Jump to content

Pretzel

Moderator
  • Content Count

    3,229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Everything posted by Pretzel

  1. 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: 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: 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
  2. No, it's comparing risks and rewards. In the proposed scenario you are risking 5 years spent in jail if you fail, but the reward if you succeed is $5,000,000. In the comparison you are risking a horrible death in a car crash if you fail to make it to the ice cream shop safely, among other things, and the reward is getting ice cream. The odds of failure are low enough to offset the relatively small reward, however. The odds of success are 99.99%, or more. In this case the odds of success are somewhere between 70% and 90%, depending on your skill level. This means you have a 10-30% chance of going to jail for 5 years, but a 70-90% chance of winning 5 million dollars. The "average" expected outcome over the course of many golfers would thus be 0.5-1.5 years in jail and 3.5-4.5 million dollars. It just comes down to how risk adverse you are when you're wagering jail time against money. For those who are older it's likely a bad move. I outlined on the 3rd page why I would take the risk, but the general gist is that because I'm young losing those 5 years wouldn't ruin my life (with only about a 15% of it happening to me) but the $5,000,000 would be a huge boost that could help me ensure financial stability and success for the rest of my life.
  3. The Maltby Playability Factor is useless when it comes to determining how easy or hard to hit a given model of clubs will be. I play Mizuno MP4 irons, which are muscleback blades, with a MPF of 397. The 2016 Titleist AP2 irons, which are significantly easier to hit than my blades, have a MPF of 417. The 2016 Titleist CB blades have a MPF of 464, almost 50 higher than the far more forgiving AP2 irons. They also rate the PING i210 irons as having a MPF of only 338, and I can assure you that the i210 irons are immensely more forgiving than my MP4's despite having a 59 point lower MPF. They also rate the i200 irons, the direct predecessor to the i210 irons, at more than 100 points higher on the MPF scale at 474 despite the fact that the i200 and i210 irons are virtual identical in terms of playability according to pretty much every review out there. They also claim that the i500 Forged irons, with a MOI of 15.6808, are SUBSTANTIALLY less forgiving than the iBlades, with their MOI of 14.1625 (188 for i500 Forged vs 430 for iBlade). The i500 Forged irons also have a COG that is positioned further to the rear than on the iBlades. The Maltby Playability Factor severely overrates the vertical center of gravity, and it fails to properly account for different lofts in different sets of irons. Part of why the i500 Forged loses so many points to the iBlades is because it's 6-iron (the only measured clubhead for MPF) has 27 degrees of loft instead of 31 degrees like the iBlades. Hell, even the 7-iron of the i500 Forged irons has less loft (30.5 degrees) than an iBlade 6-iron. Maltby may be many things, but a good evaluator of which clubs are forgiving he is not. He designed the system to maximize the ratings of his own clubhead designs, weighting the importance of different measurements accordingly.
  4. Michael Jordan has serious incentive to say bullshit like this. He wants to pretend like he'll always be the GOAT for basketball and others, such as LeBron or Curry, can't be compared to him because they're "from a different era". The truth of the matter is it's pretty damn easy to compare players of the same sport across different eras. You (and Michael Jordan) are just salty because the numbers might not turn out the way you want them to.
  5. Yeah, unfortunately those were just poorly made clubs. Either the casting process was garbage, the material was garbage, or both were bad. Nothing you can do to inspect this before the purchase unless you hit them on the range, because the flaws and defects that cause it won't be apparent from just looking at them. If you stick with a name brand such as Wilson, Spalding, or Callaway you shouldn't have any of these problems because the casting process for the heads (and the material used) will be of a much higher quality. Of the clubs you mentioned I would most strongly recommend the used Callaway XR's, since those are a solid set of irons for a beginner that will last you for a long time. For reference on how long a set of quality irons will last, in 2009 I bought a set of used PING Eye 2 irons manufactured prior to 1990 with the exempted square grooves. They'd been used for decades with the only modification being that they had been re-gripped dozens of times. I put in my preferred shafts of the time, used them for 3 years, then reshafted them after needing an x-flex instead of a regular and used them for 2 more. It was only then that I decided to replace them, simply because I had hit the 8-iron (and other clubs) so many times on the course and range that the grooves were disappearing. You can see photos of this in the thread I linked below, where the bottom groove of the 8-iron was just gone and the other grooves were actually becoming significantly narrower because of the metal folding in on top of the cut out section. Suffice to say, you will not have longevity problems from a set of Callaway XR irons from 2015.
