Hogan's Power Source & Right Elbow

So I was recently given a series of tapes called 'Gravity Golf' made years ago by some gentlemen (David Lee) who actually speaks very clearly on the topic of the evolution of the swing. Firstly, please don't think 'gravity' above means anything other than simply what many teachers advise today which is that the club should be leveraged with gravity helping and with as little upper body 'help' as possible.

To get into the meat of my question though I should state that Lee makes clear that Hogan added power to a swing that was fundamentally limited because of an initially tucked right elbow. I've always tried to tuck my right elbow through the transition to lag the club and re-route the club but Lee advises that Hogan limited his arc somewhat (compared to say, Nicklaus) by attempted to feel as though his right upper-arm was connection to his body from the beginning of the swing...interesting!

Trying this, I noted that enhancing the connection between the body and the right elbow during the take-away INSTANTLY produces Hogan's uniquely flattened swing plane, btw. The swing instantly becomes tighter, more around the body and much more from the inside.

My question then became, well how does this produce great golf? Surely this isn't a powerful swing because the swing arc is surely cut by not allowing the same freedom through the right arm. The whole 'flying elbow' idea is contrary to this. Interestingly enough, let's not argue about that because Nicklaus himself argued against the idea and insisted it was a misinterpretation of the appearance of his swing.

However, Lee explains that it was Hogan's dedication and tireless work ethic and routine that maintained this swing as well as his immense forearm and hand strength rather than his swing which produced his notable length.

By comparison, Lee explains how Nicklaus, Couples and others use a much easier swing which allows for a much more efficient use of power. It's more upright, easier to flight the ball high, easier to drive, easier to hit long irons and ultimately holds up better under pressure as well. There is no better evidence than Nicklaus record of course in both tournaments, majors and obviously, too, his time at Augusta National.

How do you all who've studied Hogan feel with regard to this topic. Now, let me assure you that David Lee is no hack here. He's not some young hot-shot selling anything but rather an experience instructor (in his late 50s at the time) who is simply trying to advise on the ease of Nicklaus' method as opposed to the 'Gospel According to Hogan' that seems to have taken over amongst the majority. He references the 'tension' that was introduced to him when he was introduced to the game through 'position golf' which spurred from a Hogan-esque view of the swing.

Interestingly enough, one of the comments I remember Nicklaus giving on Hogan was that 'what was important was that he found something that worked for him.' To me, that sounds like Jack is quietly tipping his cap to a player who found success through an alternative method but also one that Jack understands all too well requires too much effort and timing. ;) I almost had to laugh remembering that comment because it sort of takes on a new light if you think to yourself...maybe Jack was on the more correct path.

When I look at Hogan's right arm, to me it looks like it's where it should be. At least given his swing model and how he generates his power. Hogan wasn't known for lacking any power. Basically it sounds like Lee prefers Nicklaus' swing model over Hogan's. That's fine, to each their own. I don't agree that the Hogan model is limited though. Just having more width or a longer swing doesn't equal better or more powerful.

Personally, as a swing theory hobbyist, this topic is really the crux of all golf theory in the last 70 years i think.
probably the most confusing element in discussions are the incredibly different analyses from different people when they look at the same golf swing.
it often seems noone really knows anything really.
some thoughts:
If the Nicklaus swing was better for reliability etc, why is it no longer used or taught?
e.g. Johnny Miller completely lost it for no reason and never found it again.
Hogan did not keep his upper right arm against his side on takeaway, why the myth that he did is so perpetuated i don't know.
Hogan had quite a wide takeaway. see pic here for example.
[attachment=1084476:Ben_Hogan_fronton_105_takeaway.jpg]

I think Vijay Singh ruined his swing by over-emphasising the upper arms tied to the torso.
Free wide arms certainly give a lot of power - IF you can control them in the downswing.
Swing evolution - Bobby Jones and all the old school guys --> Hogan and Snead and Byron Nelson --> Nicklaus and the '70's --> then it all came back to Hogan in a sense when Mark O'Meara was hot for a while in the '80's.
why?
i think its the search for reliability which means money for pros.
think of the many good golfers who just lost it.
Johnny Miller
Ian Baker-Finch
David Duval
Bob Rogers (completely forgotten nowadays, most vertical left arm you could ever see).
and many more......

