Taggsy

http://www.cbs42.com/sports/story/Al...OYuOy33Pg.cspx Wow, not bad at all.

Nice work! I'd like to see Faldo write the foreword to the second edition of S&T; with an apology ;) lol. In all seriousness, Bennett and Plummer could have avoided all the negativity and misunderstanding from the mainstream by not giving their technique a name. Or at a push, called it "Professional Swing" or "Classical Swing" and emphasised the fact it's nothing new, and all the greats have used it to varying degrees in the past. Instead it's portrayed as something completely new and radical. And if there's something the golfing establishment is against, it's anything remotely new or radical lol. Of course, it's hard to market and sell something that doesn't have a name ;)

There's no conspiracy here. Faldo, in particular, has every right to dismiss S&T; as the "wrong" way to swing a club. The reasons are simple; it's not the technique he used to win 6 majors, and it's not the technique anyone has used to win majors (or even a notable amount of tournaments). Until that changes, S&T; will always be the minority, poorly understood and represented by mainstream media. (I'm playing devil's advocate here, I'm a fan of the S&T; principles- check out my swing)

Until a S&T; player starts cleaning up at tournaments and is a real contender for majors, the mainstream media aren't interested in accurately describing the ins and outs of the S&T; swing. They're just telling viewers how they see it. I'm sure if Kostis were analysing a "traditional" swing, you could go through the same process and pick holes in his understanding of that swing too. Unless there's a conspiracy to deliberately confuse and mislead the average golfer over the S&T; swing... ;)

Yes. If you're feeling pressure in that position, it's a sign that your hands are in front of the club head and you've maintained the lag on the downswing. How useful you find that pressure point depends on your swing mechanics and what power accumulators you use. If you rely on releasing lag to generate power, as a lot of players do, then it's a fine idea to actively maintain, or try to increase, the pressure on your index finger on the downswing and through impact.

He's referring to the 3rd pressure point in The Golfing Machine. Put simply, if you can feel the club grip pushing against your right index finger during impact, you've maintained the lag. If you can't feel any pressure against your right index finger through impact, then you've released the lag too early. Hope this helps :)

Absolutely agree. I "sneak" onto my local course late in the evening for a few holes when I can. The trick is to be dressed for the occasion, stroll up to the first tee, and smack one down the fairway. No one bats an eyelid. But then the pro shop closes at 7:30pm and I'll tee off at 8, meaning I couldn't pay for my round even if my wanted to. I played a few days ago with a group of friends at our favourite course. We'd all paid, were given receipts and set off. Later we got to the 16th and were approached by some old chap in a cart, looking to check our receipts. My partners showed theirs, but I couldn't find mine (I'd hidden it in a pocket on my bag, where the tees go). For those two minutes of going through all of my pockets, I was bricking it lol.

Good, better, best Never let it rest 'til your good is better, and your better best

Thank Mo! Keeping my arms straight through impact was the latest piece in the puzzle for me. I've never had a problem keeping my head still, but looking at the video it still looks as though my hips move back a touch... You should see me with my driver lol. I've actually moved closer to the ball lately but any nearer and it feels very cramped and I'm more likely to hit the ball fat. Thanks Delav, much appreciated. I've never really bothered much with my hips to be honest. I power the downswing by turning the shoulders as hard as comfortable and the hips seem to move out of the way on their own. I'll have to look into it. Thanks for the comments chaps.

I've been working on making my swing more Stack & Tilt-ish. How'd you think I'm getting on? What should I be working on next? Both balls go out nice and straight about 150 yards with my 6 iron. Down the line view: In front:

I'm no expert, so take what I say with a pinch of salt... The most obvious things are; the big hoop in your swing, and it looks as though you're releasing your wrist at impact (letting the clubhead travel past your hands). With your back and downswing, practice with a mirror to your right hand side and watch yourself- try to make the club travel on the same path on the back and downswing. With the flipping, try to hit the ball with your hands well in front of it- imagine you're hitting the ball into the ground, rather than trying to scoop it into the air. Just my two cents.

lol join the club.

