Yff Theos

Imo overhead views can be helpful.

What kind of mix do you regard as the best if any? For instance to make CP pattern easier to teach and learn?

I read or heard an opinion once that tee pegs usually fly back in a perfect driver shot. I always wondered if it is just an urban legend.

Rock has relatively short legs comparing to Mac. His handle raises as well albeit not so big as Mac which is understandable because of Rock's smaller #3 Angle.. I do not see nothing bad in handle raising between A1 and A7, it is a perfectly acceptable pattern. Lots of great strikers were handle raisers, btw, and not so much were able to return shaft on the same plane. I understand your philosophy. When I teach someone I also do not want to change pupil's swing habits over the dead bodies. Yet if I teach a rookie I would like him to work out habits that give best chances for effortless striking which my eyes and brain found in the late Mac's swing.

Everything he does has a reason - my answers to you: 1. too much knee flex at address - they are bent enough to bring low handle at address because of creating a decent #3 accumulator angle at address (it has been already discussed in the thread); 2. tush sticking out too much - absolutely not; it has to stick like this to have a proper weight distribution from down the line plane; if it sticks less either the upper torso will have to be less flexed (which does not correspond with the necessity of having low handle at adress) or theoverall weight will have been shifted to toes; 3. raises handle at impact - the address is on Hands Only Plane because of the reasons explained earlier, while his impact on the Elbow Plane which is OK and pretty classic pattern; he is still a double shifter equal to those who starts with high handle at address from Elbow Plane (like Hogan or Snead did); moreover, this is a draw pattern which requires high hands at impact; 4. most guys would cross line at top and collapse right arm structure trying to emulate that -- why? imo, there is no direct correllation between these; 5.left elbow too far below right too soon coming down - nothing is exaggerated; Mac plays from huge flexion to huge extension at impact (he maximizes the parametric acceleration that way) that's why he was a big hitter in his prime; it is a base for Stack and Tilt philosophy, by the way. He is big on preserving angles; every player has the same number of angles but not in such a well-organized system. People who have been close to him underline how great a ballstriker he is even now when he is in his senior days. Your arguments are weak, sorry.

Before I answer you with my arguments to wall of your points let me ask first: relative to what ? to your subjective preferences ? to a certain model you had in mind ?

OK, that is why I want to discuss it. If someone can argue that this is not the best way AND BRING ARGUMENTS TO SUPPORT IT I am all ears. Well, I hear you and I was told similar opinions on the other forum. I decided then not to look for an exact MORAD discussion, so to speak, but to discuss Mac's swing on the base of publicly available sources, such as McCord vids. I like to discuss the swing with everyone, not only literallists. Yes, there are.

Back on the right track and to Mac's swing. I wonder what is your opinion of his backswing that relies on gradual increasing of the angle between left arm and the shaft (from 30 deg at setup through 45 at A2 and to 90 deg at A3) *. It corresponds to the difference between full sweep and snap loading in TGM (10-22.A vs. C). McCord says that this is the most safe way to load, the more there is not a big difference in angles between A3 and A4 and practically only the shoulder girdle move everything. Assuming that the first part of the downswing (between A4 and A5) it is also the shoulders that move everything all is rationally organized. Imo, there is another advantage: the hit impulse at the top does not exist. The only disadvantage I can see is that snap loading procedure + float loading may (MAY !) bring higher swing speed at the bottom. Unfortunately, I have no possibilities to confirm that statement empirically. Please discuss. * in fact, it is decreasement of the angle from 180-30 = 150 deg at A1, 180-45 = 135 deg at A2 and 180-90 = 90 deg at A3); when arm is in line with shaft the angle is 180 deg

You hardly can be scratch with mediocre driving and approaches and excellent short game; you can easily be scratch with excellent driving and approaches and mediocre short game.

I never negated that. Until now, I said that IN MY HONEST OPINION his swing contains elements that could make learning swing easier. I said that a proper takeaway is important. I said that having #3 Accumulator Angle (the angle between the shaft anf the left forearm) is important. In the future most probably I shall say that closed feet stance at address is important. I shall say that having a sweep motion procedure (gradually increasing angles) is important. Etc, etc. I did not say that I am Mac O'Grady. I did not say I want to swing exactly as him. I did not say copying his swing is the cure for all problems. But certainly its analysis can help many. I say that his swing is better than all swings I have ever seen in some key aspects. I do not say that he was the best golfer ever. Hope everything is clearer now.

Yes, you don't. Golf is the game of scoring, not the contest for pretty swings. I am in awe with Mac's swing not only because it looks pretty but mainly because it seems to a be very well organized human motion, so to speak. I really do not know what to respond to such statements; I simply want to discuss his swing and philosophy. It is the second forum that I see problems with it, I am not sure why. CP swing might be more complex overall but, if a golfer has already a decent pivot it is not that hard to go CPish in a general sense. According to my experiences, it is much more profitable for a student to learn how to pivot well even if it takes more time than necessary.

Yes and no. Yes, if one's as talented as Tiger or Jack (or close to it) the RoC does not matter much; no, because ordinary golfer would prefer to have a swing that does not rely on timing so much and/or to have one-way miss. But these are just details of preference, I really would like to discuss only basic things of late Mac's swing if it is allowed here. I can open a new thread if mods prefer as well.

