Don't Bump

123578

Comments

  • Fort Worth ProFort Worth Pro Members Posts: 2,774 ✭✭
    CoiledUP wrote:



    I don't use the term braking personally but I know others who do. Not super hard to figure out it's meaning.



    A swing on a horizontal plane gets to the ground? The orientation of the ball on the ground absolutely changes the dynamics needed compared to a swing on a slightly upward plane like a baseball. Also, everything throwing motion moves laterally before it rotates which was the original point of this entire thread.



    Yes the rib cage actually has to slow down and does in every good full swing. EVERY good full swing has the body decelerating at impact.




    That's good, braking is terrible in my opinion. I am not discussing what happens in "every good full swing" as you may define it, I am talking about other possibilities that are just as good, just as efficient. A ball on the ground in no way "absolutely changes", in an absolute sense, dynamics needed compared to anything- if you think it does you may in fact be ball bound. So again, the rib cage does not have to slow down, it can remain steadily paced. Why not get on the AMG tech stuff and throw it with a caveat- allow the body to find throw mechanics while allowing the club to find the ground. Not rocket science, sounds like you may believe it needs to be.



    Both Hogan and Burke, you know, those two anecdotal professionals both describe a throw, and for good reason. They would both give AMG 2 strokes, maybe 3, a side. LOL.




    I am begging you to get measured on a 3D system and not have the pivot slow down. I thought it was possible until I was measured myself. I don't know who you are but I would more than happy to put my game on the line against you anytime.



    You mean this guy hogan? The one with the big lateral move and his upper body stacked on top of his pelvis?





  • vmanvman Members Posts: 1,227 ✭✭
    So should I bump or not and how much should I be bumping. Also should I bump slow or quick and then decelerate my ribcage. image/fool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':fool:' />
    CALLAWAY EPIC SUB ZERO 10.5*
    CALLAWAY X2 HOT 3 DEEP 14.5*
    ADAMS PRO MINI 18*
    CALLAWAY APEX 4-A
    CALLAWAY MD4 RAW 52* 58*
    ODYSSEY TUTTLE FLOW 35"
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194


    I am begging you to get measured on a 3D system and not have the pivot slow down. I thought it was possible until I was measured myself. I don't know who you are but I would more than happy to put my game on the line against you anytime.



    You mean this guy hogan? The one with the big lateral move and his upper body stacked on top of his pelvis?

    https://instagram.com/p/BVU4QvQnxRc/




    Geez, just having a discussion, no need to become triggered by suggesting matching games- we're not talking games, we're talking options and dynamics. Misleading and incorrectly suggestive Instagram, in my opinion, using those two images blended together making the lateral move look larger than it actually is. Actually, it's a very small, very tight, lateral motion layered within, and on top of, rotational movement at the same time. I wouldn't actually spend any of my cash on such device time, I would be laughing too hard to do much of anything anyway. I hate tethers.



    I now believe tech nuts use tech as a security blanket because of their uncertainty within themselves perhaps, or maybe trying to find nirvana at the end of the rainbow. Allow me to leave wise words from Mr. Burke:



    The only system is one where there is no system. After playing, teaching, and observing golf for the better part of my 83 years, I've seen nothing to convince me otherwise.



    If you don't mind, I'll stick with the anecdotes instead of tethers.
  • FatReedFatReed FatReed Unregistered Posts: 601 ✭✭
    Fort Worth Pro wrote:



    “ I don't know who you are but I would more than happy to put my game on the line against you anytime. “



    ***



    WHAT??!!!



    While you are at it, why don’t you tell him the your dad can beat up his dad?



    What the **** does a discussion on ‘bump’ in golf swing have to do with your idiotic statement as to whether or not you can beat someone you are completely unaware of in a round of golf?



    Ladies and gentleman, I offer you exhibit ‘A’ of today’s PGA teaching professional . . . and I use the ‘P’ VERY loosely.
  • BottleCapBottleCap Members Posts: 1,329 ✭✭
    vman wrote:


    So should I bump or not and how much should I be bumping. Also should I bump slow or quick and then decelerate my ribcage. image/fool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':fool:' />




    Depends on your swing, some need the bump, for others its catastrophic, there isn't a single swing model
    Titleist TS2 GD TourAD DI 7S
    Titleist 917 F3 GD TourAD IZ 8S
    Mizuno MP-18 MMC 3-4 DG AMT S300
    Mizuno MP-18 5-PW DG S400
    Vokey SM7 54M and 60M
    Cameron Newport 2 CT
    Bridgestone Tour B XS
  • TTGolf77TTGolf77 Members Posts: 134 ✭✭
    FatReed wrote:


    Fort Worth Pro wrote:



    “ I don't know who you are but I would more than happy to put my game on the line against you anytime. “



    ***



    WHAT??!!!