Interesting post! I'm guessing in the past you've got the most enjoyment from improving your game rather than just playing it. Now you're better than scratch, there isn't too much scope for improvement. You've reached a plateau, the challenge has gone and you feel as though you have nothing to play for. I suppose the question is; what's your next challenge? Have you considered going down the teaching route, even if it's informal for friends and family? How about preparing to enter a few professional tournaments- you're a great player but this could be taking it to the next level. My previous instructor was a touring professional in the European Tour back in the 90s. When he quit the tour to take up teaching, he set himself a challenge- to teach himself to play left handed. He's a scratch golfer right and left handed now. How about you pick up a cheap set of left handed clubs and start all over again?

I don't see how your list of swing errors have anything to do with hitting down on the ball. Flipping the hands to square the clubface is something you can do when topping the ball or hitting it fat. As for that producing a Pull Hook, yes that could happen if your path is out to in, and the club face is closed to the swing path. But then you can easily produce a Push Slice by flipping your hands if the swing path is in to out, and the club face is open to the swing path. Flipping your hands is a separate issue to hitting down on the ball. Push Slice by hands leading too much? Maybe that's the "feeling" you get when that happens to your shots, but mechanically I've explained why that happens above. Again, it has nothing to do with hitting down on the ball. Shanking the ball with the hosel- you've simply not hit the ball with the club face- again, nothing to do with hitting down on the ball. "Swing the clubhead down the target line and through the ball". Through the ball- that's a given. The alternative would be to miss the ball. As for the clubhead down the target line, I know what you're saying, but you've worded it incorrectly. Swing with the shaft of the club pointing down the plane line (an inch or so in front of the target line) through impact is more accurate. With an on-plane swing the clubhead points to the target line- it's only on (down) the line for a spit second through impact. The golf swing is a circle, no straight lines involved. If you're swinging the clubhead along a straight line, something's wrong. But then your advice has no baring on hitting down on the ball. It's not an alternative to it, you can still hit down on the ball and follow your advice. "There's no need to try an help the club bottom out, gravity is kind enough to do that for us." No, you control the club bottoming out, either consciously, or subconsciously (as I suspect you do). Depending on your swing, you either control the bottoming out by muscular force (hitting), or centrifugal force (swinging). If gravity is controlling someone's downswing, it's because they've just had a heart attack when reaching the top. I assume you agree you should hit the ball before the ground? And that your divots should be after the ball (preferably by a few inches)? You can only achieve this by hitting down on the ball. I'd hate to break it to you Senorchipotie, but as a 5.9 handicap, you clearly hit down on the ball.

If only you were around when Origin of Species was first published. "I have read your tome, Mr Darwin, and would like to bring to your attention a glaring omission. You speak of natural selection, and of the variety of birds and primates, but what, my learned friend, of the man who defecates on golf courses? Tis no ape of the links but a man! I put it to you Mr Darwin that your neglecting to mention the sh*tting golfer is proof enough that your theory holds no weight!"

The law's a bit different over here, but this is our Criminal Damage Act; "A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence." So long as you're playing the game properly (playing of the tees, aiming at the fairways / greens, not taking a full driver on a 120 yard par 3 etc) I think it would be hard to prove you were reckless if you pull off a nasty hook or slice and then break something. With regards to hitting someone with a golf ball, that could be classed as assault, depending on the injury. As with criminal damage, being found guilty of it depends on your intent (are you aiming at people with a club you know can reach them?), or are you being reckless (chipping your balls over a row of trees where there could be people behind). Another factor of assault is consent, or implied consent. If someone asks you to kick them in the shins to test out their new shin pads, and you actually bruise them, you're not guilty of an offense because they consented to it. It's the same with full contact sports / martial arts. Your consent is implied due to the fact you're playing. If someone gives you a black eye whilst boxing, it's not assault- you knew there was a likelihood of it happening, but went ahead and participated anyway. It would be interesting to see how consent holds up in court if someone is hit by a golf ball. It would be my guess that so long as it was a pure accident, the victim would have implied consent to being hit by the ball simply by being on the course. The victim would know there is every chance of being hit by a ball, and yet they continued to play- as we all do. As for murder, again if it was an accident and there was no intent, then you're not guilty of it. However, you could be guilty of involuntary manslaughter, which is serious and can carry a long prison sentence.

