The problem with Stack & Tilt

logan91201 · July 3, 2008

Logan
I will agree with you in that in extreme circumstances the face will over ride path, but I have a question for you. Have you ever given a golf lesson?? I am guessing not because if you have you would have seen people starting the ball on line with their paths.

I'm not a teaching professional but yes I have given lessons. Unfortunately I am going to require a little more backing than what you think you see on the range giving lessons. I don't know how you can see the divergence of someone's face and path standing behind them on a range. You would need a camera that probably none of us could afford to see the exact angle of the face at impact. You are just speculating because the PGA teaching manual told you that is the way it is. Unfortunately it is wrong. That Malaska piece is pretty good.

Do yourself a favor and go out to the range. Set up with an extremely closed face (make sure not to manipulate the face throughout your swing to prove your own point) and swing as much as you can in to out. If your face is still very closed at impact, that ball will start so far left of your target line it will be shocking, and then hook of course. Next open your face a mile (again no manipulation) and swing as hard laft as you can. That thing will start right of your target line and slice very high, almost like a push slice flop shot. And from there you can experiment with less extreme examples. Then put the ball back in your stance and weight left (promoting strong in to out swing path) with a slightly open face, hold that face open through impact, and if you are truly swinging in to out you will see a ball start slighly right (due to face) and draw back to the target (due to the path).

I hope that helps. Now let me clarify that you are not wrong. The path does affect the starting line. Just not even close to the amount that face angle does. I was told by andy and mike that face was about 80% and path was 20%. And then of course they explained all the physics. Malaska says 4:1 and that works for me too. But if you are going to continue to try and argue physics, I believe it will be an uphill battle.

....Edit to Add...although it is not the same, it is not totally different either, but Pelz does a cool demonstration in his Putting Bible. Path vs. Face where he says everyone is working on putter path but face is exponentially more important. If you swing 40 degrees left with a face square to the hole, the ball will start very near the hole, and miss by very little (like an inch or two inches max). BUT if you swing with a pefect path directly at the hole with a face thats 40 degrees open, you will miss an 8 foot putt by 4 feet to the right. Again not the same, but some relevant information there. That is a very simple one you can do on the practice green.

strataboy · July 3, 2008

Logan
I will agree with you in that in extreme circumstances the face will over ride path, but I have a question for you. Have you ever given a golf lesson?? I am guessing not because if you have you would have seen people starting the ball on line with their paths.

I'm not a teaching professional but yes I have given lessons. Unfortunately I am going to require a little more backing than what you think you see on the range giving lessons. I don't know how you can see the divergence of someone's face and path standing behind them on a range. You would need a camera that probably none of us could afford to see the exact angle of the face at impact. You are just speculating because the PGA teaching manual told you that is the way it is. Unfortunately it is wrong. That Malaska piece is pretty good.

Do yourself a favor and go out to the range. Set up with an extremely closed face (make sure not to manipulate the face throughout your swing to prove your own point) and swing as much as you can in to out. If your face is still very closed at impact, that ball will start so far left of your target line it will be shocking, and then hook of course. Next open your face a mile (again no manipulation) and swing as hard laft as you can. That thing will start right of your target line and slice very high, almost like a push slice flop shot. And from there you can experiment with less extreme examples. Then put the ball back in your stance and weight left (promoting strong in to out swing path) with a slightly open face, hold that face open through impact, and if you are truly swinging in to out you will see a ball start slighly right (due to face) and draw back to the target (due to the path).

I hope that helps. Now let me clarify that you are not wrong. The path does affect the starting line. Just not even close to the amount that face angle does. I was told by andy and mike that face was about 80% and path was 20%. And then of course they explained all the physics. Malaska says 4:1 and that works for me too. But if you are going to continue to try and argue physics, I believe it will be an uphill battle.

....Edit to Add...although it is not the same, it is not totally different either, but Pelz does a cool demonstration in his Putting Bible. Path vs. Face where he says everyone is working on putter path but face is exponentially more important. If you swing 40 degrees left with a face square to the hole, the ball will start very near the hole, and miss by very little (like an inch or two inches max). BUT if you swing with a pefect path directly at the hole with a face thats 40 degrees open, you will miss an 8 foot putt by 4 feet to the right. Again not the same, but some relevant information there. That is a very simple one you can do on the practice green.

Logan,

Good info presented in this thead... however, there are a lot of ppl who think the world is still flat..... dont know why its so hard or why we even bother trying...

The world is not flat nor round... still trying to figure out the exact shape??

club face control · July 3, 2008

Clubface,

Do sand wedges or 2 irons make the ball go higher (with the same motion)? Why?

Logan

I mentioned and agree with you when a clubface is very open or closed it will overide the path. I have no disagreement on that at all.

As far as this question I think it is a fun one the talk about. For players like Tiger I would say his 2 iron goes higher, but for most golfers it is the wedge. Why? Because of speed.

logan91201 · July 3, 2008

Clubface,

Do sand wedges or 2 irons make the ball go higher (with the same motion)? Why?

Logan
I mentioned and agree with you when a clubface is very open or closed it will overide the path. I have no disagreement on that at all.
As far as this question I think it is a fun one the talk about. For players like Tiger I would say his 2 iron goes higher, but for most golfers it is the wedge. Why? Because of speed.

Are you implying that the physical relationship between clubface, swing path, and ball change depending on the amount the clubface diverges from the target line? As in when a clubface is way open it does determine starting line, but when the divergence is slight then it is path that determines starting line? I would love to hear a factual argument explaining how that is possible.

logan91201 · July 3, 2008

Logan
I will agree with you in that in extreme circumstances the face will over ride path, but I have a question for you. Have you ever given a golf lesson?? I am guessing not because if you have you would have seen people starting the ball on line with their paths.

I'm not a teaching professional but yes I have given lessons. Unfortunately I am going to require a little more backing than what you think you see on the range giving lessons. I don't know how you can see the divergence of someone's face and path standing behind them on a range. You would need a camera that probably none of us could afford to see the exact angle of the face at impact. You are just speculating because the PGA teaching manual told you that is the way it is. Unfortunately it is wrong. That Malaska piece is pretty good.

Do yourself a favor and go out to the range. Set up with an extremely closed face (make sure not to manipulate the face throughout your swing to prove your own point) and swing as much as you can in to out. If your face is still very closed at impact, that ball will start so far left of your target line it will be shocking, and then hook of course. Next open your face a mile (again no manipulation) and swing as hard laft as you can. That thing will start right of your target line and slice very high, almost like a push slice flop shot. And from there you can experiment with less extreme examples. Then put the ball back in your stance and weight left (promoting strong in to out swing path) with a slightly open face, hold that face open through impact, and if you are truly swinging in to out you will see a ball start slighly right (due to face) and draw back to the target (due to the path).

I hope that helps. Now let me clarify that you are not wrong. The path does affect the starting line. Just not even close to the amount that face angle does. I was told by andy and mike that face was about 80% and path was 20%. And then of course they explained all the physics. Malaska says 4:1 and that works for me too. But if you are going to continue to try and argue physics, I believe it will be an uphill battle.

....Edit to Add...although it is not the same, it is not totally different either, but Pelz does a cool demonstration in his Putting Bible. Path vs. Face where he says everyone is working on putter path but face is exponentially more important. If you swing 40 degrees left with a face square to the hole, the ball will start very near the hole, and miss by very little (like an inch or two inches max). BUT if you swing with a pefect path directly at the hole with a face thats 40 degrees open, you will miss an 8 foot putt by 4 feet to the right. Again not the same, but some relevant information there. That is a very simple one you can do on the practice green.

Logan,

Good info presented in this thead... however, there are a lot of ppl who think the world is still flat..... dont know why its so hard or why we even bother trying...

The world is not flat nor round... still trying to figure out the exact shape??

The funny part is we aren't even trying to say there is a definite shape. We are just saying our shape works too, and even that is getting argued. We do happen to believe ours is more effective, but I would be happy if people just agreed that it is an effective option for swinging the club. Rather than all the people telling me it simply doesn't work and can't win big tournaments. Stay patient though, it might be later rather than sooner, but people will begin to understand.

particleman · July 3, 2008

This club face versus club path thing is intriguing to me. How does one explain the most common shot in golf among beginners, the pull fade, if the club face dominates where the ball starts?

logan91201 · July 3, 2008

This club face versus club path thing is intriguing to me. How does one explain the most common shot in golf among beginners, the pull fade, if the club face dominates where the ball starts?

Pretty simple. Path considerably out to in with a slightly closed to the target line club face. But that club face is not closed to the path or else that would be a pull draw.

