Snead, Hogan & Nicklaus vs Tiger, Rory Etc.

[Fort Worth Pro]

[quote name='Jobu' timestamp='1392398490' post='8667845']
[quote name='Fort Worth Pro' timestamp='1392320872' post='8661279']


Dj, I am fine with you relaying anecdoctly what works for you but find it disingenuous to call it research. There are many people doing real scientific research and using that word is very loaded with meaning.
[/quote]

Science is a social tool. That's why it's a school subject.
[/quote]


Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge"[1]) is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.[2][3] In an older and closely related meaning, "science" also refers to a body of knowledge itself, of the type that can be rationally explained and reliably applied. A practitioner of science is known as a scientist.

Science is testable and repeatable

[virtuoso]

I had no idea I was doing legit research until I read this thread! Thank you all!

[pinhigh27]

New position is way more anatomically favorable than the slumped address position of the past. Way stronger in extension than flexion.

[pinhigh27]

Also I have no idea how you bring the squat into this. It completely goes against your thoughts. You can't take some random picture of someone's address position and say put a bar on that. Obviously if Tiger were squatting he'd flex at the hip less.

Put a bar on tiger's back vs one of the old greats(given a reasonable amount of hip flexion in both so the bar is actually in a decent position). You will NEVER find a high level lifter that mirrors what you are saying. If I'm squatting and trying to keep a weight as stable as possible on my back, why would I have a bunch of flexion? Its hard to tell how much of the lower back is rounded, but I'd still say it's some. Which isn't ideal by any stretch of the imagination.
If we keep the spine more in a line, it's a more efficient power transfer to it when a load is applied. If you are sitting there hunched over, it's not nearly as efficient of a power transfer. Therefore I'm not sure how this has anything to do with getting hurt, and more so to do with the clubs and their lie angles.

Edit: All rounding does is make the back less stable and less strong. This is easy to see in 2 seconds if you actually squatted.

[PingG10guy]

[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392396504' post='8667627']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392348131' post='8664591']
I wish I could unsee your swing. And unparticipate in this thread.
[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read in weeks.
[/quote]

MODS delete the thread before the goats press charges

[PingG10guy]

[quote name='chrisgilly09' timestamp='1392351658' post='8665023']
Couldn't be bothered reading this whole thing, but agree in principle with slumped shoulders, less anterior tilt.

How the heck do you see the ball otherwise?
[/quote]

I know...but he said abunch of false stuff regarding the positions and how they influence movement.

And Fort Worth Pro should post more often.

[chrisgilly09]

Ya, I like what he has to say regarding NG360 and Como's stuff.

[BTP]

Your observation and curiosity is all good, DJ Watts. I've found myself that consciously focusing on "proper posture" feels less athletic and more so like I am using more energy to maintain positions rather than making a trained/unconscious athletic swing.

Just a few things of note, "neutral spine" applies to the positioning of the pelvis. That is, a more anteriorly rotated pelvis is not neutral and a more posteriorly rotated pelvis is also not neutral. Anteriorly rotating the pelvis puts the lumbar spine in more extension = excess lordosis. A posteriorly rotated pelvis, puts the lumbar spine in more of a flexion state. "Neutral spine" allows the lumbar spine to maintain its natural lordotic posture.

To find neutral spine yourself, anteriorly rotate and then posteriorly rotate the pelvis, then locate the middle ground. Once found, flex from the hips approximately 45*.

The only real difference from the older vs modern players is that the modern players' posture is related to muscle positioning whereas the Hogan through Nicklaus era were less concerned with muscle orientation.
The spinal positions between Older vs Modern is actually quite similar: Each has a natural spinal orientation of Cervical Lordosis, Thoracic Kyphosis, Lumbar Lordosis, and the fixed Sacral Kyphotic posture. The thoracic kyphosis is more evident in the older generation - again, because of the conscious muscle line of pull. Modern players are taught to retract the scapulas, which naturally makes the thoracic spine kyphosis less apparent. Older generation presents with the "rounded shoulder" posture putting the individual into more of a forward head posture and more kyphotic thoracic spine.

