Jim Venetos golf swing?

[Noke]

This swing does eliminate a number of mistakes in the golf swing

No sway ,no slide of the hips going down.no spin .insufficient weight on the left side side at impact , among others.

 

With the poor advice available from most sources on the internet and the failure of in person instruction to help most golfers,the ideas presented in this video might actually help the average golfer

 

I am no swing expert, so I will bounce this off you. Isn't he, in essence, just pre-setting the impact position?

 

Yes he is, and in his lessons, he states this.

 

I have passed it on to many of my older customers (over 55) and those that have taken the time to see Jims videos have improved 10 fold over what their instructor has been able to do for them in over a year. Their accuracy is really spot on. Kinda of funny to see an old goat hitting the 100 yard sign 10 times out of a small bucket while a young buck is trying to do the same and can't come within 10 yards of it.

 

People also don't realize the PGA has only had a unified instructional program for about 25 years.

Prior to that, every PGA pro taught what he felt was important, just as Venetos and others do with their own line of thought.

The USGTF (I am not a member of any group) has more teaching professionals than the PGA does nationwide.

 

Granted, you won't hit a ball 300 yards (carry) down the center of the fairway with it, but in 45 years I have never seen anyone do it in person throughout a round of golf. So difficult that even the pros don't do it on all par 4's and 5's during a round and 68% is what the current average is on tour I do believe.

 

It may not be for every one but I say time and again, what works for you is what you should do. You don't play against the other players on the course, you play against the course. Do what works.

 

With most golfers, 95%, being weekend warriors, hackers, nothing on the level you guys are, taking the many moving parts out of the swing produces a swing that can actually hit the ball consistently, which is what weekend warriors need first.

 

The average player cannot coordinate all the necessary moves and or moving parts in a professionals golf swing and return the face of the club to square with the target line. They just can't. So this takes out much of the guess work and allows the person to strike the ball much better and include in it a slight draw.

 

Thanks,

 

I am not sure I would feel it necessary to adopt Jim's method, but I don't see how his method is so offensive to many in this forum. I don't have a problem with a teacher going "against the grain" as well as it seems to be well thought out. Get to the left side, try to get some shaft lean, inside path to the ball. Nothing seems to be absurd here other than in trying to produce the motion the set up appears to be extreme.

 

Agreed, and I wonder if there isn't a broader question here that could be addressed.

 

Can (more?) consistent golf be played from the extremes?

[The Pearl]

Noke,

 

I think it is an interesting discussion, as well as can golf be played from a simpler approach such as a club focused instruction taught by Manuel De Le Torre. In most endeavors, the simpler approach usually results in the best process. I suspect golf is no different.

 

A few days ago I was on the range at one of our local muni and was next to the head pro giving a high school female golfer a lesson. He obviously knew his stuff, but in the hour I was casually "listening", he launched so much stuff a her that it will take years for a player of her skill level to incorporate. It just seems that Jim is trying to simplify the process which seems to me is at least heading in the right direction.

 

Most people hit the ball better by simply putting both feet together and swinging the club toward the target, so go figure.

 

As far as using extremes, I don't see any particular problem with this, especially if a golfer is trying to make a major change. The extremes don't have to stay in place forever, but can be "eased" off as learning takes place. Much of the criticism of Jim's method is based on that it will result in "big slinging hooks" or "40 yd draws". Many players would kill to get the ball moving right to left regardless of degree. Geez, once somebody can start moving it that big, they simply back off of the extreme.

 

But like most disciplines, everybody is defending their biases.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

Does Jim teach out of Warner Springs Ranch? Looks like that's where the videos were shot.....

[DocParty]

How bizarre: A thread gets started about an instructor's swing method, and the instructor is not welcome in the thread.

 

Or, the instructor comes into the thread, is rude to multiple people, won't answer questions about many inconsistent things he says, calls everyone who questions him a hack, and when again he is questioned about some fundamental inconsistencies in what he had said, the instructor picks up his ball and goes home.

 

An opinion of yours or something you can support with documents other than 'that's the way I see it"?