I only saw Nicklaus once in person here in Aus when he was older.
quite honestly i was not impressed, he looked ike he was really struggling with his swing,
that sort of action you see when he last won the Masters, a sort of prop and hit with the arms/hands.
so different to Hogan in his later years who still looked wonderful and so fluid.

I actually think Greg Norman (also largely forgotten as a swing model) was the transition from the Nicklaus era to modern times.
he was more rotational and had a lower left arm position at the top and was one of the best ball strikers EVER,
i am biased because i saw a lot of him in the '80's and he was absolutely amazing.

most of us are not born with the innate physical ability to control our bodies the way Bobby Jones did,
and include Mike Austin, John Daley, Lee Trevino, Jim Furyk and lots of other "naturals".
so the search is for a golf swing theory that will work for a very average person.
does it exist? i don't know.
how come its so difficult for most of us? i don't know that either.
Stack and Tilt has come out of this search for something easier and reliable.
i wonder what the next big theory will be.
the problem i guess is the golfer, not the particular swing style he attempts.

I'm no golf expert but to me Hogan's swing works well. I have more control and consistency in my golf swing. I think it is more mental on how you swing and where your brain tells you what it is that you are most comfortable with.

 

On the contrary, you can also free up your mind and just swing away!!!

[quote name='Pinsplitter59' timestamp='1332535498' post='4565138']
Personally, as a swing theory hobbyist, this topic is really the crux of all golf theory in the last 70 years i think.
probably the most confusing element in discussions are the incredibly different analyses from different people when they look at the same golf swing.
it often seems noone really knows anything really.
some thoughts:
If the Nicklaus swing was better for reliability etc, why is it no longer used or taught?
e.g. Johnny Miller completely lost it for no reason and never found it again.
Hogan did not keep his upper right arm against his side on takeaway, why the myth that he did is so perpetuated i don't know.
Hogan had quite a wide takeaway. see pic here for example.
[attachment=1084476:Ben_Hogan_fronton_105_takeaway.jpg]

I think Vijay Singh ruined his swing by over-emphasising the upper arms tied to the torso.
Free wide arms certainly give a lot of power - IF you can control them in the downswing.
Swing evolution - Bobby Jones and all the old school guys --> Hogan and Snead and Byron Nelson --> Nicklaus and the '70's --> then it all came back to Hogan in a sense when Mark O'Meara was hot for a while in the '80's.
why?
i think its the search for reliability which means money for pros.
think of the many good golfers who just lost it.
Johnny Miller
Ian Baker-Finch
David Duval
Bob Rogers (completely forgotten nowadays, most vertical left arm you could ever see).
and many more......

I only saw Nicklaus once in person here in Aus when he was older.
quite honestly i was not impressed, he looked ike he was really struggling with his swing,
that sort of action you see when he last won the Masters, a sort of prop and hit with the arms/hands.
so different to Hogan in his later years who still looked wonderful and so fluid.

I actually think Greg Norman (also largely forgotten as a swing model) was the transition from the Nicklaus era to modern times.
he was more rotational and had a lower left arm position at the top and was one of the best ball strikers EVER,
i am biased because i saw a lot of him in the '80's and he was absolutely amazing.

most of us are not born with the innate physical ability to control our bodies the way Bobby Jones did,
and include Mike Austin, John Daley, Lee Trevino, Jim Furyk and lots of other "naturals".
so the search is for a golf swing theory that will work for a very average person.
does it exist? i don't know.
how come its so difficult for most of us? i don't know that either.
Stack and Tilt has come out of this search for something easier and reliable.
i wonder what the next big theory will be.
the problem i guess is the golfer, not the particular swing style he attempts.
[/quote]