I change my swing almost every time I visit the range (3-4 times a week). I'll go home, actually think about my swing, and come up with a couple of things I can tinker with. Then on my next visit I'll implement those changes and jot down what seems to work, and what doesn't. Generally I have a framework, or foundation, that remains constant each time. I always aim to hit my club a few inches in front of the ball, and I always aim to keep the club shaft pointing to the target line at all stages on the swing (except when parallel to it). Apart from that, I'll change anything. I'll change either the dynamics of the swing (what actually powers the downswing, how active are the arms etc), or I'll change positioning (stance, grip, at what point the backswing stops etc). I think it's important to tinker with your swing, so long as you do it properly. That is, to be methodical and logical (understand cause and effect and ball flight laws), keep a journal of what you're changing, and how the changes have effected ball flight or consistency. Unless you're happy with your swing, then I think you should slowly and constantly make changes to it until you're satisfied, it's the only way to improve!

The problem with rotating your wrists through impact is that it can be wildly inconsistent. The club head is traveling at over 100mph. Let's say just before impact (shaft parallel to ground) your club face is open to the plane line by 45 degrees (the club head would be roughly pointing skywards). From this position, you'd need to rotate your wrists by exactly 45 degrees anti-clockwise in a fraction of a second to hit the ball square. Not only this, but the speed of your wrist rotation needs to correlate exactly with the speed of the swing (faster swing, quicker rotation through impact). The ball position will play a larger part in flight accuracy also- let's say you've performed a perfect swing and managed to exactly rotate your wrists back to square at impact.... but unknown to you the ball is half an inch back than where you usually play it- you've just faded / sliced the ball thanks to half an inch. It's much better to get the club face square to the plane line as soon as possible on the downswing, and then just maintain that position through impact and beyond. You wouldn't putt by rotating your wrists through impact, and you shouldn't do the same with a driver! As a fan of Ritter and Hardy's One-Plane teaching, I've also found the baseball bat analogy useful- but it's an awful comparison at impact. Here's why; a baseball bat is the same all the way around, there is no straight face to it. You can hit a ball with a bat with your wrists in any position you like, and so long as you've swung on plane, and the ball has struck the centre of the bat, the ball will go out great. The golf club needs to be struck with the swing on plane, with the centre of the club face and with the club face square to the target. All that said, if it's working for you then great- but you're adding another variable to your swing that's hard to control and will let you down when you need it most (just like my missus ;) lol)

I was out on the course the other day, scoring rather poorly when I decided to see what would happen if I completely locked my wrists in place for the whole swing. I was pleasantly surprised! My last three holes were all parred thanks to this new technique. I'd basically taken the usual address position and started of the backswing as normal, but instead of allowing the wrists to rotate clockwise, and for the wrists to hinge, loading lag in the usual manner, I locked my wrists in place. This meant at the top of the backswing, the shaft was more upright than horizontal, and the club face was actually facing away from the target. The wrists were in a perfect position for impact. From there I simply rotated my shoulders as fast as possible (I'm a one-planer), kept the wrists locked and the arms passive. My drives were dead straight, and around 240 yards (I'm happy with anything over 200), and with the irons I'd used there was no loss of distance at all, and again they were dead straight. I was just wondering if anyone had ever tried / heard of this before, and whether or not it's worth pursuing?

For half the swing in S&T;, the wrists shouldn't be doing anything. On the downswing, when the shaft is parallel with the ground (and parallel to the target line), the clubface will appear to be at a 45 degree angle from a down the line view. At this position the clubface is actually perpendicular to the swing plane itself. The wrists and clubface are set up for impact. From this position you simply rotate your shoulders and upper body as hard as you can towards the target- the left arm will come away form the chest and the right arm will start to straighten after impact - but there is no rotation of the wrists. On the followthrough, again when the club is parallel to the ground (and the target line), the clubface will appear from your perspective to be at a 45 degree angle, again this is perpendicular to the swing plane. After this position the wrists will rotate anti-clockwise, cocking the club again. Jim Hardy explains this very well in his Plane Truth books under the one plane section. You're simply preparing the wrists for impact as early as you can on the downswing and holding the wrists in position through impact, eliminating the rotating of the clubface from open to close as you're hitting the ball. ... or at least that's my understanding of it, I'm sure more knowledgeable folk may correct any mistakes or misunderstandings.