[DocParty]

Noke,

 

I think it is an interesting discussion, as well as can golf be played from a simpler approach such as a club focused instruction taught by Manuel De Le Torre. In most endeavors, the simpler approach usually results in the best process. I suspect golf is no different.

 

A few days ago I was on the range at one of our local muni and was next to the head pro giving a high school female golfer a lesson. He obviously knew his stuff, but in the hour I was casually "listening", he launched so much stuff a her that it will take years for a player of her skill level to incorporate. It just seems that Jim is trying to simplify the process which seems to me is at least heading in the right direction.

 

Most people hit the ball better by simply putting both feet together and swinging the club toward the target, so go figure.

 

As far as using extremes, I don't see any particular problem with this, especially if a golfer is trying to make a major change. The extremes don't have to stay in place forever, but can be "eased" off as learning takes place. Much of the criticism of Jim's method is based on that it will result in "big slinging hooks" or "40 yd draws". Many players would kill to get the ball moving right to left regardless of degree. Geez, once somebody can start moving it that big, they simply back off of the extreme.

 

But like most disciplines, everybody is defending their biases.

 

"Many players would kill to get the ball moving right to left regardless of degree."

 

You are oh so right.

To simply be able to hit a consistent draw vs an out of control inconsistent slice would take a dozen strokes off a hackers game.

People still don't understand that 60 plus years later the average golfer, the hacker, still shoots @ 97-100 for a legitimate round figuring handicap as the PGA-USGA does.

Those that don't count all their strokes, simply don't count in this calculation.

 

And one would be surprised how many do not count all the strokes. My opinion is 75% or more.

 

I volunteer in my senior days as a marshal at many courses and see it every time I go out.

 

It's not that this is the solution for everyone's swing. Jim does not present it like that.

 

However, if it helps someone to improve their game, then way are so many people angered about it being out there?

Seems odd.

[bph7]

How bizarre: A thread gets started about an instructor's swing method, and the instructor is not welcome in the thread.

 

Or, the instructor comes into the thread, is rude to multiple people, won't answer questions about many inconsistent things he says, calls everyone who questions him a hack, and when again he is questioned about some fundamental inconsistencies in what he had said, the instructor picks up his ball and goes home.

 

An opinion of yours or something you can support with documents other than 'that's the way I see it"?

 

Yeh the documents are somewhere in the Panama Papers. Almost everything anyone posts in this forum is a question or opinion. So yes, out of those two, it was an opinion. I think the opinion is strongly supported by the record of posts in this thread and that more people would agree with it than not. But yes, you have correctly identified my statement as an opinion (although I'm not sure what your point is).

[Hoganstriker]

Venetos is not a fundamentally sound method IMO.

[ALIF]

Can I hit a draw with this method?

[DocParty]

This swing does eliminate a number of mistakes in the golf swing

No sway ,no slide of the hips going down.no spin .insufficient weight on the left side side at impact , among others.

 

With the poor advice available from most sources on the internet and the failure of in person instruction to help most golfers,the ideas presented in this video might actually help the average golfer

 

I am no swing expert, so I will bounce this off you. Isn't he, in essence, just pre-setting the impact position?

You are exactly correct.

[DocParty]

2-3 yard draws...that's ducking hilarious...

If you can't hit a 2-3 yard draw maybe the driving range is the best place to go?

A slight draw just like a slight push are both necessary in golf if one really wants to play to their maximum ability.

Now I know lots of people post that have no ability at all on the course if playing by the rules but it's not possible to filter these out.

So, I'd suspect 80% of the complaints and even of the claims here are bogus.

The problem with today's golf instruction is the same thing that was wrong 70 years ago. It does not work for the average weekend warrior/hacker.

This positional hitting method will work for anyone if it's something that is given a bucket of balls a day for a week.

As with any instruction in golf the student has to do it, and do it over and over again. Golfers are most likely the worst students there are in any sport.

They already know everything and can't be taught anything that will stick, but complain every hole that the 'club' let them down.

 

Equipment, if it were the trick to the game, would have us all hitting in the 70's. It's not.

It's the swing that makes your shot and nothing else.

 

CYa

[DocParty]

Can I hit a draw with this method?