Alright, good thoughts, especially on Norman who I always thought was a great disciple of Nicklaus and a great spokesperson for that lineage. Watching Tiger drive the ball at Augusta in '97 as well totally reminds me of Norman, too. At that point Woods had a very Norman-esque was of 'lashing' the driver through impact which he's clearly strayed from in more recent times. Unless I'm wrong, I would figure that the mentality he often has with the driver then fit his swing more so than now in addition to the additional club length. Different conversation though...

[quote name='MelloYello' timestamp='1332507479' post='4562134']
So I was recently given a series of tapes called 'Gravity Golf' made years ago by some gentlemen (David Lee) who actually speaks very clearly on the topic of the evolution of the swing. Firstly, please don't think 'gravity' above means anything other than simply what many teachers advise today which is that the club should be leveraged with gravity helping and with as little upper body 'help' as possible.

To get into the meat of my question though I should state that Lee makes clear that Hogan added power to a swing that was fundamentally limited because of an initially tucked right elbow. I've always tried to tuck my right elbow through the transition to lag the club and re-route the club but Lee advises that Hogan limited his arc somewhat (compared to say, Nicklaus) by attempted to feel as though his right upper-arm was connection to his body from the beginning of the swing...interesting!

Trying this, I noted that enhancing the connection between the body and the right elbow during the take-away INSTANTLY produces Hogan's uniquely flattened swing plane, btw. The swing instantly becomes tighter, more around the body and much more from the inside.

My question then became, well how does this produce great golf? Surely this isn't a powerful swing because the swing arc is surely cut by not allowing the same freedom through the right arm. The whole 'flying elbow' idea is contrary to this. Interestingly enough, let's not argue about that because Nicklaus himself argued against the idea and insisted it was a misinterpretation of the appearance of his swing.

However, Lee explains that it was Hogan's dedication and tireless work ethic and routine that maintained this swing as well as his immense forearm and hand strength rather than his swing which produced his notable length.

By comparison, Lee explains how Nicklaus, Couples and others use a much easier swing which allows for a much more efficient use of power. It's more upright, easier to flight the ball high, easier to drive, easier to hit long irons and ultimately holds up better under pressure as well. There is no better evidence than Nicklaus record of course in both tournaments, majors and obviously, too, his time at Augusta National.

How do you all who've studied Hogan feel with regard to this topic. Now, let me assure you that David Lee is no hack here. He's not some young hot-shot selling anything but rather an experience instructor (in his late 50s at the time) who is simply trying to advise on the ease of Nicklaus' method as opposed to the 'Gospel According to Hogan' that seems to have taken over amongst the majority. He references the 'tension' that was introduced to him when he was introduced to the game through 'position golf' which spurred from a Hogan-esque view of the swing.

Interestingly enough, one of the comments I remember Nicklaus giving on Hogan was that 'what was important was that he found something that worked [i]for him[/i].' To me, that sounds like Jack is quietly tipping his cap to a player who found success through an alternative method but also one that Jack understands all too well requires too much effort and timing. I almost had to laugh remembering that comment because it sort of takes on a new light if you think to yourself...maybe Jack was on the more correct path.
[/quote]

Upper R arm connection is for consistency.

Swing arc is not limited since L arm and clubshaft didn't shorten at all.

The tucked R elbow actually gives more freedom for R arm to push/pull and allows maximum possible L wristcock and its retention (i.e., lag).

[quote name='hogangolf101' timestamp='1332918429' post='4597029']
[quote name='MelloYello' timestamp='1332507479' post='4562134']
So I was recently given a series of tapes called 'Gravity Golf' made years ago by some gentlemen (David Lee) who actually speaks very clearly on the topic of the evolution of the swing. Firstly, please don't think 'gravity' above means anything other than simply what many teachers advise today which is that the club should be leveraged with gravity helping and with as little upper body 'help' as possible.

