Who on tour has a Malaska type swing??

[Over it]

DAP: Ok now it's "very shallow" not just shallow...lol! I stand by what I said Mac is not steep in transition and like you agreed he's shallow enough... that's it. You're now trying to say he's not as shallow as some other Tour pro's... so? That wasn't my argument. Some are more shallow and some less than others but they are still not steep.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

Following along here and relishing in the irony.....

 

So, as I've read I've heard ' beta torque' mentioned by 97% of the posters as if it's a universally-established golf term....

A lot of comments about COM relationship to the hand path/force plane thrown around as if it's absolute scientific law....

 

MM obviously isn't in or 'up' on the latest bio circle jerk. Whats hard for me to wrap my dome around is that 99% of these folks commenting if you asked them a couple years ago, not only would they most likely be bashing Manzella and MacKenzie.... they proabably would have agreed with Malaskas model. But so goes the ebb and flow of the tide of trying to relevant in golf instruction lol.

 

Rant over. Flame on.

 

COM and it's relationship to force plane is physics law.

 

How is your teaching career going?

Lol. Teaching golf was never my career. Would have been just fine if I pursued it exclusively . but my income is exponentially higher in the business world so I follow the money. Maybe if I just understood physics things would have turned out differently?

[Over it]

Dap: Rory is not steep in transition if you think he is then you must not understand what he does, here's a look at him. If he were doing Malaska's move his butt end would point at the yellow line coming down but he's parallel to his original shaft line... he's shallow not steep. He said this about his over drawing the ball....

 

"Once the club starts to come down I try to get my left knee out of the way. One of the flaws that can creep into my swing is my left knee going towards the ball, the club gets behind me and I need to save it with my hands or I’ll hit a big draw."

 

 

[media=]

[/media]

[Fort Worth Pro]

Following along here and relishing in the irony.....

 

So, as I've read I've heard ' beta torque' mentioned by 97% of the posters as if it's a universally-established golf term....

A lot of comments about COM relationship to the hand path/force plane thrown around as if it's absolute scientific law....

 

MM obviously isn't in or 'up' on the latest bio circle jerk. Whats hard for me to wrap my dome around is that 99% of these folks commenting if you asked them a couple years ago, not only would they most likely be bashing Manzella and MacKenzie.... they proabably would have agreed with Malaskas model. But so goes the ebb and flow of the tide of trying to relevant in golf instruction lol.

 

Rant over. Flame on.

 

COM and it's relationship to force plane is physics law.

 

How is your teaching career going?

Lol. Teaching golf was never my career. Would have been just fine if I pursued it exclusively . but my income is exponentially higher in the business world so I follow the money. Maybe if I just understood physics things would have turned out differently?

 

Your Last sentence would have been a good start. Buying a trackman is a pretty big investment in something you never intended to do pretty seriously.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

I took that as trying to get the guy more depth in the backswing which will help him shallow

 

But the guy got clearly steeper in transition yet it was stated that he got shallower based apparently on a sim ball flight. Obviously you can still draw the ball with the COM shifting WAY above the hand path. Depth had nothing to do with his transition issues.

 

Personally I don’t think the guys swing needed an overhaul. The shaft pitch looked the same in both swings. To me it was a simple tweak that allowed him to approach the ball a little more from the inside and potentially improve his transition issues over time.

 

PKTD just has an axe to grind with anyone that has anything to do with Joe Mayo even if they get it correct.

 

That video was an edited 30 second quick tip and the goal was to show off the store. The hands were to get deeper to limit the inside takeaway and the resulting lift to the top. Where does that say I believe in steepening the shaft early to get the hands lower at impact? Was that a successful lesson? No, of course not. It wasn't even a lesson. It was a quick tip as that's what the company wanted to do, quick tips. I'm sure you could correct anyone in 30 seconds though.