This method is meant to hit a 2-3 yard draw. Personally I believe most people end up with a 5 to 10 yard draw until they perfect the swing.

If someone actually looks at Jims videos, joins his online school, sends in some vids that he can critique, they will find it not only works but it works very well.

The hardest thing for people to do is 'STAY STILL'.

We have all been taught to shift our weight. That is fine if you are a pro or an am headed to the pro circuit.

But, with the weekend warriors, the 95% of golfers, this is a very simple and sound method.

It's the simplicity that bothers people along with the 'STAY STILL' requirement.

I will personally tell you that any movement can reduce your results somewhat; however, the first time you stay so still you feel like a statue swing a club you will indeed hit that sweet little draw and if you are like many others, you'll get even more distance out of your clubs.

CYa

[DocParty]

Venetos is not a fundamentally sound method IMO.

We all have opinions like other parts of the body.

If you don't like something that's fine. But if you have a criticism it ought to be explained.

Not fundamentally sound based on what? The past 70 years of what they teach today that has not dropped the average round of golfs score?

It's still 97 to 100 and has been for half a century. So what might really be the problem? The way they teach the swing is the only thing left.

Equipment advancements have been tremendous over the past 25 years yet no one gets better.

It appears golf is difficult for you and you are not willing to try something that might help you?

[iteachgolf]

Venetos is not a fundamentally sound method IMO.

We all have opinions like other parts of the body.

If you don't like something that's fine. But if you have a criticism it ought to be explained.

Not fundamentally sound based on what? The past 70 years of what they teach today that has not dropped the average round of golfs score?

It's still 97 to 100 and has been for half a century. So what might really be the problem? The way they teach the swing is the only thing left.

Equipment advancements have been tremendous over the past 25 years yet no one gets better.

It appears golf is difficult for you and you are not willing to try something that might help you?

.

 

Just stop. Handicaps HAVE gone down steadily over last 20 years. And as equipment has improved courses have gotten more difficult and hundreds of yards longer. Less than 10% of golfers take lessons, and those that do are significantly better as a group than those who don't. Facts go against every point you tried to make.

[garyt]

How bizarre: A thread gets started about an instructor's swing method, and the instructor is not welcome in the thread.

 

Or, the instructor comes into the thread, is rude to multiple people, won't answer questions about many inconsistent things he says, calls everyone who questions him a hack, and when again he is questioned about some fundamental inconsistencies in what he had said, the instructor picks up his ball and goes home.

 

An opinion of yours or something you can support with documents other than 'that's the way I see it"?

 

Yeh the documents are somewhere in the Panama Papers. Almost everything anyone posts in this forum is a question or opinion. So yes, out of those two, it was an opinion. I think the opinion is strongly supported by the record of posts in this thread and that more people would agree with it than not. But yes, you have correctly identified my statement as an opinion (although I'm not sure what your point is).

 

I don't agree with it. What I see is a guy who came to this forum to talk about his swing and got attacked by the know it alls who can't be wrong. Did he then respond in kind to some posters, maybe but what are you supposed to do? We could have had a guy who teaches a unique swing on here for people who're interested but instead he was run off. Kinda sad , really.

[Bsgolf53]

How bizarre: A thread gets started about an instructor's swing method, and the instructor is not welcome in the thread.

 

Or, the instructor comes into the thread, is rude to multiple people, won't answer questions about many inconsistent things he says, calls everyone who questions him a hack, and when again he is questioned about some fundamental inconsistencies in what he had said, the instructor picks up his ball and goes home.

 

An opinion of yours or something you can support with documents other than 'that's the way I see it"?

 

Yeh the documents are somewhere in the Panama Papers. Almost everything anyone posts in this forum is a question or opinion. So yes, out of those two, it was an opinion. I think the opinion is strongly supported by the record of posts in this thread and that more people would agree with it than not. But yes, you have correctly identified my statement as an opinion (although I'm not sure what your point is).

 

I don't agree with it. What I see is a guy who came to this forum to talk about his swing and got attacked by the know it alls who can't be wrong. Did he then respond in kind to some posters, maybe but what are you supposed to do? We could have had a guy who teaches a unique swing on here for people who're interested but instead he was run off. Kinda sad , really.