  6. Correct, I specified standard difficulty to mean a course with a rating similar to its par, but I can understand most courses aren't that way. 36 holes on the same day is only an issue for those with some sort of disability or who are very out of shape, because the PGA requires the use of golf carts for the PAT currently (https://www.pga.org/articles/playing-ability-test-pat-policies-and-procedures).
  7. No, he wouldn't say that because he knows it would make it more likely for him to be beat. Once Tiger won 3 Ams saying that Ams don't count made it less likely for him to be beat. Him claiming that senior tour wins should count only makes it more likely for him to be beat, rather soundly, and Jack is smart enough to know this.
  8. Jack would never say that. He knows if he does his record will be broken in under 10 years, easily, because Tiger qualifies for the senior tour in 7 years and would wipe the floor with every player on it.
  9. That's impressive, it looks like they managed to infringe upon two different copyrights at once!
  10. That's true, I was assuming that the ball had moved forwards when it fell off the tee. I was thinking of what happened to Zach Johnson at the Masters, except when the player was intending to hit the ball.
  11. A player on my high school team had a truly superhuman swing speed like this. As a 17 year old in high school he had a SS of between 135 and 140. It was fast enough that his PING i20 driver broke after he used it for only 2 years, because he literally caved the face in. That was something I previously didn't know was even possible. Practice, technique, and flexibility are what gives you swing speed. Being a larger person (tall and long arms, not fat) also helps you out. As far as technique goes, a lot of it is just about the hips getting ahead of the shoulders, the shoulders ahead of the arms, and then unwinding everything with good timing to whip the club through the ball. Instead of having to actually turn your hips, back, or shoulders that fast you're using each part of the body to add tension and then unwinding it to be straight through impact. Here's Cameron Champ, the driving distance leader, at impact: You'll notice that at impact his hips are nearly entirely ahead of the target. It's also hard to see because the video was cropped poorly, but he's up on the toes of both of his feet through impact because he is driving his body up as well as around to help increase speed. Compare this to one of the shortest hitters on tour, Ben Crane, and you can see a substantial difference in the amount of hip and shoulder rotation the two have at impact: Ben's belt buckle is barely pointing past the golf ball, because he simply doesn't get quite the same hip rotation as Cameron Champ. Another notable long hitter, Rory McIlroy, can be seen doing the same thing below. It's interesting to note that Rory McIlroy is a pretty small guy yet still one of the longest hitters, in part thanks to the fact that his hip rotation is some of the fastest that's been measured by professional golfers. His hips actually get so far ahead of the rest of his body that they are forced to rotate backwards immediately after impact, to give you an idea of the amount of tension he's putting into his spine with all that twisting. Most tour pros average a max of 550 degrees per second of hip rotation. Rory averages a max of 720 degrees per second, and puts enough tension into his abdominal obliques that they pull the hips backwards at about 380 degrees per second. For reference, most amateurs rotate their hips forwards at only 350 degrees per second.
  12. The trick is to use a chisel tip pen/marker, that's what creates that distinctive looking font. Letters are pretty easy to practice and get super near because there's only ten of them, but the trick to writing out names that neatly is that you always use all capital letters. Still takes some time to get them looking nice, but it makes things easier than if you also used lowercase letters since most capitals have more straight lines and fewer curves.
