Upper core awkwardness

[Nels55]

If you are upper core and you are trying to turn through the ball per Milo Lines et al. you will struggle:

 

I have seen a lot of teaching pros who teach a body controlled swing with passive arms.  According to Wright balance / Larry Rinker 80 or 90 percent of everyday golfers are upper core which often makes for a huge disconnect between teacher and student.  Diametrically opposed teaching. 

Edited January 7 by Nels55
typo

[TheDeanAbides]

28 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

If you are upper core and you are trying to turn through the bal per Milo Lines et al. you will struggle:

 

I have seen a lot of teaching pros who teach a body controlled swing with passive arms.  According to Wright balance / Larry Rinker 80 or 90 percent of everyday golfers are upper core which often makes for a huge disconnect between teacher and student.  Diametrically opposed teaching. 

Nothing wrong with feeling like your swing is body controlled with passive arms, but you absolutely cannot do this if your arm swing is already far too slow. Like everything else, a feel has to be appropriate for your particular pattern/issue.  

[virtuoso]

1 hour ago, Nels55 said:

If you are upper core and you are trying to turn through the bal per Milo Lines et al. you will struggle:

 

I have seen a lot of teaching pros who teach a body controlled swing with passive arms.  According to Wright balance / Larry Rinker 80 or 90 percent of everyday golfers are upper core which often makes for a huge disconnect between teacher and student.  Diametrically opposed teaching. 

What does upper core mean? Just basically no golf related range of motion and flexibility?

[Jeselnik]

This is junk and not what I do.  My version of upper core is similar to Koepka.

On 1/10/2025 at 11:24 AM, Simpsonia said:

 

 

JNIK

Edited January 12 by Jeselnik

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, virtuoso said:

What does upper core mean? Just basically no golf related range of motion and flexibility?

Beat me to it. I haven’t heard of this one either.  

[GoGoErky]

1 hour ago, virtuoso said:

What does upper core mean? Just basically no golf related range of motion and flexibility?

https://www.usgtf.com/the-three-swings-of-wright-balance-which-one-are-you/

[RayPlan]

Here's a supposed test for these claimed swing types, which I find perplexing:

 

 

[virtuoso]

27 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

https://www.usgtf.com/the-three-swings-of-wright-balance-which-one-are-you/

How do you feel about these descriptions? 

[GoGoErky]

17 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

How do you feel about these descriptions? 

I haven’t spent the time to dig into the topic to have an opinion on them. Have only glanced over as I’ve seen them discussed here and like you hadn’t heard the terms before.

 

Its not something that I’ve seen instructors like AMG, GG and a few others i follow on social media talk too much about. 

[bladehunter]

57 minutes ago, RayPlan said:

Here's a supposed test for these claimed swing types, which I find perplexing:

 

 

First off. I keep running around  to try to see my knees.  And I’m not fast enough.  But seriously..😳…. Getting a down the line angle is hard enough. Now I have to do it with  the chicken dance hand signals.  
I’m into rabbit holes. So when my son comes home I’ll get him to film me so I can do this test. I’m still low tech enough that my tri pod is a rock … the wind is blowing outside. So I don’t think the rock can hold the phone still.  🤣. Man warm weather can not come fast enough.  

Edited January 7 by bladehunter

[KD1]

1. The guy says "the most awkward thing about the upper core swing is the arms disconnecting" implying upper core = arms down off the chest and leading the swing vs turning the shoulders.

2. "The most awkward thing for the upper core player is to keep the back at the target and let the arms get disconnected" implying upper core = leading with the chest...

 

I'm confused. I'm going to assume he misspoke in point 1.

Edited January 7 by KD1

[Nels55]

27 minutes ago, KD1 said:

1. The guy says "the most awkward thing about the upper core swing is the arms disconnecting" implying upper core = arms down off the chest and leading the swing vs turning the shoulders.

2. "The most awkward thing for the upper core player is to keep the back at the target and let the arms get disconnected" implying upper core = leading with the chest...

 

I'm confused. I'm going to assume he misspoke in point 1.

2 does not mean leading with the chest.  A connected swing is one where the body leads and the arms stay connected.  Usually the lead arm connected to the pec.  Disconnecting the arms means that they go first.

[Nels55]

56 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

I haven’t spent the time to dig into the topic to have an opinion on them. Have only glanced over as I’ve seen them discussed here and like you hadn’t heard the terms before.

 

Its not something that I’ve seen instructors like AMG, GG and a few others i follow on social media talk too much about. 

Wright's research and conclusions are not talked about much as you mention.

Here are some of Monte's thoughts about Dr. Wright:

 

[Nels55]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

Beat me to it. I haven’t heard of this one either.  

There is a pretty good chance that you are lower or mid core which would make the upper core instruction opposite of what you need.