Did you actually watch and listen to this crap?

[bph7]

How bizarre: A thread gets started about an instructor's swing method, and the instructor is not welcome in the thread.

 

Or, the instructor comes into the thread, is rude to multiple people, won't answer questions about many inconsistent things he says, calls everyone who questions him a hack, and when again he is questioned about some fundamental inconsistencies in what he had said, the instructor picks up his ball and goes home.

 

An opinion of yours or something you can support with documents other than 'that's the way I see it"?

 

Yeh the documents are somewhere in the Panama Papers. Almost everything anyone posts in this forum is a question or opinion. So yes, out of those two, it was an opinion. I think the opinion is strongly supported by the record of posts in this thread and that more people would agree with it than not. But yes, you have correctly identified my statement as an opinion (although I'm not sure what your point is).

 

I don't agree with it. What I see is a guy who came to this forum to talk about his swing and got attacked by the know it alls who can't be wrong. Did he then respond in kind to some posters, maybe but what are you supposed to do? We could have had a guy who teaches a unique swing on here for people who're interested but instead he was run off. Kinda sad , really.

 

I'd love for Venetos to come back too. This thread was fun when he was here. He left because when his 25 yard draw 8 iron method was questioned, he couldn't stand the scrutiny.

[garyt]

Venetos is not a fundamentally sound method IMO.

We all have opinions like other parts of the body.

If you don't like something that's fine. But if you have a criticism it ought to be explained.

Not fundamentally sound based on what? The past 70 years of what they teach today that has not dropped the average round of golfs score?

It's still 97 to 100 and has been for half a century. So what might really be the problem? The way they teach the swing is the only thing left.

Equipment advancements have been tremendous over the past 25 years yet no one gets better.

It appears golf is difficult for you and you are not willing to try something that might help you?

.

 

Just stop. Handicaps HAVE gone down steadily over last 20 years. And as equipment has improved courses have gotten more difficult and hundreds of yards longer. Less than 10% of golfers take lessons, and those that do are significantly better as a group than those who don't. Facts go against every point you tried to make.

 

I'd be interested to see data showing hdcps going down. As for courses getting longer, that has no effect on anybody but guys playing the tips. they can build 8000 yard courses and that will have no effect on this 60 year old golfer who plays from 6400 yards or less. That's why they have multiple tees. I have no doubt people who take lessons improve more than those that don't because they're more likely to practice and are probably more serious golfers.

[iteachgolf]

Venetos is not a fundamentally sound method IMO.

We all have opinions like other parts of the body.

If you don't like something that's fine. But if you have a criticism it ought to be explained.

Not fundamentally sound based on what? The past 70 years of what they teach today that has not dropped the average round of golfs score?

It's still 97 to 100 and has been for half a century. So what might really be the problem? The way they teach the swing is the only thing left.

Equipment advancements have been tremendous over the past 25 years yet no one gets better.

It appears golf is difficult for you and you are not willing to try something that might help you?

.

 

Just stop. Handicaps HAVE gone down steadily over last 20 years. And as equipment has improved courses have gotten more difficult and hundreds of yards longer. Less than 10% of golfers take lessons, and those that do are significantly better as a group than those who don't. Facts go against every point you tried to make.

 

I'd be interested to see data showing hdcps going down. As for courses getting longer, that has no effect on anybody but guys playing the tips. they can build 8000 yard courses and that will have no effect on this 60 year old golfer who plays from 6400 yards or less. That's why they have multiple tees. I have no doubt people who take lessons improve more than those that don't because they're more likely to practice and are probably more serious golfers.

Except that most golfers simply play "the white tees" which has been getting longer and longer. Most don't play a yardage. And virtually every old course in town here has been redone and lengthened in the last 10-15 years. And they didn't add a tee, every tee box moved further back. USGA and plenty of others have posted the data that handicaps have steadily been going down for decades.

[garyt]

Venetos is not a fundamentally sound method IMO.

We all have opinions like other parts of the body.