I however do not consider that the most common shot among beginners. If that was the case, they would be able to play some good golf, because shots that start left and curve right generally end up straight. I think I straight slice or push slice is more common. Which is a considerably out to in path with a sqaure (straight slice) or open (push slice) face. The common denominator in all three of these left to right curvatures is the out to in path. If you swing in to out with that same open face you would hit nice push draws.

magnum184 · July 3, 2008

iron shots - tremendous, driver - terrible.

very difficult to adapt with the longer clubs and I'd be scared to hit it off a downhill/uphill lie. brilliant science and I think the shorter guy, (andy?) is a genius.

under the headline of "proof is in the pudding" who has won recently with this method? where have Baddeley and others been??????????? this will go down as another fad.

p.s. they ripped off Mac O'Grady and he's P-I-S-S-E-D!!!

Agree.. irons vs driver.. especailly short irons are a breeze with S&T. Downhill lies not a problem, uphill are a nightmare.

My point again is not that the method is bad.. I've had some of my best ball striking rounds with it and that is why I've pretty much stayed with it for year. My point is that it is not a method that simplifes the swing dramtically (as pitched) and I think most golfers will struggle with consistancy, especially with longer clubs.

If you are having trouble with the longer clubs . . . MAKE SURE YOU GET THE FACE OPEN and really push the hips forward without the head going back. That whole deal about "negative loft" is huge. You should probably hit some drivers a little more back your stance with a face that looks really open to you.

bucket- could you please explain the "negative loft" deal ... also, what is the best way to get the face open - do you open the face a little and then grip the club? thanks.

They cover this pretty well in the video. It is basically the concept that a hackjob slicer has the same open face as a pro but the path is mixed up.

This is a draw pattern . . . so inorder for the ball to start right of the target and draw the face must be pointing right of the target and slightly left of the path. That's the big thing about going FORWARD. It keeps the hands on the circle and keeps the club moving OUT. So with the club moving out let's say 15 degrees to hit a straight push the face would be open 15 degrees. To get the draw spin you don't have to have the face closed all that much. You don't want to have the face "wrapping around the ball" to hit a draw. The whole deal is to keep the face quiet. They ain't hittin' huge draws. I'd say they want the face pretty "stable." Once your pivot stalls or you hang back the face is going to start turning FAST.

They talk about "rate of closure" . . . you don't want a fast closing face because the alignments and ball flight is fleeting. So going forward keeps the face from shutting fast and keeps the club moving out rather than going left. Also going left moves your low point forward. All good things. And the face being open means ball go higher.

They talk about this stuff in the 3rd video quite a bit. It is VERY good. A light went off for me because I was always chicken to get the face open much for fear of hitting a big flare right. But their explanation gave me "permission" to open it up. They say something like "if you are swinging 20 degrees right your face would have to be more than 20 degrees open to actually hit a push slice." That was HUGE for me. I hit these big quackers with the driver. But when I open it up . . . ball goes much higher draws to pushes without fear of a big over-draw.

The best way to open the face is to just get the face open more at address. Open it and then take your grip. I got a strong grip and I set it pretty shut address. There are going to be loft issues with that. So I don't really change my grip. I change my clubface.

Of all the times we have worked on my swing positions, the times we just talked about what you wrote above are still the most valuable to me. People find it difficult to believe that I open my face at adress, hold it open all the way into my follow through and hit a draw. But my face is 5 degrees open to the target line and my path is 10 degrees in to out. Thus although my face is open to my target line, it is closed to my swing path, creating a draw that starts slightly right of target (due to the slighly open face) and draws back to the target (due to my in to out swing path being more in to out than my face is open). People think it is silly when I tell them I play for a draw every shot and pretty much never miss left. But once you grasp it it is really very simple geometry. I'm glad the DVDs helped you Bucket. I think they are great, and watch them repeatedly when I am bored!

QUOTE(iloveplywood @ Jul 3 2008, 02:04 PM) This club face versus club path thing is intriguing to me. How does one explain the most common shot in golf among beginners, the pull fade, if the club face dominates where the ball starts?

Pretty simple. Path considerably out to in with a slightly closed to the target line club face. But that club face is not closed to the path or else that would be a pull draw.

I however do not consider that the most common shot among beginners. If that was the case, they would be able to play some good golf, because shots that start left and curve right generally end up straight. I think I straight slice or push slice is more common. Which is a considerably out to in path with a sqaure (straight slice) or open (push slice) face. The common denominator in all three of these left to right curvatures is the out to in path. If you swing in to out with that same open face you would hit nice push draws.

Hang in there, Logan. :drinks: :lol:

Everything you have said about ballflight and clubface relationship is just about spot on. Toughest thing to convince people of, IMOP.

UnmakingFoot · July 3, 2008

That statement tells me you believe path is the main determinant in where the ball starts. In fact it is the clubface that determines where the ball starts and path that determines how it curves (they each effect the other, but face mainly controls starting line and path mainly controls curvature). The slightly open face starts it right, the in to out path curves it back to the left.

logan, should it be the other way around? the path determines where the ball starts and clubface determines how it curves. let's see you have a perfect swing path (overlap with the target line) but a open club face, the ball starts out straight to the target but later curves to the right. The other example is that you have a square club face but a out-to-in swing path, the ball goes to the left but won't curve.

magnum184 · July 3, 2008

That statement tells me you believe path is the main determinant in where the ball starts. In fact it is the clubface that determines where the ball starts and path that determines how it curves (they each effect the other, but face mainly controls starting line and path mainly controls curvature). The slightly open face starts it right, the in to out path curves it back to the left.

logan, should it be the other way around? the path determines where the ball starts and clubface determines how it curves. let's see you have a perfect swing path (overlap with the target line) but a open club face, the ball starts out straight to the target but later curves to the right. The other example is that you have a square club face but a out-to-in swing path, the ball goes to the left but won't curve.

The thing you need to be thinking about is what is happening with the clubface while the ball is still on it. :lol:

Through impact, compression, and separation. I know it is an incredibly small ammount of time. But, things are most definitely occuring during those stages with the clubface and the ball. The ball will just about start out every time where the clubface is pointing at the separation stage. Curvature, while still influenced by path to a degree, will to a large degree be affected by what the clubface does from impact up to separation. In a perfect world, a straight golf shot, with perfect alignment and perfect ball position and perfect setup, will result from a clubface that is open to some degree at impact and through compression closes and at separation is dead square to the target line. The old ballflight laws are wrong, IMOP. They took a static ball/clubface position to illustrate predictions. There are more dynamics than that occuring at impact.

I'll be hung for this one I'm sure. Where's the delete button? :drinks:

particleman · July 3, 2008

This club face versus club path thing is intriguing to me. How does one explain the most common shot in golf among beginners, the pull fade, if the club face dominates where the ball starts?

Pretty simple. Path considerably out to in with a slightly closed to the target line club face. But that club face is not closed to the path or else that would be a pull draw.

.

Er . . . now I'm really confused, it sounds like you're describing a shot where the path is dictating the initial ball flight and the club face is causing the curvature. Unless I'm just confused.

club face control · July 3, 2008

I think I straight slice or push slice is more common. Which is a considerably out to in path with a sqaure (straight slice) or open (push slice) face.

Logan

I have given over 1,500 lessons a year for the past 14 years. I can promise you way more people have a pull slice patern.

logan91201 · July 3, 2008

iron shots - tremendous, driver - terrible.

very difficult to adapt with the longer clubs and I'd be scared to hit it off a downhill/uphill lie. brilliant science and I think the shorter guy, (andy?) is a genius.

under the headline of "proof is in the pudding" who has won recently with this method? where have Baddeley and others been??????????? this will go down as another fad.

p.s. they ripped off Mac O'Grady and he's P-I-S-S-E-D!!!

Agree.. irons vs driver.. especailly short irons are a breeze with S&T. Downhill lies not a problem, uphill are a nightmare.

My point again is not that the method is bad.. I've had some of my best ball striking rounds with it and that is why I've pretty much stayed with it for year. My point is that it is not a method that simplifes the swing dramtically (as pitched) and I think most golfers will struggle with consistancy, especially with longer clubs.

If you are having trouble with the longer clubs . . . MAKE SURE YOU GET THE FACE OPEN and really push the hips forward without the head going back. That whole deal about "negative loft" is huge. You should probably hit some drivers a little more back your stance with a face that looks really open to you.

bucket- could you please explain the "negative loft" deal ... also, what is the best way to get the face open - do you open the face a little and then grip the club? thanks.

