Jim Venetos golf swing?

[AndyC]

[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410881863' post='10126191']...... However, it will not be as powerful and would probably be limiting the potential of lots of decent players....... [/quote]

Fact or opinion? It's amazing that people can determine the efficacy of a method without ever really trying it. Most good golfers have way too much time and sweat invested in their current swings to abandon the status quo and try something so radically different. I certainly won't be rushing to the range to try this out but I also wouldn't condemn it out of hand.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='caeleric' timestamp='1410881155' post='10126129']
preface: i still don't like jv's swing and would never try it.

BUT, he brings up iron byron. i have always thought of iron byron as a way to support target-side biased swings like foley, snt, bender, etc. no weight shift off the ball for iron byron, and that's how a lot of empirical testing is done on golf clubs, right? so, i guess my question is why are we pounding jv for advocating no weight shift when iron byron doesn't shift either? no agenda in this question, just genuinely curious.
[/quote]

It's a machine. It doesn't have to obey the anatomical constraints of the human body. You could put a hydraulic piston on it strong enough to hit the ball 10,000 yards(assuming you could design a ball and clubhead to withstand this) and it wouldn't have to shift pressure. You can use iron byron for club testing, but it's 0 % applicable for someone's golf swing.

[northgolf]

[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1410970159' post='10132727']
[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410881863' post='10126191']...... However, it will not be as powerful and would probably be limiting the potential of lots of decent players....... [/quote]

Fact or opinion? It's amazing that people can determine the efficacy of a method without ever really trying it. Most good golfers have way too much time and sweat invested in their current swings to abandon the status quo and try something so radically different. I certainly won't be rushing to the range to try this out but I also wouldn't condemn it out of hand.
[/quote]

The method is an OTT flippy move. Most of us have past experience with over the top flippy moves, so we don't need to try this method to know its efficacy.

[AndyC]

[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1410979283' post='10133747']
[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1410970159' post='10132727']
[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410881863' post='10126191']...... However, it will not be as powerful and would probably be limiting the potential of lots of decent players....... [/quote]

Fact or opinion? It's amazing that people can determine the efficacy of a method without ever really trying it. Most good golfers have way too much time and sweat invested in their current swings to abandon the status quo and try something so radically different. I certainly won't be rushing to the range to try this out but I also wouldn't condemn it out of hand.
[/quote]

The method is an OTT flippy move. Most of us have past experience with over the top flippy moves, so we don't need to try this method to know its efficacy.
[/quote]


OTT of what? Backswing plane, target line? OTT of backswing plane can be said of many major champions. As for the flippy move, where exactly do you see that?

[northgolf]

[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1410980808' post='10133935']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1410979283' post='10133747']
[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1410970159' post='10132727']
[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410881863' post='10126191']...... However, it will not be as powerful and would probably be limiting the potential of lots of decent players....... [/quote]

Fact or opinion? It's amazing that people can determine the efficacy of a method without ever really trying it. Most good golfers have way too much time and sweat invested in their current swings to abandon the status quo and try something so radically different. I certainly won't be rushing to the range to try this out but I also wouldn't condemn it out of hand.
[/quote]

The method is an OTT flippy move. Most of us have past experience with over the top flippy moves, so we don't need to try this method to know its efficacy.
[/quote]


OTT of what? Backswing plane, target line? OTT of backswing plane can be said of many major champions. As for the flippy move, where exactly do you see that?
[/quote]

I see the flip right before impact in every one of the JV videos posted in this thread - I assume that is why he likes to slow mo it to the top of the backswing position, blather on for minutes on end, then full speed it through impact so you don't see just how horrendous a swing he has (that would also explain the extremely poor video quality and absolutely stupid camera angles). If you don't see the OTT move, then you don't understand his set up position - from a stance as closed as his the only way to get anywhere near to online is to be completely OTT.

There is no reason to try swingcrack, just say no.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410876304' post='10125763']
[quote name='Sabanator' timestamp='1410875146' post='10125673']
To all the skeptics and naysayers about this guy's swing, how about taking a few moments of your time and test it out? I stated earlier ITT that range rat at our course uses this swing and he can smash it much further than I. I've tried it myself and I didn't have any trouble picking it up. Mostly hit straight shots and at about the same distances of my usual swing.

Being relatively new to this forum, I can now see why the some of the other swing gurus probably no longer post here. State an opinion and then deal with all the bulls**t that follows.

