Single Plane Swing. Anyone tried it? Graves Golf/Moe Norman..

danattherockdanattherock Members Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭✭✭
Got an email about upcoming one day Graves Golf Academy single plane swing school in my area. Always was impressed by Moe Norman, but never thought about trying single plane swing, or Natural Golf, which appeared a similar thing in early 90’s. But I just took six years off from golf due to back injury and surgeries. Hit first balls these last two weeks, feeling optomistic. This single plane reportedley is easy on back, so figured I would at least explore the options further. Thanks for any thoughts.
«1

Comments

  • MountainGoatMountainGoat Mid-MarylandMembers Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    edited Jul 27, 2018 #2
    I studied it extensively and spent a week at the Graves Academy on OKC. It's interesting but not magic. The term "single plane" means different things to different people. To Graves, it means that the club starts on the same plane it is at impact. It does not mean the the club moves on a single plane. His approach has changed over the years, and some of what he teaches is the opposite of what he taught a decade ago. His book entitled, "The Single Plane Golf Swing" is quite good, though.



    The technique can be quite good for a bad back if done correctly. It can be quite hard on a bad back if done incorrectly.
  • BigEx44BigEx44 Members Posts: 308 ✭✭✭✭
    I used (or tried to use) a Moe Norman swing for about 10 yrs. Went to a few Todd Graves Golf Schools. That swing took me from being unable to break 100 to around a bogey golfer - but I got stuck there. I have since moved on to a more traditional swing (if you call Brian Sparks traditional...).



    So it's a legitimate way to hit a ball and a number of Todd's students have had great success with that swing. But like any swing I think - it's not for everybody.
  • nlk10010nlk10010 Members Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭
    OP: To follow up on what Mountain Goat said: Yes, from what I can see, there's a Moe Norman-type one-plane, which is extreme in that the club is supposed to stay on the plane determined by the address position of the player's shoulders and club, and there's a "Jim Hardy" type one-plane which is defined by the club at the top being (loosely) on the same plane as the shoulders. With the JH definition there are still two planes, one determined at address and one at the top, and the player is supposed to "drop" from one to the other in the downswing.



    In addition to Graves I believe Kurt Junge was involved in the Moe Norman one-plane school, although now he's operating separately. I tried Junge's approach and, despite his claims that it's easier on the back I found it to be in fact quite stressful (I'm a guy with very bad arthritis in my back, not your situation but bad enough). The reason for my post is that you MIGHT want to check out Jim Hardy's two-plane swing. It is supposed to be much less stressful and is often taught to older people with flexibility problems. The backswing is more vertical and is not used to torque the lower body. My instructor tried to teach it to me but it requires quite a high degree of timing and I could just never get it, especially since I cannot get my weight over to my lead side. But it might work for you. There aren't many two-plane videos on YT but there is an old one (I think it was posted by Golfzone) with a VERY good explanation by a guy from New Zealand that can give you an idea.
    "The company loves its money. If they could, they'd go to strip clubs and throw naked women at money."

    Professional golf swing crash test dummy. Please do not try at home (e.g. on a simulator) what you see me do on a closed course.

  • WILDTHINGWILDTHING Banned Posts: 621 ✭✭
    edited Jul 28, 2018 #5
    Graves book has some nice history about Moe and lots of pictures to try and replicate what Moe is doing. But imho he hasn't got a clue about physics of the golf swing and his 'explanations/reasoning' as to 'why' Moe did this or that just doesn't make any sense to me. He seems to be a golf theorist regarding cause and effect but can't back it up with any evidence, giving such a sense of 'vagueness' that you end up interpreting it yourself (to make some sense out of what he is saying). Frustrating book!!!!



    Example:



    Trail hand is set on the club in a non-rotational position as if you were about to skip a rock across water



    The hands are placed so the wrists can work together during the swing motion to move the clubface perfectly



    The clubhead (for a driver ) is placed about 5 to 12 inches behind the ball which allows the body to move forward to the impact position from its original starting place at address.



    Legs are relatively straight ; this makes it easier to turn into the backswing and allows the spine to tilt forward.



    Moe's arms were straight -pointing directly at the ball - This is a natural position for holding a club to hit a golf ball ; it is similar to a child holding a stick that he's going to use to hit a rock on the ground.



    His lead hand was neutral and trail hand non-rotational - This allowed for perfect clubface movement and minimal arm rotation.



