metrybill

Thanks for your interest, particularly as a Haney Instructor. I have a kind of complicated question. Many instructors teach a toe up position, half way back, sole of the club perpendicular to the ground. There are illustrations. I assume these instructors play and/or demonstrate with irons that have very little offset. Most amateurs play with some, a little,to a lot of offset. There are also variances according to the length of the club (short, mid iron, and long irons) and lie angles. Given the variances in grip styles (weak, neutral and strong), For Myself, I like the "feeling" of a right palm down gong back (not really what is going on), at the top the right palm facing backwards and skyward, (hold a tray on your right hand), and a trap action for irons (right palm down) through impact. This makes for very solid impact with the irons. Yes: I fight a hook but with strong hip action through it works for me. No slice but fight a hook, esp. for the teed shots. Have to work the hips hard. Solid iron contact. What are your thoughts? I play very well this way. How can I translate this to teed shots, esp. with driver, and FWD and HYB's? I want to use this "action" and style of swing off the tee but reduce my backspin with a medium to high launch. In short my ball-first contact with my irons does not swing style does not work well with my driver swings. Similarly, when I am hitting my driver well, (very little roll), my iron play suffers. Thanks, Metrybill

Strength and Depth of Field in Jack's Day and Tiger's Day This is edited from my post on another thread. It may need to be updated. Until otherwise proven, I am definitely an 18+2 =20 is better than a 14+3 = 17 believer. I am also a firm believer that Jack was more relevant on more occasions in the majors than has been Tiger. Majors: 1st/2nd/3rd Jack: 18/19/9 = 46 Tiger 14/6/4 = 24 Jack put himself in contention far more often than has the Tiger, actually nearly 2x as often. Going into Sundays, Jack won from in front and, importantly, from behind putting pressure on the leaders. To the best of my recollection, Tiger has never won a major from behind. IMO Jack played against more dominant, consistent majors competitors / contenders than has Tiger. Here are some of the players Jack beat (finished second) in his 18 majors wins. The numbers in parentheses show their career finishes in majors (1st, 2nd, 3rd). Arnold Palmer (7,10, 2) HOF (Hall of Fame) Tony Lema (1,1,0 )* * only played 10 years before his death in his mid 30's. Gary Player (9,6,3) HOF Billy Casper (3,4,1) HOF Tom Weiskopf (1,5,3) Ben Crenshaw (2,5,4) HOF Ray Floyd (4,5,1) HOF Tom Kite (1,4,1) HOF Greg Norman (2,8,4) HOF Totals: (30, 48, 22 = 100) http://www.worldgolfhalloffame.org/hall-of-fame/search-hall-of-fame-members/

This video shows the bottom line: short thumb inhibits wrist cock and will tend to hold off the release and the long thumb will tend to promote an easy wrist cock and an easy release of the hands through and after impact. IMO if one tends to "lift" the body going back, and/or has little or has lost trunk flexibility, and/or tends to make a false body turn, and/or to block coming through the long thumb will help.

Love the chart. Thanks. More fuel for the fire: Here are some of the players Jack beat (finished second) in his 18 majors wins. The numbers in parentheses show their career finishes in majors (1st, 2nd, 3rd). Arnold Palmer (7,10, 2) HOF (Hall of Fame) Tony Lema (1,1,0 )* * only played 10 years before his death in his mid 30's. Gary Player (9,6,3) HOF Billy Casper (3,4,1) HOF Tom Weiskopf (1,5,3) Ben Crenshaw (2,5,4) HOF Ray Floyd (4,5,1) HOF Tom Kite (1,4,1) HOF Greg Norman (2,8,4) HOF Totals: (30, 48, 22) http://www.worldgolfhalloffame.org/hall-of-fame/search-hall-of-fame-members/

Fun stuff, no?

Nicklaus had only one teacher: Jack Grout. Never really changed his swing, at least until he became a Seniors/Champions player, when he became a marginally bit flatter.