This has nothing to do with Mayo bud. However, since you mentioned it, your subtle credibility attacks against a teacher with far more stripes than you does resemble his old tactics. Gotta bust your balls a bit when you've got video footage of a player who steepens the clubs COM and adds positive 'beta' torque in both examples..... yet you've crusaded on in this thread about how wrong Malaska is. I never said you couldn't or didn't potentially help this player, just that you obviously had no idea about any of these concepts at the time. Yet now...

[bigseanc12]

If he were doing Malaska's move his butt end would point at the yellow line coming down

 

Is this trolling?

 

I’ve been following this thread and really can’t tell if some of you are serious or if this is a bunch of bored people waiting for the next “journey to scratch” thread where they can poop on someone’s swing.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

Following along here and relishing in the irony.....

 

So, as I've read I've heard ' beta torque' mentioned by 97% of the posters as if it's a universally-established golf term....

A lot of comments about COM relationship to the hand path/force plane thrown around as if it's absolute scientific law....

 

MM obviously isn't in or 'up' on the latest bio circle jerk. Whats hard for me to wrap my dome around is that 99% of these folks commenting if you asked them a couple years ago, not only would they most likely be bashing Manzella and MacKenzie.... they proabably would have agreed with Malaskas model. But so goes the ebb and flow of the tide of trying to relevant in golf instruction lol.

 

Rant over. Flame on.

 

COM and it's relationship to force plane is physics law.

 

How is your teaching career going?

Lol. Teaching golf was never my career. Would have been just fine if I pursued it exclusively . but my income is exponentially higher in the business world so I follow the money. Maybe if I just understood physics things would have turned out differently?

 

Your Last sentence would have been a good start. Buying a trackman is a pretty big investment in something you never intended to do pretty seriously.

This stuff isn't that complicated Mike. You really think I don't understand? Who said I wasn't serious about what I did? What I said was it wasn't all I did. What I take offense to and what really turned me off to a certain subset in the industry, is the application of the science/tech. IMO, it's not being used to "advance the industry" but more to discredit and get a leg up. This thread is a perfect example bud.

[TB07]

I took that as trying to get the guy more depth in the backswing which will help him shallow

 

But the guy got clearly steeper in transition yet it was stated that he got shallower based apparently on a sim ball flight. Obviously you can still draw the ball with the COM shifting WAY above the hand path. Depth had nothing to do with his transition issues.

 

Personally I don’t think the guys swing needed an overhaul. The shaft pitch looked the same in both swings. To me it was a simple tweak that allowed him to approach the ball a little more from the inside and potentially improve his transition issues over time.

 

PKTD just has an axe to grind with anyone that has anything to do with Joe Mayo even if they get it correct.

 

That video was an edited 30 second quick tip and the goal was to show off the store. The hands were to get deeper to limit the inside takeaway and the resulting lift to the top. Where does that say I believe in steepening the shaft early to get the hands lower at impact? Was that a successful lesson? No, of course not. It wasn't even a lesson. It was a quick tip as that's what the company wanted to do, quick tips. I'm sure you could correct anyone in 30 seconds though.

This has nothing to do with Mayo bud. However, since you mentioned it, your subtle credibility attacks against a teacher with far more stripes than you does resemble his old tactics. Gotta bust your balls a bit when you've got video footage of a player who steepens the clubs COM and adds positive 'beta' torque in both examples..... yet you've crusaded on in this thread about how wrong Malaska is. I never said you couldn't or didn't potentially help this player, just that you obviously had no idea about any of these concepts at the time. Yet now...

 

I didn't ask him to steepen the shaft as a matter of fact I talked about shallowing it. Again, it was a 30 second "quick tip" to show off the store/simulator. The goal was to get two diff shot shapes for the simulator within two swings. A real lesson would be totally different but regardless I didn't preach a move to steepen early so the hands could get lower at impact .

[Fort Worth Pro]

Following along here and relishing in the irony.....

 

So, as I've read I've heard ' beta torque' mentioned by 97% of the posters as if it's a universally-established golf term....