    When the trail knee is bent in the conventional swing, its much more difficult to rotate your upper body. When your legs are straight . your backside is pushed behind you. This allows you to turn more freely. Your butt follows the rotation of your hips, but it does not move laterally.





    The above are some examples of 'vague' sentences littered throughout the book and just gives the impression he hasn't really got a clue to explain cause and effect in Moe's swing.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • danattherockdanattherock Members Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭✭✭
    edited Jul 28, 2018 #6
    Thanks guys, really appreciate the thoughts.



    My sole interest in this single plane is that it might be less stressful on my back. Overall, it tolerated hitting range balls a few times, and playing two rounds, in last two weeks. However, I am reminded today that I may need to pace myself, motrin for breakfast, and although I got a new set of irons from the brown truck yesterday evening, I am thinking I might take today off and try them out tomm. Longer than normal irons to allow more upright stance, and regular flex graphite shafts so I can swing easy and still get ball up and out there a bit. Feeling much older than 45 today, my main point.



    I too picked up on some vagueness in the many videos on youtube from Graves Golf. Seems this swing isnt for everyone, clearly. Without titanium rods in my back and limited flexibilty, I would never have considered it. Also, if being honest, at 6’6” 330 lbs, and a mainly bogey golfer in past, what do I really have to lose. One thing that makes me think it may suit my swing, I have always struggled with going back too soon around my body, similar to what videos appear to promote for single plane swing.



    Always hooked and pushed as a result, never sliced a ball in my life. I also have to remind myself to keep hands lower at address, always seem to be reaching out, quite similar to address single plane apparently wants. So who knows, might be a natural transition for me, fairly inside on backswing, limited turning, wanting to stand further from ball with extended hands/arms. Could be worth dabbling with tomm as I swing my new irons at range.
  • MillbrookMillbrook Members Posts: 1,720 ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    There is a Golf Magazine article by Mike Adams called Find Your Perfect Swing which demonstrates which backswing suits which body type/build. I would check this out before you decide. I have tried googling it but a bit short on time and could not find a link for you. Away for the weekend now but if you can't find it and want the pdf message me and I'll send it.



    Google him on youtube and you'll probably find a video there. Finding your own natural backswing is better than adopting one not suited to you.
    All comments are made from the point of
    view of my learning and not a claim
    to expertise.
  • danattherockdanattherock Members Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Thanks man, found it. Watching video now.
  • WILDTHINGWILDTHING Banned Posts: 621 ✭✭
    edited Jul 28, 2018 #9


    Thanks man, found it. Watching video now.




    The article is here



    http://online.fliphtml5.com/miyz/kvga/





    I actually used a complicated template (based on Ed Tischler/Mike Adams concepts) to measure my perfect swing biomechanics in great detail . I then compared it with my Shawn Clement perpetual swing to a target and it was almost a perfect match.



    So by swinging perpetually in balance without strain to a target seemed to default my body to using the correct biomechanics (if you let it).



    Note that one way to put strain on your back is to have lots of pelvic/torso separation which is why , if you look at Shawn Clements swing , his pelvis and upper body turn together. Shawn is not very flexible in the hamstring area and can't touch his toes (just like me with fingers still about 6 inches from the toes) but he has a very strain-free swing.



    Here is his swing from above and you will clearly see that his pelvis and upper body turn together.



    [media]
  • danattherockdanattherock Members Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Thanks, just saw two videos about it. Interesting.
  • gamesgames Argue for your limitations and they are yours. Des MoinesMembers Posts: 1,787 ✭✭✭✭✭✭


    Got an email about upcoming one day Graves Golf Academy single plane swing school in my area. Always was impressed by Moe Norman, but never thought about trying single plane swing, or Natural Golf, which appeared a similar thing in early 90's. But I just took six years off from golf due to back injury and surgeries. Hit first balls these last two weeks, feeling optomistic. This single plane reportedley is easy on back, so figured I would at least explore the options further. Thanks for any thoughts.




    If saving your back is a key goal, check out this NYT article:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/sports/golf/the-achilles-heel-of-too-many-golfers-a-bad-back.html



    A lot of good views from different perspectives, including Bryson DeChambeau's comment that one of the reasons he uses single length clubs is to prevent injury from varying his stance to accommodate different length clubs. There is also discussion of the book "Swing the Clubhead." You might want to check out "Understanding the Golf Swing" by the late Manuel de la Torre who was a disciple of Ernest Jones. The UGS swing is VERY simple and back-friendly.