Lucky for us all that Monte has the patience of Job and sticks around this place.
[/quote]

Not everyone in this forum is interested in trying every new method or concept that they see in every thread. In fact, the people that do that almost never improve. As for this thread, as Monte said earlier we make jokes sometimes. This is going to get joked about, get over it, if it improves your game then just get better with it and have fun, no one is stopping you. As for Jim, he did avoid legitimate questions. Since you are new, I will say why its important to question the "pros" that show up on here with their own methods: historically, lots of people who have no idea what they are doing do this and will hurt many people's games. I'm not saying Jim is one of them necessarily, but its worthwhile to see how they respond to legitimate questions. Trust me, if you look around the internet long enough, everyone will have a monthly program that will change your game. Guess what, lots of them don't.
[/quote]

That's what I don't understand. People think you can just "try out" methods and be like " oh yeah that works pretty well so I'm gonna keep it," My own pattern changes on it's own, god forbid I try some random method what would happen to it. That's the easy way to get screwed up in any endeavor basically, jumping around from method to method. See the same thing with powerlifting training, people want to change programs every other month and spin their wheels. Anytime someone makes a distinct change in their approach to nearly any activity, the dividends from doing so aren't going to appear unless you give it a good amount of time ( let's arbitrarily say 6 months+).

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='caeleric' timestamp='1410958643' post='10131485']
[quote name='tembolo1284' timestamp='1410881402' post='10126151']
[quote name='caeleric' timestamp='1410881155' post='10126129']
preface: i still don't like jv's swing and would never try it.

BUT, he brings up iron byron. i have always thought of iron byron as a way to support target-side biased swings like foley, snt, bender, etc. no weight shift off the ball for iron byron, and that's how a lot of empirical testing is done on golf clubs, right? so, i guess my question is why are we pounding jv for advocating no weight shift when iron byron doesn't shift either? no agenda in this question, just genuinely curious.
[/quote]

Because iron byron is a robot? Human beings don't work that way.

Sir you need more bacon in your diet to get you thinking clearly!
[/quote]


mmmmmm. bacon. i've recently started cooking bacon like [url="http://www.thekitchn.com/tip-for-perfect-bacon-add-a-little-water-to-the-pan-191595"]this.[/url] significantly less mess, and bacon comes out much better than just throwing it into a hot pan. but i digress.

but what about the robot is different than we are? and if it's that different, why is it an acceptable standard for testing clubs? why not build something that more approximates a more "human" swing, if iron byron isn't apples to apples? again, i'm just genuinely trying to understand.
[/quote]

Because something that approximates a human's swing wouldn't be valid for testing clubs. The whole point of having a robot is to minimize the tolerances and make it so you can focus on the performance of the clubs. Even PGA Tour pros wouldn't be consistent enough to perform club tests and have the data be valid. It's why you will never see scientific research on the golf swing involving actual humans in terms of hitting the ball. You can examine anatomical stuff going on, but as soon as you get into contact, the tolerances are so high that it's not possible to objectively examine anything.

You have muscles that have opposing effects that cause various effects in the swing, tissue that opposes and facilitates stretch and reactionary movement, a brain that is constantly varying the amount of tension and force your muscles can generate based on how stable it feels your position is, I could go on for days. Iron byron is just a rotating lever. It will never feel unstable or have problems hitting a position because of it's mobility. I'm not saying Iron Byron isn't a useful tool, however you have to find the right application for every tool.

[garyt]

[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1410979283' post='10133747']
[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1410970159' post='10132727']
[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410881863' post='10126191']...... However, it will not be as powerful and would probably be limiting the potential of lots of decent players....... [/quote]

Fact or opinion? It's amazing that people can determine the efficacy of a method without ever really trying it. Most good golfers have way too much time and sweat invested in their current swings to abandon the status quo and try something so radically different. I certainly won't be rushing to the range to try this out but I also wouldn't condemn it out of hand.
[/quote]

The method is an OTT flippy move. Most of us have past experience with over the top flippy moves, so we don't need to try this method to know its efficacy.
[/quote]

OTT? This swing may be many things,but OTT is not one of them.

[northgolf]

[quote name='garyt' timestamp='1410998741' post='10136305']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1410979283' post='10133747']
[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1410970159' post='10132727']
[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410881863' post='10126191']...... However, it will not be as powerful and would probably be limiting the potential of lots of decent players....... [/quote]

Fact or opinion? It's amazing that people can determine the efficacy of a method without ever really trying it. Most good golfers have way too much time and sweat invested in their current swings to abandon the status quo and try something so radically different. I certainly won't be rushing to the range to try this out but I also wouldn't condemn it out of hand.
[/quote]

The method is an OTT flippy move. Most of us have past experience with over the top flippy moves, so we don't need to try this method to know its efficacy.
[/quote]

OTT? This swing may be many things,but OTT is not one of them.
[/quote]

The planes in golf are define relative to your stance. With a dramatically closed stance and an arm path going left, you are OTT. What you are evangelizing is a massive OTT swing which is assuaged by a retarded compensatory setup. If you don't think the JV swing is an OTT move, well just keep drinking the Kool-Aid. I bet you don't believe in evolution either.