If you don't like something that's fine. But if you have a criticism it ought to be explained.

Not fundamentally sound based on what? The past 70 years of what they teach today that has not dropped the average round of golfs score?

It's still 97 to 100 and has been for half a century. So what might really be the problem? The way they teach the swing is the only thing left.

Equipment advancements have been tremendous over the past 25 years yet no one gets better.

It appears golf is difficult for you and you are not willing to try something that might help you?

.

 

Just stop. Handicaps HAVE gone down steadily over last 20 years. And as equipment has improved courses have gotten more difficult and hundreds of yards longer. Less than 10% of golfers take lessons, and those that do are significantly better as a group than those who don't. Facts go against every point you tried to make.

 

I'd be interested to see data showing hdcps going down. As for courses getting longer, that has no effect on anybody but guys playing the tips. they can build 8000 yard courses and that will have no effect on this 60 year old golfer who plays from 6400 yards or less. That's why they have multiple tees. I have no doubt people who take lessons improve more than those that don't because they're more likely to practice and are probably more serious golfers.

Except that most golfers simply play "the white tees" which has been getting longer and longer. Most don't play a yardage. And virtually every old course in town here has been redone and lengthened in the last 10-15 years. And they didn't add a tee, every tee box moved further back. USGA and plenty of others have posted the data that handicaps have steadily been going down for decades.

 

I can't think of a single course in my area that has been lengthened. They just don't have the room if they wanted to in most cases. And if they did lengthen the tips, they'd have no reason to lengthen the whites. It just isn't happening.

[iteachgolf]

We all have opinions like other parts of the body.

If you don't like something that's fine. But if you have a criticism it ought to be explained.

Not fundamentally sound based on what? The past 70 years of what they teach today that has not dropped the average round of golfs score?

It's still 97 to 100 and has been for half a century. So what might really be the problem? The way they teach the swing is the only thing left.

Equipment advancements have been tremendous over the past 25 years yet no one gets better.

It appears golf is difficult for you and you are not willing to try something that might help you?

.

 

Just stop. Handicaps HAVE gone down steadily over last 20 years. And as equipment has improved courses have gotten more difficult and hundreds of yards longer. Less than 10% of golfers take lessons, and those that do are significantly better as a group than those who don't. Facts go against every point you tried to make.

 

I'd be interested to see data showing hdcps going down. As for courses getting longer, that has no effect on anybody but guys playing the tips. they can build 8000 yard courses and that will have no effect on this 60 year old golfer who plays from 6400 yards or less. That's why they have multiple tees. I have no doubt people who take lessons improve more than those that don't because they're more likely to practice and are probably more serious golfers.

Except that most golfers simply play "the white tees" which has been getting longer and longer. Most don't play a yardage. And virtually every old course in town here has been redone and lengthened in the last 10-15 years. And they didn't add a tee, every tee box moved further back. USGA and plenty of others have posted the data that handicaps have steadily been going down for decades.

 

I can't think of a single course in my area that has been lengthened. They just don't have the room if they wanted to in most cases. And if they did lengthen the tips, they'd have no reason to lengthen the whites. It just isn't happening.

 

So because you haven't experienced it, it isn't happening? The golf courses here were redesigned and they moved greens, tees, changed routing and moved bunkers. It's happened all over the country to various degrees.

 

All new courses are built longer the greens are WAY faster and firmer than they were 30 years ago. There's no arguing that golf courses are more difficult now a days. And again handicaps have gone down steadily.

[Petunia Sprinkle]

If you want to say that your way is an easier way for some people to do it, I won't argue...however, using buzz words to claim it's more powerful doesn't fly.

 

There's a reason nearly every guy who has done well in long driving has lateral movement off the ball and shifts into the rear leg.

 

It could be that's all they've ever tried. The history of a lot of sports is filled with lateral movement, so it's not unreasonable to assume that's a given. However, it doesn't preclude other possibilities. After all, we haven't seen the Western Roll in high jumping for quite some time.

[garyt]

"So because you haven't experienced it, it isn't happening? The golf courses here were redesigned and they moved greens, tees, changed routing and moved bunkers. It's happened all over the country to various degrees. "

 

So because you have experienced it ,it's happening everywhere? We can go at this all day. Let's just agree to disagree.