    While you are at it, why don’t you tell him the your dad can beat up his dad?



    What the **** does a discussion on ‘bump’ in golf swing have to do with your idiotic statement as to whether or not you can beat someone you are completely unaware of in a round of golf?



    Ladies and gentleman, I offer you exhibit ‘A’ of today’s PGA teaching professional . . . and I use the ‘P’ VERY loosely.




    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that’s just as good but not what the pros do at all. I’m surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194
    edited Apr 14, 2018 #128
    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.
  • TTGolf77TTGolf77 Members Posts: 134 ✭✭
    CoiledUP wrote:

    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.




    You don’t even know what something being a throwing motion even means. The pivot is going to slow down when you throw anything.
  • Fort Worth ProFort Worth Pro Members Posts: 2,774 ✭✭
    edited Apr 14, 2018 #130
    CoiledUP wrote:



    I am begging you to get measured on a 3D system and not have the pivot slow down. I thought it was possible until I was measured myself. I don't know who you are but I would more than happy to put my game on the line against you anytime.



    You mean this guy hogan? The one with the big lateral move and his upper body stacked on top of his pelvis?

    [url="





    Geez, just having a discussion, no need to become triggered by suggesting matching games- we're not talking games, we're talking options and dynamics. Misleading and incorrectly suggestive Instagram, in my opinion, using those two images blended together making the lateral move look larger than it actually is. Actually, it's a very small, very tight, lateral motion layered within, and on top of, rotational movement at the same time. I wouldn't actually spend any of my cash on such device time, I would be laughing too hard to do much of anything anyway. I hate tethers.



    I now believe tech nuts use tech as a security blanket because of their uncertainty within themselves perhaps, or maybe trying to find nirvana at the end of the rainbow. Allow me to leave wise words from Mr. Burke:



    The only system is one where there is no system. After playing, teaching, and observing golf for the better part of my 83 years, I've seen nothing to convince me otherwise.



    If you don't mind, I'll stick with the anecdotes instead of tethers.




    Not triggered at all. The suggestion that I must be "ball bound" because I state that the dynamics of hitting a ball off the ground and the dynamics of making a horizontal swing are different is what inspired me to offer a match anytime.



    The hogan gif is the first usable angle we have seen in this thread. It shows a strong lateral move from p3 to p5. Of course there is accompanying rotation but that doesn't discredit the obvious lateral move nor the stacked upper body.



    All technology does is give us knowledge. It's no security blanket. I rarely use it to teach but the knowledge gained from the study of technology is invaluable.



    There are swings from good players where the pivot doesn't decelerate until after impact. They are called pitch shots up to about 50 yards. Over that and I am almost willing to call it impossible to do and hit the golf ball.
  • Fort Worth ProFort Worth Pro Members Posts: 2,774 ✭✭
    edited Apr 14, 2018 #131
    CoiledUP wrote:

    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.




    The golf swing is very much a throwing motion. It's an athletic motion and is governed by the laws of motion and biomechanics like every other athletic motion. Because if physics there are absolutely certain movements that are more efficient than others and those are demonstrated by great players much more often.



  • Fort Worth ProFort Worth Pro Members Posts: 2,774 ✭✭
    FatReed wrote:


    Fort Worth Pro wrote:



    “ I don't know who you are but I would more than happy to put my game on the line against you anytime. “



    ***



    WHAT??!!!



    While you are at it, why don’t you tell him the your dad can beat up his dad?



    What the **** does a discussion on ‘bump’ in golf swing have to do with your idiotic statement as to whether or not you can beat someone you are completely unaware of in a round of golf?



    Ladies and gentleman, I offer you exhibit ‘A’ of today’s PGA teaching professional . . . and I use the ‘P’ VERY loosely.




    He called my game into question. Said I must be ball bound since I disagreed with him. Just an offer of a friendly match to see if that is he case.
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194


    Not triggered at all. The suggestion that I must be "ball bound" because I state that the dynamics of hitting a ball off the ground and the dynamics of making a horizontal swing are different is what inspired me to offer a match anytime.




    If you return to post #121 I used the word "may", not "must". I hope you agree there is a difference.
  • FatReedFatReed FatReed Unregistered Posts: 601 ✭✭
    CoiledUP wrote:

    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.