  13. Yes, because he asked about what would happen if you re-teed the ball and played it regardless of the rule against doing so. It seemed as though he knew you got a 1 stroke penalty if you intended to hit the ball but whiffed.
  14. Two rules apply here, which I'll go into depth later. I can briefly answer your questions up front though. 1) One stroke penalty, and the ball must be replaced (under Rule 9.4) 2) Disqualification (under Rules 1.3.b.1 and 3.3.b.3) For the first question, Rule 9.4 states the following: Obviously none of the exceptions for Rule 9.4 apply here, and the player should be penalized 1 stroke and is required to replace the ball on the ground where it fell from the tee originally. The primary concern of the second question is rule 1.3.b.1, which states: The second question's second concern is Rule 3.3.b.3, which states: The only exception to this rule is for a failure to include an unknown penalty, which does not apply to this scenario. The player should be disqualified if he/she returns a scorecard without adding the penalty.
  15. You heard it here first! Tiger's secret to Masters success is a tune-up at TPC Sawgrass before the main event.
  16. To answer that question, the only swings that will be different enough from each other to need to practice individually would be wedges, irons, and driver/woods. Like @boogielicious said, a Gap/Pithcing Wedge, 7-iron, and Driver would be plenty for working on the differences in how they swing. For the most part though, like I said, the fundamentals carry over from one piece to another - just with different feelings. It would probably be a good idea to just check the clubs for loft a lie. Especially with softer forged irons like Mizunos (it's less of an issue with harder cast clubs like PING irons), they can tend to change in loft and lie angle as you continue to use them over the years. It's probably not a problem, but it's worth checking for the peace of mind at least.
  17. For lessons it doesn't really matter which club you use. The same swing fundamentals will apply for every club in the bag. If you have particular issues with irons in general, or problems specifically with the driver, then it's worthwhile to bring that up with the instructor and have them look to see what you're doing with that type of club specifically. Other than that, however, just use whatever club will get you to the target you're aiming for. The difference between an 8, 7, and 6 iron is all purely in your head (none of them are significantly different from the others), so as you improve your fundamentals and swing mechanics those things will carry over to every club in the bag.
  18. Players who are a +4.2 handicap are capable of playing on Tour, but it strongly depends on their level of consistency. +4.2 is not going to make you one of the elite by any means, but it is enough to make it onto the tour and grind out a living IF you are a +4.2 who consistently plays to their handicap in tournaments without any scores much worse than a +2 differential or so. Here's a good slideshow from 2014 listing the handicap indexes of multiple different tour pros (some from the senior tour): https://www.golf.com/photos/handicaps-pga-tour-pros A summary from the slideshow (because I hate that format): Bubba Watson - +7.7 at Isleworth Country Club Phil Mickelson - +6.9 at Whisper Rock Golf Club (+6.3 currently, low H.I. of +7.1) Tim Herron - +4.8 at Whisper Rock Golf Club Paul Casey - +6 at Whisper Rock Golf Club Fred Funk - +2.3 at Pablo Creek Golf Club Aaron Baddeley - +4.7 at Whisper Rock Golf Club Jim Furyk - +5.8 at Pablo Creek Golf Club Geoff Ogilvy - +5.8 at Whisper Rock Golf Club Martin Kaymer - +6.6 at Whisper Rock Golf Club Paul Goydos - +4.6 at Dove Canyon Golf Club Tom Pernice - +4.6 at Bear Creek Golf Club Other pros with known handicaps (source: https://www.golfdigest.com/story/yes-some-tour-pros-have-a-handicap-phils-is-52) include Kevin Streelman (+5.3), Paul Casey (+3.9), Billy Mayfair (+3.7), and Chez Reavie (+4.5). Back onto the point about consistency, at my best I had a handicap index of +2.3 but I wouldn't consider myself anywhere near as good of a golfer as Fred Funk was in 2014. In my last 20 rounds at that point I had about 2 rounds at a +4-5 differential, 5 rounds at between a +2 and +3 differential, 7 rounds at about a 0 differential, and the other 6 were between 1 and 6 for the differential. If I played in a PGA Tour tournament where the course rating was a 74, I could have expected to score 75-80 about 30% of the time. I would have shot about 74 about 35% of the time, 71-72 about 25% of the time, and 69 or 70 about 10% of the time. In other words, my average score on a PGA Tour track would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 74-76ish. To make the cut I'd have to shoot a 70 or better two days in a row, at the very least, leaving me with literally a 1% chance of making the cut if we want to be generous (10% chance of shooting 69-70 happening twice in a row is 0.1 * 0.1 = 0.01). This, of course, discounts the fact that there's a big difference between the tournaments where I got my handicap index from (junor events like RMJGT and AJGA, as well as local qualifiers) and PGA Tour tournaments. The odds of me scoring the same as I did in much more relaxed events is relatively low considering my already inconsistent scoring. On the other hand, if someone with a +4.2 handicap has all of their last 20 differentials between +3 and +5 they might have a more realistic shot. They'd be a consistent enough scorer that they could, potentially, make a living from professional golf because they can grind out scores in the 60's day in and day out. They have to be capable of shooting their handicap differential, however, even in adverse conditions. They'll see the course for the first time on Monday, they'll be jetlagged, there will be television crews, there will be crowds and the crowd will never be quiet or well-behaved as you'd like them to be, you will have to take time out of your day for drug tests, media appearances, and other "non-golf" items. Point being, a +4.2 could potentially play on tour but only if they're a +4.2 at any course in the world with any level of pressure/distraction and they rarely (maybe 1-2 per revision) post a score with a differential worse than +3. A great example of how good players can be without being capable of making it on the tour, and an example of the huge gap between pros and even the best amateurs, can actually be seen in this course vlog: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyyC6guJJl0 That vlog is actually a 3 part series, but to spare you the trouble Jon Rahm is playing with the YouTuber and the course owner. Neither the course owner nor Rahm warmed up (there is no range at the course in the video, at least not when the video was filmed) and the course owner went out and shot a 5-under 67. Jon Rahm was messing around for a media event, talking during his swings, and set a course record by shooting a 10-under 62. This no-name amateur can shoot an incredible round of golf while smoking cigars and screwing around, yet he still isn't good enough to go pro because you can see he still got beaten black and blue by an actual Tour professional. It's really hard for most people to picture just how good tour pros are, but I think videos like that are a great example that puts it into perspective (see also Graeme McDowell playing with @David in FL and shooting 63 at Lake Nona, also while talking during shots and generally not paying attention to the game). Comparing myself to that, I went out to play "two" rounds of golf today for fun (played 2 balls at once) and shot 71 and 70 in similar conditions without a warmup beforehand. This was, however, on a municipal course that only measures 6,800 yards (rather than a championship golf course) and there's absolutely no way I would have come close to shooting 65 or better like it was nothing. FWIW, I'm doubtful that I'm a plus handicap golfer anymore but it still gives some perspective considering the best handicap I ever attained.
  19. It seemed like the 12th hole really helped decide the winner of the Masters this year. Four different players up at -9 or better hit it into Rae's Creek - Koepka, Molinari, Finau, and Poulter all went for a swim. Tiger did his usual thing where he played for the center of the green (just over the bunker) so that even if he missed short he wouldn't go into the water hazard. It leaves a long putt, but it's one he practices because he knows that's where he's going to try to hit the ball on Sunday.