Here's an article I've had bookmarked that may be of interest. It discusses the relationship between shoulder turn vs hip turn and its effect on distance. I would argue that regardless of spinal positioning, muscle orientation - the longer hitters all have one thing in common: Greater degree of shoulder turn to less degree of hip turn.

http://perfectgolfswingreview.net/xfactor.htm

[DJ Watts]

I want to thank everyone who has commented on this thread. Believe it or not, I appreciate every comment. We're all here because we love either the golf swing and/or the game. Agree or disagree with me, I just love discussing the swing.

Peace,

DJ Watts

[Hoganstriker]

The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.

[gabh]

[quote name='drewtaylor21' timestamp='1392318752' post='8661023']
[quote name='gabh' timestamp='1392281898' post='8658107']

Less thoracic flexion needs more tailbone release, so you're forced to sorta like early extend or early hump the goat too early too much. That would seriously compress your discs on lumbar spine up to the tailbone. Whereas more thoracic flexion means a more horizontal turn of hips will do, such as Hogan and Nicklaus; even just extending your left side or left hip will do, such as Snead and Nelson. These chaps never had serious lower back injuries. Nicklaus' injury is not due to his hip turn, it's due to his unnecessary or overly tilted lumbar at post impact and finish. Hogan, Snead and Nelson stood up as soon as they've hit the ball. Jack didn't, and I wonder why.
[/quote]

Sorry but I think you are making things up here....less thoracic flexion means you have to early extend? No, it's the other way around! The more you flex the spine at any point compared to address, the less room there is for the hands to come in to the ball. This causes the hips to early extend so that the club doesn't crash into the ground a foot fat.

Besides, wasn't Hogan's vertical posture due to his car accident and the injuries he sustained there? It was the only way he could swing at that point.
[/quote]

You just verified what I said Sir. Yes, when your thoracic is less flexed at address, you need to flex them more during the swing, hence you need to early extend, hump the goat or release the tailbone earlier or more. That's what I said, what you said.

The rationale for this is when your thoracic is less flexed, your shoulders would naturally turn more flat. When you transition with hips, the shoulder rotation will be even more flat. You'll whiff the ball without any compensations (sweet spot over plane) because the shoulders is on plane to the space above the ball. The most subconscious or instinctive way to get the shoulders to turn steeper or less flat is early extend to bring down the shoulders on plane to the ball.

Hogan's thoracic is flexed more than what we see today. He's upright on forward flexion (hips), but thoracic is bent or flexed over.

[lastmacuser]

[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392422147' post='8670337']
[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392396504' post='8667627']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392348131' post='8664591']
I wish I could unsee your swing. And unparticipate in this thread.
[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read in weeks.
[/quote]

MODS delete the thread before the goats press charges
[/quote]

Stop it my ribs hurt.

[gabh]

[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392431633' post='8671231']
The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.
[/quote]

I think the main issue related to this thoracic tilt or flex is how the shoulders turn (the angle or plane the shoulders turn). Let's remember that the shoulders would always naturally turn perpendicular to the spine it revolves around. That part of the spine is somewhere between the thoracic and cervical spines. So the angle of the thoracic is important for people concerned about the plane their shoulders turn. If the angle of the thoracic and cervical doesn't match with the downswing plane you wish the shoulders to turn parallel to, you'd have to manipulate the lower spines to get the shoulders turn parallel to such plane.

[gabh]

[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392436178' post='8671783']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392422147' post='8670337']
[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392396504' post='8667627']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392348131' post='8664591']
I wish I could unsee your swing. And unparticipate in this thread.
[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read in weeks.
[/quote]

MODS delete the thread before the goats press charges
[/quote]

Stop it my ribs hurt.
[/quote]

The usual substitution for the goat is the standing up thru impact. You'll look good but you'll be crazy inconsistent.

[gabh]

[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392436178' post='8671783']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392422147' post='8670337']
[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392396504' post='8667627']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392348131' post='8664591']
I wish I could unsee your swing. And unparticipate in this thread.
[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read in weeks.
[/quote]

MODS delete the thread before the goats press charges
[/quote]

Stop it my ribs hurt.
[/quote]

Why your ribs hurt, lack of thoracic flexion and tailbone release?

