What do you do to square the club face on downswing?

[Righty to Lefty]

13 hours ago, iacas said:

 

Banging on keys without any rhyme or reason is closer to "just swinging a stick" like you said than playing good golf. His analogy is way better than yours.

 

 

So do I, as a + index, inherently "know impact" much better than you? If you "know impact" so well, why do you struggle to break 80? Does my opinion about things carry more weight than yours? Before you answer, again, I'll remind you that you've repeatedly talked up your ability to at one time be a 5 handicap as proof or evidence that you know what you're talking about.

 

Why can a toddler learn to walk, yet some golfers will put tons of time into learning to play golf and still not break 80 or 90.

You can't do either of them well until you learn the cords/scales and learn impact and that is precisely why many put in so much effort and don't get out as much as they put in.  Impact is the foundation of golf, and the point when we are all subject to the same rules and in my opinion should be day one learning for all golfers because interpreting ball flight and impact are the most important aspects in golf in my opinion, followed by trusting your swing motion.   

 

You are not a + index because you have a pretty golf swing, you are a + index because you know impact via hitting millions of golf balls and playing thousands of rounds of golf, which is how most tour pros learn it, the mathematical route via understanding the math of impact which is how engineers that don't even play golf can design a swing robot that can play the game better than any human ever will or the most likely case is a combination of both which is where most will fit. I learned the math of impact and used it to my advantage to greatly speed up my improvement when I switched from playing right handed to lefty and it took me 6 months to break 90 lefty where it took me 6 years to do it right handed.  My best round ever of 1 over is left handed which I shot 18 months after switching.  I break 80 all the time so your assertion that I struggle to break 80 is incorrect.

 

You being a + handicap doesn't mean that your opinion carries more weight than mine because the principles of impact do not change so you either know them or you don't. You are simply further along the path than I am in your golf journey. If we stood next to each other and hit balls on the range no one would be able to tell that you are a better player than me because I am at a phase where I know impact and trust my swing motion so in a range setting where I dictate the lie I can relentlessly repeat any shot I want to hit. I know players that play to +7 and better and your opinion on just about all golf topics would be more valuable to me than theirs because they know how they play golf, and not how golf is played which takes into account the mathematical and athletic sides of the game. 

 

On course is where you shine, because you have played so much golf and your references are so tight that you will take a piece of a stroke away from me on most any hole which will add up in the end.  When I played with my tour pro friend it wasn't that I couldn't hit a shot as well as he could, but it was the fact that on most any shot his shot was just that little bit better making his percentage of success just that tick better. That was the difference, his assessment of EVERY situation on the course was better than mine because he was working from a rolodex of thousands of rounds when at the time I had only played 200 rounds left handed.  He could relentlessly repeat on course from varied lies...and that is the main differentiator.

 

Knowing d plane and ball flight laws is an area where I can easily catch up to you because the principles don't change, but how do I go about making up for the thousands of rounds of experience that you have over me is a completely different animal.  You can't have an opinion on impact, because those factors don't change and that is the perspective that I speak from and that is why I always sound like I am saying the same thing over and over, it is because I am because the requirements of impact don't change, but the second that you begin talking about course strategy, how you see the course or dissect a given hole, and how you determine how the ball is going to come out of a given lie I am all ears and taking notes.  The pro I played with said something to me one day that was profound and stuck with me when he said " I can't tell you how many birdies I'm going to make, but I can tell you exactly how I'm not going to make worse than bogey."  I have no problem with you personally, I have a problem with the way you disregard my golf journey when in reality with no disrespect, it is more unique and rare than yours. How many people do you know that have nearly broken par right and left handed? I am not a normal run of the mill  5 handicap and now that I am no longer working in the middle east stuck on compounds like I was for 17.5 years I don't intend to be a 5 handicap for much longer but time will tell. 

 

 

 

 

 

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

You can't do either of them well

 

I'm ejecting on all the comparisons of golf to walking or banging on keys or swinging a stick. I should have when you said that golf is about as complex as walking because it's just "swinging a stick."

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Impact is the foundation of golf, and the point when we are all subject to the same rules and in my opinion should be day one learning for all golfers because interpreting ball flight and impact are the most important aspects in golf in my opinion, followed by trusting your swing motion.

 

• The day one golfer doesn't even often achieve "impact" of any type every time they try to hit it.
• A golfer's swing motion can't be trusted and likely needs to be improved if it consistently arrives at impact poorly.