[bladehunter]

14 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

There is a pretty good chance that you are lower or mid core which would make the upper core instruction opposite of what you need.

I’m genuinely a curious person.  All jokes aside. I will do the test.  And see what is said. All info is good info in my opinion. 

[GoGoErky]

22 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

Wright's research and conclusions are not talked about much as you mention.

Here are some of Monte's thoughts about Dr. Wright:

 

I’ve read that thread and seen some of Monte’s for references to it. He’s one of the few that talk about it, but from

what I’ve seen his comments are mostly on here and not on his IG posts.

 

Similar to other coaches they don’t post much about it on social media

 

 

[Nels55]

3 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I’m genuinely a curious person.  All jokes aside. I will do the test.  And see what is said. All info is good info in my opinion. 

The Wright balance system is fairly complex from what i have seen.  Actually testing for core requires someone who is certified in the system.  I believe that there are nine different levels with associated stance widths and so on.  I've never been tested and my knowledge of the system is minimal at best.

[MonteScheinblum]

1 hour ago, GoGoErky said:

I’ve read that thread and seen some of Monte’s for references to it. He’s one of the few that talk about it, but from

what I’ve seen his comments are mostly on here and not on his IG posts.

 

Similar to other coaches they don’t post much about it on social media

 

 

There’s a reason I don’t talk about it much.  I’m not an expert on it.  I’m educated on it by Dr. Wright himself, who I have known for over 40 years.  I talk about body centric teaching on IG and how it fails most golfers and that’s as far as I go.

 

I know enough to understand it and give some of the evidence and dangers, but not enough to educate someone else.

[virtuoso]

3 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

I haven’t spent the time to dig into the topic to have an opinion on them. Have only glanced over as I’ve seen them discussed here and like you hadn’t heard the terms before.

 

Its not something that I’ve seen instructors like AMG, GG and a few others i follow on social media talk too much about. 

Well, lets just look at what you sent me. How do you feel about the following statements.

 

Concerning lower core swingers:

 

1. Grip uses short thumb because grip is in the fingers

2. Their hip turn is restricted going back but their center of mass is over their trail hip

3. Downswing begins with rotation of hips and shoulders

4. They use rotational and horizontal forces but little to no vertical force

5. Hands and arms follow hips and shoulders, which is opposite of backswing sequence.

6. Strong grip and forward shaft lean and ball position center to back to facilitate more shaft lean.

 

 

 

[GoGoErky]

8 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

There’s a reason I don’t talk about it much.  I’m not an expert on it.  I’m educated on it by Dr. Wright himself, who I have known for over 40 years.  I talk about body centric teaching on IG and how it fails most golfers and that’s as far as I go.

 

I know enough to understand it and give some of the evidence and dangers, but not enough to educate someone else.

Makes sense

[MonteScheinblum]

5 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

Makes sense

It’s also why I don’t get into many physics discussions.  I got an A in high school and college.  That means I know just enough to understand what an expert says, can tell when someone is not an expert and how to apply it to the golf swing, but not near enough to educate someone else on anything but basics.

 

That’s a little painful sometimes, because when someone with poor understanding of the swing and a knowledge of physics no better than mine says something dumb, I’m not educated enough to tell them how far off they are.

[GoGoErky]

7 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

Well, lets just look at what you sent me. How do you feel about the following statements.

 

Concerning lower core swingers:

 

1. Grip uses short thumb because grip is in the fingers

2. Their hip turn is restricted going back but their center of mass is over their trail hip

3. Downswing begins with rotation of hips and shoulders

4. They use rotational and horizontal forces but little to no vertical force

5. Hands and arms follow hips and shoulders, which is opposite of backswing sequence.

6. Strong grip and forward shaft lean and ball position center to back to facilitate more shaft lean.

 

 

 

a lot of these seem to just be what bad golfers do and is the core the cause

for these or do these bad mechanics cause the golfer to be lower core.

 

I need to reread what i sent and then come back with a better response maybe 

[virtuoso]

3 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

a lot of these seem to just be what bad golfers do and is the core the cause

for these or do these bad mechanics cause the golfer to be lower core.

 

I need to reread what i sent and then come back with a better response maybe 

I think he means that is what lower core golfers should do.

[virtuoso]

7 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

a lot of these seem to just be what bad golfers do and is the core the cause

for these or do these bad mechanics cause the golfer to be lower core.

 

I need to reread what i sent and then come back with a better response maybe 

Forgot to mention, Lower core golfers are supposed to take their strong grip and release the clubhead down the line....that one is a beauty.

[glk]

 

5 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

Forgot to mention, Lower core golfers are supposed to take their strong grip and release the clubhead down the line....that one is a beauty.