[Hoganstriker]

[quote name='gabh' timestamp='1392437266' post='8671869']
[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392431633' post='8671231']
The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.
[/quote]

I think the main issue related to this thoracic tilt or flex is how the shoulders turn (the angle or plane the shoulders turn). Let's remember that the shoulders would always naturally turn perpendicular to the spine it revolves around. That part of the spine is somewhere between the thoracic and cervical spines. So the angle of the thoracic is important for people concerned about the plane their shoulders turn. If the angle of the thoracic and cervical doesn't match with the downswing plane you wish the shoulders to turn parallel to, you'd have to manipulate the lower spines to get the shoulders turn parallel to such plane.
[/quote]

I mean if the 'plane' of rotation in the 'shoulders' together has a lot of meaning within a golfers system then maybe it's important for them.
Personally I am not concerned with that very much.

[gabh]

[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392438551' post='8671995']
[quote name='gabh' timestamp='1392437266' post='8671869']
[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392431633' post='8671231']
The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.
[/quote]

I think the main issue related to this thoracic tilt or flex is how the shoulders turn (the angle or plane the shoulders turn). Let's remember that the shoulders would always naturally turn perpendicular to the spine it revolves around. That part of the spine is somewhere between the thoracic and cervical spines. So the angle of the thoracic is important for people concerned about the plane their shoulders turn. If the angle of the thoracic and cervical doesn't match with the downswing plane you wish the shoulders to turn parallel to, you'd have to manipulate the lower spines to get the shoulders turn parallel to such plane.
[/quote]

I mean if the 'plane' of rotation in the 'shoulders' together has a lot of meaning within a golfers system then maybe it's important for them.
Personally I am not concerned with that very much.
[/quote]

I think it's important, especially for beginners, because being aware of it early IMO prevents a lot of potential issues. It's the shoulders that determines where the arms go, where the hands go, where the club goes, and where the sweetspot goes. So if where the shoulders go is not ideal, you have to get the arms, hands, club and sweetspot tweaked or manipulated. I think this is why when Hogan became aware of his plane, his game changed to a whole new level. His confidence grew. One major variable solved.

[lastmacuser]

[quote name='gabh' timestamp='1392437886' post='8671951']
[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392436178' post='8671783']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392422147' post='8670337']
[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392396504' post='8667627']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392348131' post='8664591']
I wish I could unsee your swing. And unparticipate in this thread.
[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read in weeks.
[/quote]

MODS delete the thread before the goats press charges
[/quote]

Stop it my ribs hurt.
[/quote]

Why your ribs hurt, lack of thoracic flexion and tailbone release?
[/quote]

You guys are killing me.

[Hoganstriker]

[quote name='gabh' timestamp='1392439259' post='8672063']
[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392438551' post='8671995']
[quote name='gabh' timestamp='1392437266' post='8671869']
[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392431633' post='8671231']
The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.
[/quote]

I think the main issue related to this thoracic tilt or flex is how the shoulders turn (the angle or plane the shoulders turn). Let's remember that the shoulders would always naturally turn perpendicular to the spine it revolves around. That part of the spine is somewhere between the thoracic and cervical spines. So the angle of the thoracic is important for people concerned about the plane their shoulders turn. If the angle of the thoracic and cervical doesn't match with the downswing plane you wish the shoulders to turn parallel to, you'd have to manipulate the lower spines to get the shoulders turn parallel to such plane.
[/quote]

I mean if the 'plane' of rotation in the 'shoulders' together has a lot of meaning within a golfers system then maybe it's important for them.
Personally I am not concerned with that very much.
[/quote]

I think it's important, especially for beginners, because being aware of it early IMO prevents a lot of potential issues. It's the shoulders that determines where the arms go, where the hands go, where the club goes, and where the sweetspot goes. So if where the shoulders go is not ideal, you have to get the arms, hands, club and sweetspot tweaked or manipulated. I think this is why when Hogan became aware of his plane, his game changed to a whole new level. His confidence grew. One major variable solved.
[/quote]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL_6M_xZvq0

[Fort Worth Pro]

[quote name='chrisgilly09' timestamp='1392425950' post='8670703']
Ya, I like what he has to say regarding NG360 and Como's stuff.
[/quote]
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392422501' post='8670381']
[quote name='chrisgilly09' timestamp='1392351658' post='8665023']
Couldn't be bothered reading this whole thing, but agree in principle with slumped shoulders, less anterior tilt.

How the heck do you see the ball otherwise?
[/quote]

I know...but he said abunch of false stuff regarding the positions and how they influence movement.

