Creating space is bunk!

[airjammer]

1 hour ago, PedronNiall said:

 

Golf is not magic, as much as you might be convinced the swing can never be understood nor truly taught through study and analysis but only by a single instructor. You can go look at the TPI vids where what they find with players aligns with what their instructors explained and then through measurement they are able to go into even more depth about what's happening and needs to happen in a few minutes. Things like that are beyond what can be fully discerned in multiple traditional or even video recorded lessons in many cases.

 

Take a look at Clark's session where they are able to cite the same thing Butch identified then tackle it in only a few minutes because they can look at far more inputs than ball flight, sound, and positions. 

 

Could also cite Hoffman having an issue with his grip addressed in 10 minutes because 3D gave him and his coach an established baseline to work from. Or when TPI and one of their associates are able to see on plates that various pros and ams weren't using their lower body correctly and in a single session again addressed things that aren't readily seen by the eyes or on video. Not going to link them all since you only believe in magic, but they're available if you want to see. 

 

The pros and ams who avail themselves of modern tech are able to achieve increased efficiency that working solo with traditional instruction never emerged or didn't emerge in nearly as much clarity or nearly as quickly. No idea why golfers are so hard up about ignoring the data when literally every other sport is steeped in it, not only for improving performance but also avoiding injury. 

Well that was kinda my point..Clark went to Butch and he gave him the fix that it took force plates and 3d body assessment to verify. Not saying nobody could have told Clark the same thing, just saying he seems to get give the right answers. 
 

The TPI videos are my favorite videos. I convinced my well heeled best friend to purchase a myswing 3d unit when it came out, so I love technology.  I agree with your observation about it not massively accepting in golf and I have a couple opinions. 

I don’t know what baseball coaches cost with all that equipment but I TPI is 8k I believe to get the full treatment. That’s a tough pill to shallow for most. He’s a student of Mark Blackburn so I’m really confused on why Hoffman even went there as Mark has the same equipment..I’ve been there as recently as last year. Mark is $1000 and hour if you can even get a lesson from him and I can tell you for me personally if I’m paying $1000 an hours for something, one or both of us will be horizontal at some point and they will definitely be more attractive than Mark😂

 

Secondly, nobody but Clark seems to have benefited yet from the change they suggested. Obviously, it’s a sample size of students but just for discussion purposes. This is Hoge’s latest results. 

Golfers just doesn’t seem to respond swing changes like other athletes respond to mechanic changes. The only thing I can attribute that to is the club face. 
 

Do you have any ideas about why adoption isn’t as widespread?

[GoGoErky]

1 hour ago, airjammer said:

I’m not going to make any friends but I put very little credence to having top level juniors and especially tour pros. Those individuals can succeed in spite of bad instruction as I don’t believe those type of players necessarily makes a coach a good coach. Tour players are born not made imo. Sure you can screw players up but the club is the best teacher and some players just have all the advantages like living in a climate where they can play 12 months out of the year.

Definitely  going to win any friends and you discredit the amount of work top level juniors and touring pros put into their craft. They have hit undress if thousands of balls over the course of their careers to ge to where they are. The didn’t just walk on the course and turn pro.

 

1 hour ago, airjammer said:

Scottie apparently had magic hands from the age of 7. How much structured instruction like, you must do it this way, do you think he really got? I believe that Randy Smith nudged him in certain directions but overall just kept an eye on him to prevent him from doing something crazy like reverse pivoting or something of that nature. 

How much time did and does he practice to get where he’s at and tk

stay there?

 

1 hour ago, airjammer said:

How many people think Haney was a great coach…obviously he has some success for Tiger to even think about having him as a coach. Haney openly admitted that Tiger didn’t really listen to him sometimes and wouldn’t do some things.  

Haney isn’t a bad coach, he works for some people, just like a bunch of others we have seen on tour. Theres alot of top athletes that don’t always listen to their coaches, doesn’t mean they are bad or wrong.

 

1 hour ago, airjammer said:

I’m absolutely sure I’m wrong about things I have said. 

Definitely 

[Valtiel]

1 hour ago, airjammer said:

Scottie apparently had magic hands from the age of 7. How much structured instruction like, you must do it this way, do you think he really got? I believe that Randy Smith nudged him in certain directions but overall just kept an eye on him to prevent him from doing something crazy like reverse pivoting or something of that nature. 