    Good luck!
  • danattherockdanattherock Members Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭✭✭
    edited Jul 28, 2018 #12
    Thanks Games, really appreciate that. I have heard of Manuel De La Torre, but dont own any of his books. Will look into it, and thanks for link to article. Funny you mention Bryson, kid must be good. Keep hearing about him. Thats what happens when you take six year hiatus from golf. Lots of stars now, I never heard of. Spieth. Single length clubs. People are going nuts over Costco golf balls, yet nobody plays Precept Laddie or Maxfli Noodles anymore. John Daly is playing on Champions Tour. Thank god Lauren Thomson is still on The Golf Channel at least. Lol.
  • gamesgames Argue for your limitations and they are yours. Des MoinesMembers Posts: 1,787 ✭✭✭✭✭✭


    Thanks Games, really appreciate that. I have heard of Manuel De La Torre, but dont own any of his books. Will look into it, and thanks for link to article. Funny you mention Bryson, kid must be good. Keep hearing about him. Thats what happens when you take six year hiatus from golf. Lots of stars now, I never heard of. Spieth. Single length clubs. People are going nuts over Costco golf balls, yet nobody plays Precept Laddie or Maxfli Noodles anymore. John Daly is playing on Champions Tour. Thank god Lauren Thomson is still on The Golf Channel at least. Lol.




    I forgot to caveat my first post: People with rods and other implants should probably try to locate a doctor that specializes in athletics and back injuries for their input on a good golf swing.



    I don't think there is one instruction method that is better than another when it comes to saving your back. A good golf swing requires separation of upper body from the hips and lower body. To that end, if we maintain a consistent spine angle and sequence properly, I think we will all experience better golf, pain-free.



    Again, that's really simplistic and doesn't account for variables like rods, plates, and prior injury. That's why I think a doctor that specializes in sports-related non-impact spinal injury might be a good start. I bet they're out there!
  • AlexCzervicAlexCzervic Members Posts: 725 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Back issues?



    Stop leading with your pivot and it will react naturally.. Less effort, less pain, more distance.



    AC
  • aliikanealiikane Members Posts: 1,634 ✭✭✭✭✭✭


    I studied it extensively and spent a week at the Graves Academy on OKC. It's interesting but not magic. The term "single plane" means different things to different people. To Graves, it means that the club starts on the same plane it is at impact. It does not mean the the club moves on a single plane. His approach has changed over the years, and some of what he teaches is the opposite of what he taught a decade ago. His book entitled, "The Single Plane Golf Swing" is quite good, though.



    The technique can be quite good for a bad back if done correctly. It can be quite hard on a bad back if done incorrectly.




    I agree. I think a lot of people think whenever someone is talking about the plane of the golf swing, they are talking only about a single plane swing. That is not the case. Most golf swings are two plane. One plane being the setup plane and one plane being the swing plane (from top of golf swing to the finish). I remember once discussing that a player's swing wasn't on plane and he needed to correct it to several people and they kept thinking I was trying to change his swing to Bryson DeChambeau. Haha.
  • MountainGoatMountainGoat Mid-MarylandMembers Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    WILDTHING wrote:


    Graves book has some nice history about Moe and lots of pictures to try and replicate what Moe is doing. But imho he hasn't got a clue about physics of the golf swing and his 'explanations/reasoning' as to 'why' Moe did this or that just doesn't make any sense to me. He seems to be a golf theorist regarding cause and effect but can't back it up with any evidence, giving such a sense of 'vagueness' that you end up interpreting it yourself (to make some sense out of what he is saying). Frustrating book!!!!



    Example:



    Trail hand is set on the club in a non-rotational position as if you were about to skip a rock across water



    The hands are placed so the wrists can work together during the swing motion to move the clubface perfectly



    The clubhead (for a driver ) is placed about 5 to 12 inches behind the ball which allows the body to move forward to the impact position from its original starting place at address.



    Legs are relatively straight ; this makes it easier to turn into the backswing and allows the spine to tilt forward.



    Moe's arms were straight -pointing directly at the ball - This is a natural position for holding a club to hit a golf ball ; it is similar to a child holding a stick that he's going to use to hit a rock on the ground.



    His lead hand was neutral and trail hand non-rotational - This allowed for perfect clubface movement and minimal arm rotation.



