Jump to content


Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Milo Lines and, to some extent, Sam Goulden teach the same thing, I think the idea is there is no release when you're first learning the swing (i.e. drilling it). It's a "rigid motion" (my term). Later of course there is a release as otherwise you wouldn't hit the ball very far. It's good for people (like me) who can't avoid using their arms and hands to hit "at" the ball and as a result have poor sequencing.
  2. I would look at the Square-to-Square swing or even better Milo Lines. Certainly GG qualifies as well. As johnrobison says, it's a rotation away, not towards, the ball. But of course your instructor is in the best position to explain how he (she) wants you to turn, pivot-driven swing methodologies vary. And again, it's NOT that you don't use your arms, it's about your primary intention in the downswing. Just internet advice from a layman.
  3. That's why some say it is not a good idea to change your swing while you play. It's a process (as you say), you're training your body to move in a different way and it will be difficult. Practice either with balls (foam or otherwise) into a net or at the range. DON'T WORRY WHERE THE BALL GOES. For now. Hit whatever positions you're supposed to hit, slowly, get the move ingrained (like martial artists). Foremost, you have to have confidence that you WILL make progress in changing how your body moves. It will take a while, however. Whether it's the RIGHT swing, well, that another th
  4. Just my take. The kind of swing you're referring to (e.g. Hardy's two-plane, Larry Rinker upper core) requires a good bit of timing so the face is square (or slightly open, I guess) at impact. Tricky to pull off. The square-to-the-path swing (e.g. Hardy's one-plane) requires in theory little forearm rotation to square, it's body-driven. Back and through. More or less you have the Square-to-Square swing, Milo Lines, even George Gankas and the variations of the Single Plane swing, they are body-driven. Sam Goulden (Square-to-Square) emphasizes that much less can go wron
  5. Yeah, well, I went out in the backyard to try it. Let's see.......feet one direction, shoulders another and club path a third. First time I swung I screwed myself into the ground. Have no idea where the ball went. So, that would be a hard no.
  6. Thank You. I stand corrected. My search is now over. The most difficult part of my golf game will now be trying to get tee times at Bethpage Black.
  7. I agree, "in principle". This swing model is very seductive, looks (and, really, is in fact) simpler, but if there's anything I've learned is that when it comes to golf there is NO swing methodology that will work right off the bat, without drills and practice. Again, the idea is very appealing, it SHOULD be simple to apply, but when I take a few "square-to-square" swings I get no better result than when I tried my first few S&T swings, or BodySwings, or SP swings. Note I'm not saying it won't work eventually, nor am I saying it won't prove a bit easier to learn o
  8. My first reaction was that this is the sort of swing you'd see recommended by a number of YT instructors, just to train contact. It's a rigid motion, I see this most often I think in S&T videos. In fact I seem to recall a video by Rob Cheney (but for the life of me I can't find it now) in which he tried to train this motion using an alignment rod, dragging it along the mat as you turned. But, again, the overall idea is some sort of rigid relationship among club, arms, shoulders and torso. Also known as 9-3 drill. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not criticizing, it's not necessarily the
  9. You can't judge progress without a proper baseline. If you're tired and weak you won't be able to rotate completely. You also won't be able to keep your head back and maintain pelvis separation, it takes a lot of effort to do that. You'll drift forward, top and scuff the ball. If you don't have a fixed preshot routine then your address and setup position will be all over the place. You at least need to have a consistent place from which to start your swing. Not only is the range misleading because you get into a "rhythm", IF you hit off mats then you won't see the conse
  10. When you say "turning the hands over very early in the swing" do you mean rotate the forearm(s) so the face becomes more open to the path?
  11. Well, I appreciate the thought but it has. Continuously. Since I started golfing 12 years ago. It's gotten so bad that I couldn't help smashing my two week old Apex 21 DCB forged club into the ground after a particularly galling effort. I know it will f**k up the lie angle but at least the shaft didn't snap like it did on a wedge I tried the same thing with a year ago. Anyhoo, yes, place a ball in front of you and things change. It changes for a number of reasons, many of which have already been mentioned. The "little golfer" inside of you makes adjustments automatical
  12. See, I would define the "one piece" takeaway as a movement of the arms, shoulders, hands AND hips/pelvis away from the ball. I believe the idea, among other things, is to keep the clubface square to the path (facing the ball). At some point, however, the hips stop rotating while the shoulders continue, "torquing" the torso. I would define the alternate you mention as simply the one-piece where the hips stop rotating from address (that's how I like to think of things). But I'm still flailing around with this golf swing thingie, so I stand to be corrected.
  13. I agree. Saying you start with the arms vs. hips doesn't, to me at least, mean that literally. I would agree that EVERYONE, even me, who has the worst hit instinct ever recorded, starts with the lower body; i.e. there's an instantaneous movement of the lower body, sometimes beginning even on the backswing. The question is, what happens after that initial tiny shift? Heaving the upper body and arms at the ball vs. continuing the hip rotation is the issue. As to Oostie's "early extension", I'm about as far from an expert as you can find, but if his arms are closer to his body at add
  14. You could be me. The thing that I fight constantly in this swing is the "coming up" out of it. I attribute it to having to be too far from the ball with my stance wider than I'm comfortable with. But I'm not sure I don't fight this problem with other swings or that I wouldn't fight it with Junge. I really like the Graves approach and I just stand as far as I am comfortable with and take practice swings to make sure my club makes a more-or-less straight path through the ball. This is actually something I DID adopt from Junge, setting distance by using practice swings to judge what's
  15. nlk10010

    Sub 70 Clubs

    Yea, like that hat. Got one just like it about a year ago when I ordered my clubs (like you, have nothing but good things to say about the company and their service). I'm matchy-matchy with my clubs and hat so I wear it every time I use my Sub70 set, which because I like them so much is almost always. As a result the hat's got, shall we say, stained from my perspiration and my partner won't let me wear it anymore, even though she doesn't golf and doesn't even go out on the course with me (she locks the thing away, at least she didn't trash it, yet). Unfortunately that particular style is no lo
  • Create New...