3:1 Tempo

[Forged4ever]

The statement in that posted Tour Temp video is absolutely false!

Hi TH, I hope that ya had a nice holiday weekend :)

 

Specifically, what statement did John make that was false?

 

Thanks!

 

All the Best,

RP

 

The pros swings are smooth and slow during take away and transition. So "slow & smooth" is not a myth. It is a fact. When a pros's rhythm goes off usually his take away and transition get faster and that happens a lot on Sundays!

The average OTT golfer is faster than a pro during transition. Swing easy hit hard is not a myth. Blindly swinging fast and following 3:1 ratio is not going to fix millions of average golfer's faulty swing sequence.

3:1 ratio is a symptom of a good swing, not a cause!

I never, nor has John or anyone associated with Tour Tempo EVER said anything about "Blindly swinging fast."

 

Tempo and whatever number one's tempo is, is very different from pure swing speed.

 

As Maddie mentioned, for the average golfer, proper sequencing is, at least initially, much more critical than tempo for developing a sound consistent swing.

 

I would kindly disagree that "slow & smooth" is a "fact."

 

It is an opinion.......

 

I am not knocking it or those that adhere to it, however I know many, including my Bro, who has a Playing SS of 118mph and a +2.5 cap, and they adhere to "fast & Smooth."

 

The 3:1 is not in stone as John has a Tour student who who's swing ratios run from 2.1:1(chip) to 2.3:1(Full wedge) to 2.4:1(7i) to a 2.8:1 for his driver.

 

And obviously the length of one's back swing will influence their ratio, as the shorter one's back swing the smaller the ratio will be.

 

Anyone that tries to say that you've got to be at 3:1 through the bag is full of s***.

 

Phil has a 2.3:1 ratio with his wedges and his driver is at 2.8:1.

 

The proper sequencing from transition, ie., hips, chest, lead arm THEN the club, is much more critical to delivering a powerful blow to the ball initially versus tempo and why I believe so strongly in super slo-mo to develop the proper transition and down swing move.

 

If one has not picked the game up early and through trial & error, lessons and thousands of rounds and millions of balls hit, and usually a combination of the three, then there is no friggin way that an adult male, most of which cannot break 100 playin it down and in and not in great shape or possessing adequate flexibility to learn a properly sequenced swing full speed lashing at a ball.

 

I am very familiar with the average Am's transition "speed" versus that of a Tour Pro, with the Am's being 3 times quicker than a Pro.

 

For most mid/high caps, coming out of the transition the club is rotating faster than the lead arm, so this tends to open the wrist angle, which indicates a "casting" movement, and again, improper sequencing, as the lead arm should lead the club, not vice versa.

 

The arms also tend to out pace the chest, further reducing the the efficiency of the swing and greatly reducing the efficient transfer of energy/power.

 

It was not my intent to get into a discussion about swing bio-mechanics however all of this plays into why the "average" Am has a s*** swing and doing things the way they've always done them, not a hell of a good chance of turning the ship around.

 

The 3:1/Tour Tempo methodology is by no means the holy grail, any more or less than any other methodology or theory, however it has a solid scientific foundation, as one of the contributing authors used this as his doctoral thesis at the Yale School of Engineering, so it faced a healthy skeptical panel of scientists who examined and cross examined the doctoral student.

 

Hey, if it helps someone great and if anyone has any questions, feel free to reach out to either Maddie or myself.

 

Take care TH and have a great season :)

 

My Best,

Richard

[HitEmTrue]

I did some frame by frame study of tour players tempo and found some key info missing from John Novosel's Tour Temp book.

It is not just "1, 2, 3" tempo but "1, 2, AND, 3". The critical transition "AND" part study is missing from Novosel's book.

 

Can you elaborate some more on this?

 

With "1,2,3", if you begin the back swing on 1, and start the downswing on 3 (allegedly hitting the ball on 4, or downbeat of 1 of the next measure for musicians), that is a 2-to-1 ratio.

 

Except it's not 1,2,3 - it's 1...2,3. The extended measure of the 1 allows for the transition, with 2 being the start of the downswing and 3 being impact.

 

Oh, in the book the time divisions are not even, just like they aren't even in the app? My bad, then.

 

If it can't be counted evenly (as in a tempo), I can't relate to it.

[games]

As Maddie mentioned, for the average golfer, proper sequencing is, at least initially, much more critical than tempo for developing a sound consistent swing.

 

Not that you or Maddie needed any support, but I re-picked up the book last weekend.