[iteachgolf]

"So because you haven't experienced it, it isn't happening? The golf courses here were redesigned and they moved greens, tees, changed routing and moved bunkers. It's happened all over the country to various degrees. "

 

So because you have experienced it ,it's happening everywhere? We can go at this all day. Let's just agree to disagree.

 

I didn't say it's happening everywhere. But you did say it wasn't happening. There's the big difference. And it's happening frequently all over the country, especially top courses. And then all new courses being built are considerably longer than they ever where in the past. Courses are firmer and faster and overall more difficult than they were 20 years ago. Any state golf association that rates courses could explain and prove that to you. It's not just the tips that are rated harder when most courses are being rerated. The whole point is that the claims that handicaps haven't gone done, which is false, is a byproduct of poor instruction, when fewer than 10% actually take golf lessons, is completely false. Standing on your front foot while aiming a mile right and hitting hooks isn't the best way to make golfers better. It'd trading one problem for another.

[oikos1]

2-3 yard draws...that's ducking hilarious...

If you can't hit a 2-3 yard draw maybe the driving range is the best place to go?

A slight draw just like a slight push are both necessary in golf if one really wants to play to their maximum ability.

Now I know lots of people post that have no ability at all on the course if playing by the rules but it's not possible to filter these out.

So, I'd suspect 80% of the complaints and even of the claims here are bogus.

The problem with today's golf instruction is the same thing that was wrong 70 years ago. It does not work for the average weekend warrior/hacker.

This positional hitting method will work for anyone if it's something that is given a bucket of balls a day for a week.

As with any instruction in golf the student has to do it, and do it over and over again. Golfers are most likely the worst students there are in any sport.

They already know everything and can't be taught anything that will stick, but complain every hole that the 'club' let them down.

 

Equipment, if it were the trick to the game, would have us all hitting in the 70's. It's not.

It's the swing that makes your shot and nothing else.

 

CYa

 

Jimmy Venetos alive and well...

 

[4thand11]

Bumping this thread to chime in that this swing is very similar to Kiran Kanwar's "minimalist golf swing" (MGS)... main difference that I see is more weight kept on the left side with Jim's swing. I am sure there are some other minor differences as well although the core fundamentals seem very similar. In fact I stumbled across this old thread when searching for info on Kiran's MGS swing.

 

I've been using Kiran's swing for a while now and I have to laugh at people who have clearly never tried this type of swing, dismissing it out of hand. I am almost 50yo and drive approx 290 yds using Kiran's swing. Before I switched I averaged about 240-250. My iron compression is night and day, more penetrating flight, better distance. Easier on the back as well. Only problem with this swing is that I find hitting a fade difficult, it is naturally a draw.

 

I think there are a lot of misconceptions especially by better players who have mastered a more traditional swing, that any alternative is some sort of gimmick, or quick-fix for high-handicappers who can't learn the "real" swing. This is simply false and rather condescending imo. If you are happy with your current swing then by all means have at it, but don't dismiss something out of hand that you have have never tried, or even seen in action on a course.

 

Just my 2 cents.

[northgolf]

Bumping this thread to chime in that this swing is very similar to Kiran Kanwar's "minimalist golf swing" (MGS)... main difference that I see is more weight kept on the left side with Jim's swing. I am sure there are some other minor differences as well although the core fundamentals seem very similar. In fact I stumbled across this old thread when searching for info on Kiran's MGS swing.

 

I've been using Kiran's swing for a while now and I have to laugh at people who have clearly never tried this type of swing, dismissing it out of hand. I am almost 50yo and drive approx 290 yds using Kiran's swing. Before I switched I averaged about 240-250. My iron compression is night and day, more penetrating flight, better distance. Easier on the back as well. Only problem with this swing is that I find hitting a fade difficult, it is naturally a draw.

