laxbballgolf

Agreed, I came to this thread to say the exact same thing. It seemed so easy to pull off those camera angles, why don't they always do that?!

Did that shot look weird to anyone else? I know it's downwind, but that's a huge PW. And it seemed to be in the air a really short amount of time. Maybe Keegan delofts his PW a lot, or he hit it thin or something? Plus, it didn't seem to have much check at all. It looked weird to me.

I agree that the practice swings are funky, but I have to say Tiger's swings looked pretty awesome. I only saw highlights for the first three days and some of the final round, and man that is a simple and powerful swing! The sound is just different - to me his swing stands out compared to other players again. And at the same time he is balanced and doesn't look like he is over-swinging. Great stuff and I also like to see him mixing in some different shot shapes again. I'm not typically a Tiger "fanboy", but I think his long game looked pretty awesome this weekend.

For some reason I get the urge to kick up this testy old thread with a new spin on the issue: Psychological and neuroscience research seems to support the idea that humans are inherently and naturally good. (It's not proven yet - not that any theory is ever really "proven" - but there is some substantial support for the idea. Type "self-determination theory into Google Scholar for a starting point.) Basically, the theory is that if a person is mentally healthy and has grown up and lives in a healthy environment, then he or she is likely to engage in a lifestyle that fits in with what are generally considered good morals. It's a powerful theory that has explanatory and predictive power for all sorts of situations, and it is my unprofessional opinion that future research will help us understand this issue in more detail while still generally supporting the idea that people are inherently good. So, to me, if someone is religious, often they will effectively be putting the word "God" where I believe the words "healthy intrinsic motivation" are more appropriate. For example, if someone is going through some hard times, he or she might try to hold onto the idea of "being guided by God" or something like that as a way of trying to stick to good morals - self determination theory would say that the person is struggling to keep his or her healthy intrinsic motivation intact in spite of some factors that are compromising his or her core psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Bottom line, science seems to indicate that people are inherently good.

Hahaha ok.....? I really don't get it. I think it would only help by letting a potential customer poke around and see the kind of instruction and knowledge and debate you guys are all about. I know TST and TGE are separate things but I think the average person would realize what your posts and Dave's posts are in relation to the whole site.

That seems like a great idea. I hadn't looked at this thread for a while, but I figured I should come back and mention that for me a key seems to be focusing on maintaining pitch elbow throughout the downswing. Since I started doing this more, my impact conditions have felt more athletic and dynamic.

Wow that looks amazing! Just out of curiosity, why don't you guys link to The Sand Trap forum on the Golf Evolution website?

Cool, I can buy that, more or less. Thanks for the elaboration. I've been meaning to sign up for Evolvr for like a year now. One of these days... But I still basically hold the opinion that taking away a major form of feedback is not an advantage, if it's meant as a most-of-the-time thing. For a lesson format with an instructor watching your shots, sure, I guess it makes sense. But I'm not confident enough in my own ability to analyze video that I can trust how the ball probably flew without really seeing it (I guess if the net is far enough away you can at least see the initial curve). To me, the ideal practice environment is: camera on, no wind, watch how the ball flies and see the video - both as needed. Of course, in reality I am usually at a windy driving range with no camera, but like I said, one of these days I will get my act together and sign up for Evolvr!

I know Erik is highly informed with everything he says, but I kind of disagree with this idea. Basically, in my opinion, the more information and feedback you get on a given shot, the better. This idea seems to rest on an assumption that a golfer can't help but get in his own way, and I don't think that's a fair assumption to make, or to assume is true for the majority of people. If you want to focus on video and positions for a particular practice session then go ahead and do it, but I think being able to observe the ball flight is generally a good thing. Furthermore, doesn't this kind of go against the idea that Erik has mentioned before about most students' ballstriking improving within a given lesson? It seems like the ballstriking improving within a given lesson idea implies that improvements occur relatively quickly, while this hitting into a net idea implies that you will often have to hit worse shots for a while before you will improve.

Good point and I think you're right, but it doesn't shift my personal view. Maybe I overstated my position; maybe I should have used the word "nature" instead of "progress", and you can think of my point "c" as figuring I might as well do what is natural and go along with nature - that way it takes the qualitative judgment and connotation out of it. I agree. I don't hate religious people at all, I'm just putting my thoughts out there.

Well, I'm not a believer in any one neatly packaged world view, but in pretty vague terms one could think a) humans are made of the same stuff as the rest of the universe b) there is some sort of force of physics or evolution that pushes onward and can be thought of as "progress" perhaps and c) living a life that fits in with a and b rather than disrupting them seems to make sense and be natural. So, for example, senseless violence and things like that would seem to disrupt "b" as I described it. I'll add a quick pragmatic perspective to my view, too. From experience and observation, being good and decent seems to make people happier and more successful than being evil, so it makes sense in that way, too. Plus it feels natural and is just the way I am. I don't know how other non-religious people think about morals and ethics, but that's how I think about it.