To get into the meat of my question though I should state that Lee makes clear that Hogan added power to a swing that was fundamentally limited because of an initially tucked right elbow. I've always tried to tuck my right elbow through the transition to lag the club and re-route the club but Lee advises that Hogan limited his arc somewhat (compared to say, Nicklaus) by attempted to feel as though his right upper-arm was connection to his body from the beginning of the swing...interesting!

Trying this, I noted that enhancing the connection between the body and the right elbow during the take-away INSTANTLY produces Hogan's uniquely flattened swing plane, btw. The swing instantly becomes tighter, more around the body and much more from the inside.

My question then became, well how does this produce great golf? Surely this isn't a powerful swing because the swing arc is surely cut by not allowing the same freedom through the right arm. The whole 'flying elbow' idea is contrary to this. Interestingly enough, let's not argue about that because Nicklaus himself argued against the idea and insisted it was a misinterpretation of the appearance of his swing.

However, Lee explains that it was Hogan's dedication and tireless work ethic and routine that maintained this swing as well as his immense forearm and hand strength rather than his swing which produced his notable length.

By comparison, Lee explains how Nicklaus, Couples and others use a much easier swing which allows for a much more efficient use of power. It's more upright, easier to flight the ball high, easier to drive, easier to hit long irons and ultimately holds up better under pressure as well. There is no better evidence than Nicklaus record of course in both tournaments, majors and obviously, too, his time at Augusta National.

How do you all who've studied Hogan feel with regard to this topic. Now, let me assure you that David Lee is no hack here. He's not some young hot-shot selling anything but rather an experience instructor (in his late 50s at the time) who is simply trying to advise on the ease of Nicklaus' method as opposed to the 'Gospel According to Hogan' that seems to have taken over amongst the majority. He references the 'tension' that was introduced to him when he was introduced to the game through 'position golf' which spurred from a Hogan-esque view of the swing.

Interestingly enough, one of the comments I remember Nicklaus giving on Hogan was that 'what was important was that he found something that worked [i]for him[/i].' To me, that sounds like Jack is quietly tipping his cap to a player who found success through an alternative method but also one that Jack understands all too well requires too much effort and timing. I almost had to laugh remembering that comment because it sort of takes on a new light if you think to yourself...maybe Jack was on the more correct path.
[/quote]

Upper R arm connection is for consistency.

Swing arc is not limited since L arm and clubshaft didn't shorten at all.

The tucked R elbow actually gives more freedom for R arm to push/pull and allows maximum possible L wristcock and its retention (i.e., lag).
[/quote]

I agree.

After a few days at home constantly working to feel the motion I was able to retrieve my re-gripped clubs and head to the range.

I was very surprised to find the flatter motion work really well. My key will have to be swing smoothly and allowing time in the transition to get the club down where I can turn naturally without getting stuck and blocking it or chunking it but the ball's flight was surprisingly nice with a little draw or a little fade most of the time.

It seems that the Hogan-esque 'leveraging' of the club for power and consistency is amazingly simple really given a tension-free swing.

[quote name='Pinsplitter59' timestamp='1332535498' post='4565138']
[size=4]it often seems noone really knows anything really.[/size]
[size=4][/quote][/size]
[size=4]Yes. [/size]
[size=4]Yes it does.[/size]
[size=4][/size]

So I was recently given a series of tapes called 'Gravity Golf' made years ago by some gentlemen (David Lee) who actually speaks very clearly on the topic of the evolution of the swing. Firstly, please don't think 'gravity' above means anything other than simply what many teachers advise today which is that the club should be leveraged with gravity helping and with as little upper body 'help' as possible.