Novosel CLEARLY states proper mechanics need to come before tempo training.

That is why they provide the "Y" and "L" drills...

[Forged4ever]

As Maddie mentioned, for the average golfer, proper sequencing is, at least initially, much more critical than tempo for developing a sound consistent swing.

 

Not that you or Maddie needed any support, but I re-picked up the book last weekend.

Novosel CLEARLY states proper mechanics need to come before tempo training.

That is why they provide the "Y" and "L" drills...

I've used the "Y" & "L" drills since shortly after I started with Pete in 1974(I was 14yo) as these were the first drills that he showed me, though he referred to them as the "Tommy Drills" after his Teacher/Mentor Tommy Armour, who also showed them to Ben Hogan, and in a funny twist, you may hear people refer to them as the "Hogan Drills," and I believe that Harvey Penick did so in speaking of them.

 

They are the first drills that Maddie teaches a child and her beginners and she also teaches them to all of her students however some obviously have different goals and for someone who comes to her for a "band aid" lesson, ie., to treat/fix a symptom, she usually won't use them as these golfers will not put the time of effort into executing the drill much less doing it properly.

 

Hands down, not even close, THE two best drills I have ever performed and when I'm able to swing again, 95% of my line time will be these two drills.

 

Yea, a lot of people, and I am in no way referring to Thoughtful Hacker here, however a lot of people are not at all familiar with either John or the 3:1 methodology and in my real world, and this has ocurred because as Maddie said, I've had John Sr. as my Teacher since late 2010 and after the Golf Magazine Cover story(Ernie Els on Cover), a lot of guys were asking me about it and I wouldn't even talk to em about it if they didn't take the time to read the clinical.

 

Not the Golf Magazine article, not his first book or of any stuff on the net, the actual study.

 

Not that you had to agree with it, though I just thought that if someone didn't have the interest to read the study, then they really weren't interested in the methodology or they, like the typical golfer, wanted that quick fix or "pearl."

 

Anyhoo, thanks for responding and I hope that ya have a great season :)

 

My Best,

Richard

[Forged4ever]

Richard,

 

Do you think it's of grave importance to mimic this 3:1 tempo?

 

I'm hitting the ball more poorly after trying it, but I don't think I've put enough reps into it yet. I'm going to stick with it for at least another week or two. Did John emphasize tempo in his one-on-one teaching?

 

Thanks - hope you're doing well!

 

Matt

Bro, either email me at rpjii84@gmail dot com or gimme a call at (four one two)six three eight- five nine eight three-

 

I'll be glad to answer any questions that I can-

 

All the Best,

Richard

[nikegal]

The vast majority(93.5%) of your Tour Pros and Plus Ams are at approximately 3:1 with long/mid clubs, with 5.6% at slightly less than 3:1, ie., Phil is at 2.8:1 with a driver however he's at 2.2:1 with wedges. Less than 1% of your Pluses and Pros swing at a tempo slower than 3:1.

 

There are basically four groups that the 93.5% fall into~

 

-> 18/6(.800 sec) Explosive

-> 21/7(.933 sec) Very Fast

-> 24/8(1.067 sec) Fast

-> 27/9(1.200 sec) Unhurried

 

These are the tempos that most of Your Pros and Pluses fall into. There are two more that have been added more so to help Ams who do not have the swing to fall into the above tempos, however a few of the outlier Pros and Ams will swing to these also. They are:

 

->30/10(1.333 sec)

->33/11(1.467 sec)

 

There are exceptions and outliers as Jay Haas, David Toms and Vaughn Taylor swing at 30/10, and as Games noted, many females swing closer to a 4:1 ratio. Most male mid/high handicaps will be closer or over 4:1 or over and should use the 3:1 and 2:1 numbers as goals to work towards because in doing so, their swings and play will become more consistent, their accuracy will improve and they will see increased distance. A few Tour Pros and their numbers:

 

Sergio...21/7

Sean O'Hara...24/8

Jan Stephenson...27/9

Kyle Stanley...24/8

Rickie...18/6

Moe Norman...18/6

Bernhard...21/7

Tiger(1997 Masters)...27/9

Tiger(2002 US Open)...24/8

Tiger(2008 US Open)...21/7

 