I can teach someone every last detail of "impact" and even set them up in an R2L-approved setup, with a grip you like, and… they can still fail to hit the ball well. They can still whiff, shank, top, slice, chunk, pull, push, snap hook, etc. the ball. "Knowing impact" is, in the grand scheme of things, a fraction of what a golfer has to know.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

You are not a + index because you have a pretty golf swing, you are a + index because you know impact via hitting millions of golf balls and playing thousands of rounds of golf, which is how most tour pros learn it

 

You're making a lot of faulty assumptions.

 

There are golfers out there who can't break 90 despite having done quadruple what I've done (while still being in their 40s). No, I'm not a + because I've done it a lot. I'm a + because I arrive at impact as a result of a better swing motion than others.

 

A golfer can have a "bad" golf swing that they just learn to groove, but their ceiling will be lower. There are also golfers with decent but not great golf swings who are just a bit more athletic than someone else, and they can sometimes take months away from the game and come back and break par or shoot an easy 74 or something.

 

But the golf swing is how you arrive at impact. And you can "know" all of the math and physics of it all you want, but you still have to DO it. The "DO" part is the golf swing.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

the mathematical route via understanding the math of impact which is how engineers that don't even play golf can design a swing robot that can play the game better than any human ever will or the most likely case is a combination of both which is where most will fit.

 

Oh boy. The robots work because their swing is ultra repeatable, and thus, the resulting ball flight is very repeatable/predictable. You could design a robot that would play better golf than an average golfer despite hitting the ball with 0° AoA and slicing every ball 35 yards… But because it's VERY repeatable… they can know exactly where to aim it and "play" better golf despite having "bad" impact conditions.

 

Because the swing is repeatable beyond a human being's capacity.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I learned the math of impact and used it to my advantage to greatly speed up my improvement when I switched from playing right handed to lefty and it took me 6 months to break 90 lefty where it took me 6 years to do it right handed.

 

It's not like you completely forgot how to do everything you learned as a righty. I've flipped clubs around and swung lefty.

 

 

and swung actual lefty clubs: https://www.instagram.com/p/BnJxA-iDi0w/.

 

The other day, one of my juniors had to leave for a tennis lesson, and his brother and he were playing on the sim, so I finished the hole for him. My first shot was his approach shot to the ninth at Augusta National. From 140 out, with a 10-year-old's lefty 7I, I hit it to just inside the 20' circle. My last lefty swing prior to that may have been a year before.

 

I didn't start from zero when I made that lefty swing. You didn't either. You'd played golf for 6 years or whatever, you'd learned a bit about how to move your body.

 

I beat people putting lefty all the time. I don't even change my righty grip. Then I make my follow-through, and then my backswing (righty) to putt. I didn't forget all I learned about putting by putting lefty. You didn't either.

 

I've taught students (I'm not claiming even 10, but it's more than five) who go from beginners to breaking 100 in a few weeks and 90 in a few months on a par 72 course. They truly are starting from nothing (in terms of golf). We don't spend a lot of time talking about impact, except to cover the basics: the ball starts right because the face is pointing right, the ball curves left because of this… almost all of the conversations and practice go to their swing itself, because that's how they "do" the impact. That's how they get there.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I break 80 all the time so your assertion that I struggle to break 80 is incorrect.

 

What's your GHIN? A 5 index golfer has an average differential of about 8, so unless you're playing lower rated courses (course rating), you're not breaking 80 more than about half the time, as half of your rounds are going to be > 8 differentials and half will be < 8 (with ~ 1/5 being < 5).

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

You being a + handicap doesn't mean that your opinion carries more weight than mine because the principles of impact do not change so you either know them or you don't.

 

Does my opinion carry more weight than yours because I have taught thousands of golfers, and see the results of what changes players can and do make, almost every day for the last 15 years or so, while you've experimented on comparatively few.

 

And, you've missed the point again:

• You talk at length about how you being such a good golfer (agree to disagree) means your opinions matters.
• I'm a better golfer (bad assumptions by you aside about how much I play), and yet… that is not a reason why my opinion matters more?

It feels contradictory to me, but hey…

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

If we stood next to each other and hit balls on the range no one would be able to tell that you are a better player than me because I am at a phase where I know impact and trust my swing motion so in a range setting where I dictate the lie I can relentlessly repeat any shot I want to hit.