 

To get into the meat of my question though I should state that Lee makes clear that Hogan added power to a swing that was fundamentally limited because of an initially tucked right elbow. I've always tried to tuck my right elbow through the transition to lag the club and re-route the club but Lee advises that Hogan limited his arc somewhat (compared to say, Nicklaus) by attempted to feel as though his right upper-arm was connection to his body from the beginning of the swing...interesting!

 

Trying this, I noted that enhancing the connection between the body and the right elbow during the take-away INSTANTLY produces Hogan's uniquely flattened swing plane, btw. The swing instantly becomes tighter, more around the body and much more from the inside.

 

My question then became, well how does this produce great golf? Surely this isn't a powerful swing because the swing arc is surely cut by not allowing the same freedom through the right arm. The whole 'flying elbow' idea is contrary to this. Interestingly enough, let's not argue about that because Nicklaus himself argued against the idea and insisted it was a misinterpretation of the appearance of his swing.

 

However, Lee explains that it was Hogan's dedication and tireless work ethic and routine that maintained this swing as well as his immense forearm and hand strength rather than his swing which produced his notable length.

 

By comparison, Lee explains how Nicklaus, Couples and others use a much easier swing which allows for a much more efficient use of power. It's more upright, easier to flight the ball high, easier to drive, easier to hit long irons and ultimately holds up better under pressure as well. There is no better evidence than Nicklaus record of course in both tournaments, majors and obviously, too, his time at Augusta National.

 

How do you all who've studied Hogan feel with regard to this topic. Now, let me assure you that David Lee is no hack here. He's not some young hot-shot selling anything but rather an experience instructor (in his late 50s at the time) who is simply trying to advise on the ease of Nicklaus' method as opposed to the 'Gospel According to Hogan' that seems to have taken over amongst the majority. He references the 'tension' that was introduced to him when he was introduced to the game through 'position golf' which spurred from a Hogan-esque view of the swing.

 

Interestingly enough, one of the comments I remember Nicklaus giving on Hogan was that 'what was important was that he found something that worked for him.' To me, that sounds like Jack is quietly tipping his cap to a player who found success through an alternative method but also one that Jack understands all too well requires too much effort and timing. I almost had to laugh remembering that comment because it sort of takes on a new light if you think to yourself...maybe Jack was on the more correct path.

 

The elbow is not pinned in the bs, the humerus is tamed. Hogans swing was considerably more efficient, Jack had 70+lbs on Hogan and was only slightly longer. Also, there is no timing in Hogans swing. The alignments and tensions are perfect.

So I was recently given a series of tapes called 'Gravity Golf' made years ago by some gentlemen (David Lee) who actually speaks very clearly on the topic of the evolution of the swing. Firstly, please don't think 'gravity' above means anything other than simply what many teachers advise today which is that the club should be leveraged with gravity helping and with as little upper body 'help' as possible.

 

To get into the meat of my question though I should state that Lee makes clear that Hogan added power to a swing that was fundamentally limited because of an initially tucked right elbow. I've always tried to tuck my right elbow through the transition to lag the club and re-route the club but Lee advises that Hogan limited his arc somewhat (compared to say, Nicklaus) by attempted to feel as though his right upper-arm was connection to his body from the beginning of the swing...interesting!

 

Trying this, I noted that enhancing the connection between the body and the right elbow during the take-away INSTANTLY produces Hogan's uniquely flattened swing plane, btw. The swing instantly becomes tighter, more around the body and much more from the inside.

 

My question then became, well how does this produce great golf? Surely this isn't a powerful swing because the swing arc is surely cut by not allowing the same freedom through the right arm. The whole 'flying elbow' idea is contrary to this. Interestingly enough, let's not argue about that because Nicklaus himself argued against the idea and insisted it was a misinterpretation of the appearance of his swing.

 

However, Lee explains that it was Hogan's dedication and tireless work ethic and routine that maintained this swing as well as his immense forearm and hand strength rather than his swing which produced his notable length.