Nor would he, I mentioned S&T; because that and One Plane seem awfully similar, and if you're interested in S&T; I'm sure you'd get some benefit from Ritter's instruction. Here's his swing from another angle...

I haven't seen Jeff Ritter mentioned here on the forums, so I thought I'd introduce his videos for those who haven't heard of him before. He teaches the one plane swing and has a series of easy-to-follow instruction videos on youtube. This is his swing... and this is a 10 minute video explaining the basics of the one plane swing... He has tons of videos on Youtube, so if you're playing around with a One Plane / Stack & Tilt swing, look him up.

I definitely recommend a laser rangefinder. I use mine whenever I'm going for the green, so off every par 3 tee, and everywhere within 150 yards of the hole. It only take a second to use, so it's not much of an inconvenience and doesn't slow down play. There's nothing worse than hitting an excellent shot, only for the ball to fly miles over the green, or stop short of it!

Definitely number 2. Number 1 has more to do with luck than anything, and number 3 is down to having enough time and money.

After reading Bobby Clampett's "The Impact Zone", Bennett and Plummer's "The Stack and Tilt Swing" and a few other great instructional books who acknowledge TGM as being the cornerstone of their golfing education, I got myself a copy of the book in March of this year. I'll have to agree with Dr Stangeclub in a couple of places. Firstly, it's a sh*tter to read. The introduction recommends you read the book by to-ing and fro-ing through the chapters in a particular order... and on your second reading, to and fro through the chapters in a different order. Immediately, that made me think "Well, why didn't they just put the chapters in that order in the first place if that's how to read it?". In the end, I ignored the suggested route through the book and just read it consecutively- and had no issues with it. The constant cross referencing is a nightmare. It's completely over the top, and starts from the beginning of the book, referencing concepts that you haven't yet read about. Instead of the references being helpful reminders of what you've read previously, or the occasional direction to a more thorough understanding of a particular concept, you're left feeling frustrated and end up glazing over sentences because in order to understand what's being written, you need to flick forwards to the references. The pictures.... Now I've also read the biography of Kelley and TGM by Scott Gummer. This explains who the model in TGM is (a student of Kelly he met at a driving range). The book also says how awful most of the pictures were and that the ones in the book were the best of a bad bunch. Fair enough for the first few editions, but it's been 40 years and the book is in its 7th edition. I respect the want for tradition, and not to "water down" the instruction within the book, but surely it's about time for new clearer pictures, or even drawings. I don't know what Dr Strangeclub is getting at in his penultimate paragraph. TGM in all its guises has never been particularly prosperous, hence the fact the book is published in relatively small numbers and poorly distributed. Testament to that, look on Amazon for the book. Unless you're buying it direct from the company for $38.95, you're having to pay over $100 from several other private sellers. As for a "profusion" of instructors and schools, look at TGM machine website for a comprehensive list of them. They're hardly on every street corner. I'd hazard a guess that only a handful of people on this forum have even met a qualified TGM instructor, much less parted with money for a lesson with them. I understand the skepticism at the book's impact when at first glance it's incomprehensible and devoid of value, but to compare it to the Emperor's New Clothes and claim it's a profiteering conspiracy isn't fair. Personally, TGM hasn't done much for my game. But that's because, to use an analogy, it doesn't teach you how to drive a car, it teaches you how the car works. At least that's what I tell myself.... maybe I'm just too thick to read it and apply it to my swing ;) The introduction to the book warns readers of it's complexity; "Treating a complex subject or action as though it were simple, multiplies its complexity because of the difficulty in systematizing missing and unknown factors or elements. Demanding that golf instruction be kept simple does not make it simple - only incomplete and ineffective."