logman

I don't really understand the "throw you a little bone", what's that? Thanks for the congrats'...........I think? Umm? I don't understand the bowling reference at all......so did you shoot a perfect game or not?

It really is some grip isn't it. It tried hitting with the HSS, and wow it's a super powerful grip and body movement. I just couldn't control the hook well enough. I think my lower body just opened up and the pull/hook took over. I didn't stick to it enough to reprogram myself but I could definitly see the potential.

Hey Meenman, did it with the 42 niblick

Yep, that seems pretty reasonable

Yeah, Absolutely forward. But not as a preset forward or a 90/10 or 80/20 or as a conscious element of the swing. I'd say if I can get back to near 50/50 or 60/40 then that range is all I need to make the swing. What I'm trying to guard against is my upper body twisting too much and my legs and waist having as little influence as possible.

Hey Stoverny, do you use the Heard Super Swing grip?

Hole 5, yarra bend par 3. 120 meter pitching wedge...I was just pacticing and hitting 3 balls. The first went in!!

Ed, there's optimism and there's self delusion

Alright LW!!, Good speed, good plane, The only thing I can see is you look a bit timid on the ball. Keep it going !

Chunky, mate, My last 3 rounds have been a 1 under 31(9holes), a 73 and a 75 (easy course). I'm doing OK. How you going,pal?

well, In a way ,yes.. but I love finding out about things in a "self discovery" way. I find those little moves forward a really interesting way to play the great game.

Wow in depth guys!. My "knowledge" is based on trial and error, feel, whatever. So I'd been noticing that with this new swing my big failing is falling back. It's kinda easy when the instruction is to keep your head over your rear knee and the body should move forward at impact -but only as a reaction to what the arms are doing. Anyhow I've got the tempo problems under control but I'm amazed that my weigh is passive but it doesn't seem to matter in terms of ball striking or distance. If I go against the teachings of Mr. Kuykendall, and press forward and hit down and finish on my font foot my dispersion goes up, the ball goes lower, shorter......all bad. If I go back to the teachings, that is flat feet, wide stance bugger all weight transfer, head over back knee etc the swing comes back into it own. It led me to question the weight forward idea.

Don't know but it was cobras new baffler iron....funny looking thing , abit like the niblick. 180 meters with a 7 iron.....I'm calling bullshit on myself!

I was doing some tyre kicking at the local golf store and the guy said "dwanna have hit?" Stupid question really. It was the new Xhot from Cally so I gave it a hit. 105, 110, 114. No warm up and very uncomfortable grips(I use thick as, almost cricket bat size). I tried a 7 iron........85 mph, and wait for it 180 meters!!!! Bollocks. The guy then told me I'd need x stiff in all my sticks! I told him that my 7 iron is a 155 meter club and maybe he should try turning the Trackman off and back on again(I.T crowd style). WTF?

Really! I'm surprised at that. So something like an e7 will go the same distance as a b330 spin ball!! ......Pinnacle gold goes the same distance as a prov1??!!! **** me!

A guy I play with occasionally uses a "distance" ball. He's a scratch guy that regularly hits 300 meter drives and finishes well under par(Bastard). His rational is he's a huge hitter and most of the greens he's playing to are watered, soft, almost pluggy greens. He says it doesn't matter what ball he hits to the green, it's gunna stop anyway, so he may as well hit a distance ball to get within wedge territory.

I thought I was the dumbest man on this forum!!!

High swing point? height swinging position,.........hello Stuart Peabody???

Congrats man, now the next one

Yeah I think you've pretty much got what I'm trying to say about reactive v prerequisite . However , the two edged sword thing is still there. I reckon if you do a 90/10 weight shift on a half shot then you're flirting with disaster. Wouldn't a better way to talk about weight forward be to say "adequate " weight forward. That is within a range is ok. That is the weight forward is enough to keep balance during the shot, enough to feel that you can swing at your full speed without balance and leverage becoming an"issue" in the swing

I agree with you about the guy who's hitting the ball 200 yards with the driver, I mean can you imagine hitting a very slow paced swing and driving your body into the 90/10 position. I think that would be obsessive and could lead to compensations in the swing. Surely a better way would be to move your weight forward by the appropriate amount for the golfer and for the swing. And the only way to get that to work would be to use weight forward as a reactive element rather than a prerequisite.

Hi all, is not meant to be a pot storing or anything like that. But I've played weight forward, so weight forward that I'm almost on One leg and neutral stance and falling backward . And by far the worst position to be in is falling back followed by extreme weight forward. What I'm saying is there is danger in weight forward. Imho there are no positions or actions in the golf swing that are solely positive. They're all double edge swords. So even the seemingly benign action of going from 50/50 to 90/10 comes with a downside. IMHO weight forward should be viewed as a reactive stance rather than a set "move" that's performed as an intrinsic part on the swing. My point is that the weight forward idea is a thing that should "happen" in the swing because of what's happened before. So a reactive movement . Ps I didn't want this to turn into a "because the pros do it " discussion because it tends to kill the discussion . Pps. Also Erik, this is not meant to be a crack at your 5 keys.

Absolutely I'm guessing, as has every golfer since golf was devised. My point is that Aimpoint is slightly less of a guess than the traditional method but guessing it is. The thing that gripes me is the Aura of science and physics that is used to promote it.

Well, I've got a view..... but I want others to maybe put theirs as well. That's OK isn't it?

Yeah , but what I'm trying to say is that there seems to be a very big emphasis on the weight going from 50/50ish to 90/10 ish. And at the same time a forward press of the club handle. So at impact and just before, at that critical split second we're trying to load the lower body to the right amount so we can keep the forward lean on the club. Don't get me wrong weight forward is good(I think?) but is it a desirable thing to do if you're using it to provide yourself with the impact position that you're seeking in the first place. I mean if you set up neutral and dont get to that 90/10 weight forward position then your shot could be knackered. Weight forward becomes an "issue" in the swing instead of a natural reaction to the movements of the arms, and upper body. Weight forward becomes a prerequisite and not a reaction. Just on a personal observation, my best swings are made when I have no thought of weight forward...but I'm sure my weight is moving forward. My worst swings are if I consiously "press" forward on impact or worse fall back at impact. Gdaddy ..... you need to get some coaching