 

I think there are a lot of misconceptions especially by better players who have mastered a more traditional swing, that any alternative is some sort of gimmick, or quick-fix for high-handicappers who can't learn the "real" swing. This is simply false and rather condescending imo. If you are happy with your current swing then by all means have at it, but don't dismiss something out of hand that you have have never tried, or even seen in action on a course.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Who cares how far you hit it, what's your handicap.

[4thand11]

 

Who cares how far you hit it, what's your handicap.

 

Why does that matter? I'm a weekend player who plays maybe 20 rounds a year. I'm telling you that I hit the ball farther, straighter, and my contact is much better using this type of swing than when using the traditional body-rotation type swing. I used to fight a slice and now almost all of my shots are a slight draw and I don't even worry about the right side of the course.

 

I don't keep a handicap but I can say my typical scores have gone down quite a bit since I switched. I am hitting it better, having shorter approach shots, and hitting more greens. My short game is still atrocious, sadly.

 

Anyway my point is that people should not comment on a swing before they've even seen it for themselves, much less tried it. The first comments itt were all about "this looks like a great way to hit a 40-yd duck hook", etc. - which shows a complete ignorance of the swing and the results it produces.

[4thand11]

Worked for me just over the last two days.

I'm physically disabled with discs and knees and braces.

Hit the 5 wood further than I ever have with a slight draw.

Every club I have tried has worked.

Keeping still is the hardest thing to do because I feel like I'm not hitting the ball hard enough. Old school concept.

I'm going to keep it up, give it a complete try and see if this old man can improve his game.

May not be for everyone, who knows, but for me it works, doesn't hurt my damaged back or knees and I get better flight and distance.

CYa

 

Yeah this is the toughest part to learn (or rather "unlearn"). It takes time to trust that you can generate the same power without all the extra movement.

 

There is a radical misconception, I am quite convinced, about exactly how power is generated in the golf swing. There was an 8-hc earlier itt who (to his credit) actually tried the swing, rather than just mocking it like most on here. He said after getting the feel down he was hitting it just as far as his normal swing. So was he lying, or do we need to assume that his "real" swing must have some fundamental flaw?

 

Honestly considering Jim seemed like a good sport and was exceedingly courteous in his answers, it's pretty sad the reaction he got from the regulars here. Golf is supposed to be a game for gentlemen, or so they say.

[northgolf]

Who cares how far you hit it, what's your handicap.

 

Why does that matter? I'm a weekend player who plays maybe 20 rounds a year. I'm telling you that I hit the ball farther, straighter, and my contact is much better using this type of swing than when using the traditional body-rotation type swing. I used to fight a slice and now almost all of my shots are a slight draw and I don't even worry about the right side of the course.

 

I don't keep a handicap but I can say my typical scores have gone down quite a bit since I switched. I am hitting it better, having shorter approach shots, and hitting more greens. My short game is still atrocious, sadly.

 

Anyway my point is that people should not comment on a swing before they've even seen it for themselves, much less tried it. The first comments itt were all about "this looks like a great way to hit a 40-yd duck hook", etc. - which shows a complete ignorance of the swing and the results it produces.

 

I know several people who use a "Venetos" like swing - none of them are particularly good and I take money off them regularly. Your statements about how you play in no way contradict that - better than atrocious is not necessarily good.

[powerpushfade]

Who cares how far you hit it, what's your handicap.

 

Why does that matter? I'm a weekend player who plays maybe 20 rounds a year. I'm telling you that I hit the ball farther, straighter, and my contact is much better using this type of swing than when using the traditional body-rotation type swing. I used to fight a slice and now almost all of my shots are a slight draw and I don't even worry about the right side of the course.

 

I don't keep a handicap but I can say my typical scores have gone down quite a bit since I switched. I am hitting it better, having shorter approach shots, and hitting more greens. My short game is still atrocious, sadly.

 

Anyway my point is that people should not comment on a swing before they've even seen it for themselves, much less tried it. The first comments itt were all about "this looks like a great way to hit a 40-yd duck hook", etc. - which shows a complete ignorance of the swing and the results it produces.

 

I know several people who use a "Venetos" like swing - none of them are particularly good and I take money off them regularly. Your statements about how you play in no way contradict that - better than atrocious is not necessarily good.

You must be awesome!