They cover this pretty well in the video. It is basically the concept that a hackjob slicer has the same open face as a pro but the path is mixed up.

This is a draw pattern . . . so inorder for the ball to start right of the target and draw the face must be pointing right of the target and slightly left of the path. That's the big thing about going FORWARD. It keeps the hands on the circle and keeps the club moving OUT. So with the club moving out let's say 15 degrees to hit a straight push the face would be open 15 degrees. To get the draw spin you don't have to have the face closed all that much. You don't want to have the face "wrapping around the ball" to hit a draw. The whole deal is to keep the face quiet. They ain't hittin' huge draws. I'd say they want the face pretty "stable." Once your pivot stalls or you hang back the face is going to start turning FAST.

They talk about "rate of closure" . . . you don't want a fast closing face because the alignments and ball flight is fleeting. So going forward keeps the face from shutting fast and keeps the club moving out rather than going left. Also going left moves your low point forward. All good things. And the face being open means ball go higher.

They talk about this stuff in the 3rd video quite a bit. It is VERY good. A light went off for me because I was always chicken to get the face open much for fear of hitting a big flare right. But their explanation gave me "permission" to open it up. They say something like "if you are swinging 20 degrees right your face would have to be more than 20 degrees open to actually hit a push slice." That was HUGE for me. I hit these big quackers with the driver. But when I open it up . . . ball goes much higher draws to pushes without fear of a big over-draw.

The best way to open the face is to just get the face open more at address. Open it and then take your grip. I got a strong grip and I set it pretty shut address. There are going to be loft issues with that. So I don't really change my grip. I change my clubface.

Of all the times we have worked on my swing positions, the times we just talked about what you wrote above are still the most valuable to me. People find it difficult to believe that I open my face at adress, hold it open all the way into my follow through and hit a draw. But my face is 5 degrees open to the target line and my path is 10 degrees in to out. Thus although my face is open to my target line, it is closed to my swing path, creating a draw that starts slightly right of target (due to the slighly open face) and draws back to the target (due to my in to out swing path being more in to out than my face is open). People think it is silly when I tell them I play for a draw every shot and pretty much never miss left. But once you grasp it it is really very simple geometry. I'm glad the DVDs helped you Bucket. I think they are great, and watch them repeatedly when I am bored!

QUOTE(iloveplywood @ Jul 3 2008, 02:04 PM) This club face versus club path thing is intriguing to me. How does one explain the most common shot in golf among beginners, the pull fade, if the club face dominates where the ball starts?

Pretty simple. Path considerably out to in with a slightly closed to the target line club face. But that club face is not closed to the path or else that would be a pull draw.

I however do not consider that the most common shot among beginners. If that was the case, they would be able to play some good golf, because shots that start left and curve right generally end up straight. I think I straight slice or push slice is more common. Which is a considerably out to in path with a sqaure (straight slice) or open (push slice) face. The common denominator in all three of these left to right curvatures is the out to in path. If you swing in to out with that same open face you would hit nice push draws.

Hang in there, Logan. :clapping: :man_in_love:

Everything you have said about ballflight and clubface relationship is just about spot on. Toughest thing to convince people of, IMOP.

Thanks man. Its not easy being on the side of the minority all the time. Good to have some support!

logan91201 · July 3, 2008

That statement tells me you believe path is the main determinant in where the ball starts. In fact it is the clubface that determines where the ball starts and path that determines how it curves (they each effect the other, but face mainly controls starting line and path mainly controls curvature). The slightly open face starts it right, the in to out path curves it back to the left.

logan, should it be the other way around? the path determines where the ball starts and clubface determines how it curves. let's see you have a perfect swing path (overlap with the target line) but a open club face, the ball starts out straight to the target but later curves to the right. The other example is that you have a square club face but a out-to-in swing path, the ball goes to the left but won't curve.

I guess the simple answer is no. I meant exactly what I wrote. And trust me. If your swing path is 0 degrees (on the target line) and your face is open, then your ball will start right because of the open face, and then curve right because the face is open to the path imparting left to right spin. You seem to be adhering to the old school ball flight laws in the PGA teaching manual, which hopefully will be permanently debunked in the near future, as they are very innacurate.

logan91201 · July 3, 2008

I think I straight slice or push slice is more common. Which is a considerably out to in path with a sqaure (straight slice) or open (push slice) face.
Logan
I have given over 1,500 lessons a year for the past 14 years. I can promise you way more people have a pull slice patern.

Well you finally got me on something. I said "I think" at the beginging of the statement because that was my guess. I just figured if a ball started left and curved right then the player should be able to play some decent golf. Again just a guess.

I find it interesting that you nitpick this statement that I made towards someone else, instead of responding to my post towards you asking you to supply any facts supporting your claims.

Tiltswing · July 3, 2008

I think S&T in the GD article (only one i have seen) is quite mis leading. Do the DVDs follow the same lines?

I can not see many players with there torso tilted towards the target.

Keeping weight centered is running thru most posted vids, not much tilting going on.

I have tried S&T a few times, its a swing wrecker to me, still complicated, and hard to reproduce.
Best thing is it really makes you think about weight shift in golf swing, most will let theres shift to much lateral.

S&T keeps your focus on getting thru the ball, which is a good thing.

Cheers

What you are failing to understand, as most people who talk negatively about S&Tdo, is that for the shoulders to turn in a circle and be truly "centered" the spine actually tilts left. All the pictures you see of S&T players that look "centered ", if you could take their skin off and see their spine, it would be tilted to the left. This is very easy to see from 45 degrees behind the player.

From what I've learned the spine should be vertical. I have some footage of Elkington and Baddeley from behind, both of them have vertical spine or spines that are tilted slightly away from the target.

Well from I learned directly from Andy and Mike the spine tilts left. I think you are maybe not understanding the difference between the spine tilting and the torso tilting left. It is in the DVDs but here is a clip on youtube where Mike clearly states the spine tilts left to keep the shoulder turn centered, and also demonstrates it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA...feature=related

Edit to Add: Aarron is not the best example for the model, and certainly not the best example for tilting. Nor is Elkington. The only reason Aarron is the poster child and in the articles is because he is the biggest star. If they had it their way it would have been Charlie Wi.

I see. So then I would assume the problem with S&T is that the weight moves towards the target in the backswing, and away from the target in the follow through. If I am wrong about this, please explain. All I know is, I would not want my pivot to look like this:

Backswing

Through swing

Looks like the weight is moving away from the target on the downswing, which makes no sense to me at all.

No. You are still struggling with the concept of the spine. You can tilt your spine to the left and move your weight to the right if you want to. Sergio does it all the time. It is merely a tilt of the spine. In stack and tilt the weight starts slightly favoring the left side 55-45, increases a little more to the left side through the backswing 60-40, and then goes ALL THE WAY to the left side on the downswing, finishing with 95% of the weight on the left side at the finish (95-5). The weight never moves back. In those sam snead pictures I don't see his weight moving back at all. Not even close actually. All I see is a hard weight shift left with the hips creating flexion in the spine which creates the axis tilt you see there. Something all great strikers have.

Here is Sergio. Someone who knows a thing or two about the S&T pattern posted this video.

Notice the spine tilting considerably left at the top (draw a line from his hip center to his shoulder center) yet his weight has shifted slightly right. Then he drives his hips hard to the right leaving his head still creating a beautiful axis tilt. Much like the moves us S&Ters are striving for.

P.S. It almost sounds like you are bashing Sneads swing. I hope that isn't the case, I think he was pretty good!

I admire Snead's swing a lot, and I know that he was a great ball striker. I've also worked with people involved in MORAD and S&T (meaning they worked with Mac O'Grady and Plummer and Bennett). I use what most would consider a S&T swing, but I was never told to tilt the spine towards the target. Anyway, I'm sure it is not a reverse pivot due to the position of the other COGs. But I did read a thread in which Slicefixer claimed Snead used a reverse pivot, but he could well be wrong.

magnum184 · July 3, 2008

That statement tells me you believe path is the main determinant in where the ball starts. In fact it is the clubface that determines where the ball starts and path that determines how it curves (they each effect the other, but face mainly controls starting line and path mainly controls curvature). The slightly open face starts it right, the in to out path curves it back to the left.

logan, should it be the other way around? the path determines where the ball starts and clubface determines how it curves. let's see you have a perfect swing path (overlap with the target line) but a open club face, the ball starts out straight to the target but later curves to the right. The other example is that you have a square club face but a out-to-in swing path, the ball goes to the left but won't curve.