  20. Pros from 1997-2008 who were of similar caliber to the stars during Jack's time (Irwin, Watson, Seve, Trevino, Player, Palmer, and Miller), listed in no particular order: Phil Mickelson Ernie Els David Duval Nick Price Davis Love III Vijay Singh Fred Couples Jim Furyk Sergio Garcia Mark Calcavecchia Chris DiMarco Fred Funk Brad Faxon Nick Faldo Stewart Cink David Toms Luke Donald Payne Stewart Padraig Harrington Literally any other player in the top 20ish each year for scoring average that averaged fewer than 70 strokes per round
  21. Interesting that you say a lower compression ball gives you less spin. My experience, at least with a fairly high clubhead speed (124mph), is that most low compression golf balls spin like crazy off the tee and can be prone to ballooning. This at least was true in the past, I haven't tried many of those balls in quite some time. That said, I think it's possible that this is changing. Up until 2015 I played a ProV1x, which was a ~100 compression ball, and then in 2015 used the newer Pro V1 because they finally made one that didn't have absurd spin off the tee and I liked the softer feel since the ProV1 is a ball with ~90 compression. In 2018 I actually switched to a Bridgestone Tour B XS, a 75 compression ball, because I found it gave me even more spin with wedge and an even softer feel without sacrificing distance off the tee. It seems like ball manufacturers are figuring out how to make a low compression golf ball that doesn't have insane spin off the tee. The Pro V1 released in 2011 had so much spin off the tee that my ball would always embed in wet fairways (came down way too steep) and would get 3-5 yards of roll otherwise. The one released in 2013 was similar, but not quite as bad. The 2015 and 2017 Pro V1 revisions were much better in that respect and actually didn't seem to spin much more than a Pro V1x when hitting tee shots.
  22. For reference, this is the view from the tee on the hole @Golfingdad is talking about: I added the giant red arrow that shows where the green was when you were standing on the tee. You had to hit it directly over the house there, and when @DeadMan and I were on the tee in this photo there were people sitting out on the patio of that house watching us - talk about pressure to not screw up the shot over the house! It was definitely high-risk, but was fun to make a run at it for sure. The greenside pitch I remember the most was when we were playing together and your approach for the alternate shot went long over the green on #13 from that awkward mound I put the tee shot into (photo below). Just a crazy flier from what looked like a buried lie, neither of us expected it to go long like that. Then I got lucky and holed out the pitch shot, but we couldn't even catch a break since @NCGolfer sank the East team's birdie putt anyways! These photos were taken by @RandallT who provided excellent photography of the entire event. I strongly encourage everyone who's even remotely interested in playing (and even those who aren't!) to check out the full album of his photos here to see some of the fun!
  23. Exactly right, and that definitely added a little bit to the already special occasion IMO.
  24. Eh, I wouldn't put it past Phil to misunderstand or manipulate what he hears from Pelz. Dave Pelz has been saying that it's best to leave the flagstick in whenever possible since 1990 (he even published results of a study he did in the December issue of GOLF magazine that year), yet Phil is one of the tour pros who likes to remove the pin the most even when he didn't have to before the rule change (for chips, pitches, and even full approach shots at times). Pelz may have monetary incentive to encourage golfers to work on their short game instead of their tee shots (which is why he likes to compare scrambling percentages to PGA pros), but most of his claims are at least not entirely untrue. He talks about how many strokes you lose out on when you miss the green compared to a tour pro, which is accurate, but he just neglects to mention that it's better to just hit more greens in the first place. I grew up watching Tiger. I may have missed his early days since I was born in 98, but I know I was watching with regularity by the time the 2002 season rolled around when my grandpa was trying to get me involved in golf. Knowing what he did before, watching the little slump, and then seeing the 2005-2008 streaks as I was dreaming of becoming a pro someday myself means another win of his would be pretty special for me to see.
  25. @iacas I'm surprised there was no commentary on Phil's talk about 10% longer drives equating to lower scores only at Augusta National, perhaps it might be a good topic for discussion elsewhere? Back more on topic, tomorrow should make for some great TV. It's been a long time since Tiger has been in the last tee time for a major, and I'll predict that the final round TV ratings will be much higher than we've seen in a long time for any golf event. The other guys in his pairing, Finau and Molinari, don't have quite the star power of Tiger, DJ, Koepka, Fowler etc. but they definitely are no slouches.
×
×
  • 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...