A lot of comments about COM relationship to the hand path/force plane thrown around as if it's absolute scientific law....

 

MM obviously isn't in or 'up' on the latest bio circle jerk. Whats hard for me to wrap my dome around is that 99% of these folks commenting if you asked them a couple years ago, not only would they most likely be bashing Manzella and MacKenzie.... they proabably would have agreed with Malaskas model. But so goes the ebb and flow of the tide of trying to relevant in golf instruction lol.

 

Rant over. Flame on.

 

COM and it's relationship to force plane is physics law.

 

How is your teaching career going?

Lol. Teaching golf was never my career. Would have been just fine if I pursued it exclusively . but my income is exponentially higher in the business world so I follow the money. Maybe if I just understood physics things would have turned out differently?

 

Your Last sentence would have been a good start. Buying a trackman is a pretty big investment in something you never intended to do pretty seriously.

This stuff isn't that complicated Mike. You really think I don't understand? Who said I wasn't serious about what I did? What I said was it wasn't all I did. What I take offense to and what really turned me off to a certain subset in the industry, is the application of the science/tech. IMO, it's not being used to "advance the industry" but more to discredit and get a leg up. This thread is a perfect example bud.

did you buy a trackman to advance the industry or to get a leg up on the teacher's around you? As an industry we all need to continue learning everything we need to get s leg up on teacher's who aren't learning more and more and through that leg up we can advance the industry. I have had numerous guys in my section come to me with questions because they saw me getting a leg up.

[Over it]

If he were doing Malaska's move his butt end would point at the yellow line coming down

 

Is this trolling?

 

I've been following this thread and really can't tell if some of you are serious or if this is a bunch of bored people waiting for the next "journey to scratch" thread where they can poop on someone's swing.

 

 

Really? it's got to do with the butt of the club and Rory's swing. It's got nothing to do with you, I don't remember addressing my post to you. Maybe you're trolling?

[PutterKilledTheDream]

To advance the industry and offer a service that wasn't available at the time. Period. However the industry is insecure as a whole with limited market share. What happens as a result is obvious. ( Like this thread).

[Fort Worth Pro]

To advance the industry and offer a service that wasn't available at the time. Period. However the industry is insecure as a whole with limited market share. What happens as a result is obvious. ( Like this thread).

 

"To offer a service that wasn't available at the time". I.e. To get a leg up on the competition in my area.

 

How is gaining more knowledge , sharing it and promoting it showing insecurity? This is a forum to share ideas and talk about the golf swing. That's what we are doing.

[Over it]

The smart survive, it's a free country and anyone can take advantage of the advances in tech if they so choose. If they don't they got no reason to complain about those who do, period,

[bigseanc12]

If he were doing Malaska's move his butt end would point at the yellow line coming down

 

Is this trolling?

 

I've been following this thread and really can't tell if some of you are serious or if this is a bunch of bored people waiting for the next "journey to scratch" thread where they can poop on someone's swing.

 

 

Really? it's got to do with the butt of the club and Rory's swing. It's got nothing to do with you, I don't remember addressing my post to you. Maybe you're trolling?

 

Nobody points the butt of the club behind them at that point in the swing because of one of these videos.

 

Also, thank you for editing your post to make it more clear.

 

This thread should be locked before it gets any more ridiculously off track.

[Over it]

If he were doing Malaska's move his butt end would point at the yellow line coming down

 

Is this trolling?

 

I've been following this thread and really can't tell if some of you are serious or if this is a bunch of bored people waiting for the next "journey to scratch" thread where they can poop on someone's swing.

 

 

Really? it's got to do with the butt of the club and Rory's swing. It's got nothing to do with you, I don't remember addressing my post to you. Maybe you're trolling?

 

Nobody points the butt of the club behind them at that point in the swing because of one of these videos.

 

Also, thank you for editing your post to make it more clear.

 

This thread should be locked before it gets any more ridiculously off track.