I guess the simple answer is no. I meant exactly what I wrote. And trust me. If your swing path is 0 degrees (on the target line) and your face is open, then your ball will start right because of the open face, and then curve right because the face is open to the path imparting left to right spin. You seem to be adhering to the old school ball flight laws in the PGA teaching manual, which hopefully will be permanently debunked in the near future, as they are very innacurate.

Right!!!

Dr. Wiren's laws are outdated and simply wrong. Static ball / club relationship is simply wrong!! It's flat earth thinking, IMOP. I just don't know how many people will be hurt if they are ever debunked.

If you want to really understand ballflight, pay close attention to your alignment, your target line, and your divots especially. If you study your divots carefully enough you will be able to tell to some degree what your face looked like on both ends of that divot as well as direction. But understanding ballflight and what causes it will help more people understand their mistakes and the adjustments needed to fix them.

So, ask yourself how you can hit a shot that starts right of your target line, alignment line which is parallel left of your target line (square set up), and then draws back to the target. Clubhead is on a perfect path, the face is open at impact, in the process of closing during compression, and still open at separation in relation to your alignment. The result is a ball that starts right and draws back. The ammount the clubface closed while the ball was on the face influenced the draw. Something like that without going into too much detail.

kosmosspoetz · July 3, 2008

Clubface,

Do sand wedges or 2 irons make the ball go higher (with the same motion)? Why?

Logan
I mentioned and agree with you when a clubface is very open or closed it will overide the path. I have no disagreement on that at all.
As far as this question I think it is a fun one the talk about. For players like Tiger I would say his 2 iron goes higher, but for most golfers it is the wedge. Why? Because of speed.

With the same motion. Sure we can adjust to make the sandwedge go low and the 2 iron go high. Speed is involved, but....... If you shafted both clubheads the same and made the same swing with the same speed which one would make the ball go higher? Why?....the face angle.

HMSmai · July 4, 2008

Just wanted to credit Logan with a nice explanation of face/path relationship - I hear you here man!! Maybe if you posted a video of a CP draw face on and dtl it would illustrate how an open face can produce draws. I know this is how I feel most comfortable hitting draws and sometimes 'a picture will speak 1000 words'. Keep hanging in there..

12 piece bucket · July 4, 2008

Bottom line . .. the ball start line is at 90 degrees to the leading edge when it separates from the face . . . it curves due to the divergence of the face to the path assuming there is enough speed to create enough ball speed for the air to flow over the ball to cause it to lift and curve one way or the other.

The face is WAY more important to the start line than path. The short game and putting is ALL ABOUT FACE pretty much and the angle of descent and ascent.

logan91201 · July 4, 2008

I think S&T in the GD article (only one i have seen) is quite mis leading. Do the DVDs follow the same lines?

I can not see many players with there torso tilted towards the target.

Keeping weight centered is running thru most posted vids, not much tilting going on.

I have tried S&T a few times, its a swing wrecker to me, still complicated, and hard to reproduce.
Best thing is it really makes you think about weight shift in golf swing, most will let theres shift to much lateral.

S&T keeps your focus on getting thru the ball, which is a good thing.

Cheers

What you are failing to understand, as most people who talk negatively about S&Tdo, is that for the shoulders to turn in a circle and be truly "centered" the spine actually tilts left. All the pictures you see of S&T players that look "centered ", if you could take their skin off and see their spine, it would be tilted to the left. This is very easy to see from 45 degrees behind the player.

From what I've learned the spine should be vertical. I have some footage of Elkington and Baddeley from behind, both of them have vertical spine or spines that are tilted slightly away from the target.

Well from I learned directly from Andy and Mike the spine tilts left. I think you are maybe not understanding the difference between the spine tilting and the torso tilting left. It is in the DVDs but here is a clip on youtube where Mike clearly states the spine tilts left to keep the shoulder turn centered, and also demonstrates it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA...feature=related

Edit to Add: Aarron is not the best example for the model, and certainly not the best example for tilting. Nor is Elkington. The only reason Aarron is the poster child and in the articles is because he is the biggest star. If they had it their way it would have been Charlie Wi.

I see. So then I would assume the problem with S&T is that the weight moves towards the target in the backswing, and away from the target in the follow through. If I am wrong about this, please explain. All I know is, I would not want my pivot to look like this:

Backswing

Through swing

Looks like the weight is moving away from the target on the downswing, which makes no sense to me at all.

No. You are still struggling with the concept of the spine. You can tilt your spine to the left and move your weight to the right if you want to. Sergio does it all the time. It is merely a tilt of the spine. In stack and tilt the weight starts slightly favoring the left side 55-45, increases a little more to the left side through the backswing 60-40, and then goes ALL THE WAY to the left side on the downswing, finishing with 95% of the weight on the left side at the finish (95-5). The weight never moves back. In those sam snead pictures I don't see his weight moving back at all. Not even close actually. All I see is a hard weight shift left with the hips creating flexion in the spine which creates the axis tilt you see there. Something all great strikers have.

Here is Sergio. Someone who knows a thing or two about the S&T pattern posted this video.

Notice the spine tilting considerably left at the top (draw a line from his hip center to his shoulder center) yet his weight has shifted slightly right. Then he drives his hips hard to the right leaving his head still creating a beautiful axis tilt. Much like the moves us S&Ters are striving for.

P.S. It almost sounds like you are bashing Sneads swing. I hope that isn't the case, I think he was pretty good!

I admire Snead's swing a lot, and I know that he was a great ball striker. I've also worked with people involved in MORAD and S&T (meaning they worked with Mac O'Grady and Plummer and Bennett). I use what most would consider a S&T swing, but I was never told to tilt the spine towards the target. Anyway, I'm sure it is not a reverse pivot due to the position of the other COGs. But I did read a thread in which Slicefixer claimed Snead used a reverse pivot, but he could well be wrong.

A pivot is not reversed unless weight is moving backwards in the downswing. Sneads weight didn't and neither do any stack and tilters (pros and good players I mean, I can't speak for all). Slicefixer and I have agreed on this on more than one occaision.

I don't mean to sound rude, but I work directly with Andy and Mike and they tell me to tilt my spine to the left. They say it in the golf digest articles, and they say it in their DVDs. I'm still not totally convinced you understand the difference between a tilt in the spine and a tilt in the torso, but I guess that is neither here nor there. I can say that I have found in general MORAD players were taught to be "less left" in the backswing than I was. I think I've even heard Dana say it on this forum.

Either way there are a million ways to do it. We just believe that this way is the most efficient. But however you feel, the facts are that one can tilt left in the backswing, move left throughout the rest of the swing, and hit the ball very solid, very far, very straight, and very high. Maybe not the farthest possible, and maybe not the straightest possible, but a great blend of both. Mike talks about it in a youtube video and I think it does a good job of really describing what they are all about. Here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA (about the 1 minute mark)

I believe I posted this before but I'm posting it again. By the way, did you watch this MacFan? Mike says more than once that the spine tilts left. I understand if you don't agree with it, but here is the inventor of this pattern telling you this is how its done.

logan91201 · July 4, 2008

Just wanted to credit Logan with a nice explanation of face/path relationship - I hear you here man!! Maybe if you posted a video of a CP draw face on and dtl it would illustrate how an open face can produce draws. I know this is how I feel most comfortable hitting draws and sometimes 'a picture will speak 1000 words'. Keep hanging in there..

Thanks for the nice words! When you said CP draw did you mean CF? I don't see how it is possible to hit a CP draw with an open face. Also I really only ever swing CF. I don't really mess with CP and other patterns like a lot of the MORAD guys do.

With that said I have some CF draws on youtube with the driver and 7 iron. They were posted in a thread dedicated to my buddy's and my swings.

7 iron

Driver

In the driver you can actually trace the ball flight with the right pauses and see it start right and begin to turn back. Pretty cool.

Bottom line . .. the ball start line is at 90 degrees to the leading edge when it separates from the face . . . it curves due to the divergence of the face to the path assuming there is enough speed to create enough ball speed for the air to flow over the ball to cause it to lift and curve one way or the other.

The face is WAY more important to the start line than path. The short game and putting is ALL ABOUT FACE pretty much and the angle of descent and ascent.

I don't know how to say it any better than that

Tiltswing · July 4, 2008

I think S&T in the GD article (only one i have seen) is quite mis leading. Do the DVDs follow the same lines?

I can not see many players with there torso tilted towards the target.

Keeping weight centered is running thru most posted vids, not much tilting going on.

I have tried S&T a few times, its a swing wrecker to me, still complicated, and hard to reproduce.
Best thing is it really makes you think about weight shift in golf swing, most will let theres shift to much lateral.

