What are your thoughts on Brooks Koepka swing?

[MonteScheinblum]

Lack of ingrained motor function is mislabeled timing.

 

Then non timing based pattern is used as a marketing ploy.

[pinhigh27]

The best golfers in the world spray it 60-100 yards offline at times. But ya there's no timing involved in good golf swings

[BiggErn]

The best golfers in the world spray it 60-100 yards offline at times. But ya there's no timing involved in good golf swings

 

Yea it’s that manipulation of the hands and clubface .002 of a second before impact that helps them consistently hit straight shots.

[Krt22]

The best golfers in the world spray it 60-100 yards offline at times. But ya there's no timing involved in good golf swings

 

Yea it’s that manipulation of the hands and clubface .002 of a second before impact that helps them consistently hit straight shots.

 

As long as you focus on the club head and dont pollute your mind with frivolous matters like mechanics and positions, you can acquire the skill to square said club-face in the aforementioned .002 seconds before impact

 

The best golfers in the world spray it 60-100 yards offline at times. But ya there's no timing involved in good golf swings

 

They also shank easy wedges and 3-jack from 15feet, which makes me feel mildly better when I do it

[Jim Waldron]

I don't know of a single good golfer who has some "timing" move that allows the club to be square for a split second at impact. Nobody I know consciously thinks about it. The club should "feel" square throughout the swing and that "feel" will vary from golfer to golfer. That's why even the best golfers in the world have different grips, positions, swings,....whatever. Every golfers swing can get out of sync but I would find it difficult to have some move I had to perfectly time to hit a straightish shot. Good grip, good setup, good takeaway, good position at the top. After that squaring the face shouldn't even be a thought, just swing through the ball and the face will square.

 

Every straight shot requires a ton of stuff to be perfectly timed to make happen. There zero way to eliminate timing in the golfswing. Just because something is subconscious doesn't mean it's not happening.

 

Well said, Dan!

[Range Pro]

I don't know of a single good golfer who has some "timing" move that allows the club to be square for a split second at impact. Nobody I know consciously thinks about it. The club should "feel" square throughout the swing and that "feel" will vary from golfer to golfer. That's why even the best golfers in the world have different grips, positions, swings,....whatever. Every golfers swing can get out of sync but I would find it difficult to have some move I had to perfectly time to hit a straightish shot. Good grip, good setup, good takeaway, good position at the top. After that squaring the face shouldn't even be a thought, just swing through the ball and the face will square.

 

Every straight shot requires a ton of stuff to be perfectly timed to make happen. There zero way to eliminate timing in the golfswing. Just because something is subconscious doesn't mean it's not happening.

No doubt! That's why we try to eliminate as many unnecessary body movements as possible. I think Brooks' wrist action is one of those for him.

[Range Pro]

I love his swing. The best part is how he keeps the clubface square to the swing path all the way back and through. It elimiates the timing of closing the clubface on the downswing.

 

lol

 

You never seen this before? http://mentoredbythelegend.com/?p=660

 

Except that literally doesn’t happen in anyone ever measured. The clubface is not staying square to the arc in Brooks swing or any full swing

I really am convinced these Austin guys like go to seminars by the airport.

I am not advocating that it's the best way to swing a golf club. But it works for Brooks and I like it. Don't insult if you never tried it. Golf is a hard game that requires an open mind.

[Krt22]

There is a big difference between being open to new ideas and believing in fundamentally wrong principles

[Range Pro]

There is a big difference between being open to new ideas and believing in fundamentally wrong principles

 

Show me a golf book with all the Right principles. Some like wide stance, and some like narrow stance. Some plays a draw and some prefer a fade. What you or iteach consider the gospel, there are many golf pros will disagree with you.

 

To this day, people are still trying to figure out Hogan's 5 fundamentals, and they still can't figure out the missing secret. What works for Brooks doesn't mean it will work for you. Just because I like it doesn't warrant insults from you.

[Krt22]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

[Range Pro]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

[iteachgolf]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

 

No Brooks doesn’t have the wrong principle, you do. The face isn’t staying square to the path, period. And that’s not a computer model, is the literal 3D measurement of a players swing.

[Range Pro]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

 

No Brooks doesn't have the wrong principle, you do. The face isn't staying square to the path, period. And that's not a computer model, is the literal 3D measurement of a players swing.

And you are the authority on "Right Principle". Passing a PAT doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. My local pro at the country club plays to a +3, but can't teach worth a lick. All the high school hotshots go take lesson from another pro with an unorthodox swing.

[iteachgolf]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

 

No Brooks doesn't have the wrong principle, you do. The face isn't staying square to the path, period. And that's not a computer model, is the literal 3D measurement of a players swing.

And you are the authority on "Right Principle". Passing a PAT doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. My local pro at the country club plays to a +3, but can't teach worth a lick. All the high school hotshots go take lesson from another pro with an unorthodox swing.

 

Again it’s literally not possible and not happening in any full swing.

 

And my resume and results speak for themselves.