Scottie made some very significant changes to his takeaway and backswing between his amateur competitive years and turning pro. 

[KD1]

39 minutes ago, Snarkesor said:

In other words the “wipe” move

Lol, no not at all

[MK7Golf21]

25 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

Scottie made some very significant changes to his takeaway and backswing between his amateur competitive years and turning pro. 

I saw some video clip of him the other day when he was younger (possibly college) and his swing actually was more normal then. It wasn’t across the line and he didn’t shuffle his feet much on the downswing. 

[airjammer]

27 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

Scottie made some very significant changes to his takeaway and backswing between his amateur competitive years and turning pro. 

As you would expect going thru growth spurts. My point I was trying to to make that it’s obvious that Randy didn’t have Scottie in every week for a lesson hammering home footwork of whatever else like you see in these golf schools. I’m not saying he didn’t do anything, just that it seems he allowed Scottie to figure it out more than some less talented students. 

[iacas]

3 hours ago, KD1 said:

Could you decode this graphic a bit? I'm thinking bottom labels 1 through 7 are meant to be P1 through P7?

 

Yep.

 

3 hours ago, Snarkesor said:

The real problem with the AMG the video is that they are denigrating the "wipe" move as being something simply like shoving the arms forwards linearly, when Tyler Ferrell who coined the wipe term, has always been explicit that it occurs along with rotation and is not simply a linear movement. Are they really suggesting that the arms don't extend through the release?

 

It's possible they are just using a word to mean what they demonstrate it to mean, not using his term the way he uses it specifically.

 

Maybe even likely… Seeing as how they demonstrate it pretty clearly.

[airjammer]

Seems like some of you forgot about the old timers and new timers like Bubba who never had a lesson. Yes you can make it without a swing coach..exceedingly rare yes but not impossible. 
 

Can anyone explain how that is possible?  It’s not to discredit coaches but you just can’t teach innate athletic ability. Not everyone can run a 4.4 40 yard dash while being 6ft 200lbs. It’s not wrong for every person trying to do that and their coach when they don’t achieve it…it was never in the cards. 

[Pnwpingi210]

22 minutes ago, airjammer said:

As you would expect going thru growth spurts. My point I was trying to to make that it’s obvious that Randy didn’t have Scottie in every week for a lesson hammering home footwork of whatever else like you see in these golf schools. I’m not saying he didn’t do anything, just that it seems he allowed Scottie to figure it out more than some less talented students. 

Ah yes.  Tell Randy and Scottie I said hi since you seem to have great personal insight to what they worked on and how much.

 

/s

[Pnwpingi210]

17 minutes ago, airjammer said:

Seems like some of you forgot about the old timers and new timers like Bubba who never had a lesson. Yes you can make it without a swing coach..exceedingly rare yes but not impossible. 
 

Can anyone explain how that is possible?  It’s not to discredit coaches but you just can’t teach innate athletic ability. Not everyone can run a 4.4 40 yard dash while being 6ft 200lbs. It’s not wrong for every person trying to do that and their coach when they don’t achieve it…it was never in the cards. 

Why is exceedingly rare?

 

ill tell you why.

 

with today’s ability to measure what happens in good golf swings and the level of instruction that’s accessible to support that it’s exceedingly rare that somebody is able to play at the highest level without utilizing those tools because their competition is.

 

then add in well fitted equipment is also easily accessible and your even less likely to get by on natural ability.

Edited July 31 by Pnwpingi210

[airjammer]

12 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

Why is exceedingly rare?

 

ill tell you why.

 

with today’s ability to measure what happens in good golf swings and the level of instruction that’s accessible to support that it’s exceedingly rare that somebody is able to play at the highest level without utilizing those tools because their competition is.

 

then add in well fitted equipment is also easily accessible and your even less likely to get by on natural ability.

I agree with that and also believe that the increased purses are Incentivizing parents to put their kids in golf instruction and invest money/time in hope for return. 
 

I have a 9 year old daughter and you wouldn’t believe the amount of parents who are putting their girls in golf programs/instruction in hopes they have enough talent to get a college scholarship. 