S&T keeps your focus on getting thru the ball, which is a good thing.

Cheers

What you are failing to understand, as most people who talk negatively about S&Tdo, is that for the shoulders to turn in a circle and be truly "centered" the spine actually tilts left. All the pictures you see of S&T players that look "centered ", if you could take their skin off and see their spine, it would be tilted to the left. This is very easy to see from 45 degrees behind the player.

From what I've learned the spine should be vertical. I have some footage of Elkington and Baddeley from behind, both of them have vertical spine or spines that are tilted slightly away from the target.

Well from I learned directly from Andy and Mike the spine tilts left. I think you are maybe not understanding the difference between the spine tilting and the torso tilting left. It is in the DVDs but here is a clip on youtube where Mike clearly states the spine tilts left to keep the shoulder turn centered, and also demonstrates it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA...feature=related

Edit to Add: Aarron is not the best example for the model, and certainly not the best example for tilting. Nor is Elkington. The only reason Aarron is the poster child and in the articles is because he is the biggest star. If they had it their way it would have been Charlie Wi.

I see. So then I would assume the problem with S&T is that the weight moves towards the target in the backswing, and away from the target in the follow through. If I am wrong about this, please explain. All I know is, I would not want my pivot to look like this:

Backswing

Through swing

Looks like the weight is moving away from the target on the downswing, which makes no sense to me at all.

No. You are still struggling with the concept of the spine. You can tilt your spine to the left and move your weight to the right if you want to. Sergio does it all the time. It is merely a tilt of the spine. In stack and tilt the weight starts slightly favoring the left side 55-45, increases a little more to the left side through the backswing 60-40, and then goes ALL THE WAY to the left side on the downswing, finishing with 95% of the weight on the left side at the finish (95-5). The weight never moves back. In those sam snead pictures I don't see his weight moving back at all. Not even close actually. All I see is a hard weight shift left with the hips creating flexion in the spine which creates the axis tilt you see there. Something all great strikers have.

Here is Sergio. Someone who knows a thing or two about the S&T pattern posted this video.

Notice the spine tilting considerably left at the top (draw a line from his hip center to his shoulder center) yet his weight has shifted slightly right. Then he drives his hips hard to the right leaving his head still creating a beautiful axis tilt. Much like the moves us S&Ters are striving for.

P.S. It almost sounds like you are bashing Sneads swing. I hope that isn't the case, I think he was pretty good!

I admire Snead's swing a lot, and I know that he was a great ball striker. I've also worked with people involved in MORAD and S&T (meaning they worked with Mac O'Grady and Plummer and Bennett). I use what most would consider a S&T swing, but I was never told to tilt the spine towards the target. Anyway, I'm sure it is not a reverse pivot due to the position of the other COGs. But I did read a thread in which Slicefixer claimed Snead used a reverse pivot, but he could well be wrong.

A pivot is not reversed unless weight is moving backwards in the downswing. Sneads weight didn't and neither do any stack and tilters (pros and good players I mean, I can't speak for all). Slicefixer and I have agreed on this on more than one occaision.

I don't mean to sound rude, but I work directly with Andy and Mike and they tell me to tilt my spine to the left. They say it in the golf digest articles, and they say it in their DVDs. I'm still not totally convinced you understand the difference between a tilt in the spine and a tilt in the torso, but I guess that is neither here nor there. I can say that I have found in general MORAD players were taught to be "less left" in the backswing than I was. I think I've even heard Dana say it on this forum.

Either way there are a million ways to do it. We just believe that this way is the most efficient. But however you feel, the facts are that one can tilt left in the backswing, move left throughout the rest of the swing, and hit the ball very solid, very far, very straight, and very high. Maybe not the farthest possible, and maybe not the straightest possible, but a great blend of both. Mike talks about it in a youtube video and I think it does a good job of really describing what they are all about. Here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA (about the 1 minute mark)

I believe I posted this before but I'm posting it again. By the way, did you watch this MacFan? Mike says more than once that the spine tilts left. I understand if you don't agree with it, but here is the inventor of this pattern telling you this is how its done.

I am not trying to say that they don't teach their students to lean the spine left, I am saying that is not what I was taught. I know there are several variations to change shot shape, trajectory, etc (I have studied TGM as well). What I don't understand is what you're arguing about. I never said that the S&T swing cannot allow golfers to hit the ball high, far, and straight. I know that Mike and Andy can hit 2 irons very high and soft without taking a divot. I believe the swing is extremely effective, and it is nothing more than a variation of the very swing I use (or my swing could be considered a variation of what you use). I have a question for you, however. What is the difference between the swing Slicefixer teaches, and the swing P&B teach? The biggest difference I see is that Slice's students set up with axis tilt, and do not straighten the right leg very much. What would you say are the advantages of leaning the spine left? And finally, would you agree with P&B, in that Hogan used what would today be considered a S&T swing? And before I forget, I liked your description of the relationship between the club face and club path, and how ball flight is affected. Very well done.

logan91201 · July 4, 2008

I think S&T in the GD article (only one i have seen) is quite mis leading. Do the DVDs follow the same lines?

I can not see many players with there torso tilted towards the target.

Keeping weight centered is running thru most posted vids, not much tilting going on.

I have tried S&T a few times, its a swing wrecker to me, still complicated, and hard to reproduce.
Best thing is it really makes you think about weight shift in golf swing, most will let theres shift to much lateral.

S&T keeps your focus on getting thru the ball, which is a good thing.

Cheers

What you are failing to understand, as most people who talk negatively about S&Tdo, is that for the shoulders to turn in a circle and be truly "centered" the spine actually tilts left. All the pictures you see of S&T players that look "centered ", if you could take their skin off and see their spine, it would be tilted to the left. This is very easy to see from 45 degrees behind the player.

From what I've learned the spine should be vertical. I have some footage of Elkington and Baddeley from behind, both of them have vertical spine or spines that are tilted slightly away from the target.

Well from I learned directly from Andy and Mike the spine tilts left. I think you are maybe not understanding the difference between the spine tilting and the torso tilting left. It is in the DVDs but here is a clip on youtube where Mike clearly states the spine tilts left to keep the shoulder turn centered, and also demonstrates it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA...feature=related

Edit to Add: Aarron is not the best example for the model, and certainly not the best example for tilting. Nor is Elkington. The only reason Aarron is the poster child and in the articles is because he is the biggest star. If they had it their way it would have been Charlie Wi.

I see. So then I would assume the problem with S&T is that the weight moves towards the target in the backswing, and away from the target in the follow through. If I am wrong about this, please explain. All I know is, I would not want my pivot to look like this:

Backswing

Through swing

Looks like the weight is moving away from the target on the downswing, which makes no sense to me at all.

No. You are still struggling with the concept of the spine. You can tilt your spine to the left and move your weight to the right if you want to. Sergio does it all the time. It is merely a tilt of the spine. In stack and tilt the weight starts slightly favoring the left side 55-45, increases a little more to the left side through the backswing 60-40, and then goes ALL THE WAY to the left side on the downswing, finishing with 95% of the weight on the left side at the finish (95-5). The weight never moves back. In those sam snead pictures I don't see his weight moving back at all. Not even close actually. All I see is a hard weight shift left with the hips creating flexion in the spine which creates the axis tilt you see there. Something all great strikers have.

Here is Sergio. Someone who knows a thing or two about the S&T pattern posted this video.

Notice the spine tilting considerably left at the top (draw a line from his hip center to his shoulder center) yet his weight has shifted slightly right. Then he drives his hips hard to the right leaving his head still creating a beautiful axis tilt. Much like the moves us S&Ters are striving for.

P.S. It almost sounds like you are bashing Sneads swing. I hope that isn't the case, I think he was pretty good!

I admire Snead's swing a lot, and I know that he was a great ball striker. I've also worked with people involved in MORAD and S&T (meaning they worked with Mac O'Grady and Plummer and Bennett). I use what most would consider a S&T swing, but I was never told to tilt the spine towards the target. Anyway, I'm sure it is not a reverse pivot due to the position of the other COGs. But I did read a thread in which Slicefixer claimed Snead used a reverse pivot, but he could well be wrong.

A pivot is not reversed unless weight is moving backwards in the downswing. Sneads weight didn't and neither do any stack and tilters (pros and good players I mean, I can't speak for all). Slicefixer and I have agreed on this on more than one occaision.