 

By comparison, Lee explains how Nicklaus, Couples and others use a much easier swing which allows for a much more efficient use of power. It's more upright, easier to flight the ball high, easier to drive, easier to hit long irons and ultimately holds up better under pressure as well. There is no better evidence than Nicklaus record of course in both tournaments, majors and obviously, too, his time at Augusta National.

 

How do you all who've studied Hogan feel with regard to this topic. Now, let me assure you that David Lee is no hack here. He's not some young hot-shot selling anything but rather an experience instructor (in his late 50s at the time) who is simply trying to advise on the ease of Nicklaus' method as opposed to the 'Gospel According to Hogan' that seems to have taken over amongst the majority. He references the 'tension' that was introduced to him when he was introduced to the game through 'position golf' which spurred from a Hogan-esque view of the swing.

 

Interestingly enough, one of the comments I remember Nicklaus giving on Hogan was that 'what was important was that he found something that worked for him.' To me, that sounds like Jack is quietly tipping his cap to a player who found success through an alternative method but also one that Jack understands all too well requires too much effort and timing. I almost had to laugh remembering that comment because it sort of takes on a new light if you think to yourself...maybe Jack was on the more correct path.

 

The elbow is not pinned in the bs, the humerus is tamed. Hogans swing was considerably more efficient, Jack had 70+lbs on Hogan and was only slightly longer. Also, there is no timing in Hogans swing. The alignments and tensions are perfect.

 

Of course R elbow ain't pinned. R armpit sure seems so though, especially from hands hip height to top...

Pretty good thread. Let's keep it going.

I think the pitch elbow is so that Hogan can get down to elbow plane with a shallow attack in prep for his R arm thrust...like saving the R elbow and arm for later. You get to save the lag as well.

Doing it is difficult though. Probably most difficult of all Hogan moves. Getting to elbow plane while already firing the hips in transition is hard....very very hard...

[quote name='jblacoustics' timestamp='1366520288' post='6886389']
I think the pitch elbow is so that Hogan can get down to elbow plane with a shallow attack in prep for his R arm thrust...like saving the R elbow and arm for later. You get to save the lag as well.

Doing it is difficult though. Probably most difficult of all Hogan moves. Getting to elbow plane while already firing the hips in transition is hard....very very hard...
[/quote]

I don't think I even have the shoulder and back flexibility to get myself down there to a pitch elbow position. Can't internally rotate my right shoulder worth a damn.

This is one of the MAJOR illusions in golf...the arm swing. The backswing is an arm travel of about 18 inches...everything else is mantaining the correct pressure points and pivot train/tilts. And no Hogan did NOT keep his pinned...but he did maintain his pressure points. fwiw

[quote name='tembolo1284' timestamp='1368801916' post='7053354']
[quote name='jblacoustics' timestamp='1366520288' post='6886389']
I think the pitch elbow is so that Hogan can get down to elbow plane with a shallow attack in prep for his R arm thrust...like saving the R elbow and arm for later. You get to save the lag as well.

Doing it is difficult though. Probably most difficult of all Hogan moves. Getting to elbow plane while already firing the hips in transition is hard....very very hard...
[/quote]

I don't think I even have the shoulder and back flexibility to get myself down there to a pitch elbow position. Can't internally rotate my right shoulder worth a damn.
[/quote]

You meant EXTERNAL rotation of the right shoulder, correct? Great feel exercises for this are large reverse arm circles with belly of the right forearm to the sky.

Its all in the ketchup....................
[attachment=1691478:Hogans_Power_Sauce_02.jpg]

[quote name='Pinsplitter59' timestamp='1369094361' post='7072278']
Its all in the ketchup....................
[attachment=1691478:Hogans_Power_Sauce_02.jpg]
[/quote]

I prefer using salamis.

[quote name='moehogan' timestamp='1368891184' post='7059492']
[quote name='tembolo1284' timestamp='1368801916' post='7053354']
[quote name='jblacoustics' timestamp='1366520288' post='6886389']
I think the pitch elbow is so that Hogan can get down to elbow plane with a shallow attack in prep for his R arm thrust...like saving the R elbow and arm for later. You get to save the lag as well.