 

 

First it's pointing more at the yellow line and not behind them, second there are many who would point it towards that yellow shaft line on the way down thus they are steep not shallow. Malaska is one who does exactly that in his own swing he's steeper all the way and that's a fact.

 

 

Thread is not off track except for some who want to derail it because they don't like the fact that their guy is promoting a steep club in transition. It's right in his video's straight from the horses mouth, don't blame us for what he teaches.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

To advance the industry and offer a service that wasn't available at the time. Period. However the industry is insecure as a whole with limited market share. What happens as a result is obvious. ( Like this thread).

 

"To offer a service that wasn't available at the time". I.e. To get a leg up on the competition in my area.

 

How is gaining more knowledge , sharing it and promoting it showing insecurity? This is a forum to share ideas and talk about the golf swing. That's what we are doing.

Not even close to accurate. I already had two other business ventures when I bought the unit. Was gonna be used with the USD program initially and I was consulting with other instructors to make the data available at a reasonable cost. Not competing against. If you believe this thread is about sharing info and not tearing down others you're not a bright as I thought.

[Fort Worth Pro]

To advance the industry and offer a service that wasn't available at the time. Period. However the industry is insecure as a whole with limited market share. What happens as a result is obvious. ( Like this thread).

 

"To offer a service that wasn't available at the time". I.e. To get a leg up on the competition in my area.

 

How is gaining more knowledge , sharing it and promoting it showing insecurity? This is a forum to share ideas and talk about the golf swing. That's what we are doing.

Not even close to accurate. I already had two other business ventures when I bought the unit. Was gonna be used with the USD program initially and I was consulting with other instructors to make the data available at a reasonable cost. Not competing against. If you believe this thread is about sharing info and not tearing down others you're not a bright as I thought.

 

What malaska said about gravity and its effect on the club is wrong. I am not tearing him down or saying he can't help people when I say that.

[BottleCap]

Seems like when it comes to a top instructor like Malaska, guys likeTB7, iTeach and FWP have p3nis envy

[TB07]

Why would I envy Malaska or any other teacher? It doesn't effect me at all. I just want to get better at golf and learn more about the swing. People get offended when they are attached to something that is factually incorrect.

[iteachgolf]

Seems like when it comes to a top instructor like Malaska, guys likeTB7, iTeach and FWP have p3nis envy

 

What’s there to envy?

[jbw749]

Weather Malaska is right or not was irrelevant. It's the smugness from you guys that's putting me off.

 

[Hilts1969]

Seems like when it comes to a top instructor like Malaska, guys likeTB7, iTeach and FWP have p3nis envy

 

What’s there to envy?

 

His p3nis can you not read man

[Hawkeye77]

Seems like when it comes to a top instructor like Malaska, guys likeTB7, iTeach and FWP have p3nis envy

 

What’s there to envy?

 

His p3nis can you not read man

 

Apparently like a hydra.

[golow]

For the record the P envy comment is not cool or accurate .... I just think some top instructors like Dan and MMartin are really into accuracy of info to the enth degree and pursue it hard at times .... it’s what makes you guys successful in part I’m sure.

 

But try something for the people who click on this thread because they really like Malaskas stuff. Give your short bulleted list of a few things one could be envious of in reference to Malaska .... again not admitting envy.

 

I just want to see an instructor say something positive about another outside instructor.

 

PS FWP has the best swing of any instructor I’ve ever seen .... that’s just my opinion

[BottleCap]

For the record the P envy comment is not cool or accurate .... I just think some top instructors like Dan and MMartin are really into accuracy of info to the enth degree and pursue it hard at times .... it's what makes you guys successful in part I'm sure.

 

But try something for the people who click on this thread because they really like Malaskas stuff. Give your short bulleted list of a few things one could be envious of in reference to Malaska .... again not admitting envy.

 

I just want to see an instructor say something positive about another outside instructor.