    When the trail knee is bent in the conventional swing, its much more difficult to rotate your upper body. When your legs are straight . your backside is pushed behind you. This allows you to turn more freely. Your butt follows the rotation of your hips, but it does not move laterally.





    The above are some examples of 'vague' sentences littered throughout the book and just gives the impression he hasn't really got a clue to explain cause and effect in Moe's swing.




    Within the single plane community there is a general belief that the swing is somehow more efficient and easier to implement. Neither of these claims is supported by any evidence. I once reviewed a stack of notes that Jack Kuykendall had prepared on Moe's swing that attempted to describe the underlying physical principles, but his analysis was amateurish in my opinion. As far as Todd Graves is concerned, he's not interested in underlying physics; he's only interested in what Moe did. From his perspective, if Moe did it, it must be correct. No other analysis is needed. You don't question the master.



    Interestingly, over the course of my career I studied the single plane swing with several teachers, two of which traveled with Moe and claimed to have learned the underlying secrets. Those two teachers didn't agree with one another and taught different things. I found this frustrating and somewhat revealing. My swing today is far closer to the single plane swing that Jim Hardy teaches. There is some overlap with the swing Todd Graves teaches, but it's not the same by any means. Hardy never claims any lineage back to Moe.



    What's important about all of the single plane interpretations is that they're linear, not rotary. They're more of an arm/shoulder move on a solid foundation. The move isn't driven by the hips, it's supported by the lower body. The mistake a lot of people make is that they get into the high hands setup position and try to swing from the hips. That's fine if you're a long drive champion, but otherwise it's tough on the back.
  • WILDTHINGWILDTHING Banned Posts: 621 ✭✭
    edited Aug 3, 2018 #17
    Here is a video by Shawn Clement that may provide a better idea on the limitations of spine movement. Unsure whether it's totally accurate or not as I'm not a medical doctor but I never try to create pelvic/torso separation as it kills my lower back and am happy enough to consider the pelvis/torso as a unified turntable sitting on the hips.



    [media]







    PS. Been looking and asking questions about Moe Norman and apparently he set up aiming right of target at address but pulled the ball left (which made the ball go to the actual target), so was using an OTT move while still keeping the club path IN-SQUARE-IN. Seems like this was also something that Sam Snead used to do too. Looks like pivoting the upper body almost immediately (or before) the lower body pivot could very likely cause an OTT (if you didn't use a lot of right arm adduction combined with right shoulder down plane) , but the trick is still keeping that OTT path inside of ball target line (ie. ends up like a functional pull).
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • Todd GravesTodd Graves Members Posts: 5
    WILDTHING wrote:


    Graves book has some nice history about Moe and lots of pictures to try and replicate what Moe is doing. But imho he hasn't got a clue about physics of the golf swing and his 'explanations/reasoning' as to 'why' Moe did this or that just doesn't make any sense to me. He seems to be a golf theorist regarding cause and effect but can't back it up with any evidence, giving such a sense of 'vagueness' that you end up interpreting it yourself (to make some sense out of what he is saying). Frustrating book!!!!



    Example:



    Trail hand is set on the club in a non-rotational position as if you were about to skip a rock across water



    The hands are placed so the wrists can work together during the swing motion to move the clubface perfectly



    The clubhead (for a driver ) is placed about 5 to 12 inches behind the ball which allows the body to move forward to the impact position from its original starting place at address.



    Legs are relatively straight ; this makes it easier to turn into the backswing and allows the spine to tilt forward.



    Moe's arms were straight -pointing directly at the ball - This is a natural position for holding a club to hit a golf ball ; it is similar to a child holding a stick that he's going to use to hit a rock on the ground.



    His lead hand was neutral and trail hand non-rotational - This allowed for perfect clubface movement and minimal arm rotation.



    When the trail knee is bent in the conventional swing, its much more difficult to rotate your upper body. When your legs are straight . your backside is pushed behind you. This allows you to turn more freely. Your butt follows the rotation of your hips, but it does not move laterally.





    The above are some examples of 'vague' sentences littered throughout the book and just gives the impression he hasn't really got a clue to explain cause and effect in Moe's swing.




    Wild Thing,



    Go to Singleplane3D.com. This might answer some of your questions.



    As far as your critique of the book. The general nature of the Single Plane Golf Swing book is on purpose as not to confuse the reader with boring biomechanics data. For example the rotation of the trial hand as though skipping a rock is easier to interpret than saying the trail hand is rotated at 13 degrees as a function of the sidebend of the torso at 16 degrees.