[Krt22]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

 

This isn't about about what people like or don't, what people consider right/wrong way to swing the club, its about what actually happens in the swing, which has been verified with actual 3D data. And keeping the face square to the path throughout the entire swing (thus eliminating the need to close the face) simply doesnt happen with any golfer so trying to chase that notion is largely going to be a fruitless exercise.

[Range Pro]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

 

This isn't about about what people like or don't, what people consider right/wrong way to swing the club, its about what actually happens in the swing, which has been verified with actual 3D data. And keeping the face square to the path throughout the entire swing (thus eliminating the need to close the face) simply doesnt happen with any golfer so trying to chase that notion is largely going to be a fruitless exercise.

 

RBImGuy says hi, BTW.

[BiggErn]

I guess Spieth sucks as bad as Koepka. Throw DJ in there too. How are these wrong principle hacks winning anything?

[pinhigh27]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

 

No Brooks doesn't have the wrong principle, you do. The face isn't staying square to the path, period. And that's not a computer model, is the literal 3D measurement of a players swing.

And you are the authority on "Right Principle". Passing a PAT doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. My local pro at the country club plays to a +3, but can't teach worth a lick. All the high school hotshots go take lesson from another pro with an unorthodox swing.

 

that sucks because you couldn't do either

[Krt22]

It's not an insult when it's the a fact that has verified by 3D data with countless touring pros, just because you discount that data vs your own intuition doesn't mean I am insulting you. This video just shows how it doesnt even happen the last segment of downswing, thus impossible to accomplish it throughout the entire swing once you factor in the full backswing, wrist c0ck, transition, etc

 

 

Again, just becasue I like it doesn't mean I am discounting other teachings. We are all built differently with different age and flexiblilty, so I doubt anyone can swings like a computer model. Maybe Justin Rose, he does seem very robotic. But his robot like swing hasn't won a major in a few years, while Brooks has won 3 in 14 months with a "wrong principle". Maybe we should rethink what's considered right principles.

 

This isn't about about what people like or don't, what people consider right/wrong way to swing the club, its about what actually happens in the swing, which has been verified with actual 3D data. And keeping the face square to the path throughout the entire swing (thus eliminating the need to close the face) simply doesnt happen with any golfer so trying to chase that notion is largely going to be a fruitless exercise.

 

RBImGuy says hi, BTW.

 

Im not sure what that clown has to do with anything, but if you ignore the shanks, 3% dispersion on 300yrd drives is the business.

[iteachgolf]

I guess Spieth sucks as bad as Koepka. Throw DJ in there too. How are these wrong principle hacks winning anything?

 

The hell are you talking about? Again neither have wrong principles. It’s you guys who think the clubface stays square to the path.

[BiggErn]

I guess Spieth sucks as bad as Koepka. Throw DJ in there too. How are these wrong principle hacks winning anything?

 

The hell are you talking about? Again neither have wrong principles. Its you guys who think the clubface stays square to the path.

 

I was being sarcastic to the other guy. Not that I completely agree with that video either.

[Fort Worth Pro]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

[Range Pro]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

I agree with that. Just like there is no absolutes in life nor in golf.

[iteachgolf]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

I agree with that. Just like there is no absolutes in life nor in golf.

 

How can you agree with that while the entire thread you e argued that it literally stays square to the path the entire time?

[Range Pro]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

I agree with that. Just like there is no absolutes in life nor in golf.

 

How can you agree with that while the entire thread you e argued that it literally stays square to the path the entire time?

Ok fine. Most of the time. You win. RBImGuy says hi to you too. ;)

[BiggErn]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

 

If you take a circle that’s perpendicular to the ground and place a clubface inside it would that be square to its path the entire time? If you take that same circle and turn it 45* it suddenly isn’t? I don’t get that complex in my swing concepts and realize it would be physically impossible to do it based on the reasoning provided.

[iteachgolf]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

I agree with that. Just like there is no absolutes in life nor in golf.

 

How can you agree with that while the entire thread you e argued that it literally stays square to the path the entire time?

Ok fine. Most of the time. You win. RBImGuy says hi to you too. ;)

 

It’s not square to the path most of the time either. Get better at trolling

[Range Pro]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

I agree with that. Just like there is no absolutes in life nor in golf.

 

How can you agree with that while the entire thread you e argued that it literally stays square to the path the entire time?

Ok fine. Most of the time. You win. RBImGuy says hi to you too. ;)

 

It's not square to the path most of the time either. Get better at trolling

:russian_roulette: I no longer give a d^&*!

[glk]

It's not a matter of believing that playing with the face less open is wrong. It's the absurd statement that they are keeping the face square to the path the entire swing. Literally everyone opens it in the backswing. LITERALLY EVERYONE. Brooks koepka opens the clubface. It is less open than some other players but it is still open.

 

If you take a circle that’s perpendicular to the ground and place a clubface inside it would that be square to its path the entire time? If you take that same circle and turn it 45* it suddenly isn’t? I don’t get that complex in my swing concepts and realize it would be physically impossible to do it based on the reasoning provided.

 

Try this explanation.

[Krt22]

Excellent video, it shows how much shaft rotation would be required to keep the face square the entire time, pretty much debunking the idea that keeping the face square to the path the entire time takes the timing element out of the swing