 

PS FWP has the best swing of any instructor I've ever seen .... that's just my opinion

 

I disagree with you. You have to qualify that they are top GolfWrx IA instructors, Malaska is a Golf Digest top instructor, you won't ever see any Golf Digest top instructor on this forum. All I see them do is derail threads with their info that maybe half the folks don't care about. This thread was about something, but now it's not, no one asked them why Malaskas instruction sucks, but they decided to beat it into everyone.

 

Maybe they should start their own threads like "We'll tell you why (insert Golf Digest instructors name here) sucks" and keep their thoughts in there.

 

I don't even really follow Malaska's swing model, I'm a Hardy one planer, but I know there's more than one way to do and teach things and like to hear from folks on how they were helped and maybe tinker from time to time.

 

Jim Hardy has the best one plane and two plane swing of any instructor I've ever seen in person

[golow]

For the record the P envy comment is not cool or accurate .... I just think some top instructors like Dan and MMartin are really into accuracy of info to the enth degree and pursue it hard at times .... it's what makes you guys successful in part I'm sure.

 

But try something for the people who click on this thread because they really like Malaskas stuff. Give your short bulleted list of a few things one could be envious of in reference to Malaska .... again not admitting envy.

 

I just want to see an instructor say something positive about another outside instructor.

 

PS FWP has the best swing of any instructor I've ever seen .... that's just my opinion

 

I disagree with you. You have to qualify that they are top GolfWrx IA instructors, Malaska is a Golf Digest top instructor, you won't ever see any Golf Digest top instructor on this forum. All I see them do is derail threads with their info that maybe half the folks don't care about. This thread was about something, but now it's not, no one asked them why Malaskas instruction sucks, but they decided to beat it into everyone.

 

Maybe they should start their own threads like "We'll tell you why (insert Golf Digest instructors name here) sucks" and keep their thoughts in there.

 

I don't even really follow Malaska's swing model, I'm a Hardy one planer, but I know there's more than one way to do and teach things and like to hear from folks on how they were helped and maybe tinker from time to time.

 

Jim Hardy has the best one plane and two plane swing of any instructor I've ever seen in person

 

I basically agree .... I was just being a b****

[iteachgolf]

For the record the P envy comment is not cool or accurate .... I just think some top instructors like Dan and MMartin are really into accuracy of info to the enth degree and pursue it hard at times .... it's what makes you guys successful in part I'm sure.

 

But try something for the people who click on this thread because they really like Malaskas stuff. Give your short bulleted list of a few things one could be envious of in reference to Malaska .... again not admitting envy.

 

I just want to see an instructor say something positive about another outside instructor.

 

PS FWP has the best swing of any instructor I've ever seen .... that's just my opinion

 

I disagree with you. You have to qualify that they are top GolfWrx IA instructors, Malaska is a Golf Digest top instructor, you won't ever see any Golf Digest top instructor on this forum. All I see them do is derail threads with their info that maybe half the folks don't care about. This thread was about something, but now it's not, no one asked them why Malaskas instruction sucks, but they decided to beat it into everyone.

 

Maybe they should start their own threads like "We'll tell you why (insert Golf Digest instructors name here) sucks" and keep their thoughts in there.

 

I don't even really follow Malaska's swing model, I'm a Hardy one planer, but I know there's more than one way to do and teach things and like to hear from folks on how they were helped and maybe tinker from time to time.

 

Jim Hardy has the best one plane and two plane swing of any instructor I've ever seen in person

 

I think you’re very ignorant of the credentials of some of the teachers who post here

[golow]

For the record the P envy comment is not cool or accurate .... I just think some top instructors like Dan and MMartin are really into accuracy of info to the enth degree and pursue it hard at times .... it's what makes you guys successful in part I'm sure.

 

But try something for the people who click on this thread because they really like Malaskas stuff. Give your short bulleted list of a few things one could be envious of in reference to Malaska .... again not admitting envy.

 

I just want to see an instructor say something positive about another outside instructor.