 

I'd take that bet.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

On course is where you shine, because you have played so much golf

 

You probably play more golf than I do. There's a joke about getting into the golf industry because you like to play golf, and the irony of never really getting to play golf again… You also live in a warmer climate.

 

Also, I could not play golf on a golf course for six months, show up to your home course, and beat you.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

When I played with my tour pro friend it wasn't that I couldn't hit a shot as well as he could

 

Oh boy.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

but it was the fact that on most any shot his shot was just that little bit better making his percentage of success just that tick better.

 

That's a heckuva big "tick."

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

He could relentlessly repeat on course from varied lies...and that is the main differentiator.

 

It really wasn't.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Knowing d plane and ball flight laws is an area where I can easily catch up to you because the principles don't change

 

The fact that you can "easily catch up" to me shows how unimportant "knowing" that stuff is.

 

We agree — it's pretty easy to learn and "know" impact "math" or physics or whatever. Actually DOING it is what's difficult, and what you rarely talk about.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

but how do I go about making up for the thousands of rounds of experience that you have over me is a completely different animal.

 

You know what they say about assuming things.

 

I don't think I've played 2000 rounds in my life. Throw out the first three years I played (15-17) and I don't think I'm at 1000. It's amusing that you think that the only difference between you and a Tour player is how much golf you've played/balls you've hit.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

You can't have an opinion on impact, because those factors don't change and that is the perspective that I speak from and that is why I always sound like I am saying the same thing over and over

 

Let's stipulate to the fact that:

• Impact "math" (physics, whatever) doesn't change.
• It's pretty simple to learn that stuff.

Again, the fundamental basis for why you're so far off base is that the golf swing is how you create your impact conditions. You repeat often that you have to "know" impact and "set up" to guarantee your impact conditions, but you rarely give weight to the golf swing itself. The golf swing is how any golfer arrives at impact, and every move they make is their best effort to get to a place that sends the ball in a usable way from where they are at that moment.

 

You can know impact physics to a PhD level, setup in a perfectly R2L-approved way… and still suck at golf.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I have no problem with you personally, I have a problem with the way you disregard my golf journey when in reality with no disrespect, it is more unique and rare than yours.

 

I "disregard" your golf journey because it's not relevant. What is relevant is what you have to say, and far too often, what you have to say is either incorrect or not helpful. And again, it's not like you forgot everything you learned righty when you started playing lefty, nor do I forget everything I know as a righty when I make a lefty swing.

 

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I am not a normal run of the mill 5 handicap

 

Uniqueness ≠ "correctness."

 

And I've never seen anyone claim you are "normal." 🤣

[nikos74]

On 7/12/2024 at 8:35 PM, Righty to Lefty said:

The club face will square itself if you are in the right location to the ball.  By that I mean if your upper body as getting deep as it possibly can in the down swing you have no choice but to release the clubhead through impact and this should become very reliable over time.  The hard part is making the adjustments as you fatigue during a given round of golf or practice session.  You have to monitor every shot that you hit and measure that against what you expected to happen then adjust accordingly.  Not even swing robots with their perfect swing motion manages the club face perfectly but you have to try and come as close as you can while realizing that there is only one point along your swing arc that will match your intentions and the ball must be present at that location.  You should be assessing very closely the start direction of every shot that you hit, but also don't try manipulate the face, rather try to see your club in slow motion entering impact and see it striking the ball just prior to your club face squaring to your target while just letting you swing motion happen.  Am I making sense? 

The clubface squares itself if the arms are passive and the body rotates correctly before and after impact.  It has to since the hands and arms are attached to the shoulders.  The forearms and wrists rotate the clubface open and close.  But the chest should be covering the ball and the body should continue rotating past impact into the finish position.

 

There are some ardent haters of this method that claim the arms fall behind and they mishit the ball.  It seems to me their shoulders not turning fast enough is the problem.  Initiating the arms first approach is reverse sequencing and technically wrong.  If it helps some people I don't mind though.  They can do whatever they want.

Edited July 16, 2024 by nikos74

[me05501]

@MannJ as serious as you seem to be about improving your game, it wouldn't hurt to invest in a real hitting mat that allows you to stand on the same surface the ball is on. You could remove a ton of swing-to-swing variables by making sure the surface under your feet and under the ball is not going to shift during your swing. 

 

Along those lines, you may also want to keep a pair of old golf shoes handy at your hitting station. It's highly unlikely that the shoes you're practicing in have the same traction or sole thickness as the shoes you'll be playing in. 

 

 

[GoGoErky]

30 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

The clubface squares itself if the arms are passive and the body rotates correctly before and after impact.  It has to since the hands and arms are attached to the shoulders.  The forearms and wrists rotate the clubface open and close.  But the chest should be covering the ball and the body should continue rotating past impact into the finish position.

 

There are some ardent haters of this method that claim the arms fall behind and they mishit the ball.  It seems to me their shoulders not turning fast enough is the problem.  Initiating the arms first approach is reverse sequencing and technically wrong.  If it helps some people I don't mind though.  They can do whatever they want.

There reason there are haters of passive arms is because the arms aren’t passive in the swing. Thats not just and opinion it’s measured data and claiming anything else is bad information.

 

It does nothing to help anyone by stating the arms need to be passive.

 

Despite the number of replies from those with thousands upon thousands of lessons that have replied to you and shown this you have refused to listen and understand them and want to hold onto some old notion because you believe it to be true

[Righty to Lefty]

41 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

The clubface squares itself if the arms are passive and the body rotates correctly before and after impact.  It has to since the hands and arms are attached to the shoulders.  The forearms and wrists rotate the clubface open and close.  But the chest should be covering the ball and the body should continue rotating past impact into the finish position.

 

There are some ardent haters of this method that claim the arms fall behind and they mishit the ball.  It seems to me their shoulders not turning fast enough is the problem.  Initiating the arms first approach is reverse sequencing and technically wrong.

I am definitely in the letting the upper body be passive camp to allow the club time to regain the plane that the ball is on but oh boy prepare yourself for the backlash that is coming from many on this site. I like how this instructor put the concept together: 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2024 by Righty to Lefty

[nikos74]

7 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

There reason there are haters of passive arms is because the arms aren’t passive in the swing. Thats not just and opinion it’s measured data and claiming anything else is bad information.

 

It does nothing to help anyone by stating the arms need to be passive.

 

Despite the number of replies from those with thousands upon thousands of lessons that have replied to you and shown this you have refused to listen and understand them and want to hold onto some old notion because you believe it to be true

Plenty of instructors on Youtube teach the passive arm body swing.  Clay Ballard, Eric Cogorno, Milo Lines, Martin Ayers easily come to mind. Claiming proper sequencing is bad information or outdated and the "let the body react to the arms" narrative is correct is pure irony.

[MannJ]

22 minutes ago, me05501 said:

@MannJ as serious as you seem to be about improving your game, it wouldn't hurt to invest in a real hitting mat that allows you to stand on the same surface the ball is on. You could remove a ton of swing-to-swing variables by making sure the surface under your feet and under the ball is not going to shift during your swing. 

 

Along those lines, you may also want to keep a pair of old golf shoes handy at your hitting station. It's highly unlikely that the shoes you're practicing in have the same traction or sole thickness as the shoes you'll be playing in. 

 

 

Good point. 

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

Plenty of instructors on Youtube teach the passive arm body swing.  Clay Ballard, Eric Cogorno, Milo Lines, Martin Ayers easily come to mind. Claiming proper sequencing is bad information or outdated and the "let the body react to the arms" narrative is correct is pure irony.

 

And… #FeelAintReal

 

Milo's arms are not passive to start the downswing. Neither are Rory's. Or anyone good, really. Or they'd look something like this near impact:

 

 

Edited July 16, 2024 by iacas
changed image size

[GoGoErky]

13 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

Plenty of instructors on Youtube teach the passive arm body swing.  Clay Ballard, Eric Cogorno, Milo Lines, Martin Ayers easily come to mind. Claiming proper sequencing is bad information or outdated and the "let the body react to the arms" narrative is correct is pure irony.

Some of them say that and have yet to show it on any system that it’s actually happening.

 

Eric Cogorno definitely doesn’t teach passive arms.

 

There have been threads about Milo and it has been shown with data that what he’s saying doesn’t actually happen in the swing. AMG has done videos disputing his claims.

 

So while you may believe what you hear from them what they are saying isn’t happening in the swing. Again it’s been measured and proven. You can’t either accept the data or continue to be stuck on incorrect thinking, but please stop telling someone arms should be passive 

[Nard_S]

30 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

The clubface squares itself if the arms are passive and the body rotates correctly before and after impact.  It has to since the hands and arms are attached to the shoulders.  The forearms and wrists rotate the clubface open and close.  But the chest should be covering the ball and the body should continue rotating past impact into the finish position.