Ryder Cup records of Jack v. Tiger do not compare favorably for Tiger. http://www.rydercup.com/usa/history/2014-ryder-cup-player-records Tiger's injuries have been largely self-inflicted, not always part of just living. Over the top training, sometime Seal-type training. Ridiculous. If Tiger will follow Rory's golf-oriented-only training regimen, Tiger might have a shot at coming back. Here are some of Tiger's problems, in no particular order of importance, IMHO: He is 39; He has changed / altered his technique and swing at least 3 times, since 1997; he has been injured, or injured himself, or been injured by someone else, several times; he has had at least 5 teachers, ? from his boyhood, Ledbetter, Harmon, Haney, Foley, anyone else?; He is no longer the longest player on the tour; he has avoided (self-indulgence) courses that he doesn't like - cf. Nicklaus who played everywhere; He has LOST HIS KNACK FOR SCORING from lack of play; He has lost his advantage as the best short game player on Tour, or no worse than 2nd to Mickelson and several others; His picadilos have taken off of the godlike list - he is just a joe; He is no longer the clearly most fit person on tour; He has and he will have for sometime to come an unsettled personal life; He is no Hogan, Nicklaus, Watson, ... Julius Boros : 1968 PGA Championship, 48 years, 4 months, 18 days Jack Nicklaus : 1986 Masters, 46 years, 2 months, 23 days Old Tom Morris : 1867 British Open, 46 years, 99 days Jerry Barber: 1961 PGA Championship, 45 Years, 3 months, 6 days Hale Irwin : 1990 U.S. Open, 45 years, 15 days old Lee Trevino : 1984 PGA Championship, 44 years, 8 months, 18 days Roberto de Vicenzo : 1967 British Open, 44 years, 93 days Harry Vardon : 1914 British Open, 44 years, 41 days Raymond Floyd : 1986 U.S. Open, 43 years, 9 months, 11 days Ted Ray: 1920 U.S. Open, 43 years, 4 months, 16 days old Only 33 of the last 410 major championships dating to the 1860 British Open has been won by a player in his 40s. Here’s a look at the players, including the tournament and where it was played. Check out how many have won after Nicklaus's 1986 win at the Masters: AGE 48 Julius Boros, 1968 PGA Championship, Pecan Valley AGE 46 Jack Nicklaus, 1986 Masters, Augusta National Old Tom Morris, 1867 British Open, Prestwick AGE 45 Hale Irwin, 1990 U.S. Open, Medinah Jerry Barber, 1961 PGA Championship, Olympia Fields AGE 44 Lee Trevino, 1984 PGA Championship, Shoal Creek Robert De Vicenzo, 1967 British Open, Royal Liverpool Harry Vardon, 1914 British Open, Prestwick AGE 43 Ben Crenshaw, 1995 Masters, Augusta National Raymond Floyd, 1986 U.S. Open, Shinnecock Hills Julius Boros, 1963 U.S. Open, The Country Club Ted Ray, 1920 U.S. Open, Inverness Old Tom Morris, 1864 British Open, Prestwick AGE 42 Payne Stewart, 1999 U.S. Open, Pinehurst No. 2 Tom Kite, 1992 U.S. Open, Pebble Beach Gary Player, 1978 Masters, Augusta National Tommy Bolt, 1958 U.S. Open, Southern Hills J.H. Taylor, 1913 British Open, Royal Liverpool Willie Park Sr., 1875 British Open, Prestwick AGE 41 Vijay Singh, 2004 PGA Championship, Whistling Straits Mark O’Meara, 1998 British Open, Royal Birkdale Mark O’Meara, 1998 Masters, Augusta National Sam Snead, 1954 Masters, Augusta National Henry Cotton, 1948 British Open, Muirfield Harry Vardon, 1911 British Open, Royal St. George’s Old Tom Morris, 1862 British Open, Prestwick AGE 40 Jack Nicklaus, 1980 PGA Championship, Oak Hill Jack Nicklaus, 1980 U.S. Open, Baltusro l Ben Hogan, 1953 British Open, Carnoustie Ben Hogan, 1953 U.S. Open, Oakmont Ben Hogan, 1953 Masters, Augusta National James Braid, 1910 British Open, St. Andrews Old Tom Morris, 1861 British Open, Prestwick What do you think? Don't be shy. It's OK to beat me up. It is ok. Go for it. btw, Gary Player, arguably the most fit man over an extended period of time in the history of the Game, last won a PGA event at the age of 42-43. Sorry, Tiger. IMHO, for the first time in your life, there will be a field of competitors who will/may have a run at Hall of Fame Status, other than Mickelson (a lock). Rory et al. Honestly, what players in their prime, Majors winners, has Tiger played against who are currently locks for the golf Hall of Fame?