    CoiledUP



    You are only prompting the de facto response of modern golf instructors caught up in irrelevant minutia – their security blanket, as you say - that golfer ‘x’ is not, or was not doing what he/she thought they were doing. As though it makes there feels and intents irrelevant compared to tour pros are ‘really’ doing!



    Has anyone ever thought to consider that, if the tour pros measured really knew what they were doing, why would they even need their swings analyzed in ‘3D’ anyway? Not one player on tour today had access to 3D data when LEARNING THEIR golf swing, nor would any of them be on tour if their development depended upon it!



    Modern golf instruction is in the dark ages! Motion cannot be taught. It must be learned!!
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194

    CoiledUP wrote:

    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.




    The golf swing is very much a throwing motion. It's an athletic motion and is governed by the laws of motion and biomechanics like every other athletic motion. Because if physics there are absolutely certain movements that are more efficient than others and those are demonstrated by great players much more often.




    What laws of throwing bio-mechanics suggests, or demands, that one motion prevails over another for efficiency. I don't know of any. Two pitchers on the same pitching staff each throw 100 mph with two different motions- let's say Koufax and Drysdale, who is more efficient and how is efficiency being defined.
  • Fort Worth ProFort Worth Pro Members Posts: 2,774 ✭✭
    FatReed wrote:

    CoiledUP wrote:

    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.




    CoiledUP



    You are only prompting the de facto response of modern golf instructors caught up in irrelevant minutia – their security blanket, as you say - that golfer ‘x’ is not, or was not doing what he/she thought they were doing. As though it makes there feels and intents irrelevant compared to tour pros are ‘really’ doing!



    Has anyone ever thought to consider that, if the tour pros measured really knew what they were doing, why would they even need their swings analyzed in ‘3D’ anyway? Not one player on tour today had access to 3D data when LEARNING THEIR golf swing, nor would any of them be on tour if their development depended upon it!



    Modern golf instruction is in the dark ages! Motion cannot be taught. It must be learned!!




    The fact that there is a difference in teaching and learning is one of the first things i have ever heard you type that I agree with. I say that often.



    Here is where you don't understand. This a golf swing forum. In it we discuss the minutia of what happens in the golf swing. I personally don't discuss intents because they are personal and vary fromnplayer to player. Nobody is saying that great players intents were wrong AS INTENTS. I am saying they were not actually what they were doing. Using their intents might work. Might not but if you actually achieve their intent it often times will be a disaster.
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194
    edited Apr 14, 2018 #137


    Nobody is saying that great players intents were wrong AS INTENTS. I am saying they were not actually what they were doing. Using their intents might work. Might not but if you actually achieve their intent it often times will be a disaster.




    Yes, just like Michelangelo didn't know what he was actually doing. I'm starting to see your point. LOL. I would imagine the Burke family has screwed thousands of golfers by having them throw clubs as an action and intention.
  • Fort Worth ProFort Worth Pro Members Posts: 2,774 ✭✭
    CoiledUP wrote:


    CoiledUP wrote:

    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.




    The golf swing is very much a throwing motion. It's an athletic motion and is governed by the laws of motion and biomechanics like every other athletic motion. Because if physics there are absolutely certain movements that are more efficient than others and those are demonstrated by great players much more often.




    What laws of throwing bio-mechanics suggests, or demands, that one motion prevails over another for efficiency. I don't know of any. Two pitchers on the same pitching staff each throw 100 mph with two different motions- let's say Koufax and Drysdale, who is more efficient and how is efficiency being defined.




    One law of movement/biomechanics that both Koufax and drysdale share is that as their arm was still going back as they moved home and before they rotate, they were moving laterally forward toward home plate. Lot of different arm slots/planes but their are required commonalities.
  • FatReedFatReed FatReed Unregistered Posts: 601 ✭✭

    FatReed wrote:

    CoiledUP wrote:

    TTGolf77 wrote:


    What CoiledUP has been saying is just nonsense and somehow he thinks he knows a way to hit a ball that's just as good but not what the pros do at all. I'm surprised Fort Worth pro made it this far.




    Mr. Burke says this:



    The forward part of the swing is a throwing motion, plain and simple.



    If you believe it's nonsense, fine. Burke is alive and well in Houston- pay him a visit and I'm sure he, or Elk, may find delight with your insights into the golf swing, they are always receptive to different opinions. You might even be able to call him, never know.