[Just looking]

[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411002837' post='10136855']
[quote name='garyt' timestamp='1410998741' post='10136305']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1410979283' post='10133747']
[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1410970159' post='10132727']
[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1410881863' post='10126191']...... However, it will not be as powerful and would probably be limiting the potential of lots of decent players....... [/quote]

Fact or opinion? It's amazing that people can determine the efficacy of a method without ever really trying it. Most good golfers have way too much time and sweat invested in their current swings to abandon the status quo and try something so radically different. I certainly won't be rushing to the range to try this out but I also wouldn't condemn it out of hand.
[/quote]

The method is an OTT flippy move. Most of us have past experience with over the top flippy moves, so we don't need to try this method to know its efficacy.
[/quote]

OTT? This swing may be many things,but OTT is not one of them.
[/quote]

The planes in golf are define relative to your stance. With a dramatically closed stance and an arm path going left, you are OTT. What you are evangelizing is a massive OTT swing which is assuaged by a retarded compensatory setup. If you don't think the JV swing is an OTT move, well just keep drinking the Kool-Aid. I bet you don't believe in evolution either.
[/quote]

I hope he doesn't believe in evolution, even Darwin didn't believe in his own theory. You're better off using Mendel's Law of Genetics to make your point. Evolution is junk science. Sorry for the side note. Just hate the whole "evolution is the gold standard" thing. Carry on

[northgolf]

^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.

[Just looking]

[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you

[northgolf]

[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411004577' post='10137113']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you
[/quote]

Actually, it would bode quite well for me. A LAW in science is just theory as well. LAWs are just a theory which has experimental evidence waiting for an experiment which evidences them wrong.

You aren't arguing science, you are arguing philosophy or religion (belief). By it's very nature a scientist does not believe in anything: they postulate theories and use empirical evidence to assert their validity. Belief is for the religious - it is an act of faith.


Bring it on.

[Noke]

[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411004577' post='10137113']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you
[/quote]

You may be an expert scientist- but even if so- you are in the extreme minority of that community if you disavow the Theory of Evolution. A theory does not grow into a law if watered.

[Just looking]

[quote name='nohny noke' timestamp='1411005425' post='10137263']
[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411004577' post='10137113']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you
[/quote]

You may be an expert scientist- but even if so- you are in the extreme minority of that community if you disavow the Theory of Evolution. A theory does not grow into a law if watered.
[/quote]

Actually, I'm not in the minority. What we teach, and what we know to be true are two different things in the scientific community. Why is it like this? Well, you can draw your own conclusions as to the why. And, in scientific terms, Evolution doesn't even qualify for the title of "Theory". I'm not going to further take away from the topic of this thread. If you want to know more, pm me.

[Just looking]

[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411005202' post='10137221']
[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411004577' post='10137113']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you
[/quote]

Actually, it would bode quite well for me. A LAW in science is just theory as well. LAWs are just a theory which has experimental evidence waiting for an experiment which evidences them wrong.

You aren't arguing science, you are arguing philosophy or religion (belief). By it's very nature a scientist does not believe in anything: they postulate theories and use empirical evidence to assert their validity. Belief is for the religious - it is an act of faith.


Bring it on.
[/quote]

I did not use the word "belief" or "religion" at all, you did. I used a scientific law to refute Evolution. I can give you at least ten scientific reasons why evolution, as Darwin describes it, is impossible. If you want to continue this conversation, pm me. This thread isn't about Darwin

[eightiron]

I didn't know people actually believed Darwin's Theory lmfao , you have to be a mental midget to think its fact

[northgolf]

[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411006544' post='10137411']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411005202' post='10137221']
[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411004577' post='10137113']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you
[/quote]

Actually, it would bode quite well for me. A LAW in science is just theory as well. LAWs are just a theory which has experimental evidence waiting for an experiment which evidences them wrong.

You aren't arguing science, you are arguing philosophy or religion (belief). By it's very nature a scientist does not believe in anything: they postulate theories and use empirical evidence to assert their validity. Belief is for the religious - it is an act of faith.