Doing it is difficult though. Probably most difficult of all Hogan moves. Getting to elbow plane while already firing the hips in transition is hard....very very hard...
[/quote]

I don't think I even have the shoulder and back flexibility to get myself down there to a pitch elbow position. Can't internally rotate my right shoulder worth a damn.
[/quote]

You meant EXTERNAL rotation of the right shoulder, correct? Great feel exercises for this are large reverse arm circles with belly of the right forearm to the sky.
[/quote]

This is correct of course and written in 5L lessons as "save the shoulder for last".
[quote name='jblacoustics' timestamp='1366520288' post='6886389']
I think the pitch elbow is so that Hogan can get down to elbow plane with a shallow attack in prep for his R arm thrust...like saving the R elbow and arm for later. You get to save the lag as well.

Doing it is difficult though. Probably most difficult of all Hogan moves. Getting to elbow plane while already firing the hips in transition is hard....very very hard...
[/quote]

No it isn't , hip rotation makes it easier, you not moving your hips correctly and/or are losing posture somewhere .

[quote name='AlexCzervic' timestamp='1369190127' post='7081654']
[quote name='moehogan' timestamp='1368891184' post='7059492']
[quote name='tembolo1284' timestamp='1368801916' post='7053354']

I don't think I even have the shoulder and back flexibility to get myself down there to a pitch elbow position. Can't internally rotate my right shoulder worth a damn.
[/quote]

You meant EXTERNAL rotation of the right shoulder, correct? Great feel exercises for this are large reverse arm circles with belly of the right forearm to the sky.
[/quote]

This is correct of course and written in 5L lessons as "save the shoulder for last".
[quote name='jblacoustics' timestamp='1366520288' post='6886389']
I think the pitch elbow is so that Hogan can get down to elbow plane with a shallow attack in prep for his R arm thrust...like saving the R elbow and arm for later. You get to save the lag as well.

Doing it is difficult though. Probably most difficult of all Hogan moves. Getting to elbow plane while already firing the hips in transition is hard....very very hard...
[/quote]

No it isn't , hip rotation makes it easier, you not moving your hips correctly and/or are losing posture somewhere .
[/quote]

Hmmm...you're right...thanks. Slide the hips and open the L foot more?

[b]PITCH ELBOW[/b]
No slide if that means hip bump, just turn hips, turn will produce mostly lateral first. The hard part is the setup, BS and steady head the DS is a piece of cake provided you didn't botch the prerequisites.

If your a recreational golfer and want to learn just one swing very well for the rest of your life then emulate Steve Stricker not Hogan.

But it wouldn't be fun...lol...the process of figuring out and trying to get Hogan is THE hobby...lol

So what have we learned gents?

The 3 R hands lesson is true...

I love this thread.

Shhhh. The One Who Shall Not Be Named 101 is in this thread. He cleverly appeared using two aliases.

Great topic. Hopefully a newly joined member doesn't start posting in here and ruin it.

Why can't he not be named?

[quote name='tembolo1284' timestamp='1377024927' post='7713892']
Why can't he not be named?
[/quote]

Because the Mods in the other thread deleted all of his posts and any post referring to him or what his other usernames were.

So I was recently given a series of tapes called 'Gravity Golf' made years ago by some gentlemen (David Lee) who actually speaks very clearly on the topic of the evolution of the swing. Firstly, please don't think 'gravity' above means anything other than simply what many teachers advise today which is that the club should be leveraged with gravity helping and with as little upper body 'help' as possible.

 

To get into the meat of my question though I should state that Lee makes clear that Hogan added power to a swing that was fundamentally limited because of an initially tucked right elbow. I've always tried to tuck my right elbow through the transition to lag the club and re-route the club but Lee advises that Hogan limited his arc somewhat (compared to say, Nicklaus) by attempted to feel as though his right upper-arm was connection to his body from the beginning of the swing...interesting!