I like the BOAT moniker. Thanks. EVERY Major winner was at that point in time better than everyone else for that week. Colin Montgomerie is a lesser version of Tom Kite, who DID win a major. Montgomerie is not a gnat on Ben Crenshaw's buttocks btw.Lanny Wadkins,Time Kite., and Weikopf. Steve Sticker IS the better player than any current player, who has one Major. Level of competition Peter Thomson is the most underrated Majors Champion. One Major does not make a great player, But without at least one Major one should NOT be a Hall of Famer.

I AM one of the 18>14 men. Jack IS the greatest of all time, at least until unseated by Tiger. The latter is quickly losing ground in his quest, but there is still time. Not sure I like the GOAT moniker for the Greatest Golfers of All Time. Having said that, let me express my admiration for Nicklaus, Tiger, and so many others and my perspective as a 66 y.o. player of 50 years. Please bear with me. Please. It's interesting to note that most of the following came from very humble, even poor backgrounds, notwithstanding the fact that golf has long been considered the game of the elite. No; well before the Tiger, the game was largely dominated by men of very humble beginnings. Notwithstanding much due respect to Bobby Jones. Francis Ouimet; enough said. Very, very poor. Golf for the very, very poor became a possibility over the wealthy, advantaged elite. Walter Hagen almost single-handedly created the PGA "tour," which became The Tour of today and "outings." It is well-documented that Hagen was not allowed into country club clubhouses, changed his clothes in his expensive cars with the help of his valet-driver-caddie (if he changed them at all), and competed against players that spent most of their time as club pros and part-time tour players. There may be no way of telling how many exhibitions Hagen played for guaranteed and (oft-times) split purses in advance of the finish. (btw, this practice was still in existence in the late '60's when I caddied in two tour events. I have no idea of this practice was outlawed, although I suspect and hope that it was long ago.) Bobby Jones was an amateur, at least as defined at the time. His father and grandfather were both wealthy. Jones also worked for Spalding, receiving a salary and who knows what other incentives for designing golf clubs with his name on them. An extraordinary talent, he competed against the best amateurs and pros at Home and abroad. A slight man by all accounts, he hit the ball extraordinary distances with equipment that would be considered extremely primitive by today's standards. If you have the interest and the time, check out his movie-star type instructional videos and let us know what you think. He was a Renaissance-man type golfer, learned in engineering (Ga. Tech.), literature (Harvard), and read for the law to become a lawyer after a little more than a year at Emory law school. Sarazen (an even smaller man), Byron Nelson, Snead, Gary Player, Hogan, Demaret, Palmer, Trevino, Rodriguez, and Ballesteros all came from very humble backgrounds. (I would almost include the diminutive, short game genius Paul Runyan in this category, just b/c of his short game prowess). NIcklaus' dad was by all accounts somewhere between upper middle class and barely "rich." Now for the Tiger. By all appearances, Tiger, the son of a retired Army officer, also came from very humble beginnings. However, my own personal suspicion is that is only an appearance. Earl traded heavily on his son's potential as a prodigy. Tiger was his father's "ticket" and "property" from a very, very early age. Think Johnny Carson. I would argue that Earl was paid for his son's potential before Tiger was paid for it. How does one explain Tiger's travels, equipment, lessons from Ledbetter, entry fees, ... go on and on? A free ride to Stanford. Tom Watson, Johnny Miller, Ray Floyd ... advantaged upbringings, yes, but also self-made, hard working, and vastly competitive, improved golfers. Put Wadkins and Kite in there, too. (Kite practically invented the modern L-wedge, altbeit at a 34", 58*Cleveland gap wedge.) Tiger's injuries, past and present, are not remotely as bad as those of Ben Hogan. Check it out. IMHO Tiger's course management has been second only to Jack's, but still a distant second. IF Tiger can bring himself back to the field in driving distance, improving accuracy and fairways hit, and absolutely BEG for the opportunity to shine on and around the greens, he may find himself in contention and winning majors again. Tiger cannot count on beating McIlroy ever again head-to-head. Tiger cannot out drive, hit more greens in regulation, make more putts, or intimidate today's players. Tiger's narcissism will be his undoing, until he accepts his limitations and he adapts. Fans don't pull for Tiger the Man, fans pull for Tiger the Talent, the Powermeister, the prodigy. He is no longer The Talent. Tiger may, should, could become the Corey Pavin with world class but not premiere length. Does anyone see Tiger becoming the Tom Watson of the next 25 years? I don't; but I could be wrong. Metrybill OK; I cannot resist. Can anyone see Tiger becoming a true Gentleman? See narcissism, supra.