    Regards.



    Todd Graves
  • Todd GravesTodd Graves Members Posts: 5
    WILDTHING wrote:


    Here is a video by Shawn Clement that may provide a better idea on the limitations of spine movement. Unsure whether it's totally accurate or not as I'm not a medical doctor but I never try to create pelvic/torso separation as it kills my lower back and am happy enough to consider the pelvis/torso as a unified turntable sitting on the hips.



    [media]







    PS. Been looking and asking questions about Moe Norman and apparently he set up aiming right of target at address but pulled the ball left (which made the ball go to the actual target), so was using an OTT move while still keeping the club path IN-SQUARE-IN. Seems like this was also something that Sam Snead used to do too. Looks like pivoting the upper body almost immediately (or before) the lower body pivot could very likely cause an OTT (if you didn't use a lot of right arm adduction combined with right shoulder down plane) , but the trick is still keeping that OTT path inside of ball target line (ie. ends up like a functional pull).




    Just for clarity. Moe did not align right. At address his torso is always OPEN to the target line. His feet, with irons was OPEN to the target line. With Driver, his TORSO was open to the target line, his feet were slightly CLOSED to the target line. This represented the radius of the ball position - similar to Ben Hogan's representation of Ball position.



    Todd
  • Todd GravesTodd Graves Members Posts: 5

    WILDTHING wrote:


    Graves book has some nice history about Moe and lots of pictures to try and replicate what Moe is doing. But imho he hasn't got a clue about physics of the golf swing and his 'explanations/reasoning' as to 'why' Moe did this or that just doesn't make any sense to me. He seems to be a golf theorist regarding cause and effect but can't back it up with any evidence, giving such a sense of 'vagueness' that you end up interpreting it yourself (to make some sense out of what he is saying). Frustrating book!!!!



    Example:



    Trail hand is set on the club in a non-rotational position as if you were about to skip a rock across water



    The hands are placed so the wrists can work together during the swing motion to move the clubface perfectly



    The clubhead (for a driver ) is placed about 5 to 12 inches behind the ball which allows the body to move forward to the impact position from its original starting place at address.



    Legs are relatively straight ; this makes it easier to turn into the backswing and allows the spine to tilt forward.



    Moe's arms were straight -pointing directly at the ball - This is a natural position for holding a club to hit a golf ball ; it is similar to a child holding a stick that he's going to use to hit a rock on the ground.



    His lead hand was neutral and trail hand non-rotational - This allowed for perfect clubface movement and minimal arm rotation.



    When the trail knee is bent in the conventional swing, its much more difficult to rotate your upper body. When your legs are straight . your backside is pushed behind you. This allows you to turn more freely. Your butt follows the rotation of your hips, but it does not move laterally.





    The above are some examples of 'vague' sentences littered throughout the book and just gives the impression he hasn't really got a clue to explain cause and effect in Moe's swing.




    Within the single plane community there is a general belief that the swing is somehow more efficient and easier to implement. Neither of these claims is supported by any evidence. I once reviewed a stack of notes that Jack Kuykendall had prepared on Moe's swing that attempted to describe the underlying physical principles, but his analysis was amateurish in my opinion. As far as Todd Graves is concerned, he's not interested in underlying physics; he's only interested in what Moe did. From his perspective, if Moe did it, it must be correct. No other analysis is needed. You don't question the master.



    Interestingly, over the course of my career I studied the single plane swing with several teachers, two of which traveled with Moe and claimed to have learned the underlying secrets. Those two teachers didn't agree with one another and taught different things. I found this frustrating and somewhat revealing. My swing today is far closer to the single plane swing that Jim Hardy teaches. There is some overlap with the swing Todd Graves teaches, but it's not the same by any means. Hardy never claims any lineage back to Moe.



    What's important about all of the single plane interpretations is that they're linear, not rotary. They're more of an arm/shoulder move on a solid foundation. The move isn't driven by the hips, it's supported by the lower body. The mistake a lot of people make is that they get into the high hands setup position and try to swing from the hips. That's fine if you're a long drive champion, but otherwise it's tough on the back.




    If you would like a detailed representation of the Single Plane swing, go to Singleplane3d.com.