[Snarkesor]

3 hours ago, KD1 said:

Lol, no not at all

lol watch any of Tyler’s videos on the wipe move. 

[KD1]

1 hour ago, Snarkesor said:

lol watch any of Tyler’s videos on the wipe move. 

Maybe we're talking about different versions of "wipe". I haven't watched much of Tyler's stuff, can you provide a video where he describes the wipe?

 

Here is more on AMG's "wipe": 

 

More on AMG's trail arm extension:

 

And some more on AMG's trail arm extension:

 

[PedronNiall]

5 hours ago, airjammer said:

Seems like some of you forgot about the old timers and new timers like Bubba who never had a lesson. Yes you can make it without a swing coach..exceedingly rare yes but not impossible. 
 

Can anyone explain how that is possible?  It’s not to discredit coaches but you just can’t teach innate athletic ability. Not everyone can run a 4.4 40 yard dash while being 6ft 200lbs. It’s not wrong for every person trying to do that and their coach when they don’t achieve it…it was never in the cards. 

 

Already said, but Bubba is an outlier. It's not like the tech turns people into robots. Scott, Kitayama, Scottie, Rory, Xander, Nelly, Ko, Woad, Rory, and on and on and on all still look differently enough throughout to tell them apart, but they all do the major things within a window of efficiency. Most of them and almost everyone coming up through the ranks now is making sure they're doing the same as easily as they can and maintaining it by using what's available. You can still have all the magic of your own swing, 3D, force plates, and monitors don't take that away. 

 

Do you have to use tech? No, but used correctly it can catch in a few minutes what might take multiple sessions over days or weeks to spot otherwise and get you started on the right thing in far fewer swings. Someone like Smylie Kaufman might not have gone from winning to broadcasting if he'd had access to better data to know what he was doing before vs after. It also gives portable data that means even if you don't click with an instructor or you simply relocate you have something objective to take to someone else from day one.

 

Hoge being an outlier by not improving because he didn't put what the data showed to use doesn't offset the majority who have utilized it seeing faster improvement. 

 

Still guys like Porzak who deal in methods and drills alone with very little other than video as checks, so that's out there if it appeals to you, but it won't change the value of current and emerging tech outweighing the cost. Time is far more finite and valuable than money and you're using the former far more effectively if you take advantage of the data tech offers to skip the guessing games. 

 

It's unlikely that there's no gain to be had or that studies supporting the value of 3D capture and pressure traces are bad science when football, skiing, running, marital arts, skateboarding, snowboarding, surfing, baseball, basketball and many other sports besides golf are already incorporating them. 

[ALIF]

On 7/29/2025 at 8:12 AM, iacas said:

Imagine a triangle with these three points:

• Left shoulder (A)
• Right shoulder (B)
• Middle of the hands. (C)

 

AC (blue) is going to be longer than BC (green) because B bridges the gap of a bent right elbow.

 

The angle CAB (blue/magenta) is basically the adduction angle, or a close approximation for it, and you can rotate the triangle around the magenta axis to raise and lower point C. Rotate C upward, the right elbow is farther off the ribs. Rotate it downward, closer to the ribs.

 

In most good swings the right elbow and the adduction angle narrow slightly in transition, before widening again.

 

We (me, AMG, hundreds of others) have these measurements in 3D. This isn't guessing or going by feels. (3:55)

 

 

Rare that I got to play today. Only one guy ahead of us, we played casually in 2:40. But, yeah, I look occasionally online when I'm playing golf. Message a few people, have a few chuckles. So long as I can do it without taking myself away from the actual in-real-life people I'm with…

 

Long-time student of mine recorded that for me of course. That reminds me, here's a not-long-time student, a relatively new student, nearly 50. Was 17.8° open with the pelvis at impact, and 20 minutes later, was just over 51° open. Arms weren't working properly, so he had to stall to give his hands time to get down to the ball in the blue image (and right side bend to do it, too). Chest was open 14.something and then got to 37.something (slightly over-did the pelvis/chest rotation stuff).

 

What did you do to get him into this position? What feels did you give him or what did he change in his thinking?  Just asking for a friend.😀

[Hilts1969]

10 hours ago, Snarkesor said:

The real problem with the AMG the video is that they are denigrating the "wipe" move as being something simply like shoving the arms forwards linearly, when Tyler Ferrell who coined the wipe term, has always been explicit that it occurs along with rotation and is not simply a linear movement. Are they really suggesting that the arms don't extend through the release?