 

I have tried to find golf research papers by Dr Wright and have found none - I'm open to google search suggestions cause I've exhausted them - only thing I see is videos on his wright balance site showing putting and full swings involving a 3d system and some kind of force shoes in a lab in LA - claims to be research but again no published findings.   He has one joint published paper on his site which has to do with a golfer exercise program.   I can find no paper on how he came up with the core regions, let alone a peer reviewed paper.   Seems to be a bunch of stuff on balance but I can't find any peer reviewed balance papers either.   If I search for research on balance in golf I find a number of papers but none by Dr wright or even any that reference him.

 

A few years ago when I asked Dr Kwon about Wright and Adams (I sent him Wright's article and some of Adams youtubes) he first asked for any papers with statistical analysis cause he said when classifying swings is it easy to find subjective observation examples that fit your narrative. 

 

He ended with:

 

In scientific research, we always look for generalizable facts, not subjective observations. That is why we use group analysis first and then give attention to individual cases under the umbrella of the generalizable model. I did run regressions with measured anthropometric parameters such as wing span, arm-stature ratio, forearm-upperarm length difference, etc. None of them yielded significant results. My interpretation is, the variation in the swing style is a lot more dominant than the anthropometric variations.

 

Also, classification only focuses on what the golfers currently do. The swing patterns they currently use may not be the best for them and can be altered. “If you have A, B, and C, you must use D pattern” type statement is dangerous if the classification is based on the observed patterns that are not the best for the golfers. That is why mechanical/biomechanical reasoning is so important.

 

[virtuoso]

11 minutes ago, glk said:

 

 

I have tried to find golf research papers by Dr Wright and have found none - I'm open to google search suggestions cause I've exhausted them - only thing I see is videos on his wright balance site showing putting and full swings involving a 3d system and some kind of force shoes in a lab in LA - claims to be research but again no published findings.   He has one joint published paper on his site which has to do with a golfer exercise program.   I can find no paper on how he came up with the core regions, let alone a peer reviewed paper.   Seems to be a bunch of stuff on balance but I can't find any peer reviewed balance papers either.   If I search for research on balance in golf I find a number of papers but none by Dr wright or even any that reference him.

 

A few years ago when I asked Dr Kwon about Wright and Adams (I sent him Wright's article and some of Adams youtubes) he first asked for any papers with statistical analysis cause he said when classifying swings is it easy to find subjective observation examples that fit your narrative. 

 

He ended with:

 

 

In scientific research, we always look for generalizable facts, not subjective observations. That is why we use group analysis first and then give attention to individual cases under the umbrella of the generalizable model. I did run regressions with measured anthropometric parameters such as wing span, arm-stature ratio, forearm-upperarm length difference, etc. None of them yielded significant results. My interpretation is, the variation in the swing style is a lot more dominant than the anthropometric variations.

 

Also, classification only focuses on what the golfers currently do. The swing patterns they currently use may not be the best for them and can be altered. “If you have A, B, and C, you must use D pattern” type statement is dangerous if the classification is based on the observed patterns that are not the best for the golfers. That is why mechanical/biomechanical reasoning is so important.

 

You did a deep dive......for me the real scandal was classifying Dustin Johnson and Jordan Speith as the same swing type.

[RayPlan]

8 hours ago, Nels55 said:

If you are upper core and you are trying to turn through the ball per Milo Lines et al. you will struggle:

 

I have seen a lot of teaching pros who teach a body controlled swing with passive arms.  According to Wright balance / Larry Rinker 80 or 90 percent of everyday golfers are upper core which often makes for a huge disconnect between teacher and student.  Diametrically opposed teaching. 

What if the real reason the large majority of everyday golfers fall into an observed swing category ("upper core") is because the 80-90% just don't swing know how to swing the club correctly? 

 

If the purpose of this is to help determine what feels or motions someone needs to work on (focus on the hands/arms or focus on lower body), then I can see how that would be beneficial, but this seems to go a few steps beyond that, from reading the Wright article posted above. 

[GoGoErky]

37 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

I think he means that is what lower core golfers should do.

Ok. I’ll have to go back an reread.

 

I had the link saved so it was easy for me to post it in reply to your earlier post about never hearing about it

[ThinkingPlus]

11 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

You did a deep dive......for me the real scandal was classifying Dustin Johnson and Jordan Speith as the same swing type.

Wow, that's crazy. They aren't even the same species.

[virtuoso]

4 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

Ok. I’ll have to go back an reread.

 

I had the link saved so it was easy for me to post it in reply to your earlier post about never hearing about it

Oh, I had heard about about it. My initial question was a smart a** reply because basically, an upper core player is your garden variety 20 hdcp swing, with all the attendant issues (stand up and slap your arms at it), and Wright decides that this is a natural swing style.....instead of just saying you suck.

Edited January 8 by virtuoso