I don't mean to sound rude, but I work directly with Andy and Mike and they tell me to tilt my spine to the left. They say it in the golf digest articles, and they say it in their DVDs. I'm still not totally convinced you understand the difference between a tilt in the spine and a tilt in the torso, but I guess that is neither here nor there. I can say that I have found in general MORAD players were taught to be "less left" in the backswing than I was. I think I've even heard Dana say it on this forum.

Either way there are a million ways to do it. We just believe that this way is the most efficient. But however you feel, the facts are that one can tilt left in the backswing, move left throughout the rest of the swing, and hit the ball very solid, very far, very straight, and very high. Maybe not the farthest possible, and maybe not the straightest possible, but a great blend of both. Mike talks about it in a youtube video and I think it does a good job of really describing what they are all about. Here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA (about the 1 minute mark)

I believe I posted this before but I'm posting it again. By the way, did you watch this MacFan? Mike says more than once that the spine tilts left. I understand if you don't agree with it, but here is the inventor of this pattern telling you this is how its done.

I am not trying to say that they don't teach their students to lean the spine left, I am saying that is not what I was taught. I know there are several variations to change shot shape, trajectory, etc (I have studied TGM as well). What I don't understand is what you're arguing about. I never said that the S&T swing cannot allow golfers to hit the ball high, far, and straight. I know that Mike and Andy can hit 2 irons very high and soft without taking a divot. I believe the swing is extremely effective, and it is nothing more than a variation of the very swing I use (or my swing could be considered a variation of what you use). I have a question for you, however. What is the difference between the swing Slicefixer teaches, and the swing P&B teach? The biggest difference I see is that Slice's students set up with axis tilt, and do not straighten the right leg very much. What would you say are the advantages of leaning the spine left? And finally, would you agree with P&B, in that Hogan used what would today be considered a S&T swing? And before I forget, I liked your description of the relationship between the club face and club path, and how ball flight is affected. Very well done.

I misunderstood where you were coming from when saying that is what you were taught. And I wasn't arguing the points about high and long and such more stating them as it seems to get brought up time and time again, sorry it came off that way.

You have asked me some very good questions. Now I have not studied slicefixers swing near to the extent I should (as all the information is here) so if I am wrong about anything I will gladly be corrected by him. The differences you stated are correct. And they are neccessary to his method because his method moves less laterally through the ball than mine does. You see if a student sets up like a Slicefixer student, but pushed his hips laterally forward as hard as he could on the throughswing (hipslide or whatever you want to call it) as taught by mike and andy, then the players axis tilt would be too much, causing a whole flurry of errors. As I understand it a Slicefixer student sets up with many of their impact angles in tact (axis tilt and such) and for most part just rotate on the way through (I know there is some lateral movement, but it is not concious in Slice's eyes). They have axis tilt at impact because they created it at setup.

Andy and mike believe in the many benefits of lateral motion. Therefore tilting left at the top keeps you centered on top of the ball. Now add in the large lateral motion and the correct amount of axis tilt is created coming down. If the player had tilted his spine away from the target going back, then there would be too much axis tilt. Also tilting left makes it easier for your centers of gravity to be ahead of the ball at impact (important for making contact with the ground after the ball everytime), and also helps with what they consider the proper shoulder turn (down and in a circle, centered)

Other than that I see a lot of similarities in Slice's and Mike and Andys motions. Slice does want the club working left harder, which fits right in with the amount of rotation he desires on the downswing.

About Hogan my answer is no. But Mike and Andy also never said Hogan used their method, just that he has a lot of pieces they like. And I agree with that. Hogan does a lot of things we work on. And although I have seen many swings of his with his spine tilted away at the top, I have seen many that dont tilt at all and are perfectly centered. But that isn't important. What is important is that even on the swings where he tilts away slightly, he is still far more centered than most teachers are teaching today, which is what they are trying to say. And also his handpath is very very very in, which obviously Mike and Andy also teach. So basically alot of things he did they teach, but he certainly didn't swing to the model.

I think thats about it. Slice, if anything is wrong feel free to correct me. I'm not trying to step on your toes at all, just answering the questions asked of me.

Thanks for the nice words MacFan!

Tiltswing · July 4, 2008

I think S&T in the GD article (only one i have seen) is quite mis leading. Do the DVDs follow the same lines?

I can not see many players with there torso tilted towards the target.

Keeping weight centered is running thru most posted vids, not much tilting going on.

I have tried S&T a few times, its a swing wrecker to me, still complicated, and hard to reproduce.
Best thing is it really makes you think about weight shift in golf swing, most will let theres shift to much lateral.

S&T keeps your focus on getting thru the ball, which is a good thing.

Cheers

What you are failing to understand, as most people who talk negatively about S&Tdo, is that for the shoulders to turn in a circle and be truly "centered" the spine actually tilts left. All the pictures you see of S&T players that look "centered ", if you could take their skin off and see their spine, it would be tilted to the left. This is very easy to see from 45 degrees behind the player.

From what I've learned the spine should be vertical. I have some footage of Elkington and Baddeley from behind, both of them have vertical spine or spines that are tilted slightly away from the target.

Well from I learned directly from Andy and Mike the spine tilts left. I think you are maybe not understanding the difference between the spine tilting and the torso tilting left. It is in the DVDs but here is a clip on youtube where Mike clearly states the spine tilts left to keep the shoulder turn centered, and also demonstrates it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA...feature=related

Edit to Add: Aarron is not the best example for the model, and certainly not the best example for tilting. Nor is Elkington. The only reason Aarron is the poster child and in the articles is because he is the biggest star. If they had it their way it would have been Charlie Wi.

I see. So then I would assume the problem with S&T is that the weight moves towards the target in the backswing, and away from the target in the follow through. If I am wrong about this, please explain. All I know is, I would not want my pivot to look like this:

Backswing

Through swing

Looks like the weight is moving away from the target on the downswing, which makes no sense to me at all.

No. You are still struggling with the concept of the spine. You can tilt your spine to the left and move your weight to the right if you want to. Sergio does it all the time. It is merely a tilt of the spine. In stack and tilt the weight starts slightly favoring the left side 55-45, increases a little more to the left side through the backswing 60-40, and then goes ALL THE WAY to the left side on the downswing, finishing with 95% of the weight on the left side at the finish (95-5). The weight never moves back. In those sam snead pictures I don't see his weight moving back at all. Not even close actually. All I see is a hard weight shift left with the hips creating flexion in the spine which creates the axis tilt you see there. Something all great strikers have.

Here is Sergio. Someone who knows a thing or two about the S&T pattern posted this video.

Notice the spine tilting considerably left at the top (draw a line from his hip center to his shoulder center) yet his weight has shifted slightly right. Then he drives his hips hard to the right leaving his head still creating a beautiful axis tilt. Much like the moves us S&Ters are striving for.

P.S. It almost sounds like you are bashing Sneads swing. I hope that isn't the case, I think he was pretty good!

I admire Snead's swing a lot, and I know that he was a great ball striker. I've also worked with people involved in MORAD and S&T (meaning they worked with Mac O'Grady and Plummer and Bennett). I use what most would consider a S&T swing, but I was never told to tilt the spine towards the target. Anyway, I'm sure it is not a reverse pivot due to the position of the other COGs. But I did read a thread in which Slicefixer claimed Snead used a reverse pivot, but he could well be wrong.

A pivot is not reversed unless weight is moving backwards in the downswing. Sneads weight didn't and neither do any stack and tilters (pros and good players I mean, I can't speak for all). Slicefixer and I have agreed on this on more than one occaision.

I don't mean to sound rude, but I work directly with Andy and Mike and they tell me to tilt my spine to the left. They say it in the golf digest articles, and they say it in their DVDs. I'm still not totally convinced you understand the difference between a tilt in the spine and a tilt in the torso, but I guess that is neither here nor there. I can say that I have found in general MORAD players were taught to be "less left" in the backswing than I was. I think I've even heard Dana say it on this forum.

Either way there are a million ways to do it. We just believe that this way is the most efficient. But however you feel, the facts are that one can tilt left in the backswing, move left throughout the rest of the swing, and hit the ball very solid, very far, very straight, and very high. Maybe not the farthest possible, and maybe not the straightest possible, but a great blend of both. Mike talks about it in a youtube video and I think it does a good job of really describing what they are all about. Here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA (about the 1 minute mark)

I believe I posted this before but I'm posting it again. By the way, did you watch this MacFan? Mike says more than once that the spine tilts left. I understand if you don't agree with it, but here is the inventor of this pattern telling you this is how its done.