    CoiledUP



    You are only prompting the de facto response of modern golf instructors caught up in irrelevant minutia – their security blanket, as you say - that golfer 'x' is not, or was not doing what he/she thought they were doing. As though it makes there feels and intents irrelevant compared to tour pros are 'really' doing!



    Has anyone ever thought to consider that, if the tour pros measured really knew what they were doing, why would they even need their swings analyzed in '3D' anyway? Not one player on tour today had access to 3D data when LEARNING THEIR golf swing, nor would any of them be on tour if their development depended upon it!



    Modern golf instruction is in the dark ages! Motion cannot be taught. It must be learned!!




    The fact that there is a difference in teaching and learning is one of the first things i have ever heard you type that I agree with. I say that often.



    Here is where you don't understand. This a golf swing forum. In it we discuss the minutia of what happens in the golf swing. I personally don't discuss intents because they are personal and vary fromnplayer to player. Nobody is saying that great players intents were wrong AS INTENTS. I am saying they were not actually what they were doing. Using their intents might work. Might not but if you actually achieve their intent it often times will be a disaster.




    . . . and what I am saying is what someone else’s feels, intents . . . and, likewise, whatever minutia is measured in a laboratory is irrelevant to anyone else trying to learn their motion.



    You can analyze complex motion in 2D, 3D or whatever ‘D’ you desire, but the more you continue to break it down into individual parts, the further you are giving chase down the rabbit hole.



    P.S. I believe we are in the golf ‘instruction’ portion of the forum; do not see golf ‘swing’ in title of current sub-forum.
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194






    One law of movement/biomechanics that both Koufax and drysdale share is that as their arm was still going back as they moved home and before they rotate, they were moving laterally forward toward home plate. Lot of different arm slots/planes but their are required commonalities.




    Standard commonalities, good, and some applicability to a swing transition perhaps, in my opinion. Now, is it a stretch, excuse the pun, to suggest the rib cage center would be trailing the pelvis center in this regard and discussion- a throw.
  • dapdap Members Posts: 2,556 ✭✭
    Getting back to the bump or not, you will find most top players in the world will have some lateral pelvis movement in the transition. Then there is someone like Sadlowski who is probably the longest pound for pound hitter ever with almost zero bump. You can argue he is not a top player but he does prove the bump is not required for power.
  • AFcelicaAFcelica Members Posts: 705 ✭✭
    Most fast pitchers would have their center of rib cage forward or at worst even with their pelvis at release point. Many of those would go from trailing to stacked in "transition"
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194


    There are swings from good players where the pivot doesn't decelerate until after impact. They are called pitch shots up to about 50 yards. Over that and I am almost willing to call it impossible to do and hit the golf ball.




    Why "almost willing", not sure?
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194
    edited Apr 14, 2018 #144
    AFcelica wrote:


    Most fast pitchers would have their center of rib cage forward or at worst even with their pelvis at release point. Many of those would go from trailing to stacked in "transition"




    Exactly, transitioning the throw would be a trailing relationship to the pelvis. Not an expert on throwing so not sure, and may not be an expert on swinging either, who is! So in a throw the pelvis works out from under the torso I would think, leaving the torso trailing for lack of a better description. I think it can go from trailing in transition to remaining trailing until release where it is then stacked. That was somewhat my point when discussing the AMG video, there are other efficient ways to move a club.
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194
    dap wrote:


    Getting back to the bump or not, you will find most top players in the world will have some lateral pelvis movement in the transition. Then there is someone like Sadlowski who is probably the longest pound for pound hitter ever with almost zero bump. You can argue he is not a top player but he does prove the bump is not required for power.




    Agree, bump not required for power.
  • golowgolow I Gots Issues Members Posts: 897 ✭✭
    AMG guys have been intentionally posting vids, IG posts and comments directed at GGs stuff for months. Sometimes they clearly understood but disagreed ... cool. A couple of instances they totally misunderstood what GG taught (could have been intentional). GG finally responds in his slapstick way and a thread is born.



    Best response from GG was "No one swings like this on tour but they will" ... he believes it to be efficient and repeatable I guess.



    Go look at all the swings from the kids and higher level players who work with Shaun Webb, Ft Worth, GG, Geoff Jones .... all phenomenal, go low, raise trophies etc.



    Discuss and dissect but criticizing to tear down or to make yourself feel better wears thin.



    Modern golf instruction is in the dark ages! Motion cannot be taught. It must be learned!! .... I love this BTW
  • AFcelicaAFcelica Members Posts: 705 ✭✭
    edited Apr 14, 2018 #147
    CoiledUP wrote:

    AFcelica wrote:


    Most fast pitchers would have their center of rib cage forward or at worst even with their pelvis at release point. Many of those would go from trailing to stacked in "transition"




    Exactly, transitioning the throw would be a trailing relationship to the pelvis. Not an expert on throwing so not sure, and may not be an expert on swinging either, who is! So in a throw the pelvis works out from under the torso I would think, leaving the torso trailing for lack of a better description. That was somewhat my point when discussing the AMG video, there are other efficient ways to move a club.




    No the torso leaves the pelvis trailing by the time the ball is released and is stacked on top of the pelvis around the time the arm starts moving forward. No one with any athletic ability would try to throw a ball keeping their torso trailing their pelvis.... maybe if they were trying to throw a ball over a 50 foot building standing just a few feet away but even then unlikely
  • CoiledUPCoiledUP Banned Posts: 194
    AFcelica wrote:

    CoiledUP wrote:

    AFcelica wrote:


    Most fast pitchers would have their center of rib cage forward or at worst even with their pelvis at release point. Many of those would go from trailing to stacked in "transition"




    Exactly, transitioning the throw would be a trailing relationship to the pelvis. Not an expert on throwing so not sure, and may not be an expert on swinging either, who is! So in a throw the pelvis works out from under the torso I would think, leaving the torso trailing for lack of a better description. That was somewhat my point when discussing the AMG video, there are other efficient ways to move a club.




    No the torso leaves the pelvis trailing by the time the ball is released and is stacked on top of the pelvis around the time the arm starts moving forward. No one with any athletic ability would try to throw a ball keeping their torso trailing their pelvis.... maybe if they were trying to throw a ball over a 50 foot building standing just a few feet away but even then unlikely




    That makes sense, thanks.
  • BottleCapBottleCap Members Posts: 1,329 ✭✭
    golow wrote:


    AMG guys have been intentionally posting vids, IG posts and comments directed at GGs stuff for months. Sometimes they clearly understood but disagreed ... cool. A couple of instances they totally misunderstood what GG taught (could have been intentional). GG finally responds in his slapstick way and a thread is born.



    Best response from GG was "No one swings like this on tour but they will" ... he believes it to be efficient and repeatable I guess.



    Go look at all the swings from the kids and higher level players who work with Shaun Webb, Ft Worth, GG, Geoff Jones .... all phenomenal, go low, raise trophies etc.



    Discuss and dissect but criticizing to tear down or to make yourself feel better wears thin.



    Modern golf instruction is in the dark ages! Motion cannot be taught. It must be learned!! .... I love this BTW




    That's not what the AMG guys do, they show movement captured on Gears and they compared it to the George Gankas signature moves.



    You can say their sample size is too small, but there is no misunderstanding.
    Titleist TS2 GD TourAD DI 7S
    Titleist 917 F3 GD TourAD IZ 8S
    Mizuno MP-18 MMC 3-4 DG AMT S300
    Mizuno MP-18 5-PW DG S400
    Vokey SM7 54M and 60M
    Cameron Newport 2 CT
    Bridgestone Tour B XS
  • golowgolow I Gots Issues Members Posts: 897 ✭✭
    BottleCap wrote:

    golow wrote:


    AMG guys have been intentionally posting vids, IG posts and comments directed at GGs stuff for months. Sometimes they clearly understood but disagreed ... cool. A couple of instances they totally misunderstood what GG taught (could have been intentional). GG finally responds in his slapstick way and a thread is born.



    Best response from GG was "No one swings like this on tour but they will" ... he believes it to be efficient and repeatable I guess.



    Go look at all the swings from the kids and higher level players who work with Shaun Webb, Ft Worth, GG, Geoff Jones .... all phenomenal, go low, raise trophies etc.



    Discuss and dissect but criticizing to tear down or to make yourself feel better wears thin.



    Modern golf instruction is in the dark ages! Motion cannot be taught. It must be learned!! .... I love this BTW




    That's not what the AMG guys do, they show movement captured on Gears and they compared it to the George Gankas signature moves.



    You can say their sample size is too small, but there is no misunderstanding.




    They misunderstood what GG taught not their own stuff
  • dapdap Members Posts: 2,556 ✭✭
    GG says "no one swings like this on tour but they will". That is going to be an awfully big claim to live up to.



    Snead did use a similar move but Sam also had plenty of lateral pelvis movement.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file