This is kind of fun! The chemicals are not random, they are the product of many years of evolution. I try to frame my moral reasoning (and all other types of reasoning I do) around science and evidence as much as I can. Count me in the non-religious camp.

This article lists the most dominant major performances ever based on comparing the winner's score to the mean score of the field - ranking Tiger at Pebble as the most dominant performance by a wide margin since 1960, and Rory's as the 17th most dominant. http://espn.go.com/espn/grantland/story/_/id/6680477/relative-dominance It seems like a decent method of analysis to me. It could be even better if the strength of field were taken into consideration, since a Masters field for instance is typically weaker than other fields because of special exemptions and things like that.

I'd be interested in this info, too. When I need to fade the ball or draw it more than normal, I like to keep my swing the same and only adjust my alignment and where the club is pointed. So if I need to fade the ball around a tree, for example, I will point the club face roughly where I want the ball to start and align my stance further to the left of that intended starting line, and try to make a normal swing. For now, I basically estimate that I need to align my stance twice as far wide as the club face to get the ball to curve the proper amount: so if I want to start the ball 10 yards left of the flag and have it fade to the flag, I will align my stance 20 yards left of the flag and take my grip so that the club face is pointing 10 yards left of the flag. Or if I want to start the ball 15 yards left of the flag, I will align my stands 30 yards left of the flag and point the club face 15 yards left of the flag. You get the idea. But I don't know if these estimates are correct. And of course I don't know for sure exactly how my swing path was for a given swing, so even if the ball curves the amount I want it to, I'm still not sure if it was because I aligned myself properly and made a good swing or because I aligned myself wrong but messed up my swing just the correct way by coincidence. So basically, if you have the info, I would love to know the general, basic estimates for the swing path / club face angle combination that will produce a given amount of curve to the ball, just assuming a normal lie, average swing speed, perfect contact, no wind. Just a basic estimate so I can be confident about my alignment and just focus on making a good swing. Thanks. PS: I know there will be a difference for draws and fades if you normally play a push draw or something, but the info about swing path / club face angle would still be very useful. A push draw player will just need to realize that you exaggerate the set up for fades and reduce it for hooks (all of this assuming you hit fades and draws by adjusting your set up and making a normal swing).

I don't totally believe that claim, but I think it's a good point. Not that anyone was mentioning Stack and Tilt in this thread, but this is the only part about Stack and Tilt that I am not personally a believer in. Stack and Tilt says you should hold the wedge all the way through to the finish position, so that from a down the line view the shaft is leaning to the right on the follow through. I don't think it's possible to do this while swinging with full power. I've yet to see video of someone making a powerful swing without losing the flying wedge and unhinging the wrist at some point after impact, and I have seen video of Mike Bennett's swing in which he loses the wedge (you can tell because his shaft pops into frame above his left shoulder and leaning to the left from the down the line view) and then he quickly regains the wedge and tilts the shaft to the right. Video is in this thread: http://thesandtrap.com/forum/thread/40806/mike-bennett-swing I don't think anyone should be taught to try to hold the wedge all the way through to the finish (if holding the wedge is even the correct term- but you know what I mean - maintain wrist angles that are required for a forward shaft lean). I simply think it's impossible to do if you swing with full power. I understand the argument that if you tell someone to try to hold the wedge through to the finish, then maybe they will be likely to release their lag later, but I think people should just be taught that the wedge should be held until after impact but that after that into the finish it's not possible to keep it in place. The goal is to be actively engaging the power accumulators through impact. Stack and Tilt tells the truth about physics in the rest of the swing, but I don't think it tells the truth in claiming that the wedge should (or can) be held all the way to the finish in a powerful golf swing. If someone has a video showing otherwise then I could be convinced.

I'm really glad I saw this post. How far or close the ball is from my feet has been an issue of mine for a long time, but for some reason it never occurred to me to specifically measure my angles. Something that strikes me about those photos is that the angle of bend in the waist seems very consistent between the different players, as well. Do you know what the average amount of waist bend for good players is?

I agree with everything you said. Thanks for the input. The thread I linked actually made me realize how little wrist hinge I was making...I'm not entirely sure if I have increased it since then. I need to resist the urge to just play golf when I have free time and instead actually get some new video! I think the only place we might differ in our thoughts a little is about how to think about lag and how to get feedback about lag in our own swings - but maybe we even agree about that. For a bit, I was thinking pretty mechanically about lag, and now I have started to emphasize how fluid of a concept lag really is. At least for me, I ran into trouble trying to get myself into the ideal positions and I lost some perspective about the big picture.