My point with Tiger is that not only did he never swing slow, he got faster, and it's safe to say that it didn't hurt his swing. The Big Easy? Nice low, slow easy pass at the ball? Ernie swings at a 24/8 tempo and is actually only one frame slower(.33 sec) than Jjonattan Vega(21/7), considered one of the hardest swingers on Tour. Richard's fave Pro, and one of the game'e longest hitters, Greg Norman? He's actually one frame slower than Ernie at 25/8. Oh, and Bob "nobody ever swung a golf club too slowly" Jones swung at a 27/9 tempo. The plain fact is yes, a golfer can swing too slowly and in fact most of those 98% who do not break 100 consistently do indeed swing wayyyy too slowly. However the one thing that should not be taken away from here is that the tempo ratio directly correlates to one's swing speed. One has to look no further than Kenny Perry, a bomber regardless of what tour he Plays and an outlier to boot, who swings at a 31/8 tempo. My only point in this post is to give a little perspective because the 3:1 tempo may or may not be for you however if you're going to attempt to rip it apart, please do a little research, gets your facts straight and don't mistake opinion for fact, which seems to occur a lot on this board, lol. My point with Bernhard is that even though he Plays at a glacial pace, his tempo is that of Tiger and Sergio and faster than either Ernie or Kyle Stanley so I would not just assume because you are a laid back individual and take life as it comes kinda guy, that you will automatically have a slower more languid tempo. Mistake. Have a great day guys :) Maddie

[The Pearl]

Maddie and Richard, et al.

 

Good discussion. I find the TT interesting, but I have always been troubled by the possibility of data-mining/torturing the data and thereby extrapolating cause/effect where there might not be any. I am not questioning the researcher's result or methodology, but rather the conclusions that can be drawn from them. A few thoughts:

 

1. Is the 3:1 ratio the cause or the effect? It is almost certain that the 3:1 is an observed result of being a Tour player/top-amateur/good player rather than contributing to being a great player. I can certainly disprove the causation theory easily as we could take a beginner and train them to swing the club at a 3:1 tempo rather quickly. Taken to the extreme, a beginning golfer could swing the club at 3:1 and whiff every time.

 

2. If my first statement above is correct than the research is some of variation data-mining. For an extreme example of data mining, after extensive research of tour pros, I have come to the following conclusion "all Tour pro's wear pants during tournaments, so in order to improve your game, start wearing pants during your competitive rounds."

 

3. Certainly this type of research, when applied to other sports, to some extent would be held up to more scrutiny. For instance, if I did extensive study on the top shooters in the NBA, I could come to the conclusion that nearly all shooters elevate 30 inches off the floor at the peak of their release. Perhaps closer to golf, researchers have concluded that MLB pitcher's all have delivery tempo's at a 2:1. Again, are these metrics a cause or effect?

 

Some of my statements above are certainly mitigated, as suggested, by focusing on "sequencing" or other fundamentals, so to some extent, the TT concept has some necessary pre-conditions.

 

Anyway, thanks for the excellent discussion and my comments are more inquisitive rather than claiming any definitive counter-argument to TT.

[games]

Jan Stephenson...27/9

Kyle Stanley...24/8

 

Irony that a Jan Stephenson lesson is what that turned Novosel on to the TT concept. And, now years later, he comes out saying most female pros are closer to 4:1. (In fairness to John Sr. I believe he always felt the women had a wider band of tempo that included Nancy Lopez's 5:1.)

 

I put Kyle Stanley in the quote box just out of sheer amazement, as I would have figured him as MUCH faster...

[games]

1. Is the 3:1 ratio the cause or the effect? It is almost certain that the 3:1 is an observed result of being a Tour player/top-amateur/good player rather than contributing to being a great player. I can certainly disprove the causation theory easily as we could take a beginner and train them to swing the club at a 3:1 tempo rather quickly. Taken to the extreme, a beginning golfer could swing the club at 3:1 and whiff every time.

...

Some of my statements above are certainly mitigated, as suggested, by focusing on "sequencing" or other fundamentals, so to some extent, the TT concept has some necessary pre-conditions.

 

Anyway, thanks for the excellent discussion and my comments are more inquisitive rather than claiming any definitive counter-argument to TT.

 

I think your post somewhat answers itself in your acknowledgement of "sequencing or other fundamentals."

 

The Novosels would say that while tempo is a key fundamental, the swing fundamentals (learned through the Y and L drills) should be developed first. And, swing fundamentals should not come at the expense of TT.

[BdaGolfer]

I did some frame by frame study of tour players tempo and found some key info missing from John Novosel's Tour Temp book.

It is not just "1, 2, 3" tempo but "1, 2, AND, 3". The critical transition "AND" part study is missing from Novosel's book.