I am not trying to say that they don't teach their students to lean the spine left, I am saying that is not what I was taught. I know there are several variations to change shot shape, trajectory, etc (I have studied TGM as well). What I don't understand is what you're arguing about. I never said that the S&T swing cannot allow golfers to hit the ball high, far, and straight. I know that Mike and Andy can hit 2 irons very high and soft without taking a divot. I believe the swing is extremely effective, and it is nothing more than a variation of the very swing I use (or my swing could be considered a variation of what you use). I have a question for you, however. What is the difference between the swing Slicefixer teaches, and the swing P&B teach? The biggest difference I see is that Slice's students set up with axis tilt, and do not straighten the right leg very much. What would you say are the advantages of leaning the spine left? And finally, would you agree with P&B, in that Hogan used what would today be considered a S&T swing? And before I forget, I liked your description of the relationship between the club face and club path, and how ball flight is affected. Very well done.

I misunderstood where you were coming from when saying that is what you were taught. And I wasn't arguing the points about high and long and such more stating them as it seems to get brought up time and time again, sorry it came off that way.

You have asked me some very good questions. Now I have not studied slicefixers swing near to the extent I should (as all the information is here) so if I am wrong about anything I will gladly be corrected by him. The differences you stated are correct. And they are neccessary to his method because his method moves less laterally through the ball than mine does. You see if a student sets up like a Slicefixer student, but pushed his hips laterally forward as hard as he could on the throughswing (hipslide or whatever you want to call it) as taught by mike and andy, then the players axis tilt would be too much, causing a whole flurry of errors. As I understand it a Slicefixer student sets up with many of their impact angles in tact (axis tilt and such) and for most part just rotate on the way through (I know there is some lateral movement, but it is not concious in Slice's eyes). They have axis tilt at impact because they created it at setup.

Andy and mike believe in the many benefits of lateral motion. Therefore tilting left at the top keeps you centered on top of the ball. Now add in the large lateral motion and the correct amount of axis tilt is created coming down. If the player had tilted his spine away from the target going back, then there would be too much axis tilt. Also tilting left makes it easier for your centers of gravity to be ahead of the ball at impact (important for making contact with the ground after the ball everytime), and also helps with what they consider the proper shoulder turn (down and in a circle, centered)

Other than that I see a lot of similarities in Slice's and Mike and Andys motions. Slice does want the club working left harder, which fits right in with the amount of rotation he desires on the downswing.

About Hogan my answer is no. But Mike and Andy also never said Hogan used their method, just that he has a lot of pieces they like. And I agree with that. Hogan does a lot of things we work on. And although I have seen many swings of his with his spine tilted away at the top, I have seen many that dont tilt at all and are perfectly centered. But that isn't important. What is important is that even on the swings where he tilts away slightly, he is still far more centered than most teachers are teaching today, which is what they are trying to say. And also his handpath is very very very in, which obviously Mike and Andy also teach. So basically alot of things he did they teach, but he certainly didn't swing to the model.

I think thats about it. Slice, if anything is wrong feel free to correct me. I'm not trying to step on your toes at all, just answering the questions asked of me.

Thanks for the nice words MacFan!

Thanks a lot for the response. Very clear and detailed.

12 piece bucket · July 4, 2008

Andy and mike believe in the many benefits of lateral motion. Therefore tilting left at the top keeps you centered on top of the ball. Now add in the large lateral motion and the correct amount of axis tilt is created coming down. If the player had tilted his spine away from the target going back, then there would be too much axis tilt. Also tilting left makes it easier for your centers of gravity to be ahead of the ball at impact (important for making contact with the ground after the ball everytime), and also helps with what they consider the proper shoulder turn (down and in a circle, centered)

Nice! The interesting thing about the whole deal is they believe in the power of the circle but to keep the hands on the circle and the arms IN you have to move LINEAR.

Good post.

dana dahlquist · July 4, 2008

I think S&T in the GD article (only one i have seen) is quite mis leading. Do the DVDs follow the same lines?I can not see many players with there torso tilted towards the target.Keeping weight centered is running thru most posted vids, not much tilting going on.I have tried S&T a few times, its a swing wrecker to me, still complicated, and hard to reproduce.Best thing is it really makes you think about weight shift in golf swing, most will let theres shift to much lateral. S&T keeps your focus on getting thru the ball, which is a good thing.Cheers
What you are failing to understand, as most people who talk negatively about S&Tdo, is that for the shoulders to turn in a circle and be truly "centered" the spine actually tilts left. All the pictures you see of S&T players that look "centered ", if you could take their skin off and see their spine, it would be tilted to the left. This is very easy to see from 45 degrees behind the player.
From what I've learned the spine should be vertical. I have some footage of Elkington and Baddeley from behind, both of them have vertical spine or spines that are tilted slightly away from the target.
Well from I learned directly from Andy and Mike the spine tilts left. I think you are maybe not understanding the difference between the spine tilting and the torso tilting left. It is in the DVDs but here is a clip on youtube where Mike clearly states the spine tilts left to keep the shoulder turn centered, and also demonstrates it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA...feature=relatedEdit to Add: Aarron is not the best example for the model, and certainly not the best example for tilting. Nor is Elkington. The only reason Aarron is the poster child and in the articles is because he is the biggest star. If they had it their way it would have been Charlie Wi.
I see. So then I would assume the problem with S&T is that the weight moves towards the target in the backswing, and away from the target in the follow through. If I am wrong about this, please explain. All I know is, I would not want my pivot to look like this:BackswingThrough swingLooks like the weight is moving away from the target on the downswing, which makes no sense to me at all.
No. You are still struggling with the concept of the spine. You can tilt your spine to the left and move your weight to the right if you want to. Sergio does it all the time. It is merely a tilt of the spine. In stack and tilt the weight starts slightly favoring the left side 55-45, increases a little more to the left side through the backswing 60-40, and then goes ALL THE WAY to the left side on the downswing, finishing with 95% of the weight on the left side at the finish (95-5). The weight never moves back. In those sam snead pictures I don't see his weight moving back at all. Not even close actually. All I see is a hard weight shift left with the hips creating flexion in the spine which creates the axis tilt you see there. Something all great strikers have. Here is Sergio. Someone who knows a thing or two about the S&T pattern posted this video.
Notice the spine tilting considerably left at the top (draw a line from his hip center to his shoulder center) yet his weight has shifted slightly right. Then he drives his hips hard to the right leaving his head still creating a beautiful axis tilt. Much like the moves us S&Ters are striving for. P.S. It almost sounds like you are bashing Sneads swing. I hope that isn't the case, I think he was pretty good!
I admire Snead's swing a lot, and I know that he was a great ball striker. I've also worked with people involved in MORAD and S&T (meaning they worked with Mac O'Grady and Plummer and Bennett). I use what most would consider a S&T swing, but I was never told to tilt the spine towards the target. Anyway, I'm sure it is not a reverse pivot due to the position of the other COGs. But I did read a thread in which Slicefixer claimed Snead used a reverse pivot, but he could well be wrong.
A pivot is not reversed unless weight is moving backwards in the downswing. Sneads weight didn't and neither do any stack and tilters (pros and good players I mean, I can't speak for all). Slicefixer and I have agreed on this on more than one occaision.I don't mean to sound rude, but I work directly with Andy and Mike and they tell me to tilt my spine to the left. They say it in the golf digest articles, and they say it in their DVDs. I'm still not totally convinced you understand the difference between a tilt in the spine and a tilt in the torso, but I guess that is neither here nor there. I can say that I have found in general MORAD players were taught to be "less left" in the backswing than I was. I think I've even heard Dana say it on this forum. Either way there are a million ways to do it. We just believe that this way is the most efficient. But however you feel, the facts are that one can tilt left in the backswing, move left throughout the rest of the swing, and hit the ball very solid, very far, very straight, and very high. Maybe not the farthest possible, and maybe not the straightest possible, but a great blend of both. Mike talks about it in a youtube video and I think it does a good job of really describing what they are all about. Here it is.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA (about the 1 minute mark)I believe I posted this before but I'm posting it again. By the way, did you watch this MacFan? Mike says more than once that the spine tilts left. I understand if you don't agree with it, but here is the inventor of this pattern telling you this is how its done.
I am not trying to say that they don't teach their students to lean the spine left, I am saying that is not what I was taught. I know there are several variations to change shot shape, trajectory, etc (I have studied TGM as well). What I don't understand is what you're arguing about. I never said that the S&T swing cannot allow golfers to hit the ball high, far, and straight. I know that Mike and Andy can hit 2 irons very high and soft without taking a divot. I believe the swing is extremely effective, and it is nothing more than a variation of the very swing I use (or my swing could be considered a variation of what you use). I have a question for you, however. What is the difference between the swing Slicefixer teaches, and the swing P&B teach? The biggest difference I see is that Slice's students set up with axis tilt, and do not straighten the right leg very much. What would you say are the advantages of leaning the spine left? And finally, would you agree with P&B, in that Hogan used what would today be considered a S&T swing? And before I forget, I liked your description of the relationship between the club face and club path, and how ball flight is affected. Very well done.

