iacas

This is still a bunch of EE during the backswing. And, I think, too much rotation of the pelvis too. Setup is still back on the ankles. Then not only does your left hip go through the line quite a bit, the right hip moves toward the ball, too.

MLB pitchers do mirror work, and they seem to have no problem feeding themselves. Even if their "group" is now called the Guardians. 😛 https://www.platecrate.com/blogs/baseball-101/how-to-practice-pitching-without-a-catcher-techniques-for-skill-development https://www.topvelocity.net/2023/04/17/off-season-throwing-program-for-professional-pitchers/ etc.

You need to see the ball out of both eyes for depth perception, though.

Everyone here can do themselves a favor and look up the strategies of the two best players in the last 25 years have done. Tiger and Scottie have traditionally, outside of even 50 yards: Aimed toward the fat side of the green. Sought to be pin high (except on highly sloped greens to slightly short, as greens are typically back to front). Even from as little as 75 yards… they'll aim toward the fat side of the green. If you care primarily about your index, sure, be aggressive inside of 100 yards, even 140 or so. You'll have a few lower rounds, and since we only count eight, the 12 rounds that leave you with a few too many short-sided shots* and too many bogeys. True good, solid golf, though, is still conservative, even from 50 yards. It doesn't mean you're aiming 20 feet right from 50 yards. It means you're shading a yard right if the pin is tucked left. Another thing I'm not sure I've seen noted: get really good at your distance control inside of 15 feet. Too many amateurs leave too many putts inside this range short. Your distance control — even right now — shouldn't be so bad that trying to "make" a 15-footer (assuming it's not a "yellow light putt") should have you hitting it over 2.5' past the hole very often. If you do… you really need to work on distance control because your speed changes your read. For others, stop leaving putts from this range short. A shocking # of golfers do this. You don't get a lot of these in a round — get 'em to the hole and give them a chance (while also being aware that you're not even going to make probably 60% from 8'). All that said, there are some shots in a round that suit you. You hit a low skipping draw with your PW, and there's a back left pin with water behind it… maybe the shot suits your eye and you can land a ball middle of the green and skip it back before it grabs. Or something else just lights up for you. Now, it's still important to learn which ones are true light-you-up moments that fall into your strong suit (just as you have to learn what the opposite situations are) versus the ones you just want to be those moments, but in those cases… go for it. For example, one of the Tour players with whom we've worked was a phenomenal wedge player inside of about a 20-yard range. When he got a shot in that range, it didn't matter where… he fired at the hole. Not a yard left, or a yard short… right at it. For a few years. (But, I will also note… he wasn't so good from that range that if he could get 30 yards closer… it was a smart play to lay back. At 10 yards, even 15… sure. At 20 it was pretty much even.) Again, if you want to play golf for fun, and would rather fire a net 67 to cancel out your net 78… be more aggressive. There will be days your variance has you hitting a bunch of shots tight. If you want a more solid game, which is what survives on the PGA Tour (they play four-round events after all), then the play is aggressive off the tee, conservative into the greens, and then letting your good putting variance days carry the scoring (along with raising your putting baseline). *

Your nose is that big and your neck range of motion is that small? Now, most people aren't Rory (125° shoulder turn, only about 10° "nose turn") who is part owl, but I can turn 115° and still see the golf ball. Right eye, right hand, neither foot dominant (grew up playing soccer and think calling one foot dominant over the other is silly, which is why I played left wing). Wow, that's a whole lotta stuff… that I don't think is really as strongly tied to this stuff as you seem to want to make it. I'll pass. I play the ball more forward than almost anyone else I know. Sample size of one, I know, but generally… the better the player, the more forward the ball position. I use an intermediate spot, but I've also played soccer and hockey… and tennis, and baseball… you learn what things look like from the perspective of the ball or puck. I use an intermediate spot, and… my teaching partner and I joke that 90% of golfers aim right. The other 10% are lefties. I don't think you'll find a strong correlation let alone causation here. Gonna start skipping ahead now… I have not. That same article also says: "It also became clear that the dominant eye is the positional or aiming eye and the non-dominant eye is the one which allows Depth Perception." In which case, you'd almost surely want your non-dominant eye to be able to see the ball a bit more than your dominant one, as depth perception is quite important, no? Aiming isn't too hard - the ball isn't going anywhere. Good luck with your topic.

Your main issue isn’t the right knee my man.

It's EE:

Do you have some data from a launch monitor on these kinds of things? VLA/launch angle, descent angle, spin rates, ball speeds and clubhead speeds? I mean… given your impact position (below), you might literally be thinning almost everything.

I'd like to help, but: You're using the word "shrug" differently than I would, as I'd think a shrug is an upward movement of your shoulders (toward your ears, kinda).* How your shoulders are at setup isn't necessarily how they are even by P1.5. Feel ain't real. No videos to address the bullet point above. You might be doing other things to cause your shoulder to collide with your chin. Your trail shoulder should retract and your lead should protract during the backswing, generally. As always… video would be helpful. *

You over-load the arms a little and then right tilt (and turn in the frontal plane too much) to get the club to the ground rather than rotating horizontally more. You've likely learned to throw the clubhead at the ball so you have a chance because you're almost completely square to the ball with your whole body at impact.

Did you watch the video in the OP?

I don't think the "crossing" bit was the main part of his "disagreement." It got a few words, while "another thing" got all of this:

Again (emphasis added): However, in such situations, the player may not, in a single procedure, concurrently take relief from two conditions by dropping a ball in a single relief area determined by a combined nearest point of complete relief from both conditions, except in the situation where the player has successively taken relief for interference from each condition and is essentially back where the player started. The player could drop from the temporary water and be on the cart path. Relief from the cart path could have them dropping in the temporary water. They are "essentially back where [they] started." They're not required to zig-zag backward to work their way toward an area where they may be able to successfully take relief from both, especially if that may take a series of twelve drops. I said all of this earlier in the post you chose to reply to with an inaccurate personal comment rather than actually advancing the topic.

Except that it is. The image is very obviously not to scale, unless the person is playing a VERY large golf ball or has very small feet (with a tiny cart path). I only added the cut-in to show that you could eventually, way past B in the direction of the arrow, get to a point of relief. Could you zig-zag downward and eventually get relief from both conditions? Maybe… but what if that's going to take twelve drops to get there? This is what's described in the Clarification — you can just skip to the end after seeing that you're going to be going back and forth.

@TexasTurf, do you have a swing thread? It feels like this will go pretty far into your swing instead of the topic here (the Bradley Hughes video). I'll let others comment, but I'd save more (perhaps) for a specific topic. I think you have a thread somewhere, yeah?

If one goes low (er than predicted by that very basic formula), then I'd still say no. It may be the short game, or maybe you hit a lot of fringes or stuffed it on a few holes or had some two-putt birdies or rolled in an eagle or two. Still counts as one GIR, but are great scores. Anyway, the main point is… you really should be tracking true stats. These counting stats are of very limited utility.

No. Truly low scores come from not needing to use your short game much. From hitting a lot of greens and hitting it close + a hot (randomness) day with the putter. Beyond that, these are mostly counting stats (# of putts, # of greens), and they're of limited use. You seem to be gaining a little in all areas, but… it'd be silly to try to get any more granular than that.

They're not good "because" they have firm grips. A weightlifter might whiff half the time he tries to hit the ball and hit it 150 yards with 80 MPH of driver clubhead speed. I've seen it. It's correlation, not causation. That's all. 99% of the time.

Really? You could easily ping pong between the ball in the temporary water (bright blue not to indicate a pond or penalty area, just to say that's the temporary water area) — the darker footprints and the ball leaving your stance on the cart path. The nearest point for each is in the other. The question then becomes is the nearest point of relief from both A or farther down in the direction of the arrow near B if the temporary water area continues to move away from the path enough to let the player take a stance.

We covered this in a recent episode of the podcast, but here are two quotes from two speed training-related biomechanists: Dr. Tyler Standifird (associated with SuperSpeed, Smart2Move): Dr. Sasho MacKenzie (The Stack obviously): The summary from me: I'm coming down on the side of correlation, not causation here. Pros grip the club more strongly at setup and more consistently throughout. Worn, slick, or firm (the rock hard ones, I don't mean anything but Winn) grips promote needing to squeeze the grip harder just to swing it. I have seen people limited by grip strength… when doing speed training. They swing faster than they expect, the club doesn't hit a ball, and the club flies out of their hands. Grip strength is important, but most people are generally "balanced" enough that they can grip a club firmly enough to support what their body can generate. I see little harm in training grip strength, but limited benefits, too.

No. That’s not true. Too many clubs is a match adjustment penalty, loss of hole applies to the hole on which the infraction occurs. If someone loses the hole due to penalty, the hole is over right then. Everyone can pick up and move onto the next hole.

The drill applies to the driver too. You can chip some drivers 150 yards with a little exaggerated backswing.

Causing? No. That doesn’t mean it’s not hurting though. Almost no rotation from the pelvis here. Over-using arms required given that.

IMO not all that different from the iron swing. Too much arms, not enough body.

Yes, you do your best to recreate it. That’s all.