 

Can you elaborate some more on this?

 

With "1,2,3", if you begin the back swing on 1, and start the downswing on 3 (allegedly hitting the ball on 4, or downbeat of 1 of the next measure for musicians), that is a 2-to-1 ratio.

 

Except it's not 1,2,3 - it's 1...2,3. The extended measure of the 1 allows for the transition, with 2 being the start of the downswing and 3 being impact.

 

Oh, in the book the time divisions are not even, just like they aren't even in the app? My bad, then.

 

If it can't be counted evenly (as in a tempo), I can't relate to it.

 

Think of it as 4 beats with the 2nd beat omitted or silenced. The book I bought came with a CD with the tones, so hearing them properly spaced helped.

[Forged4ever]

1. Is the 3:1 ratio the cause or the effect? It is almost certain that the 3:1 is an observed result of being a Tour player/top-amateur/good player rather than contributing to being a great player. I can certainly disprove the causation theory easily as we could take a beginner and train them to swing the club at a 3:1 tempo rather quickly. Taken to the extreme, a beginning golfer could swing the club at 3:1 and whiff every time.

...

Some of my statements above are certainly mitigated, as suggested, by focusing on "sequencing" or other fundamentals, so to some extent, the TT concept has some necessary pre-conditions.

 

Anyway, thanks for the excellent discussion and my comments are more inquisitive rather than claiming any definitive counter-argument to TT.

The Novosels would say that while tempo is a key fundamental, the swing fundamentals (learned through the Y and L drills) should be developed first. And, swing fundamentals should not come at the expense of TT.

THIS!!

 

LMAO, cuz the one thing that Maddie and her club president agreed on as a stipulation to her being allowed to participate on the board was that she was not to participate in instruction threads, lol

 

She's friggin worse than me, she's just a little better lookin so she gets away with more, haha.

 

Pearl, I'm in IV's and medicated so I'll answer your post later when I'm in my room however Games is more than qualified to answer.

 

Look, like anything, 3:1 is not the holy grail, even though I've seen it referred to and written about that it is and as Games stated, when people ask me if the book is worth getting and why, my answer is simple-

 

Absolutely, and I base this on the part of the book dedicated to the "Tommy Drills("Y" & "L," Hogan Drills)." If someone gets nothing else from any of the TT stuff, if they incorporated these two drills into their practice regime, did them correctly and diligently, they would develop a solid swing, solid tempo and a swing that would transfer to the long end of their bag.

 

This just my .01 worth though a mid/high cap who can't perform the Tommy Drills adequately and jumps to the 3:1 tones is at worst wasting their time and at best building a swing/house on sand.

 

Oh, and Pearl, and I am in no way saying this sarcastically because I greatly respect you, your thoughts and posts though it stuck out and that is you stated that you were not questioning the results and methodology of the Yale Study and then you ask about data mining. That is fine and when I am of clearer mind(well, clear for me at least), I will respond though as I said, I'm sure Games could. That just sorta jumped out at me, lol. No biggy :)

 

Now the nurses are giving me the evil eye. God do I have an aversion to authority, lol

 

Take care Gents :)

 

My Best,

RP

[nikegal]

1. Is the 3:1 ratio the cause or the effect? It is almost certain that the 3:1 is an observed result of being a Tour player/top-amateur/good player rather than contributing to being a great player. I can certainly disprove the causation theory easily as we could take a beginner and train them to swing the club at a 3:1 tempo rather quickly. Taken to the extreme, a beginning golfer could swing the club at 3:1 and whiff every time.

...

Some of my statements above are certainly mitigated, as suggested, by focusing on "sequencing" or other fundamentals, so to some extent, the TT concept has some necessary pre-conditions.

 

Anyway, thanks for the excellent discussion and my comments are more inquisitive rather than claiming any definitive counter-argument to TT.

The Novosels would say that while tempo is a key fundamental, the swing fundamentals (learned through the Y and L drills) should be developed first. And, swing fundamentals should not come at the expense of TT.

THIS!!

 

LMAO, cuz the one thing that Maddie and her club president agreed on as a stipulation to her being allowed to participate on the board was that she was not to participate in instruction threads, lol

 

She's friggin worse than me, she's just a little better lookin so she gets away with more, haha.

Good point sweetie. I am going to bow out of this discussion though whether you try the 3:1 methodology or not, the Tommy Drills are drills to build a solid consistent swing with. Thanks guys, you're all gentlemen and if you ever get through the Burgh, please give is a call. Oh, and sweetie regarding your looks, you humility is what initially attracted me to you, hahahaha. Please be nice to the nurses so I don't have to hear about it. When I get to the hospital I feel like I'm at one of the kid's schools when the teachers start telling me about their behavior, lolok. :) Fondly, Maddie

[Thoughtful Hacker]

Yes indeed good discussion.

 

As I said 3:1 ratio is an interesting observation. It is just an effect of a good swing not the cause!

Pros take the club back in thousand different ways. In their backswings, some are very short and some are very long. Some are very flat and some are very steep. Some are slow and some are fast.

 

How did Novosel define the end of the backswing and the start of the downswing?

 

How did he define the transition?

 

Did he even attempt to define the difference between tempo, timing, and rhythm?

 

I read the Novosel's original book more than a decade ago. The first thing that turned me off in that book was the phrase in the title "Golf's Last Secret Finally Revealed".

Last secret? Really?!

[Forged4ever]

Yes indeed good discussion.

 

As I said 3:1 ratio is an interesting observation. It is just an effect of a good swing not the cause!

Pros take the club back in thousand different ways. In their backswings, some are very short and some are very long. Some are very flat and some are very steep. Some are slow and some are fast.

 

How did Novosel define the end of the backswing and the start of the downswing?

 

How did he define the transition?

 

Did he even attempt to define the difference between tempo, timing, and rhythm?

 

I read the Novosel's original book more than a decade ago. The first thing that turned me off in that book was the phrase in the title "Golf's Last Secret Finally Revealed".

Last secret? Really?!

Most of your questions can be answered by reading the Yale Study. This is why I mentioned earlier that to have a legitimate discussion one should read the study-

 

Look, with this many questions and doubts there is no way in hell that you should concern yourself with the 3:1 tempo or TT. If you read the study and still have questions, then ask them.

 

Regarding "the last secret," John Sr. Was just being cute and playing off of the Hogan "secret." It was a lighthearted attempt at some levity. I found it cute, you didn't. Oh well ;)

 

He's a great Guy, he's humble and he's a former college football Player(Yea, this matters to me :) )

 

I Love Him so I'm biased toward him. He's a guy that 98% of ya would enjoy the hell out of having a pop with, whether you discussed Tour Tempo or not. He's the head of a successful company however you can get him on the phone and he'll spend time with you if need be.

 

That's all I can say-

 

If ya read the study and then think 3:1 is bulls***, great, come back and voice those thoughts.

 

Like I said, I don't think the 3:1 is for you.

 

There's nothing wrong with that-

 

Hey, I think S&T by and large was a crock of s*** :)

 

Stay well my Friend :)

 

All the Best,

Richard

[BdaGolfer]

Yes indeed good discussion.

 

As I said 3:1 ratio is an interesting observation. It is just an effect of a good swing not the cause!

Pros take the club back in thousand different ways. In their backswings, some are very short and some are very long. Some are very flat and some are very steep. Some are slow and some are fast.

 

How did Novosel define the end of the backswing and the start of the downswing?

 

How did he define the transition?

 

Did he even attempt to define the difference between tempo, timing, and rhythm?

 

I read the Novosel's original book more than a decade ago. The first thing that turned me off in that book was the phrase in the title "Golf's Last Secret Finally Revealed".

Last secret? Really?!

 

Having read the book, you'll remember that there are 3 components to the swing, matching the tones - backswing through transition, start of downswing to impact, and impact. The rhythm and tempo are defined by the 3:1 ratio and the subset of 24/8, 21/7 etc. used within that ratio.

 

I have found it to be very useful in 2 ways:

- it helps eliminate the "extra" movements that creep into the swing (a little bit of arm run-off, for example),

- it provides a constant frame of reference i.e. 24/8 is always 24/8; the perception on course of the tempo can feel very different, or some days things just feel "quick".

 

It's certainly not the holy grail (there are none in goal, as far as I can tell), but is a good tool to have available. Some of my best range sessions have been when I am using TT, and hitting the 24/8 tempo. Feels easy and takes little effort, unlike those days when every swing is following by a grunt or loud exhale.