 

Err no -)

[Hilts1969]

9 hours ago, PedronNiall said:

 

Golf is not magic, as much as you might be convinced the swing can never be understood nor truly taught through study and analysis but only by a single instructor. You can go look at the TPI vids where what they find with players aligns with what their instructors explained and then through measurement they are able to go into even more depth about what's happening and needs to happen in a few minutes. Things like that are beyond what can be fully discerned in multiple traditional or even video recorded lessons in many cases.

 

Take a look at Clark's session where they are able to cite the same thing Butch identified then tackle it in only a few minutes because they can look at far more inputs than ball flight, sound, and positions. 

 

Could also cite Hoffman having an issue with his grip addressed in 10 minutes because 3D gave him and his coach an established baseline to work from. Or when TPI and one of their associates are able to see on plates that various pros and ams weren't using their lower body correctly and in a single session again addressed things that aren't readily seen by the eyes or on video. Not going to link them all since you only believe in magic, but they're available if you want to see. 

 

The pros and ams who avail themselves of modern tech are able to achieve increased efficiency that working solo with traditional instruction never emerged or didn't emerge in nearly as much clarity or nearly as quickly. No idea why golfers are so hard up about ignoring the data when literally every other sport is steeped in it, not only for improving performance but also avoiding injury. 

 

I honestly think it's a defence mechanism or wishful thinking and I understand why. If you have swung a certain way or followed a certain coach and then data drops that questions it you would prefer it to be wrong or convince yourself that the other way is just as valid.

 

For me the handle dragging, hold angles.elbow leading stuff has destroyed my game for decades. Its still being taught by plenty out there. It's so ingrained in me that I'm not sure I can get it out of my DNA tbh.

 

Most of us when we start just throw the clubhead at the ball, its natural to do do, we are not very good but that's expected we've never played before. 

 

Then after a while and getting a bit better you start looking at why you hit it fat thin left or right. If only someone said you need to stop swinging with your body and club at the ball. Do this instead it will feel totally alien to you and get help and stick with it.

 

I blame golf digest and that local pro who also read golf digest for going in a totally different direction :-)

 

Anyhow I'm off for a round and I'm sticking with what I've learnt from the data this time until that bad hole where i feel that snatchy moment again, one partner will say j was too quick, the other I need to keep my head down. I know deep down I was just trying to save it,  my need to pull on it like a madman again. Anyhow it's only one bad sh........

 

Wait that Johnny Miller said pull the handle into the wall, I'm a puller and can't stop, maybe dragging can work. Miller was better than AMG at this game and have you ever seen Eamonn D'Arcy, looks like he's been tazered when he swings, he was good.

 

This is the magic move, handle into wall, cant fail, well it did last year when i tried it and the year before. In fact ive tried it hundreds of times. Gonna stick with it this time mustn't have been pulling hard enough. 

 

 

 

 

[baudi]

2 + 2 = 4 has its own truth.

Follow the crowd: your integrity stays safe.

Follow survival: 2 + 2 = 5. Integrity is destroyed (ask Winston Smith).

Follow change: math is redefined, integrity enlightened.

[TheDeanAbides]

14 hours ago, airjammer said:

Eye of the beholder 

We've been here so many times before, and this is the kind of post that gets people riled up and libel to post something that some would call 'dickish'. If you take measurable data and then say 'I see something else' even though it's measurably not true you're not having a different opinion, you're acting disingenuously at best and downright trolling at worst. 

 

This comes with the fallacious idea that every opinion has equal merit, which is nonsense. 

[golferdude54]

1 hour ago, TheDeanAbides said:

We've been here so many times before, and this is the kind of post that gets people riled up and libel to post something that some would call 'dickish'. If you take measurable data and then say 'I see something else' even though it's measurably not true you're not having a different opinion, you're acting disingenuously at best and downright trolling at worst. 

 

This comes with the fallacious idea that every opinion has equal merit, which is nonsense. 

 

Also, why show examples of a consistently mediocre ball striker to prop your theories up? Kevin Na has always been 100% reliant on his strokes gained around the green and putting. He has won in his career in spite of his ball striking, not the other way around.