I know this is beating this thread to death. BUT, you can change the centers which people have stated in the past to change the relationship you hit the ball. If your going to hit a 2iron out of a fwy bunker over a lip. Your centers would not be forward. You would hit a CF. (Not going to go into it though) Lets just say the set up of the swing would be fully changed.But this is my take--------This is possible a base model for there students. Most teachers fall into several things that they are fully looking for in a perfect situation to fit a perfect shot. That being said, a slight draw on a med flight would fit right into this pattern. So you have to change several things in that pattern to curve it or hit it higher. BTW Mikes 2 iron that was posted was that of the centers being back. The six iron were in the center.

These are the six irons.

These are 2 irons, high.

Tiltswing · July 5, 2008

I think S&T in the GD article (only one i have seen) is quite mis leading. Do the DVDs follow the same lines? I can not see many players with there torso tilted towards the target. Keeping weight centered is running thru most posted vids, not much tilting going on. I have tried S&T a few times, its a swing wrecker to me, still complicated, and hard to reproduce. Best thing is it really makes you think about weight shift in golf swing, most will let theres shift to much lateral. S&T keeps your focus on getting thru the ball, which is a good thing. Cheers
What you are failing to understand, as most people who talk negatively about S&Tdo, is that for the shoulders to turn in a circle and be truly "centered" the spine actually tilts left. All the pictures you see of S&T players that look "centered ", if you could take their skin off and see their spine, it would be tilted to the left. This is very easy to see from 45 degrees behind the player.
From what I've learned the spine should be vertical. I have some footage of Elkington and Baddeley from behind, both of them have vertical spine or spines that are tilted slightly away from the target.
Well from I learned directly from Andy and Mike the spine tilts left. I think you are maybe not understanding the difference between the spine tilting and the torso tilting left. It is in the DVDs but here is a clip on youtube where Mike clearly states the spine tilts left to keep the shoulder turn centered, and also demonstrates it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA...feature=related Edit to Add: Aarron is not the best example for the model, and certainly not the best example for tilting. Nor is Elkington. The only reason Aarron is the poster child and in the articles is because he is the biggest star. If they had it their way it would have been Charlie Wi.
I see. So then I would assume the problem with S&T is that the weight moves towards the target in the backswing, and away from the target in the follow through. If I am wrong about this, please explain. All I know is, I would not want my pivot to look like this: Backswing Through swing Looks like the weight is moving away from the target on the downswing, which makes no sense to me at all.
No. You are still struggling with the concept of the spine. You can tilt your spine to the left and move your weight to the right if you want to. Sergio does it all the time. It is merely a tilt of the spine. In stack and tilt the weight starts slightly favoring the left side 55-45, increases a little more to the left side through the backswing 60-40, and then goes ALL THE WAY to the left side on the downswing, finishing with 95% of the weight on the left side at the finish (95-5). The weight never moves back. In those sam snead pictures I don't see his weight moving back at all. Not even close actually. All I see is a hard weight shift left with the hips creating flexion in the spine which creates the axis tilt you see there. Something all great strikers have. Here is Sergio. Someone who knows a thing or two about the S&T pattern posted this video.
Notice the spine tilting considerably left at the top (draw a line from his hip center to his shoulder center) yet his weight has shifted slightly right. Then he drives his hips hard to the right leaving his head still creating a beautiful axis tilt. Much like the moves us S&Ters are striving for. P.S. It almost sounds like you are bashing Sneads swing. I hope that isn't the case, I think he was pretty good!
I admire Snead's swing a lot, and I know that he was a great ball striker. I've also worked with people involved in MORAD and S&T (meaning they worked with Mac O'Grady and Plummer and Bennett). I use what most would consider a S&T swing, but I was never told to tilt the spine towards the target. Anyway, I'm sure it is not a reverse pivot due to the position of the other COGs. But I did read a thread in which Slicefixer claimed Snead used a reverse pivot, but he could well be wrong.
A pivot is not reversed unless weight is moving backwards in the downswing. Sneads weight didn't and neither do any stack and tilters (pros and good players I mean, I can't speak for all). Slicefixer and I have agreed on this on more than one occaision. I don't mean to sound rude, but I work directly with Andy and Mike and they tell me to tilt my spine to the left. They say it in the golf digest articles, and they say it in their DVDs. I'm still not totally convinced you understand the difference between a tilt in the spine and a tilt in the torso, but I guess that is neither here nor there. I can say that I have found in general MORAD players were taught to be "less left" in the backswing than I was. I think I've even heard Dana say it on this forum. Either way there are a million ways to do it. We just believe that this way is the most efficient. But however you feel, the facts are that one can tilt left in the backswing, move left throughout the rest of the swing, and hit the ball very solid, very far, very straight, and very high. Maybe not the farthest possible, and maybe not the straightest possible, but a great blend of both. Mike talks about it in a youtube video and I think it does a good job of really describing what they are all about. Here it is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBdiDlIyCgA (about the 1 minute mark) I believe I posted this before but I'm posting it again. By the way, did you watch this MacFan? Mike says more than once that the spine tilts left. I understand if you don't agree with it, but here is the inventor of this pattern telling you this is how its done.
I am not trying to say that they don't teach their students to lean the spine left, I am saying that is not what I was taught. I know there are several variations to change shot shape, trajectory, etc (I have studied TGM as well). What I don't understand is what you're arguing about. I never said that the S&T swing cannot allow golfers to hit the ball high, far, and straight. I know that Mike and Andy can hit 2 irons very high and soft without taking a divot. I believe the swing is extremely effective, and it is nothing more than a variation of the very swing I use (or my swing could be considered a variation of what you use). I have a question for you, however. What is the difference between the swing Slicefixer teaches, and the swing P&B teach? The biggest difference I see is that Slice's students set up with axis tilt, and do not straighten the right leg very much. What would you say are the advantages of leaning the spine left? And finally, would you agree with P&B, in that Hogan used what would today be considered a S&T swing? And before I forget, I liked your description of the relationship between the club face and club path, and how ball flight is affected. Very well done.
I know this is beating this thread to death. BUT, you can change the centers which people have stated in the past to change the relationship you hit the ball. If your going to hit a 2iron out of a fwy bunker over a lip. Your centers would not be forward. You would hit a CF. (Not going to go into it though) Lets just say the set up of the swing would be fully changed. But this is my take-------- This is possible a base model for there students. Most teachers fall into several things that they are fully looking for in a perfect situation to fit a perfect shot. That being said, a slight draw on a med flight would fit right into this pattern. So you have to change several things in that pattern to curve it or hit it higher. BTW Mikes 2 iron that was posted was that of the centers being back. The six iron were in the center. These are the six irons. These are 2 irons, high.

This is one of the reasons why these methods (S&T, MORAD, TGM) are so effective. They allow a golfer to alter the trajectory and shape of their shots by altering set up alignments, rather than relying on changes during the swing (hand manipulation, path, etc.) to use various shot types.

mtm159 · May 21, 2010

I completely disagree with the statement someone made earlier about stack and tilt being "all or nothing". The first time I tried "stack and tilt" I didn't even know what a flying wedge was. I was struggling hitting the ball thin, so I went to the range, and put 55% of the weight on my left side and turned my left shoulder down. I then proceeded to hit a bucket of some of most solid irons I ever hit in my life. I didn't even know what all the pieces were, but just by doing these pieces, I went from shooting in the mid 80's to almost breaking 70 3 weeks later. I had played golf for 15 years and always hit my irons thin. Now I compress the ball and take nice divots. I can swing as hard as I want with my driver, and I know that the ball is going to start right of my target and curve left.

Some of you are probably getting wrapped up in too much terminology and you probably "think yourself to death" already on the golf course. For me, stack and tilt puts my body in the position that allows me to deliver the club from the inside and compress the ball.

Also, I believe that Stack and tilt is just a name given to some of the mechanics that the greatest players have used for years. Show me any player on tour who hits a great iron shot, and you will see that their centers are ahead of the golf ball at impact.

Randiesel · May 21, 2010

Why on earth did you dig up a thread from July of '08?

The problem with Stack & Tilt

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites