"GAP" - And Then "Your Naturally Effective Swing" Emerges

[Golfonthemind]

27 minutes ago, iacas said:

I appreciate the reply, but that’s not the topic.

 

It’s been said (to be clear it’s not my hypothesis) that if you give a golfer a good GAP, a swing that hits “consistently solid, straight shots” will “naturally emerge.” That’s what I’m attempting to discuss here.

ok well I apologize if that’s the entirety of the topic open for discussion then it’s likely not going to lead to a lot of discussion. The percent of people who really believe that is extremely small and it’s not something that could be empirically tested. You are just going to get a lot of people that agree or do what I am doing and try and expound on the general ideas of the topic. 
 

A general PSA of my position is “ having a perfect GAP is not the end all be all, you still need to know how do move the club and your body intelligently” probably leads to more discussion and improvement for people. 

[Nard_S]

4 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

Do most promote a stronger grip?

 

most I see talk about a neutral grip. Which instructors promote a stronger grip?

The instructors I had many years ago were all about strong grip, not surprised if that's mellowed but if you were err on newbie, I would think slightly stronger disposition is better than neutral, that's just opinion.

[virtuoso]

9 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

The instructors I had many years ago were all about strong grip, not surprised if that's mellowed but if you were err on newbie, I would think slightly stronger disposition is better than neutral, that's just opinion.

The new "neutral" is strong but called "Tour Neutral"

[MonteScheinblum]

56 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

The instructors I had many years ago were all about strong grip, not surprised if that's mellowed but if you were err on newbie, I would think slightly stronger disposition is better than neutral, that's just opinion.

What’s weak and what’s strong is all based on an artists sketch of a player who fought hooks.

 

 

[virtuoso]

4 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

What’s weak and what’s strong is all based on an artists sketch of a player who fought hooks.

 

 

Did his name start with an H and end with ogan?

[ThinkingPlus]

9 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

What’s weak and what’s strong is all based on an artists sketch of a player who fought hooks.

 

 

And you gotta admit that anything defined by how many knuckles you can see can't be the most precise placement in the world.

[GoGoErky]

1 hour ago, Nard_S said:

The instructors I had many years ago were all about strong grip, not surprised if that's mellowed but if you were err on newbie, I would think slightly stronger disposition is better than neutral, that's just opinion.

So don’t want to take the thread too far off topic, but claiming most based on many years ago is a bad generalization.

 

As mentioned above and in other threads over time strong, neutral, weak are general references. Should be about the individual. There are several instructors which I believe include AMG who talk about letting the arms hang naturally and that’s your grip.

 

then you have the Mike Adams who base it off other measurements. But again not on topic for the thread

[MonteScheinblum]

13 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

Did his name start with an H and end with ogan?

It’s starts with a Ben and ends with a Dover, which is what that book did to a lot of golfers.

[virtuoso]

1 minute ago, MonteScheinblum said:

It’s starts with a Ben and ends with a Dover, which is what that book did to a lot of golfers.

HOW DARE YOU, SIR!

 

(yeah....pretty much)

[MonteScheinblum]

10 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

HOW DARE YOU, SIR!

 

(yeah....pretty much)

Most people are unaware that book is a 3rd hand account of things he’s said.  The pencil drawing of his grip is not the most egregious of atrocities.  If you don't believe me, listen to the man himself.

 

Son, if you're stupid enough to follow what that book says, then you don't deserve to be playing golf, because that's a description my golf swing, based on my injuries and my abilities, it is not anything to do with what you're capable of".

 

 

Ive seen different versions of that quote from Hogan, but I came to find out he was not happy with it and wasn’t really involved in its writing.  I was told by many reputable sources, it was an interpretation of what he said to someone who interviewed him.  A Sports Illustrated article.

 

Yet people use this as a bible and discount actual measurement.

 

Uy vey.

Edited September 12, 2024 by MonteScheinblum

[Nard_S]

11 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

So don’t want to take the thread too far off topic, but claiming most based on many years ago is a bad generalization.

 

As mentioned above and in other threads over time strong, neutral, weak are general references. Should be about the individual. There are several instructors which I believe include AMG who talk about letting the arms hang naturally and that’s your grip.

 

then you have the Mike Adams who base it off other measurements. But again not on topic for the thread

Just to be clear, I'm not dying on a hill about weak or strong positioning, how the hands interact with each other and their relation to handle was a bigger concern made in my original point. Many do not have that ideal. Strong or weak is a tuning, not much more. Good grip, has hands, wrists and even elbows working together better, can be weak, neutral or strong but key is things are working together. GAP is not be all solver, but poor application adds variance, poor grip will do just that. Add variance.

[virtuoso]

2 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Most people are unaware that book is a 3rd hand account of things he’s said.  The pencil drawing of his grip is not the most egregious of atrocities.  If you don't believe me, listen to the man himself.

 

Son, if you're stupid enough to follow what that book says, then you don't deserve to be playing golf, because that's a description my golf swing, based on my injuries and my abilities, it is not anything to do with what you're capable of".

The thing I love about Hogan is that many instructors with either say, "I teach what he did.", which is usually not true....or they will say, "Hogan had a very unorthodox swing that required exquisite timing and relied on hitting hundreds of balls everyday to maintain."...which is also not true.

[MonteScheinblum]

6 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

The thing I love about Hogan is that many instructors with either say, "I teach what he did.", which is usually not true....or they will say, "Hogan had a very unorthodox swing that required exquisite timing and relied on hitting hundreds of balls everyday to maintain."...which is also not true.

I always find it ironic that the 2 swings (Hogan and Norman) that everyone preaches to mimic, are the two guys that were notorious as the hardest workers.

 

If I was forced to teach a swing model it would be Bruce Lietzki.  Practiced little compared to most and was an ATM machine.

[virtuoso]

17 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

I always find it ironic that the 2 swings (Hogan and Norman) that everyone preaches to mimic, are the two guys that were notorious as the hardest workers.

 

If I was forced to teach a swing model it would be Bruce Lietzki.  Practiced little compared to most and was an ATM machine.

Presumably you've heard the banana story.

[MonteScheinblum]

1 minute ago, virtuoso said:

Presumably you've heard the banana story.

I don’t remember the caddie’s name off hand, but I was standing there when he was telling it to a few of us young players.  

[golferdude54]

1 hour ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Most people are unaware that book is a 3rd hand account of things he’s said.  The pencil drawing of his grip is not the most egregious of atrocities.  If you don't believe me, listen to the man himself.

 

Son, if you're stupid enough to follow what that book says, then you don't deserve to be playing golf, because that's a description my golf swing, based on my injuries and my abilities, it is not anything to do with what you're capable of".

 

 

Ive seen different versions of that quote from Hogan, but I came to find out he was not happy with it and wasn’t really involved in its writing.  I was told by many reputable sources, it was an interpretation of what he said to someone who interviewed him.  A Sports Illustrated article.

 

Yet people use this as a bible and discount actual measurement.

 

Uy vey.

 

I think one line in the book resonates the most and it was in all caps to emphasize. I don't have the book with me so I'm paraphrasing here; he said that there were a certain number of specific fundamentals/movements that tie the swing altogether to create a powerful, repeating swing.

 

Funnily enough, he narrowed it down to 8 (in the review chapter) rather than the titled "5 Lessons" and those 8 were specific to him only. It's up to everyone else to find their own fundamentals, however many or whatever they are.

[GoldenAges]

As a base point, all good players have a very solid GAP process they follow. Logic says in order to be a consistently good golfer you need a good GAP. 

 

I think the idea that a good swing will naturally emerge is a controversial idea. While GAP is obviously very important, there are a million variables in the golf swing that could go wrong after the GAP.

 

GAP is similar to the foundation in a building process. You can't have a nice house without a solid foundation, but you also can't have a nice house if all you have is a foundation.  

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

I always find it ironic that the 2 swings (Hogan and Norman) that everyone preaches to mimic, are the two guys that were notorious as the hardest workers.

 

If I was forced to teach a swing model it would be Bruce Lietzki.  Practiced little compared to most and was an ATM machine.

Yeah, but Lietzke had a very doubtful caddie.🤣

 

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, virtuoso said:

Presumably you've heard the banana story.

Dang it!  I just posted a bunch of bananas….. I keep telling myself to read to the end of the thread before posting but NO!!!  I had to go and post a bananas pic.

[iacas]

5 hours ago, Golfonthemind said:

A general PSA of my position is “ having a perfect GAP is not the end all be all, you still need to know how do move the club and your body intelligently” probably leads to more discussion and improvement for people. 

 

Thanks, again, but the point wasn't really to lead to "more discussion" it was to discuss the very specific thing in the OP. I suspected most, like me, would disagree. And that's bearing out. Below has more, but… I know you may not know all of them, but I have my reasons for wanting to keep it focused.

 

38 minutes ago, GoldenAges said:

As a base point, all good players have a very solid GAP process they follow. Logic says in order to be a consistently good golfer you need a good GAP.

 

Yes, as noted above, correlation ≠ causation, and that's not what the quote in the OP is talking about. You could also give Rory, DJ, BDC, whomever a screwy grip… and they'd still be way better than anyone here. Not as good as they are now, but still really, really good.

 

38 minutes ago, GoldenAges said:

I think the idea that a good swing will naturally emerge is a controversial idea. While GAP is obviously very important, there are a million variables in the golf swing that could go wrong after the GAP.

 

I lean that way too, yes. The quote isn't mine, again, but I did want to discuss it, as it's been thrown about here in various topics.

[Shilgy]

For you young guys…Bruce Lietzke was probably the best part time player ever. He hit this little fade on every single shot.  Pin tucked left? No problem he’d still hit the cut.

And…he took more time off the game than perhaps any really good player. 
 As I heard the story it was that at the end of a season Lietzke told his caddie see ya in January…..and that he would touch the clubs in the intervening months.  Caddie didn’t believe him so he put a banana under his driver headcover.  
 

AND revealed the rotten stinky mess in January.🤯
 

EDITED TO ADD TO STAY ON TOPIC

 

He had a very good GAP.

Edited September 12, 2024 by Shilgy

[ac6]

Back to the OPs question--no, I absolutely do not believe that getting GAP correct (with adjustments made for biomechanics, etc.) results in a naturally effective swing emerging. But it does make it so that the naturally ineffective swing that does emerge is simpler to understand and fix. If a player can't consistently aim properly they'll never be able to figure out why they can't consistently hit it where they think they're aiming

Edited September 13, 2024 by ac6

[MBAndrews21]

8 hours ago, iacas said:

I appreciate the reply, but that’s not the topic.

The topic of this thread can  be whatever we want and it's gonna be about me next.

[Albatross Dreamer]

On 9/9/2024 at 6:57 PM, MonteScheinblum said:

Setup is important, but there is no standard for everyone and you can have a crappy setup and build a great swing.  See Bradley, the guy at the us am this year, moe Norman, etc.

However, if you give someone a “perfect” setup and no other direction, it is unlikely they will build anything but misery.

 

A good setup for the INDIVIDUAL makes a good swing easier to perform, but by no means assures a good swing.  There are so many physical variabilities.  There is no standard grip or setup that is universal.  Dr. Wright proved it, even down to stance width.  Lower core need stronger grip, upper need weaker, etc.

 

Is it easier to achieve wealth if you start with wealth or a major investor, of course, but you need a proper understanding of how to build wealth.

 

It’s why most lottery winners go broke.

 

If you gave me twin brothers with a crappy setup and said one you can only teach setup and nothing else and the other you can’t change his setup, but you can teach him a solid swing to over come the setup……brother number 2 destroys number 1.

 

The reason I know this is I have hacks with great setups on my lesson tee often and I have people with horrendous setups who play some damn good golf.

Can you define what the different “cores” means physically? As in what physically is different about someone that’s lower core and upper core.

 

i ask since I haven’t been able to find the answer anywhere and it sounds more mythical than real as a result. (I’m not saying that’s the case, just that’s how it feels based on the information I’ve seen)

[GoGoErky]

7 minutes ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

Can you define what the different “cores” means physically? As in what physically is different about someone that’s lower core and upper core.

 

i ask since I haven’t been able to find the answer anywhere and it sounds more mythical than real as a result. (I’m not saying that’s the case, just that’s how it feels based on the information I’ve seen)

This if off topic. The OP wants to keep this to the topic of GAP and if a natural swing emerges. Would recommend starting a new thread about cores so this one doesn’t veer of the OP

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

Can you define what the different “cores” means physically? As in what physically is different about someone that’s lower core and upper core.

 

Lots of other places for that, like here (or a few other places):

 

 

I'd like to request that this topic remain as set out in the OP.

[Albatross Dreamer]

15 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

This if off topic. The OP wants to keep this to the topic of GAP and if a natural swing emerges. Would recommend starting a new thread about cores so this one doesn’t veer of the OP

Fiiiine. OP is easy answer- no

 

Example. Theres a best way to stand when shooting a bow and arrow. But just because we stand in that posture doesn’t mean we’re magically gonna be able to hit the bullseye. And pros can prob hit it in all sorts of stances/positions

 

GAP simply puts us in a better position to do what comes after more effectively. Doesn’t mean it’ll automatically happen

[Ty_Webb]

1 hour ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

Fiiiine. OP is easy answer- no

 

Example. Theres a best way to stand when shooting a bow and arrow. But just because we stand in that posture doesn’t mean we’re magically gonna be able to hit the bullseye. And pros can prob hit it in all sorts of stances/positions

 

GAP simply puts us in a better position to do what comes after more effectively. Doesn’t mean it’ll automatically happen

 

Yep - having a good GAP helps, but it is neither a pre-requisite nor sufficient on its own. You can play good golf with a poor GAP (might be you'd play better golf with a good GAP, but that doesn't mean you can't play well with a poor setup) and you can play bad golf with a good GAP. 

[Golfonthemind]

Ok then how about this scenario? 
 

You take 100 high school aged kids and randomly split them into two groups with instructors for both groups. Group As instructors goal is to instill the best GAP possible but are not allowed to veer from that at all other than “ set up correctly like we discussed and then try and hit the ball at the target” 

 

Group B instructors are not allowed to discuss anything related to GAP but can provide instruction on the most optimal way to move the club and body for each player. 
 

After a year which group is better ? If that’s what you mean by “emerge naturally “ honestly would put my money on Group A. 

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Golfonthemind said:

You take 100 high school aged kids and randomly split them into two groups with instructors for both groups. Group As instructors goal is to instill the best GAP possible but are not allowed to veer from that at all other than “ set up correctly like we discussed and then try and hit the ball at the target” 

 

Group B instructors are not allowed to discuss anything related to GAP but can provide instruction on the most optimal way to move the club and body for each player.

 

That's completely different than the quote I was using. Nobody's said GAP isn't important at all. The question is how many people think that if you just have someone learn to have a good GAP, a swing that hits "consistently solid, straight shots" "naturally emerges."

 

And Group B wins handily. And not only because they're gonna adapt their GAP to match what they see their instructors demonstrating.