And Fort Worth Pro should post more often.
[/quote]

Thanks guys. I appreciate the kind words. Will try to post more. Between teaching, practicing a little and then with the new baby at home it's likely to stay somewhat limited but I will definitely try to make more effort to be consistent on here

[gabh]

[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392422501' post='8670381']
[quote name='chrisgilly09' timestamp='1392351658' post='8665023']
Couldn't be bothered reading this whole thing, but agree in principle with slumped shoulders, less anterior tilt.

How the heck do you see the ball otherwise?
[/quote]

I know...but he said abunch of false stuff regarding the positions and how they influence movement.

And Fort Worth Pro should post more often.
[/quote]

Agree with FWPro posting more often.

But can you point out specifically the things DJ said that IYO are false stuff? Just saying generalizing that they're false without explaining it and saying they're not proper research seems like, with due respect, a weak windup to me.

[Jobu]

[quote name='Fort Worth Pro' timestamp='1392400915' post='8668117']
[quote name='Jobu' timestamp='1392398490' post='8667845']
[quote name='Fort Worth Pro' timestamp='1392320872' post='8661279']
Dj, I am fine with you relaying anecdoctly what works for you but find it disingenuous to call it research. There are many people doing real scientific research and using that word is very loaded with meaning.
[/quote]

Science is a social tool. That's why it's a school subject.
[/quote]


Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge"[1]) is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.[2][3] In an older and closely related meaning, "science" also refers to a body of knowledge itself, of the type that can be rationally explained and reliably applied. A practitioner of science is known as a scientist.

Science is testable and repeatable
[/quote]

The universe worked without our knowledge of it.

[jons1]

If you perform a physiological activity like twisting your spine over and over again, you're going to damage your back. It's not a matter of if you will, it's a matter of how bad you will. Your spine is really not designed very well to perform that motion.

In the 'good 'ol days' people would try to keep the ball in play with the equipment they had. Now you can swing 100% and still put the ball in play. That extra torque causes more damage. Back pain of the past was from the reverse C, back pain today is caused by excessive torque and a desire to achieve 'x factor'... imo.

[RBImGuy]

If you perform a physiological activity like twisting your spine over and over again, you're going to damage your back. It's not a matter of if you will, it's a matter of how bad you will. Your spine is really not designed very well to perform that motion.

 

In the 'good 'ol days' people would try to keep the ball in play with the equipment they had. Now you can swing 100% and still put the ball in play. That extra torque causes more damage. Back pain of the past was from the reverse C, back pain today is caused by excessive torque and a desire to achieve 'x factor'... imo.

 

yea and if you twist it like Rory here, your into hurt.

adress and set up wont hurt your spine or back.

impact will.

 

[DJ Watts]

I've have a persimmon headed driver [i](actually, a whole set of woods from driver to 5w)[/i] that I've taken to the range to hit balls with a couple of times to see if the modern equipment does require a different swing from the old.

Even with the persimmon head, you should have no problem getting a modern ball into the air.

It's of course shorter than the standard modern driver and I found myself swinging it much as I would a fairway wood or 3-hybrid.

With the older ball that was actually used with persimmon - sure, Nicklaus, Snead and others could hit 300 yard drives - longer than most of the players on Tour today with all of their modern equipment.

I got this club up into the mid-120's on the SSR, but I didn't want to break the thing [i](it was a gift)[/i], and I probably won't hit it ever again, but I have the video!

The classic address position allows a full pivot without loading the lower back, and you can swing all day. The bent-over address of the modern players - very hard on the lower back.

And the modern players [b]don't[/b] swing [i]"harder"[/i] than the old fellows did, those guys nearly came out of their shoes at times. How many modern players could hit it as far as Nicklaus in his prime, or Snead, or Palmer, using the old equipment?

Not many. And then they'd have a trip to the fitness trailer to get that back worked on.

I'm telling you, friends - I'll be 44 next month, and the only working out I do is when I hit balls or walk a few holes playing golf. I can hit balls all day, really, without any back fatigue or pain and it's not because I'm superhuman - it's the posture and the stance, among several reasons.