 

As for fitting all golfers - there are always exceptions, and always other ways to do something. If your particular swing falls outside the defined parameters of TT, then certainly stay away. Sometimes your own way is just as good, even if outside "the norm" (I say this as a guy who plays crosshanded, so my norm is off-kilter to begin with :-) )

 

Alan

[North Texas]

1. Is the 3:1 ratio the cause or the effect? It is almost certain that the 3:1 is an observed result of being a Tour player/top-amateur/good player rather than contributing to being a great player. I can certainly disprove the causation theory easily as we could take a beginner and train them to swing the club at a 3:1 tempo rather quickly. Taken to the extreme, a beginning golfer could swing the club at 3:1 and whiff every time.

...

Some of my statements above are certainly mitigated, as suggested, by focusing on "sequencing" or other fundamentals, so to some extent, the TT concept has some necessary pre-conditions.

 

Anyway, thanks for the excellent discussion and my comments are more inquisitive rather than claiming any definitive counter-argument to TT.

The Novosels would say that while tempo is a key fundamental, the swing fundamentals (learned through the Y and L drills) should be developed first. And, swing fundamentals should not come at the expense of TT.

THIS!!

 

LMAO, cuz the one thing that Maddie and her club president agreed on as a stipulation to her being allowed to participate on the board was that she was not to participate in instruction threads, lol

 

She's friggin worse than me, she's just a little better lookin so she gets away with more, haha.

 

Pearl, I'm in IV's and medicated so I'll answer your post later when I'm in my room however Games is more than qualified to answer.

 

Look, like anything, 3:1 is not the holy grail, even though I've seen it referred to and written about that it is and as Games stated, when people ask me if the book is worth getting and why, my answer is simple-

 

Absolutely, and I base this on the part of the book dedicated to the "Tommy Drills("Y" & "L," Hogan Drills)." If someone gets nothing else from any of the TT stuff, if they incorporated these two drills into their practice regime, did them correctly and diligently, they would develop a solid swing, solid tempo and a swing that would transfer to the long end of their bag.

 

This just my .01 worth though a mid/high cap who can't perform the Tommy Drills adequately and jumps to the 3:1 tones is at worst wasting their time and at best building a swing/house on sand.

 

Oh, and Pearl, and I am in no way saying this sarcastically because I greatly respect you, your thoughts and posts though it stuck out and that is you stated that you were not questioning the results and methodology of the Yale Study and then you ask about data mining. That is fine and when I am of clearer mind(well, clear for me at least), I will respond though as I said, I'm sure Games could. That just sorta jumped out at me, lol. No biggy :)

 

Now the nurses are giving me the evil eye. God do I have an aversion to authority, lol

 

Take care Gents :)

 

My Best,

RP

 

Richard, I'm sure you meant to say she's a lot better lookin, right :taunt:

[Matt J]

To reiterate where I was coming from when I started this thread...

 

I'm playing off a 7 index, so I usually hit the ball pretty solid. I think my sequencing is okay although like most of us I can get out of sync. I struggled coming over the top as a new player and realized in my journey that I was too quick in transition. I developed a very deliberate takeaway that was quite slow in order to "give myself time" at the top to transition slower and shallow the club. Most significantly I was using a totally different swing with driver, that served me well, but that I had outgrown as my playing improved. No need to get into it in great detail, but I would use an abridged and slow backswing and then time a place where I could go hard at the ball. No intentional transition, no change in plane, and a very big tempo ratio, as I mentioned upwards of 4:1 even on a relatively short swing.

 

So, since using the Tour Tempo App, I take the club back much quicker and then slow in transition. I think my misses are smaller and I'm gaining a little distance. I've been tweaking another element of my backswing so it's tougher to say what exactly is happening with my irons. I'm playing through the swing changes (usually I'll resign myself to range time) and haven't been disappointed with my play and am sticking with the changes on the course. Certain shots with more finite timing, like 3/4 knockdowns, have been a little more off and my misses have been mostly related to face angle and path. I just haven't grooved getting the club to the ball exactly right.

 

Anyways, that's where I was coming from... at first I was on the fence because I had been striking the ball well with my deliberate backswing. I have a gut feeling that my previous tempo would eventually be a limiting factor in having a great golf swing so figured now is as good a time as any to start working on fixing it.

 

As a side note, the short game tempo tones have helped me immensely with my putting and that was an unexpected benefit.

[Thoughtful Hacker]

Richard could you post a link to that Yale Study. Thanks.

[Forged4ever]

Richard could you post a link to that Yale Study. Thanks.

Sure TH :)

 

This is a link to the TT site and at the bittom of the page are some subjects and below John Sr, Jr and John Garrity's names is "Yale University Study" and ya click in and it'll take ya to a 16 page PDF file.