I feel like I have to defend myself here, haha. This thread has a video of my swing right around the time I moved the ball further forward in my stance. I really need to get some more recent video soon but I never seem to get around it for some reason. http://thesandtrap.com/forum/thread/32176/my-turn-critique-my-swing-video#post_410042 I wouldn't say that I am or ever was a full-fledged flipper; I prefer to think I am just trying to optimize the timing of my lag to transfer power to the ball as efficiently as possible. Right now I think my lag is maximized slightly too soon. In other words, I think my swing is at its fastest slightly before I hit the ball, even though I haven't totally flipped. And I'm talking about a pretty minor change to my ball position. I think lag is a really fluid thing. It's not as simple as "holding the flying wedge" after impact - what it really means is that you want to be actively engaging the stored energy from all your various accumulators through the impact event - ideally with some leeway before and especially after impact to be safe. It can be really hard to figure out precisely what's happening because it's such a fluid action - a way to do it would be to measure for small differences in swing speed within specific portions of the swing just before impact, during impact, and just after impact. Even looking frame by frame at a swing from face on to analyze the wrist and shaft positions isn't a guarantee that lag is being full optimized - the impact position could be perfect while some accumulators still aren't optimally engaged at the proper time. I want to my swing speed to reach its maximum just after impact to be on the safe side, and right now I suspect that it's maximized a tiny bit before impact. Some fine-tuning really, but it's very important fine-tuning and it's pretty tough to work on and to get feedback about for a given swing, other than the feeling of a very well struck ball and seeing good distance.

Anyone else like Ed Banger? The French label that brought the world Daft Punk and Justice. They came out with a new compilation album called Let The Children Techno and I have been blaring it for weeks haha. It's awesome, silly stuff.

Tangent here but I hope someone will respond and tell me if this makes sense. Sorry if I should have put this up as a new thread instead of writing it here - I wasn't sure and I didn't think it needed to be a new thread. I think I had an epiphany about my lag. And the news for me isn't good, haha; I think I need to do some work. I used to set up with the ball pretty far back in my stance. I also used to kind of suck at greenside bunker shots, but I could hit the ball pretty far on full swings. Now, I moved the ball to a more normal position and my short game is better - especially greenside bunker shots - but I don't think I'm compressing the ball as well as I used to on full swings. My thinking is this: that change in ball position is enough that I'm losing some of my lag before the club gets to the ball, even if I'm swinging basically the same way. Either by coincidence or because I subconsciously trained myself to do it, my swing is such that my lag is maximized for my old ball position - and that relatively small change in ball position is enough for me to lose some lag. By lag I mean the timing of when my various power accumulators are released. The reason the greenside bunker shots used to be bad is because I was making contact with the sand far behind where my swing bottoms out which is a recipe for stabbing into the sand like a chump. Now, I have the task of getting myself to hold my lag later into my swing. Does this make sense? If so, should I take the easy way out and go back to my old ball position on full swings - and go around making massive divots all over the place, haha? Or should I do the smart thing and work on holding my lag later into my swing? Funny thing is, I've never taken very big divots even with my old ball position, so I must have been doing other things to compensate - jumping or straightening left leg or something.

Is it safe to say that the ball usually flies further when you are downwind, even with short irons? I understand the physics described in this thread and it makes sense, but does the extra "push" from the wind usually have a greater effect on carry distance (adding to it) than the loss of lift (which decreases carry distance)? In my experience, it seems like the ball carries further downwind with all clubs, most of the time.

Is there such thing as too low of a spin rate with the driver? Maybe there is theoretically, but does it ever really happen? I'm asking this because it seems to me that spin rate is the only thing this adjustment would improve. If the two things to improve are launch angle and spin rate, couldn't launch angle be fixed just by using a driver with a different loft? Also, as a push draw player myself, I think for me to be comfortable making this change I would have to accompany it with a leftward adjustment to my alignment, as well, just to provide a little breathing room to make sure the shot actually fades - to make sure I don't get caught in no man's land not sure whether my shot is going to draw or fade. Just my 2 cents agreeing with what Iacas mentioned in the first post. Anyone have more specific or detailed data on how much difference an upward vs downward strike makes to spin rate, distance, etc?

Agreed, that's a great looking swing. Does Mike play a push draw? I think I remember reading that one of Mike or Andy plays a push draw and the other plays a push fade, but I can't remember who plays which shot. Also, if you freeze the down the line video in the follow through, I noticed that at least for this swing Mike's club shaft tilts to the left on the follow through for a moment before he tilts it to the right for the signature Stack and Tilt finish. Doesn't this mean he didn't hold the flying wedge on this swing?