[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gqXVP8SF7Q&feature=youtu.be[/media]

Peace,

DJ Watts

[PingG10guy]

[quote name='gabh' timestamp='1392437886' post='8671951']
[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392436178' post='8671783']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392422147' post='8670337']
[quote name='lastmacuser' timestamp='1392396504' post='8667627']
[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1392348131' post='8664591']
I wish I could unsee your swing. And unparticipate in this thread.
[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read in weeks.
[/quote]

MODS delete the thread before the goats press charges
[/quote]

Stop it my ribs hurt.
[/quote]

Why your ribs hurt, lack of thoracic flexion and tailbone release?
[/quote]
Bwahahaha

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392431633' post='8671231']
[b]The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk[/b] when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.
[/quote]

Lol the part I bolded shows you have no idea what you are talking about. You will never ever find an athlete that prefers to be in the old golfers position. It's hilarious you'd call it balanced in terms of health or injury risk. That position is about as weak as you can get, with the only exception being even more spinal flexion and getting more on your toes.

It's just funny you try to seem objective to either point, yet so clearly show bias in your statement. Also I'm pretty sure set up angles matter significantly. Nearly all coaches look at the set up position of the players, and I know tons that consider it the most important attribute...... I have literally never heard someone say your address position doesn't matter because you obviously move in the backswing.... In any activity where you start from one position and then move to another, obviously the initial position affects the manner at which you move to the next 2 positions.........

[Hoganstriker]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1392499951' post='8675521']
[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392431633' post='8671231']
[b]The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk[/b] when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.
[/quote]

Lol the part I bolded shows you have no idea what you are talking about. You will never ever find an athlete that prefers to be in the old golfers position. It's hilarious you'd call it balanced in terms of health or injury risk. That position is about as weak as you can get, with the only exception being even more spinal flexion and getting more on your toes.

It's just funny you try to seem objective to either point, yet so clearly show bias in your statement. Also I'm pretty sure set up angles matter significantly. Nearly all coaches look at the set up position of the players, and I know tons that consider it the most important attribute...... I have literally never heard someone say your address position doesn't matter because you obviously move in the backswing.... In any activity where you start from one position and then move to another, obviously the initial position affects the manner at which you move to the next 2 positions.........
[/quote]

The bolded part says in terms of health or injury risk. Your response is intended to be inflammatory but I do not find it so.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392506331' post='8676065']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1392499951' post='8675521']
[quote name='Hoganstriker' timestamp='1392431633' post='8671231']
[b]The discussion regarding address is amusing. What real diff does it make whether you rigidly try to set angles at address or address the ball naturally in a balanced position in terms of health or injury risk[/b] when you have to move out of that position quite a ways before there is any real load on the body?
Address is diff from top of bs which is diff from impact-there's movement so to me you cannot say one address style is safer or healthier than another.
It would be one thing if you immediately lifted a great load from address but thats not what happens in golf.
[/quote]

Lol the part I bolded shows you have no idea what you are talking about. You will never ever find an athlete that prefers to be in the old golfers position. It's hilarious you'd call it balanced in terms of health or injury risk. That position is about as weak as you can get, with the only exception being even more spinal flexion and getting more on your toes.

It's just funny you try to seem objective to either point, yet so clearly show bias in your statement. Also I'm pretty sure set up angles matter significantly. Nearly all coaches look at the set up position of the players, and I know tons that consider it the most important attribute...... I have literally never heard someone say your address position doesn't matter because you obviously move in the backswing.... In any activity where you start from one position and then move to another, obviously the initial position affects the manner at which you move to the next 2 positions.........
[/quote]

The bolded part says in terms of health or injury risk. Your response is intended to be inflammatory but I do not find it so.
[/quote]

Yet it's completely incorrect in that respect. I can read as well.
This is a really easy question, is it easier to hold a weight on your back if you have a straight back and bend at hip to establish the COG so you can hold onto it, or if you stand straighter at the hip and then round your back to establish that same COG?
Or to simplify even further, have someone push on your palm and try to overpower you. Try this with your entire arm extended(except the wrist of course, so the activity is even possible), vs being flexed at the elbow. Should be a pretty substantial difference.

[pinhigh27]

Touching back on the squatting issue and somehow being superior for the old guys(which is completely incorrect), this is precisely the reason that a squatter retracts their shoulders when squatting. Again, not as structurally sound(and thus injury proof) when the shoulders are just sitting there, versus when they are retracted. Back is also less rounded when the shoulders are retracted.