 

Trying this, I noted that enhancing the connection between the body and the right elbow during the take-away INSTANTLY produces Hogan's uniquely flattened swing plane, btw. The swing instantly becomes tighter, more around the body and much more from the inside.

 

My question then became, well how does this produce great golf? Surely this isn't a powerful swing because the swing arc is surely cut by not allowing the same freedom through the right arm. The whole 'flying elbow' idea is contrary to this. Interestingly enough, let's not argue about that because Nicklaus himself argued against the idea and insisted it was a misinterpretation of the appearance of his swing.

 

However, Lee explains that it was Hogan's dedication and tireless work ethic and routine that maintained this swing as well as his immense forearm and hand strength rather than his swing which produced his notable length.

 

By comparison, Lee explains how Nicklaus, Couples and others use a much easier swing which allows for a much more efficient use of power. It's more upright, easier to flight the ball high, easier to drive, easier to hit long irons and ultimately holds up better under pressure as well. There is no better evidence than Nicklaus record of course in both tournaments, majors and obviously, too, his time at Augusta National.

 

How do you all who've studied Hogan feel with regard to this topic. Now, let me assure you that David Lee is no hack here. He's not some young hot-shot selling anything but rather an experience instructor (in his late 50s at the time) who is simply trying to advise on the ease of Nicklaus' method as opposed to the 'Gospel According to Hogan' that seems to have taken over amongst the majority. He references the 'tension' that was introduced to him when he was introduced to the game through 'position golf' which spurred from a Hogan-esque view of the swing.

 

Interestingly enough, one of the comments I remember Nicklaus giving on Hogan was that 'what was important was that he found something that worked for him.' To me, that sounds like Jack is quietly tipping his cap to a player who found success through an alternative method but also one that Jack understands all too well requires too much effort and timing. I almost had to laugh remembering that comment because it sort of takes on a new light if you think to yourself...maybe Jack was on the more correct path.

 

Nicklaus and Hogan simply swing the club in different ways, and draw upon different power sources.

 

Niether approach is "right" or "wrong" in any absolute sense. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages.

 

Nicklaus' method draws upon the arms and the legs for power, especially as the arms release past the body during impact. It maximizes power and shot-making creativity (because there is a lot of arm rotation through the hitting area)...but it can be at the expense of ball-striking consistency unless the player has very good small muscle coordination and/or a good sense of rhythm.

 

Hogan's method draws upon the rotation of the body for power, drawing on the muscles of the body-core. It maximizes ball-striking consistency (since the timing of the release is connected to ---and controlled by the "big muscles" of the body-core). But it can be at the expense of power (in someone who is not very flexible in the hips and back) or at the expense of forcing the player to take a more "mechanical" approach to shot-shaping since there is less arm and clubface rotation through the hitting area.

 

This is why I hate discussions of swing mechanics. Because what tends to happen is people latch onto their favorite swing method...or their pet swing theory...and then insist that everything else is either "wrong" or "bad" in some fashion.

 

My feeling about swing mechanics are like those great British golf instructure John Jacobs....

 

"The sole purpose of the golf swing is to produce a correct position of the body at impact. Whatever method that is used to do this is of no consequence AS LONG AS THE METHOD IS REPEATABLE."

 

That is form follows function...and the goal of instruction is to find A METHOD that is comfortable and repeatable for the INDIVDUAL player.

 

In my case, I can't play consistent golf trying to swing like "Gravity Golf", Nicklaus or Couples with that upright hand-and-arms swing method. Lord knows I wasted almost a decade trying.

 

Whereas I made MUCH more rapid progress with the body-swing method like that promoted by Hogan.

 

YMMV....but don't accept anyone swing mechanics BIASES or AGENDA without testing other options to see if something works better for you.

So how does the right elbow fit in?