Bring it on.
[/quote]

I did not use the word "belief" or "religion" at all, you did. I used a scientific law to refute Evolution. I can give you at least ten scientific reasons why evolution, as Darwin describes it, is impossible. If you want to continue this conversation, pm me. This thread isn't about Darwin
[/quote]

You refuted nothing, you made an unsupported assertion, as have all the swingcrack proponents on this thread (hmmm, relevance). BTW, Mendel's Law of Genetics is orthogonal to the theory of evolution.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411006544' post='10137411']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411005202' post='10137221']
[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411004577' post='10137113']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you
[/quote]

Actually, it would bode quite well for me. A LAW in science is just theory as well. LAWs are just a theory which has experimental evidence waiting for an experiment which evidences them wrong.

You aren't arguing science, you are arguing philosophy or religion (belief). By it's very nature a scientist does not believe in anything: they postulate theories and use empirical evidence to assert their validity. Belief is for the religious - it is an act of faith.


Bring it on.
[/quote]

I did not use the word "belief" or "religion" at all, you did. I used a scientific law to refute Evolution. I can give you at least ten scientific reasons why evolution, as Darwin describes it, is impossible. If you want to continue this conversation, pm me. This thread isn't about Darwin
[/quote]'
lol what? you used a law about genetics to somehow reflect on evolution. alrighty then

[Noke]

[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411006544' post='10137411']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411005202' post='10137221']
[quote name='Just looking' timestamp='1411004577' post='10137113']
[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411004330' post='10137099']
^^^ yeah, evolution is only a theory. Religion doesn't work that way.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about religion, talking about science. In scientific terms, evolution is a THEORY, not a LAW. I suggest you not debate science with me, won't bode well for you
[/quote]

Actually, it would bode quite well for me. A LAW in science is just theory as well. LAWs are just a theory which has experimental evidence waiting for an experiment which evidences them wrong.

You aren't arguing science, you are arguing philosophy or religion (belief). By it's very nature a scientist does not believe in anything: they postulate theories and use empirical evidence to assert their validity. Belief is for the religious - it is an act of faith.


Bring it on.
[/quote]

I did not use the word "belief" or "religion" at all, you did. I used a scientific law to refute Evolution. I can give you at least ten scientific reasons why evolution, as Darwin describes it, is impossible. If you want to continue this conversation, pm me. This thread isn't about Darwin
[/quote]

PM'ed. Thanks for being polite and suggesting that this conversation go there.

[Noke]

[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1411006735' post='10137439']
I didn't know people actually believed Darwin's Theory lmfao , you have to be a mental midget to think its fact
[/quote]

Can't tell if you're serious.

[bph7]

What. Is. Going. On. Is. This. Real. Life? I guess this is a logical place for this thread to have ended up....

[northgolf]

Yes BPH, when you don't know you are OTT, then everything gets existential (feel isn't real).

[pinhigh27]

Mendel's work isn't really related to Darwin's at all... Glad we turned this into the discovery channel though. The concept of how someones genome passes down doesn't have much to do with the concept for some traits being beneficial and others being harmful.... If anything it would support Darwin's work in my opinion....

[ej002]

Dumbarses it's intelligent design / end thread

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='ej002' timestamp='1411009319' post='10137719']
Dumbarses it's intelligent design / end thread
[/quote]

Hogan is God and out of generosity he just decided to let other people win a few, seems pretty clear to me. And now we've established that the Hoganites are a religion

[ej002]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1411009566' post='10137745']
[quote name='ej002' timestamp='1411009319' post='10137719']
Dumbarses it's intelligent design / end thread
[/quote]
Hogan is God and out of generosity he just decided to let other people win a few, seems pretty clear to me. And now we've established that the Hoganites are a religion
[/quote]

Or maybe a blasphemous cult - Bc everyone knows that the darkside = truth and the way.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='ej002' timestamp='1411009669' post='10137761']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1411009566' post='10137745']
[quote name='ej002' timestamp='1411009319' post='10137719']
Dumbarses it's intelligent design / end thread
[/quote]
Hogan is God and out of generosity he just decided to let other people win a few, seems pretty clear to me. And now we've established that the Hoganites are a religion
[/quote]

Or maybe a blasphemous cult - Bc everyone knows that the darkside = truth and the way.
[/quote]

Who is the dark side then, Schoen?

[LaggingBehind]

[quote name='northgolf' timestamp='1411008164' post='10137603']
Yes BPH, when you don't know you are OTT, then everything gets existential (feel isn't real).
[/quote]
Doesn't look OTT to me, nor does it look flippy. He releases AFTER impact from the vids I see and he also has a shallow in-out descent (not OTT).

[eightiron]

[quote name='nohny noke' timestamp='1411007551' post='10137545']
[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1411006735' post='10137439']
I didn't know people actually believed Darwin's Theory lmfao , you have to be a mental midget to think its fact
[/quote]

Can't tell if you're serious.
[/quote]

I'm from another galaxy