You are really onto something here. This is pure Hogan and Tom Watson, the latter of which emphasized in his instructional book the idea of trying to squeeze the elbows together through impact. Here is a good video: There is actually a training aid that you may buy relatively inexpensively which is an elastic band, essentially two large rubber bands joined at the middle, which wrap around the forearms to ingrain the feel. Another form of this is to try to keep both of the elbows pointing downward during the backswing and the downswing, after setting up with the elbows pointing inward toward the hips at address.

Open to conversation. If he promotes the 2" shoulder blade takeaway back to the target for a 90* shoulder turn, then shouldn't it be a 2" move of the left shoulder blade back to square, and another 2" left shoulder blade move behind to a full shoulder turn follow through? Don't get me wrong, I like this idea but I think it is grossly oversimplistic.

Jack v. Tiger. It's a 2 man list, isn't it? Wonderful. Those of you who have the math and engineering skills, try to compute how far Tiger would hit the ball with a Nicklaus,steel, heavier 43", steel shafted driver (Nicklaus), 200 sq. cm, today.

Non sequitur here: you decide. Not totally on point but close. Pinehurst no. 2 is a great golf course. No doubt. Let's face it, Scottish courses are the seminal courses for golf, also no doubt. Having said that, I don't consider Pinehurst No. 2, as redone, representative of the best of what American golf courses have brought to the game. I think the USGA was trying to make a statement about its desire to "go green" and water bare, EPA friendly. Pinehurst no. 2, as redone, may have looked like a British Open course, but I didn't see a lot of bump and runs from a distance, one of the landmarks of a British Open course. Give Martin Kaymer a Lot of Credit, he figured out the setup for that tournament and he also executed better than anyone else. I prefer the differences between the tournaments, To me this year's US Open looked more like a British Open than an U. S. Open, Not lot of shot making going into the greens. (Remember, the larger American ball became the game-changer in golf, because it could be "worked" better than the bullet shots of the smaller R&A;, smaller diameter ball. Look it up; by almost every definition, America's first great golf course was and remains National Golf Links by C. B. Macdonald, not by Donald Ross. In prior years in degree of prestige and difficulty I would have ranked US Open 1st, Masters 2nd, British Open 3rd, and PGA 4th. This year, I would rank them Masters 1st, British Open 2nd, PGA 3rd, and US Open 4th. USGA, please don't do this again for another 10-15 years again, Please.

New to the game? Time-tested golf cliches: Playing 9 or 18 alone is common. Top amateurs and pros do it all the time, or did it in their past. Play short tees to learn and to become confident with the short game; and also play long tees to learn the importance of the long game. A poor short game puts stress on the long game. A poor long game puts stress on the short game. Spend as much time as possible (75%) on the driver, wedge and putter. After you can break 90, spend a good deal of time on your irons, until you can break 85. Try as much as possible to play with a single digit handicapper. See how he/she manages his/her scoring game. Play from a tee that is proper for your length and distance with all clubs, esp. off the tee. The golfer who can chip and putt can play with anyone. Handicap, you know. The trees are filled with long hitters and slicers. Watch the Greatest Game Ever Played, Caddie Shack (I), and Bagger Vance. Take some lessons, periodically and regularly. Play alone frequently, at least until you can finish every hole with the same ball and not score worse than a triple bogey for the entire round - and sink all putts. Play your own, one-man scramble, It takes 3-4 balls: 1 of 2 best balls (your potential) and 1 of 2 worst balls (consistency) for a realistic learning curve. When you do play with others, have a bet even if it is a $1 Nassau . Graduate to "presses" and then "automatic, 2 down presses." Find out what that means. There are also games called Skins (strategy, ties, and hero shots), Wolf (my least favorite, but ego, fun and strategy), and nines (my favorite, consistency to handicap). WELCOME TO A GREAT FRATERNITY, no entry fee required, dating back over 500 years. ENJOY. Get the golf "fever." The practice tee and the practice green are where to learn, improve, test, improve, and prepare. The golf course is where to learn how to apply, to learn, to test strategy, to score, and to compete. Bobby Jones: Learn to compete against "Old Man Par."