[TheDeanAbides]

25 minutes ago, golferdude54 said:

 

Also, why show examples of a consistently mediocre ball striker to prop your theories up? Kevin Na has always been 100% reliant on his strokes gained around the green and putting. He has won in his career in spite of his ball striking, not the other way around.

There is merit to that, but he's still a tour pro, so he's better than almost everyone here. I do get your point, though. 

[airjammer]

3 hours ago, PedronNiall said:

 

Already said, but Bubba is an outlier. It's not like the tech turns people into robots. Scott, Kitayama, Scottie, Rory, Xander, Nelly, Ko, Woad, Rory, and on and on and on all still look differently enough throughout to tell them apart, but they all do the major things within a window of efficiency. Most of them and almost everyone coming up through the ranks now is making sure they're doing the same as easily as they can and maintaining it by using what's available. You can still have all the magic of your own swing, 3D, force plates, and monitors don't take that away. 

 

Do you have to use tech? No, but used correctly it can catch in a few minutes what might take multiple sessions over days or weeks to spot otherwise and get you started on the right thing in far fewer swings. Someone like Smylie Kaufman might not have gone from winning to broadcasting if he'd had access to better data to know what he was doing before vs after. It also gives portable data that means even if you don't click with an instructor or you simply relocate you have something objective to take to someone else from day one.

 

Hoge being an outlier by not improving because he didn't put what the data showed to use doesn't offset the majority who have utilized it seeing faster improvement. 

 

Still guys like Porzak who deal in methods and drills alone with very little other than video as checks, so that's out there if it appeals to you, but it won't change the value of current and emerging tech outweighing the cost. Time is far more finite and valuable than money and you're using the former far more effectively if you take advantage of the data tech offers to skip the guessing games. 

 

It's unlikely that there's no gain to be had or that studies supporting the value of 3D capture and pressure traces are bad science when football, skiing, running, marital arts, skateboarding, snowboarding, surfing, baseball, basketball and many other sports besides golf are already incorporating them. 

I don’t disagree with anything you said. As I said before this thread, I believe that we have a lot to learn about learning and golfers seem to be very willing to try new things if somebody else has success with them. Some people might remember the Gabe golf trainer. That device got hot on tour very quickly after someone had success with it, of course it died very quickly too once other players didn’t receive any benefits from it. 
 

So I would say so far, that golfers in general haven’t been able to go and get 3-D assessed and see a much more dramatic increase in performance or the ability to make positive swing changes or if they have are able to make swing changes, the changes haven’t been that positive. I don’t think we know why yet but I don’t think anyone can claim that golfers just don’t like technology when there is millions of dollars to be won with just a minor improvement in a particular weakness for a tour player…I don’t believe they have seen other players on tour get enough improvement. Maybe it will be like launch monitors and once someone really has a dramatic change the floods gates will open..we shall see. 
 

It’s a fascinating topic in which we don’t have all the answers to. 

[airjammer]

34 minutes ago, golferdude54 said:

 

Also, why show examples of a consistently mediocre ball striker to prop your theories up? Kevin Na has always been 100% reliant on his strokes gained around the green and putting. He has won in his career in spite of his ball striking, not the other way around.

For a tour player yes but if the average golfer got paired up with him, after the round most people would probably be thinking “this guy wasn’t the longest person I’ve ever played with but he never missed a shot all day”. 

[GoGoErky]

22 minutes ago, airjammer said:

So I would say so far, that golfers in general haven’t been able to go and get 3-D assessed and see a much more dramatic increase in performance or the ability to make positive swing changes or if they have are able to make swing changes, the changes haven’t been that positive.

What data do you have to support this?

 

AMG in a recent video said they have more gears data on amateurs than they do pros.

 

23 minutes ago, airjammer said:

I don’t think we know why yet but I don’t think anyone can claim that golfers just don’t like technology when there is millions of dollars to be won with just a minor improvement in a particular weakness for a tour player…I don’t believe they have seen other players on tour get enough improvement. Maybe it will be like launch monitors and once someone really has a dramatic change the floods gates will open..we shall see. 

again what data supports this?