 

There are some ardent haters of this method that claim the arms fall behind and they mishit the ball.  It seems to me their shoulders not turning fast enough is the problem.  Initiating the arms first approach is reverse sequencing and technically wrong.

He's somewhat doing what you advocate. So....

 

Pro's pro-actively rotate club in an axial direction to square head earlier, it can be seen, they also move hands faster & earlier, a great pivot requires great arm triangle behavior, the two work off each other and it becomes easier to do both if you approach it from both sides. If you expand the scope.

[nikos74]

23 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

Some of them say that and have yet to show it on any system that it’s actually happening.

 

Eric Cogorno definitely doesn’t teach passive arms.

 

There have been threads about Milo and it has been shown with data that what he’s saying doesn’t actually happen in the swing. AMG has done videos disputing his claims.

 

So while you may believe what you hear from them what they are saying isn’t happening in the swing. Again it’s been measured and proven. You can’t either accept the data or continue to be stuck on incorrect thinking, but please stop telling someone arms should be passive 

Eric Cogorno did a video about it a few days ago.  Come to think of it Rick Shiels and Peter Finch teach a similar system.  Most instructors probably do because it's the most technically sound.

 

Like I said I don't have a problem with *alternative swing methods* like this one and stack and tilt because for some people one system is better than another.  It's the dishonesty that bothers me.  MDLT and Mike Malaska teach something similar to what monte teaches?

 

AMG seems to be biased and agenda driven.  Others have noted that as well.

Edited July 16, 2024 by nikos74

[johnrobison]

49 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I am definitely in the letting the upper body be passive camp to allow the club time to regain the plane that the ball is on 

Despite it being shown to you repeatedly that even in your own swing you don't do that.

[Righty to Lefty]

21 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

Despite it being shown to you repeatedly that even in your own swing you don't do that.

Yup thanks for repeatedly telling me what I do....you know that you can ignore my posts and move on to the ones that you agree with right instead of repeatedly responding to my posts?  I repeatedly post about d plane and ball flight laws that are 100% fact and am still told "repeatedly" that I am wrong about those too. So what do you want me to do? Should I not post about anything in this public forum?  Please tell me how to proceed Sir?  Or just ignore my posts and keep it moving. 

[GoGoErky]

56 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

Eric Cogorno did a video about it a few days ago.  Come to think of it Rick Shiels and Peter Finch teach a similar system.  Most instructors probably do because it's the most technically sound.

 

Like I said I don't have a problem with *alternative swing methods* like this one and stack and tilt because for some people one system is better than another.  It's the dishonesty that bothers me.  MDLT and Mike Malaska teach something similar to what monte teaches?

 

AMG seems to be biased and agenda driven.  Others have noted that as well.

He’s not saying arms are passive. He’s tong about a feel for creating an effortless swing, and if you watched his swings by no means were his arms passive. They actually came down and off his chest. 
 

AMG and Monte teach the same thing. AMG is providing content that shows the data about how the swing works. Everything they show contradicts the passive arms. Their agenda is to provide data and help golfers learn.

 

 

[johnrobison]

42 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Yup thanks for repeatedly telling me what I do....you know that you can ignore my posts and move on to the ones that you agree with right instead of repeatedly responding to my posts?  I repeatedly post about d plane and ball flight laws that are 100% fact and am still told "repeatedly" that I am wrong about those too. So what do you want me to do? Should I not post about anything in this public forum?  Please tell me how to proceed Sir?  Or just ignore my posts and keep it moving. 

I'm pointing it out so that people who are trying to learn the swing won't be fooled by your claims of having passive arms and think that's the way to do it. They should see that, even though you say it's correct, you don't even do it yourself. And when that's been pointed out to you, you don't have an answer for it.

 

It's not for me to tell you how to proceed - feel free to post in the forums all you like. I do wish, however, that you would argue in good faith and with intellectual honesty and integrity. But you do you, and where I think it's important to correct you, well... I'll do me.

[nikos74]

28 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

He’s not saying arms are passive. He’s tong about a feel for creating an effortless swing, and if you watched his swings by no means were his arms passive. They actually came down and off his chest. 
 

