iacas

Almost everyone returns the hands a little higher than they were at setup, and as I mentioned to Andrew Rice like 15 years ago, if that was the trick… you'd just set your hands higher at setup. 🙂 This is IMO way, way down on the list of things you should worry about or work on right now. Also, even at your swing speed, the head is going to droop a good bit. That's normal.

No lucky ball markers, don't prefer number 3 balls over number 1, or anything like that? If so, you're in a tiny, minuscule group. 🙂 Two of my degrees are medicinal chemistry and computer science… though maybe it's the French degree leading to an occasional superstition (I do step on cracks, but not the foul line on a baseball field, and I still position the remote differently depending on how the Steelers [not this year] or Penguins are doing, while being aware that it has no effect at all… but it's a little fun anyway). As for why I chuckle at the LAB, well, it's OT for this topic. 😄 We don't putt with a marketing trick Revealer, though. People play their way off the PGA Tour all the time. Many will assign blame somewhere. Some will even manage to do it correctly. Since we don't have access to time travel and parallel universes, we will never know if Rinker was actually "taught" off the Tour or not.

Everyone's entitled to believe in a few superstitions in life. 😉

To what end? Also, not for nothing… I looked for PDF versions of the rules of these major sports: NHL Rules - 234 pages NBA Rules - 74 pages NFL Rules - 85 pages MLB Rules - 188 pages Casual players of those sports don't know the rules all that well, either. And those rules are extensive and sometimes complicated, too, and they play on relatively uniform surfaces/courts/fields!

Is it geometrically necessary? No. But if 95% or 99% of the game's best players (or chippers at least) have their COM rising in this part of the motion… saying that it's not "necessary" is perhaps just playing word games. CCW from what POV? Or about what axis? Because if you're at the position he shows, the arrows shown here are CW from our perspective, but CCW from his, and would… just put the club closer to the ground (and likely shove the sweet spot outside the ball a bit). Like what? Do you feel that the COM shouldn't go up a little throughout that part of a chipping motion? Or maybe you just generally against things "lifting"??? 🤣

If you want good help, I strongly recommend some good camera angles. And slow-motion video. Wrist height. Through the wrists, parallel to or perpendicular to the target line. Good luck.

… come up with a way to market something of dubious scientific validity.

That's about where I land on this, especially when the stuff seems like phony "science." Like LAB putters. 😉 A lot of things can help people be a little better somewhat quickly… and then the players either get worse or they've gone down a road where their improvement hits a lower ceiling. Not talking about this topic specifically, more these "kinds" of things.

Ehhhhhh.

You were wrong when you said this part: That's not how it works. It works like I said. A ball is always treated as lying in only one area of the course: If part of the ball is in both the general area and one of the four specific areas of the course, it is treated as lying in that specific area of the course. If part of the ball is in two specific areas of the course, it is treated as lying in the specific area that comes first in this order: penalty area, bunker, putting green.

For now (and the past 10+ years) I’ve had my own site for online instruction. I may move to Skillest eventually. Won’t link to it or promote it here.

They might say that, but I think it's unlikely or rare. It gives momentum to the club, sure, but it's momentum in the wrong direction from what we need to hit the ball. And, of course, good golfers almost immediately begin slowing it down, working in the opposite direction of the momentum they put into the club. So, yeah, that'd be a curious thing to say. At the top, the club has next to no momentum.

In rules parlance… 1 + 2 = 2. The penalty is two strokes. One for moving your ball at rest when you're not allowed to, two for playing from the wrong place. But because it's the same act, they basically take the higher penalty.

No. The ball moved and must be replaced. The player is given grace if they use their best estimate when dropping or replacing or estimating spots where a ball crossed or something, not whether a shot is actually affected. As @st1800e said, what if their practice swing moved the ball into a good spot? Or a terrible spot? It wasn’t a stroke, and we can only advance the ball in almost all cases by making a stroke at it. A practice swing is not a stroke. I saw a player making practice swings near his ball on a chip shot one time and for whatever reason he hit the ball and it lipped out and sat a foot away from the hole. He immediately called the stroke on himself and replaced the ball. You can’t advance the ball in that way without making a stroke.

Yes I think of it as the ball is always “in” something: in bounds, in the PA, in the bunker, in the teeing area … or in the green. 😀

You can find these answers in the rules. The first one is in the definition of OB: Out of Bounds All areas outside the boundary edge of the course as defined by the Committee. All areas inside that edge are in bounds. The boundary edge of the course extends both up above the ground and down below the ground: This means that all ground and anything else (such as any natural or artificial object) inside the boundary edge is in bounds, whether on, above or below the surface of the ground. If an object is both inside and outside the boundary edge (such as steps attached to a boundary fence, or a tree rooted outside the edge with branches extending inside the edge or vice versa), only the part of the object that is outside the edge is out of bounds. The boundary edge should be defined by boundary objects or lines: The second one, I'm not entirely sure what you're saying. Why is there a path, and where exactly are the leaves? But if it's like the above, the definition provides the clue again: The edge of a penalty area extends both up above the ground and down below the ground: This means that all ground and anything else (such as any natural or artificial object) inside the edge is part of the penalty area, whether on, above or below the surface of the ground. If an object is both inside and outside the edge (such as a bridge over the penalty area, or a tree rooted inside the edge with branches extending outside the edge or vice versa), only the part of the object that is inside the edge is part of the penalty area. Hope that helps.

And what do you tell someone whose hands don't do what they should? Odds are they're gonna have to actively "do" something with their hands for awhile. This is like the "natural" stuff. Some people do things "naturally…" after years of learning to do them. Or after playing other sports and getting a general motion or movement pattern down. But that doesn't make the move "natural" - it's only natural to those that have learned to do it, plus a small minority to which it may actually be somewhat natural… but even they probably mimicked someone or something without really knowing about it.

I'm not sure you understood the point of @Newby's post. At what point — whether by distance or "how much" the lie was affected or any other factors — would you have to replace it versus just playing it from the spot it moved to? The current rule is simple: you replace it if it moves. If it moved, it came to rest in a different spot, so you have to put it back. Is that spot likely to be exactly where it was, especially if it settles down a little? No, but then you are covered by the best estimate or best judgment language in the ROG. And by doing so, you've shown an effort to replace it. It applies to all situations, without a grey area hinted at by @Newby. Good rules are clear where they can be. This is one of those times.

Did you show Dan and Monte the picture I posted and ask them if they agree that it's "very little arm lifting"? No. @MonteScheinblum's post says he doesn't FEEL like his arms lift. So, tagging him there is his invitation to tell you that his arms definitely lift in his golf swing. And not "very little." I'll ask you directly: how do the arms of the robot guy get from the image on the left to the image on the right? How do these guys get their arms this high? Scottie's left arm started around where the yellow line is relative to his torso, after all.

As in: Now: P3 + 40% = your P4 Future: Learn to swing to P3 only for a bit, then add only 10%. That's your new and improved P4.

To build on what @MonteScheinblum said: Right hand is opened up there, the longer backswing with the poor pivot leads to a shallow shoulder turn that requires you to drop down as you do from the top to get to the golf ball. Lotta work ahead if you want to do it. But you have speed, and that's tough to teach, so you can get pretty good if you do put in the work. Grip, setup, and then P1-P3 work is advised. Then add like 10% to get to what should be your actual P4.

It would satisfy the "replace the ball" step, yes. The ball was played from a wrong place, making @Newby's question to you the operative thing.

Good for you. I'm probably softcore. Mostly marshmallows and ice cream.