 

Its the Department of Physics, not Engineering. Sorry :)

 

Have a good one :)

 

All the Best,

RP

[Forged4ever]

To reiterate where I was coming from when I started this thread...

 

I'm playing off a 7 index, so I usually hit the ball pretty solid. I think my sequencing is okay although like most of us I can get out of sync. I struggled coming over the top as a new player and realized in my journey that I was too quick in transition. I developed a very deliberate takeaway that was quite slow in order to "give myself time" at the top to transition slower and shallow the club. Most significantly I was using a totally different swing with driver, that served me well, but that I had outgrown as my playing improved. No need to get into it in great detail, but I would use an abridged and slow backswing and then time a place where I could go hard at the ball. No intentional transition, no change in plane, and a very big tempo ratio, as I mentioned upwards of 4:1 even on a relatively short swing.

 

So, since using the Tour Tempo App, I take the club back much quicker and then slow in transition. I think my misses are smaller and I'm gaining a little distance. I've been tweaking another element of my backswing so it's tougher to say what exactly is happening with my irons. I'm playing through the swing changes (usually I'll resign myself to range time) and haven't been disappointed with my play and am sticking with the changes on the course. Certain shots with more finite timing, like 3/4 knockdowns, have been a little more off and my misses have been mostly related to face angle and path. I just haven't grooved getting the club to the ball exactly right.

 

Anyways, that's where I was coming from... at first I was on the fence because I had been striking the ball well with my deliberate backswing. I have a gut feeling that my previous tempo would eventually be a limiting factor in having a great golf swing so figured now is as good a time as any to start working on fixing it.

 

As a side note, the short game tempo tones have helped me immensely with my putting and that was an unexpected benefit.

LMFAO, my sincerest apologies for not only derailing the thread but blowing up the tracks, lol

 

I'm sorry Bro, I didn't mean to-

 

I'm the worst, lol. I derail your thread & then get Maddie involved in the only area she agreed to stay away from, lol. What a Putz ;)

 

I'll just exit stage right :)

 

Have a Great day Bro!!

 

My Best,

RP

[games]

Regarding "the last secret," John Sr. Was just being cute and playing off of the Hogan "secret." It was a lighthearted attempt at some levity. I found it cute, you didn't. Oh well ;)

 

Actually, I think he was drawing a parallel to a quote he actually uses to introduce a chapter in the TT book!

"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration." - Nikola Tesla

[nikegal]

Regarding "the last secret," John Sr. Was just being cute and playing off of the Hogan "secret." It was a lighthearted attempt at some levity. I found it cute, you didn't. Oh well ;)

 

Actually, I think he was drawing a parallel to a quote he actually uses to introduce a chapter in the TT book!

"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration." - Nikola Tesla

That is it. I think Richard was trying to be cute, lol, because Richard has joked with him about TT being the secret that Ben Hogan took to the grave with him. He was very medicated when he typed that. Have a nice day Games :) Maddie

[Matt J]

No problem, RP.

 

I don't mind a little debate over whether tempo is important, if it matters what your tempo is as long as it's consistent, etc.

 

I don't want to debate small details in the research. I don't care if 3.1 or 2.9 tempo was rounded to 3. I was slower in the backswing than 4 to 1, so I was more interested in knowing if that was a death sentence to good golf.

[Forged4ever]

No problem, RP.

 

I don't mind a little debate over whether tempo is important, if it matters what your tempo is as long as it's consistent, etc.

 

I don't want to debate small details in the research. I don't care if 3.1 or 2.9 tempo was rounded to 3. I was slower in the backswing than 4 to 1, so I was more interested in knowing if that was a death sentence to good golf.

I'm not qualified to comment as to what a death sentence is or isn't regarding TT or any other theory or methodology. Maddie can better comment to that however like she said, there are outliers. The big thing that it does is it keeps your swing "tight" in that you don't start doin stuff at the top that leads to a poor downswing. I don't even like talking about it cuz I'm not a Teacher but I'll PM ya Maddie's email if youd like and you can talk to her.

 

Oh, and BTW, I was screwing around about the "last secret" and I was gonna say that at the end of the post however I was sorta flighty and forgot, lol.

 

That's what happens when I violate the "60 minute" rule. And no, there's no study to support the "60 minute" rule other than Brian, Mitch, Isaac and Maddie saying that it's a fact and I'm prone to being a flaming a**h*** when I violate it, like above ;)

 

They're probably right-

 

All the Best,

Richard

[Thoughtful Hacker]

Richard could you post a link to that Yale Study. Thanks.