AMG and Monte teach the same thing. AMG is providing content that shows the data about how the swing works. Everything they show contradicts the passive arms. Their agenda is to provide data and help golfers learn.

 

 

Turning from the hips and up with a 1 piece takeaway means the shoulders are turning and thus the arms put the club on the correct swing path in the backswing.  Then with the downswing the same happens as the body unwinds.  There is a pivot to start the BS and a pivot to start the DS.  Of course the arms come down and out because his chest is covering the ball at impact.

[GoGoErky]

4 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

Turning from the hips and up with a 1 piece takeaway means the shoulders are turning and thus the arms put the club on the correct swing path in the backswing.  Then with the downswing the same happens as the body unwinds.  There is a pivot to start the BS and a pivot to start the DS.  Of course the arms come down and out because his chest is covering the ball at impact.

You have no idea what your talking about.

the one piece takeaway is another bad idea. It’s usually the cause of many issues because it gets then club to far inside. So no a one piece takeaway doesn’t do that. Proper active use of the wrist and arms get the club in the proper positions in the takeaway, backswing, transition and downswing 
 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CukD6VzsSKy/?igsh=Y203bHduaHd0bzk=

People pivot wrong all the time and the arms get out of position in both the backswing and downswing. If one covers the ball with the chest but don’t actively use the arms they are left behind. That’s been shown over and over in nearly every swing video in this section and the swing section for golfers who either believe the the leave the arms up theory or the fire the hips one.

 

[nikos74]

44 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

You have no idea what your talking about.

the one piece takeaway is another bad idea. It’s usually the cause of many issues because it gets then club to far inside. So no a one piece takeaway doesn’t do that. Proper active use of the wrist and arms get the club in the proper positions in the takeaway, backswing, transition and downswing 
 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CukD6VzsSKy/?igsh=Y203bHduaHd0bzk=

People pivot wrong all the time and the arms get out of position in both the backswing and downswing. If one covers the ball with the chest but don’t actively use the arms they are left behind. That’s been shown over and over in nearly every swing video in this section and the swing section for golfers who either believe the the leave the arms up theory or the fire the hips one.

 

The shoulders turn 90 degrees, not just the hips that turn 45 degrees.  So you don't run out of turn and lift the arms up at some point.  It just takes synchronization from the ground up.

 

And it's much easier to prevent the club being sucked in by using the body as a whole, rather than focusing on the arms and hands to initiate the swing.  But this is my opinion primarily.

Edited July 16, 2024 by nikos74

[KD1]

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I repeatedly post about d plane and ball flight laws that are 100% fact and am still told "repeatedly" that I am wrong about those too.

 

No one has ever argued against the ball flight laws. They've argued against your teaching methods... Repeatedly. There's a difference. Stop trying to be a victim.

[KD1]

4 hours ago, nikos74 said:

There are some ardent haters of this method that claim the arms fall behind and they mishit the ball.  It seems to me their shoulders not turning fast enough is the problem.

If the arms fall behind, and you spin the shoulders out even faster... The arms fall further behind.

[KD1]

2 hours ago, nikos74 said:

AMG seems to be biased and agenda driven.  Others have noted that as well.

Can you elaborate?

[nikos74]

3 minutes ago, KD1 said:

Can you elaborate?

It seems to me and others they favor the "let the hands and arms make the body react" narrative.  Data and opinions can be manipulated to push that conclusion.  Can't say for sure because I haven't watched them enough.

[GoGoErky]

1 hour ago, nikos74 said:

The shoulders turn 90 degrees, not just the hips that turn 45 degrees.  So you don't run out of turn and lift the arms up at some point.  It just takes synchronization from the ground up.

 

And it's much easier to prevent the club being sucked in by using the body as a whole, rather than focusing on the arms and hands to initiate the swing.  But this is my opinion primarily.

Not everyone turns 90 and 45c some turn less and sorme turn more.
 

Some only get their hands to a 10 o’clock position and some can go past it.

 

The synchronization is actually sequencing which amongst things like wrist set, shoulder turn, hip turn, there’s also arm rotation and elevation in the backswing.

 

Everything you said in the first paragraph is just repeating things hover read that say 90 and 45 and outdated swing thoughts. You lack understanding of what happens in the swing. 
 

what does using the body as a whole mean?

 

Are you willing to change your opinion based on facts that show it to be wrong or will you continue to

hold onto it despite constantly being shown how it’s wrong?