[airjammer]

2 hours ago, TheDeanAbides said:

We've been here so many times before, and this is the kind of post that gets people riled up and libel to post something that some would call 'dickish'. If you take measurable data and then say 'I see something else' even though it's measurably not true you're not having a different opinion, you're acting disingenuously at best and downright trolling at worst. 

 

This comes with the fallacious idea that every opinion has equal merit, which is nonsense. 

It shouldn’t get anyone riled up. Is Kevin Na’s hips at impact literally 0, no most likely not. He was used as someone who is exactly opposite of Jim Furyk to illustrate a point I was trying to make that the 2+2=4 tour player doesn’t exist. 
 

So if someone really wants to put out an informative video, they would explain with 3d data how these 2 wildly different golfers make their swing functional. Teachers don’t because they really don’t know. 
 

I’ve had a couple conversations with Brian Manzella about how close their Jacobs 3D group knows exactly how the swing works…the answer is they are close but not quite there yet. 
 

So if we have one of the premier golf research groups in the world says that they don’t quite know exactly how the golf swing works…why would it be so appalling to suggest your local pro not knowing either and he’s giving you an educated guess at best. 

[TheDeanAbides]

48 minutes ago, airjammer said:

It shouldn’t get anyone riled up. Is Kevin Na’s hips at impact literally 0, no most likely not. He was used as someone who is exactly opposite of Jim Furyk to illustrate a point I was trying to make that the 2+2=4 tour player doesn’t exist. 
 

So if someone really wants to put out an informative video, they would explain with 3d data how these 2 wildly different golfers make their swing functional. Teachers don’t because they really don’t know. 
 

I’ve had a couple conversations with Brian Manzella about how close their Jacobs 3D group knows exactly how the swing works…the answer is they are close but not quite there yet. 
 

So if we have one of the premier golf research groups in the world says that they don’t quite know exactly how the golf swing works…why would it be so appalling to suggest your local pro not knowing either and he’s giving you an educated guess at best. 

Where did the goalposts go? Oh, you moved them. 

[Hawkeye77]

10 minutes ago, TheDeanAbides said:

Where did the goalposts go? Oh, you moved them. 

 

Which happens continually with all these stupid "bunk" takes.  At least this one wasn't the troll at the outset the others have generally been, no swipe at the OP directly, lol, but the discussion steadily devolves.

Edited July 31 by Hawkeye77

[GoGoErky]

58 minutes ago, airjammer said:

So if someone really wants to put out an informative video, they would explain with 3d data how these 2 wildly different golfers make their swing functional. Teachers don’t because they really don’t know. 

It’s obvious you are anti instruction trolling at this point.

 

 

[airjammer]

19 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

What data do you have to support this?

 

AMG in a recent video said they have more gears data on amateurs than they do pros.

 

again what data supports this?

No it’s opinion based on my observations. I’m not stating anything as absolute fact, just my observations so others can give their opinions or stats or whatever as discussion to counter. It’s my fault, as I write very matter of factly. 
 

Do you personally know someone who has been 3d evaluated and made great strides in an area in which they haven’t been in the past? I’m certain that many people have but such stories aren’t really widespread as you would think they are. 
 

Let’s take this forum for example, how many people come here and sing praises of xyz instructor for helping them shoot lower scores. It’s almost unheard of on this forum which I believe it is the largest in the world. Why is that?  It’s an interesting question with many potential answers. 
 

Are there people who don’t want others to get better so they keep their instructor secret so other players don’t go see them and get better thus rendering the original student back to their previous rank within the group. Possibly 

 

Could it be that if too many people go to their instructor because of a particular students success, the instructor will have less time for them or will charge more per hour thus making the instructor unobtainable for them. Possibly as I’ve personally seen this happen in my area. 
 

Golfers are a weird group in general. My best friend is playing his best golf of his life at 56 years old. I suggested that he get 3d analyzed so that when it goes south, he’ll have a road map to follow to hopefully find his way back. He won’t do it and he’s close to a genius who makes mega bucks in his field. Golfers are just weird individuals. 

[Pnwpingi210]

25 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

Which happens continually with all these stupid "bunk" takes.  At least this one wasn't the troll at the outset the others have generally been, no swipe at the OP directly, lol, but the discussion steadily devolves.

Agreed.  The bunk threads are designed to start bickering, not discussion .