    Todd
  • Todd GravesTodd Graves Members Posts: 5


    Got an email about upcoming one day Graves Golf Academy single plane swing school in my area. Always was impressed by Moe Norman, but never thought about trying single plane swing, or Natural Golf, which appeared a similar thing in early 90's. But I just took six years off from golf due to back injury and surgeries. Hit first balls these last two weeks, feeling optomistic. This single plane reportedley is easy on back, so figured I would at least explore the options further. Thanks for any thoughts.




    Hello Major winner,



    Regarding how the Moe Norman / GGA Single Plane Swing is easier on the back let me provide a bit of detail. The Conventional (two-plane) swing produces and upward pelvis movement of approximately 2 to 3 inches. This is due to the straightening of the lead leg into impact and rotation of the pelvis and torso causing compression and shear. This upward push is a result (caused) because of the address position of the arms hanging below the shoulders at address. When the club moves around the body during the swing it attempts to lift and align with the arms. Space between the body and ball is needed and the body lifts.



    On the other hand, the Single Plane Swing that I teach offers a simple solution, flex the lead knee into impact and move the pelvis downwards as opposed to upward. When the pelvis moves down, it removes the compression of the spine. To do this however, you will need to address the ball on a Single Plane or the same plane you impact, that way you will be spatially correct to strike the ball. This is a brief synopsis of why the Single Plane swing takes stress off of the back.



    Regards.



    Todd Graves
  • Todd GravesTodd Graves Members Posts: 5



    Got an email about upcoming one day Graves Golf Academy single plane swing school in my area. Always was impressed by Moe Norman, but never thought about trying single plane swing, or Natural Golf, which appeared a similar thing in early 90's. But I just took six years off from golf due to back injury and surgeries. Hit first balls these last two weeks, feeling optomistic. This single plane reportedley is easy on back, so figured I would at least explore the options further. Thanks for any thoughts.




    Hello Major winner,



    Regarding how the Moe Norman / GGA Single Plane Swing is easier on the back let me provide a bit of detail. The Conventional (two-plane) swing produces and upward pelvis movement of approximately 2 to 3 inches. This is due to the straightening of the lead leg into impact and rotation of the pelvis and torso causing compression and shear. This upward push is a result (caused) because of the address position of the arms hanging below the shoulders at address. When the club moves around the body during the swing it attempts to lift and align with the arms. Space between the body and ball is needed and the body lifts.



    On the other hand, the Single Plane Swing that I teach offers a simple solution, flex the lead knee into impact and move the pelvis downwards as opposed to upward. When the pelvis moves down, it removes the compression of the spine. To do this however, you will need to address the ball on a Single Plane or the same plane you impact, that way you will be spatially correct to strike the ball. This is a brief synopsis of why the Single Plane swing takes stress off of the back.



    Regards.



    Todd Graves




    I studied it extensively and spent a week at the Graves Academy on OKC. It's interesting but not magic. The term "single plane" means different things to different people. To Graves, it means that the club starts on the same plane it is at impact. It does not mean the the club moves on a single plane. His approach has changed over the years, and some of what he teaches is the opposite of what he taught a decade ago. His book entitled, "The Single Plane Golf Swing" is quite good, though.



    The technique can be quite good for a bad back if done correctly. It can be quite hard on a bad back if done incorrectly.




    All swings are bad on the back if done incorrectly. Lol.
  • N0rs3manN0rs3man Members Posts: 70 ✭✭

    I read Todd graves reply and thought... wow finally someone who gets it... I then saw it was Todd graves and was like of course lol.

    PXG 0811XF Gen. 2 HZRDUS ProjectX shaft
    King Cobra ROUGE X shaft woods
    Sterling single length irons
    Random putter

  • KtophKtoph Members Posts: 1

    Dan,
    I want you to get some good information out of this thread, and you haven’t gotten much worthwhile advice.
    You asked if Todd’s swing instruction would help relieve a bad back.
    It will.
    Todd does an excellent job explaining why it works in many of his videos, but the truth is that you really need to implement all of the elements of the swing for it to be effective. It is VERY different than a conventional swing, and it takes awhile to understand the differences and apply them. It’s especially difficult if you have a lot of years under your belt swinging conventionally.
    The explanations above of Todd’s swing are pretty inaccurate, so take them with a grain of salt.
    I highly recommended that you give the swing a try. It works, and it does take pressure and strain off your back.
    Also, if you have the chance, just watch Todd hit a few balls. It’s pretty incredible and you’ll be sold. First time I saw him was in Texas for a Natural golf clinic. The wind was howling in our face and Todd was striping shot after shot dead straight effortlessly. In that kind of wind even the slightest bit of side spin would cause shots to go massively offline. It was unbelievable.
    His method works.
    I hope you find a way that enables you to play and enjoy the game the way you deserve.