Edited July 16, 2024 by GoGoErky

[nikos74]

21 minutes ago, KD1 said:

If the arms fall behind, and you spin the shoulders out even faster... The arms fall further behind.

If you stay in posture you can't come over the top by spinning the shoulders.

shift, turn, shift, turn

[GoGoErky]

14 minutes ago, nikos74 said:

It seems to me and others they favor the "let the hands and arms make the body react" narrative.  Data and opinions can be manipulated to push that conclusion.  Can't say for sure because I haven't watched them enough.

There is a .02 second difference between the lower and upper body. The arms don’t lead, the downswing starts from the ground. 
 

So you whet from having an opinion that they have an agenda to getting asked why you think that way, to now your not sure because you haven’t watched them enough. You obviously watched them enough to think they have an agenda. So what makes you think they have some agenda.

 

they are literally showing measurements of what happens in the swing, they aren’t making conclusions they are pointing out the actual measurements and data. 

[iacas]

4 hours ago, nikos74 said:

AMG seems to be biased and agenda driven.

 

They aren't. They show the data and teach what the data leads them to understand. Their bias is in teaching what the best players tend to do.

 

4 hours ago, johnrobison said:

Despite it being shown to you repeatedly that even in your own swing you don't do that.

 

Yep.

 

3 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Yup thanks for repeatedly telling me what I do.

 

#FeelAintReal

 

3 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

you know that you can ignore my posts and move on to the ones that you agree with right instead of repeatedly responding to my posts?

 

Some of us reply because we feel it's important to help others avoid bad information that will not help their golf game.

 

3 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I repeatedly post about d plane and ball flight laws that are 100% fact and am still told "repeatedly" that I am wrong about those too.

 

That stuff's pretty simple, so even you tend to get that stuff right. I don't think I can recall a time when anyone has said you get ball flight law/D-plane stuff wrong.

 

2 hours ago, johnrobison said:

I'm pointing it out so that people who are trying to learn the swing won't be fooled by your claims of having passive arms and think that's the way to do it. They should see that, even though you say it's correct, you don't even do it yourself. And when that's been pointed out to you, you don't have an answer for it.

 

👍🏼

 

2 hours ago, johnrobison said:

It's not for me to tell you how to proceed - feel free to post in the forums all you like. I do wish, however, that you would argue in good faith and with intellectual honesty and integrity. But you do you, and where I think it's important to correct you, well... I'll do me.

 

It's been the same stuff since at least 2008. Expecting it to change is lunacy at this point, so I'm with you @johnrobison — it's just to help others avoid going down a bad road.

 

2 hours ago, nikos74 said:

Turning from the hips and up with a 1 piece takeaway means the shoulders are turning and thus the arms put the club on the correct swing path in the backswing.  Then with the downswing the same happens as the body unwinds.  There is a pivot to start the BS and a pivot to start the DS.  Of course the arms come down and out because his chest is covering the ball at impact.

 

If you actually had passive arms in the backswing, you'd look like this:

 

 

Good players look something like this:

 

 

Ergo, they have to reverse that and go from the bottom image to the top image during the downswing.

 

If your arms were passive and you just turned, the hands would fall even farther behind your pivot/shirt seam.

 

[KD1]

1 hour ago, nikos74 said:

If you stay in posture you can't come over the top by spinning the shoulders.

shift, turn, shift, turn

 

 

I didnt say anything about OTT... My tendencies are shoulder spins out too fast, leave hands behind, too in to out, hook.

 

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, nikos74 said:

If you stay in posture you can't come over the top by spinning the shoulders.

shift, turn, shift, turn

Pretty sure at this point you are just repeating things you hear that sound good and reasonable 

[nikos74]

13 hours ago, iacas said:

If you actually had passive arms in the backswing, you'd look like this:

 

No.  The swing path is on a much higher inclination and far less inside.  At the top of the BS the lead arm is approximately on the shoulder plane.  One would have to actually push their arms down and not let their trail elbow hinge to achieve the position depicted in the diagram.  The goal is a 1PS.

13 hours ago, iacas said:

Good players look something like this:

 

 

Ergo, they have to reverse that and go from the bottom image to the top image during the downswing.

 

If your arms were passive and you just turned, the hands would fall even farther behind your pivot/shirt seam.

 

A 2PS is not inherently better than a 1PS.  The first tends to be more powerful and the second tends to be more consistent.  It comes down to a personal preference.