn't change anything for me.

I think you have to define exactly what you are talking about (perspective I suppose). Are we talking about the label? The information behind the label? The way the instructor implements his understanding of the information? I think your definition of what S&T; is very much has to be based on how you answer that question. If we are talking about the label, then yes, I would agree that there is a "model" or "a swing." If we are talking about the information and how a good instructor is going to implement that, then I would say no, its not "a swing." It becomes an understanding of the measurements and how you can apply those to the individual to make "his" swing better. The whole label thing is double edged. It seems very hard to get the information out there without a label. However, with a label you become an easier target. Those with vested interests bypass the information and focus attention on the label. Because of that, I think one has to stay open minded and be cautious when criticizing another's explanation of what the system means to him or her.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Time for another pic. I have a basic explanation on this one, but anyone think they can explain it in more detail? IE: Why elbows separate, etc.

Doing some work.... still working on right hip. Started working on going back into flexion today. Also, I worked on thrust near the end of my session, but didn't get a video. Hitting it so much better.

Absolutely! 110% for you... haha. Low point and distance difference was dramatic. I'll post another one soon.

Yep, and something to feel when the right knee goes out towards the toes too much. I use a stick (see the pic) or two baskets stacked on each other. So time for another. Any thoughts on what changed here (what the lines mean)? Also, do you see anything else that has changed that isn't pointed out by a line.

Yep, but I didn't tell him to bank his foot. I used a preset and a drill that encouraged the banking. Any ideas as to what those two things might be? (look close)

Its been a while since I last posted, so I figured I should put something up. I've been doing pictures recently instead of videos. I didn't start doing these with you guys in mind, but I think you guys might like these more. Or at least that's what I'm hoping. I decided to start with this one first because its been coming up recently. I'm not going to say anything at first, but instead ask you guys the questions. Why do you think I named it what I did and what do you think I changed that helped get the picture to look different on the right?

Some people need to hear no arms and some people need to hear all arms and others need a mixture of both in the same swing. Just to give a visual to what has already been said, her feel in this video was "no arms back, all arms down." Someone watching this might think that she is just rotating with passive arms though.

And again no B&A;, just a swing. We were working on not overloading and then unloading #1 and #4. I think the second half of her season is going to be a good one.

Yeah, he reminds me a lot of Troy in certain areas. Hes a super kid and really is inspired. After this golf season I will probably do a big B&A; post on him. The swing is night and day, but so are other parts of his game. Can't wait to see what he does this year. Yeah, we actually touched on the PP's. He's a young kid though (despite appearances) and hes in one of those stages where his muscles are trying to catch up with a growth spurt. So hes a little tight and a little weaker than he will be once some time passes. Because of that he has minor physical trouble performing some of the pieces. I absolutely agree with what you are saying though.

Have two updates today. Both have been on my youtube for a couple days... just getting around to posting them. First is Trev. We were just working on polishing up upper CoG stuff. If you watched the other you saw how he dipped down and forward on the backswing. We got rid of that and then we just had to make sure it wasn't going forward on the DS either. Really important for the driver. I still need to do a B&A; from when we first started working to now... He really has come a long way. Anyways, here it is And then here is my newest student. This is our first lesson... if you don't count the 4 minutes of our original lesson that ended up getting rained out. All I told him was you need to stand closer to the ball (he was really really far away) and then the rains came. This is an interesting one. I'm really, really against the idea of setup components being "fundamentals." However, setup is an extremely important piece of the puzzle, and it played a big role in this instance. For one, like I said, he was standing way too far away. Then, he was doing a really good job of what someone had told him (some of you might even think his original setup was good), but it just wasn't putting him in a good position to hit a ball.. thats on the ground at least. His neck tilt was super high, so he had to strain to see the golf ball. In fact, if you pay attention you will see it change mid swing. His shoulders were pulled back (trying to achieve a flat back), but that pulled his arms in and he couldn't get his arms extended comfortably at address. Then we got into swing stuff. The number one issue was that his shoulders turned too flat. Again, if you pay attention you will see shoulder tilt change mid swing. If the shoulders aren't working on the right pitch the arms are forced to work independently (flat shoulders, steep arms). After that we worked on his compensation of early extending. If you look at the right elbow in the DS (around p6) you will see how much more room the right elbow has. I wish I would have gotten some of the last swings he took because he started hitting it extremely well, but we just ran out of light. He actually surprised himself a few times and turned around and just smiled... I don't think he knew what to say. Anyways, still have a bunch of stuff to smooth out, but now he fulfills the real first "fundamental."

Dude, listen, you are trying to prove Erik, Michael, etc. wrong. You are the one that started this, not them. If you feel like you have a better way to do it then fine, that is your opinion and good for you. However, when you try to call someone out or poke holes in something, you can't then turn around and say they are rude when they give backing to what they teach. My opinion on your argument is that I don't understand what you are talking about. In my opinion there is minimal movement in what the Golf Evo guys teach (which is similar to what a lot of short game instructors teach). You talk about wrist hinge being a problem, but then you say that Trevino is demonstrating what you believe in. Do you not see the wrist hinge in his action? As for the part about S&T;, I'm not sure you understand. This conversation, as far as I'm concerned, has extremely little to do with S&T.; Priorities are different, thus the action is going to be different.

Great video as usual Michael! Surely it will reach a few people that need it. To that point, one thing always floors me. When I surf around youtube I see instructional pieces, put up by instructors, that demonstrate things they neither do themselves, nor do you see good golfers doing. Now think about that for a second... One, they have access to a computer. Two, they have access to a camera. And I don't mean to be negative or sound like I know everything (I certainly don't... probably not even as much as I should), but to promote some of this stuff just seems unreal to me.

First thing, get your camera angle better on the DTL shot. Whoever is holding it needs to be closer to your shoulders and needs to shoot more parallel to your shoulders. The shot that you have is distorted thanks to the fact that the person is shooting with the camera angled left. Also, when you start changing clubs, the swings are going to look different because of distortion caused by you being further away or closer to the ball. Second, while I agree that the shoulder turn starts to get a little flat, I would probably start at getting the clubface a little more open on the backswing... more roll of #3 (left forearm). That would add loft and get the club more inside without needing the left arm to be too in... which in turn will probably allow the left arm to not get kicked out on the DS. Then from there I'd work on the extension piece in the DS (head translating forward).