  • oikos1oikos1 Members Posts: 2,319 ✭✭✭✭✭✭

    I would imagine Todd Graves has mastered his craft. The query is are you and Graves Golf Academy students striping shot after shot dead straight effortlessly into a howling wind?

  • MountainGoatMountainGoat Mid-MarylandMembers Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭✭✭✭

    @oikos1 said:
    I would imagine Todd Graves has mastered his craft. The query is are you and Graves Golf Academy students striping shot after shot dead straight effortlessly into a howling wind?

    This is the essential question. I got plastered above for sharing my experience with NG in general and Graves in particular. Todd hits it great. But, I have yet to see anyone else successfully master the technique. Let's face it, courses today aren't filled with satisfied Natural Golf adherents smashing the ball down the middle with every swing.
    However, it is a different way to hit the ball, and it is easier on the back. That much is true.

  • danattherockdanattherock Members Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭✭✭

    I have learned a lot since starting this post last year. Thought I would chime in on my perspective for folks interested in graves golf, Bryson DeChambeau, or Kirk Junges Settup 4 impact single plane swing.

    Last two lines above from mountain goat are spot on, regarding single plane. Lots of branding involved here, but graves Moe Norman approach, or Bryson DeChambeau, or my path with Kirk Junges Settup 4 impact, they are all more similar than not. Kirk may be a former instructor for graves golf, if I recall. The methods are similar, but at same time they are not.

    If I was a good golfer and healthy, I wouldn't be doing a single plane swing most likely. But I was a longtime bogey golfer and had back injured in car crash. Single plane swing is allowing me to play golf again, and much better than I could have dreamed. So now, ironically, my wife is switching over to Settup 4 impact, and my 6 year old son learning the game, tempted to have him learn the same. It's simple and effective.

    I went with Kirk Junges Settup 4 impact single plane swing after seeing his YouTube channel. Mainly because he has a certified instructor, Tony Griffin in Sanford NC, that's near where I live. Just had my second lesson last week, highly impressed with Tony and the single plane swing. One thing that helped me was getting jumbomax grips put on, allowed gripping more in palms so much easier. I went with their medium, which is huge. I would suggest getting a trial pack of 2-3 grips before ordering a set.

    Casual observation, and I could be mistaken as I'm fairly new to this. But graves appears to have a very rigid must follow every step to be like Moe Norman type of approach. Kirk Junges Settup 4 impact has more open approach, customizations he calls it, for various aspects of the swing, grip for example has some leeway. At 6'6" 350 lbs, with bad back, Kirk's methods appeal to me. Kirk has several videos that show variances in his Settup 4 impact vs Graves Golf moe Norman swing.

    Going to either in person for 1:1 or golf school would be great, but many folks might find that difficult. With graves, I initially looked into, you will get lots of junk email and buy numerous DVDs and training aids they push, if trying to learn at home. I got few hundred bucks worth of such graves items. Initially planned on graves 2-3 day school but schedule didn't work out. Few weeks later I saw Tony Griffin here in central NC, Kirk Junges Settup 4 impact certified instructor.

    With Kirk Junges Settup 4 impact, you will want to join his website, plugged on every YouTube video he has. His website has paid member features, $139 for lifetime, monthly and yearly options also. There you will find detailed videos on how to do his swing. His free YouTube videos are not detailed enough in my opinion, by design, and serve as clickbait to get folks to join his website. One cool feature, members can send in all the swing videos they want, Kirk will evaluate and make suggestions and respond. So there is some ongoing support for those going at it at home.

    In either case, if you are not a good golfer after trying the conventional golf swing, or have back or other health issues, limited flexibility, obesity, etc, the single plane swing is undoubtedly my suggestion to you. It's easy to learn, has few moving parts relatively speaking, and is far easier on the back and joints. If I can do it, anyone can. Literally. I gave up the game, after life long obsession, nearly 7 years ago due to injury and poor health. Anyone reading, I am certain would master the single plane swing faster than I.