Well, Iacas has already answered some of your false statements. I will only say that there are great teachers (with MORAD past) posting short films on Instagram worth looking at where they show changes they made in their students' swings. Some are pretty good. The only thing I do agree to you is that I am not Mac. But I never pretende3d to be, just willing to learn and discuss his swing because I believe I can find lots of good things for my swing as well as for those I will teach. OK, I understand your point of view. I prefer CPish patterns because of better consistency, perhaps some CF ones with longest clubs (especially from the tee). But those are details, I'd like to concentrate and discuss basic things in the late Mac's swing without being a MORAD literallist, so to speak.

Well, because of consistency of produced results? I believe CF pattern relies on higher clubface closure rate leading to two-way misses. Imo, when one already pivots well it is easier to learn CP swing. But I agree it is easier to teach CF to a guy who has problems with body rotation although I have recently seen good attempts on Instagram posted by good instructors.

Perhaps it is like you said that I am fascinated too much nowadays. It is temporary, I guess . Btw, I prefer late Mac's swing not the one he used during his PGA days. More than Snead's and Hogan's, not mentioning others. It is something in it that attracts me a lot. Perhaps aesthetics, perhaps simplicity...

Yes, I know it is different to Snead's and Hogan's takeaway. I believe Mac wanted to have a bigger #3 Accumulator Angle preset at address as well as have shaft inline with left arm. Imo, it sounds reasonable and logical if we are to look for a low maintenance swing. The wrist set also gradually increases if we believe numbers quoted by McCord in one of the YouTube vids. Could I ask why do you prefer CF over CP if the latter has more connections to Hogan and Snead? I will take a closer look to Bender's teachings anyhow. Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, this is exactly what I'd do to "normalize" S&T swing. I agree, lots of good info from Plummer and Bennet, lots of great looking swings (despite this excessive weight forward stuff and some other things like not closed feet or zeroing #3 Acc. at setup) such as for instance Grant Waite or Mike McNary. I still revert to their book from time to time.

Thank you for a detailed answer. I shall revert to it in a couple of hours.

You have misunderstood my intent. What I was to say is that in order to hit a club with small loft correctly from the deck one needs to have high enough swing speed. Hence a 19 deg. club shot will most probably go further than a 13 deg. one in case of golfers with smaller swing speeds (despite the clubhead speed numbers that are dependent on shaft length, as you said).

I am searching for an efficient simple swing not only for myself but also to teach others. As you mentioned, I have not found the holy grail in TGM despite studying it for a few years that is why I turn my face somewhere else but not so far away, which is I guess pretty normal attitude in my shoes. I have been studying S&T for some time and found it too limited and one-sided approach.

I heard he had given the Yellow Book to his dentist friend who had involved some scientists. Perhaps this is only a legend, but if not, it appears to be quite a scientific approach to the golf swing. I will be interested in getting to know any other good scientific researches though. You are right that from a pure aesthetic point of view Mac's swing is of top quality and perhaps enhances that way my willingness to know it better.

Perhaps it is like you said, but I assumed that Mac's researches aimed at achieving the most efficient swing (efficiency of movement, so to speak) ended in creating a model one. That is why I prefer to discuss Mac's swing than e.g. Fowler's one. A very good point. What hinging depends on then except one's will ? A grip type? Amount of forearm rotation? BTW, I understand As are equivalents of ps here, right ? I certainly will not get stuck on it. I am currently interested in Mac's swing, that is all.

Thank you, gentlemen. What is important for me to discuss is, as I would consider it, a perfect takeaway (between p1 through p2 and to p3). Imo, lots of swing errors that yield for compensations occur because of takeaway errors. Let us formulate how this "perfect" takeaway looks (based on Mac O'grady dtl views): a) between p1 and p2 - hands do not go inside and move linearily away from the target - clubhead go inside but remains outside hands until p2 b) between p2 and p3 - hands start to go inside - clubhead continues to go inside and starts to be inside hands from p2 on c) gradual cocking of wrists (IIRC according to the McCord vid the angles between the shaft and left forearm are 30 deg at p1, 45 deg at p2 and approaching 90 deg at p3 and not exceeding it further on). Interestingly, both Hogan and Snead (especially Snead) took the handle to the inside much earlier either because of their earlier hip/torso turn inside or because they rotated their forearms earlier. This is the vid I based my observations on: (Ed: https://thesandtrap.com/how-to/embed-videos/)

The smaller the loft is the higher should be the swing speed. Recently, I have started to use my 19 degree hybrid as the longest club from the fairway. My #3 wood is just a shorter but tighter equvalent for my driver off the tee.

Hello all, I am a moderate fan of TGM (not a literallist and aware of it's weaknesses) and a declared fan of Mac's swings and his researches. Being located ar away and having not any possibilities to attend his schools, I had tried to exchange views with some MORAD-versed guys on another forum with some success until I was thrown away apparently for having not popular beliefs. This forum is the second one where I found some threads that might be of my interest, so welcome all. I am familiar with all available YouTube vids of Mac's clinics. They are very good as an introduction. There are also some great footages of Mac and Robert Rock there (which have been mentioned in the thread). I would like to discuss Mac's swing further but I do not know if it is allowed to do here as well as if there are guys who I could discuss it with.