Sure TH :)

 

This is a link to the TT site and at the bittom of the page are some subjects and below John Sr, Jr and John Garrity's names is "Yale University Study" and ya click in and it'll take ya to a 16 page PDF file.

 

Its the Department of Physics, not Engineering. Sorry :)

 

Have a good one :)

 

All the Best,

RP

 

Sorry, I don't see any link in your post! What's the title of the Yale TT Study?

[Cicero]

Richard could you post a link to that Yale Study. Thanks.

Sure TH :)

 

This is a link to the TT site and at the bittom of the page are some subjects and below John Sr, Jr and John Garrity's names is "Yale University Study" and ya click in and it'll take ya to a 16 page PDF file.

 

Its the Department of Physics, not Engineering. Sorry :)

 

Have a good one :)

 

All the Best,

RP

 

Sorry, I don't see any link in your post! What's the title of the Yale TT Study?

 

http://www.tourtempo.com/yale.pdf

[Forged4ever]

Richard could you post a link to that Yale Study. Thanks.

Sure TH :)

 

This is a link to the TT site and at the bittom of the page are some subjects and below John Sr, Jr and John Garrity's names is "Yale University Study" and ya click in and it'll take ya to a 16 page PDF file.

 

Its the Department of Physics, not Engineering. Sorry :)

 

Have a good one :)

 

All the Best,

RP

 

Sorry, I don't see any link in your post! What's the title of the Yale TT Study?

No, I'm sorry, LMAO

 

I also forgot to post the link, lol.

 

Its been a long day-

 

Apologies :)

 

Down at the bottom of the TT link is the study link -

 

http://www.tourtempo.com/cert1.html

 

Have a nice evening Bro and thanks for your patience :)

 

My Best,

RP

[nikegal]

Jan Stephenson...27/9

Kyle Stanley...24/8

 

Irony that a Jan Stephenson lesson is what that turned Novosel on to the TT concept. And, now years later, he comes out saying most female pros are closer to 4:1. (In fairness to John Sr. I believe he always felt the women had a wider band of tempo that included Nancy Lopez's 5:1.)

 

I put Kyle Stanley in the quote box just out of sheer amazement, as I would have figured him as MUCH faster...

HaHa, I'm ok as long as I don't give instruction. Yes, I found Kyle surprising as well as Greg Norman, who I would off the top of my head say was 21/7. The other surprising thing was that when John measured Jan Stephenson at 27/9 he also measured/compared her to Tiger and he was swinging an 8i at 27/9. I believe that it was the '97 Masters. I would never put those two together or she having a faster tempo than Kenny Perry of even Jay Haas. Maybe I'm guilty of stereotyping, lolol. Actually, as a rookie, Nancy Lopez was at 30/10 and and only hit 50/10 at the end of her career when she was hitting the ball terribly. Annika was smoking at 20/7 and Michelle Wei was 30/10 in 2003 and dropped to 27/9 later that season while Suzy Whaley, the first Woman to qualify for a Men's tour event in 58 years swung at 28/9. However Se Ri Pak didn't quite fit the template at 31/9, which is close to Payne at 30/9, still TT, though an outlier. Joining Nancy at 50/10 is Ai Miyazato, who unlike Nancy was winning LPGA titles at that tempo and then there is HoFer Juli Inkster at 30/7(4:1). As Games mentioned, the fact that the average woman tends to be hypermobile, which limits the "snap" that our joints have can lead to a slower tempo. I myself swing at 27/9 and though Richard won't mention it, he had a beautiful 24/8 tempo. Have a nice evening Games :) Maddie

[Matt J]

That's part of the reason I was wondering if 3 to 1 is all that essential, I only create 100ish mph driver swing.

 

Edited to add: Maddie, some how in the whole thing I missed your longer post describing the different stats on tempo. I think the tempo work has been good for me and will continue to use it, as well as the Y and L drills. Thanks.

[Forged4ever]

Since Maddie can't really address the instructional side I'll just say that the most prevalent comment from her students who try the TT is that it "forces(my word)" swing, mechanical and technical thoughts from their mind. This is great thing as this is what our Teacher spoke to when he talked of crossing the "bridge" where a golfer goes from pre-swing mechanical and swing thoughts to a PSR focused on the visualization of the swing, shot and target and the feel needed to execute that swing and shot.

 

Have a Great day :)

 

Oh Yea, Happy Birthday Sweetie :)

 

Lovingly,

Me