  • oikos1oikos1 Members Posts: 2,319 ✭✭✭✭✭✭

    "If I was a good golfer and healthy, I wouldn't be doing a single plane swing most likely. But I was a longtime bogey golfer and had back injured in car crash. Single plane swing is allowing me to play golf again, and much better than I could have dreamed."

    Perspective, enlightenment and better golf? Fantastic and good on you. Your coordinates most likely are difficult to find within the wrx matrix.

  • SEP1006SEP1006 Pearland, Tx.ClubWRX Posts: 991 ClubWRX

    Well just to chime in and give my "who gives a s**t" opinion. I am a healthy and in great physical shape decent ( 8 - 10 hcp ) golfer and swapped to the Dechambeau method a couple of weeks ago. I also added the Jumbomax medium grips ( they are awesome ).

    My scores have stayed the same even with the swing change so I am very optimistic on dropping my hcp even lower after some more time with this method. To ME this swing method is so much simpler and easier to repeat. Been watching every video analysis I can and picking up little tidbits of info. Also been watching Kirk Junges You Tube channel as well.

    Danattherock - question for you. With me using the Dechambeau method do you think it would be worthwhile for me to pay the subscription for Kirk's website? Been thinking about it anyway but just curious.



    Taylor Made M6 10.5 * | Ventus 6s
    Taylor Made M4 | Graphite Design IZ-7s
    Adams Pro A12 -  2 / 3 / 4 Hybrids | UST Mamiya Silver
    PXG Gen 2 0311P 5 - GW | Accra Tour 100i Stiff
    Ping Stealth Glide 2.0 54-12 / 58-06 Wedges | Wedge Flex
    JumboMax Medium grips on ALL - Dechambeau-ing it baby!!!!!
    PXG Gunboat H Putter
    PXG Staff Bag
    Snell MTB Black
  • Snowman9000Snowman9000 Members Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    edited Aug 12, 2019 1:23pm #30

    I've written before about my experience with a bad back and the Moe swing. I'll keep this as short as I can.
    15 years ago I decided I had to find a new way to swing because golf was hurting my back. I typically shot upper 90s, so my swing was definitely flawed. I tried Natural Golf, and found my back pain went away. Obviously, your mileage may vary. My scores dropped by 12 strokes give or take. 15 years later, I'm still using it, still pain free, and my index is 10.

    I've had to be my own coach for the most part. I have a lot of Graves materials, and subscribe to Kirk Junge's site. My swing is extremely similar to the Junge swing. If you can go to a teacher early on, it will be a big help. It's still a golf swing; it's simpler than most, but not simple. It's very setup dependent. Make a mistake or an "I don't like doing ____, so I'm going to do ____ instead" in the setup, and you'll start a cascade of alterations to try to compensate. BTDT, many times. I always have to come back to getting the setup right. I'm mentally lazy wrt golf. When I am playing real well, I will stop thinking about my setup, and within a week or two I crash and burn. And have to get back to focusing on my setup. (Usually my grip gets too strong.) This happens every season, lol.

    Driver 915 D2
    5W Wilson Fybrid
    4h, 5h, 6h Adams Idea Tech 2015
    6-AW Snake Eyes Viper MS, graphite
    58º Callaway MD2 Forged S grind
    Odyssey Jailbird Mini
  • danattherockdanattherock Members Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭✭✭

    @SEP1006 said:
    Well just to chime in and give my "who gives a s**t" opinion. I am a healthy and in great physical shape decent ( 8 - 10 hcp ) golfer and swapped to the Dechambeau method a couple of weeks ago. I also added the Jumbomax medium grips ( they are awesome ).

    My scores have stayed the same even with the swing change so I am very optimistic on dropping my hcp even lower after some more time with this method. To ME this swing method is so much simpler and easier to repeat. Been watching every video analysis I can and picking up little tidbits of info. Also been watching Kirk Junges You Tube channel as well.

    Danattherock - question for you. With me using the Dechambeau method do you think it would be worthwhile for me to pay the subscription for Kirk's website? Been thinking about it anyway but just curious.

    Absolutely, I would subscribe. For a few months, just to learn from the videos and ensure setup, grip, etc were right. Kirk has lots of videos specific to Bryson's swing, so I suspect many parallels between the two swings. Bryson's is not quite the same however, as I understand it. But I would think Kirk's methods are as close as you will find for public consumption. A few months of subscription is very cheap, watch all the videos, make notes and illustrations, would be my suggestion.

Leave a Comment

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