 

PS FWP has the best swing of any instructor I've ever seen .... that's just my opinion

 

I disagree with you. You have to qualify that they are top GolfWrx IA instructors, Malaska is a Golf Digest top instructor, you won't ever see any Golf Digest top instructor on this forum. All I see them do is derail threads with their info that maybe half the folks don't care about. This thread was about something, but now it's not, no one asked them why Malaskas instruction sucks, but they decided to beat it into everyone.

 

Maybe they should start their own threads like "We'll tell you why (insert Golf Digest instructors name here) sucks" and keep their thoughts in there.

 

I don't even really follow Malaska's swing model, I'm a Hardy one planer, but I know there's more than one way to do and teach things and like to hear from folks on how they were helped and maybe tinker from time to time.

 

Jim Hardy has the best one plane and two plane swing of any instructor I've ever seen in person

 

I think you're very ignorant of the credentials of some of the teachers who post here

 

I know full well your juniors become competitive juniors and high school golfers, your mini tour guys have become tour players, and you've had tour player(s) win. More importantly you work long hours because you want to make players of all levels better. You are a great mind (like a computer IMO) in the instruction game and have greater and greater success as time goes on. Your resume should have more weight than it does. I'm also not impressed with any Magazine list ... that should carry less weight.

 

Did Bottlecap undersell some of the GolfWRX members who are instructors ... sure. But is that all you keyed in on from the above quoted posts ? My request and BC's general accusation of thread derailment. Come now.

[dap]

Dap: Rory is not steep in transition if you think he is then you must not understand what he does, here's a look at him. If he were doing Malaska's move his butt end would point at the yellow line coming down but he's parallel to his original shaft line... he's shallow not steep. He said this about his over drawing the ball....

 

"Once the club starts to come down I try to get my left knee out of the way. One of the flaws that can creep into my swing is my left knee going towards the ball, the club gets behind me and I need to save it with my hands or I’ll hit a big draw."

 

 

[media=]

[/media]

He gets in trouble sometimes mainly with the driver. I chose this video because it's shot at a neutral angle down the hand line so it's representative of what's going on.If you look at his transition the club is pointed halfway between his feet and the target line. That is steep. Is that very steep like handicap players? Of course not otherwise he wouldn't be playing on tour. It's still a wonderful swing but he can get a little underplane with this action.

 

[iteachgolf]

For the record the P envy comment is not cool or accurate .... I just think some top instructors like Dan and MMartin are really into accuracy of info to the enth degree and pursue it hard at times .... it's what makes you guys successful in part I'm sure.

 

But try something for the people who click on this thread because they really like Malaskas stuff. Give your short bulleted list of a few things one could be envious of in reference to Malaska .... again not admitting envy.

 

I just want to see an instructor say something positive about another outside instructor.

 

PS FWP has the best swing of any instructor I've ever seen .... that's just my opinion

 

I disagree with you. You have to qualify that they are top GolfWrx IA instructors, Malaska is a Golf Digest top instructor, you won't ever see any Golf Digest top instructor on this forum. All I see them do is derail threads with their info that maybe half the folks don't care about. This thread was about something, but now it's not, no one asked them why Malaskas instruction sucks, but they decided to beat it into everyone.

 

Maybe they should start their own threads like "We'll tell you why (insert Golf Digest instructors name here) sucks" and keep their thoughts in there.

 

I don't even really follow Malaska's swing model, I'm a Hardy one planer, but I know there's more than one way to do and teach things and like to hear from folks on how they were helped and maybe tinker from time to time.

 

Jim Hardy has the best one plane and two plane swing of any instructor I've ever seen in person

 

I think you're very ignorant of the credentials of some of the teachers who post here

 

I know full well your juniors become competitive juniors and high school golfers, your mini tour guys have become tour players, and you've had tour player(s) win. More importantly you work long hours because you want to make players of all levels better. You are a great mind (like a computer IMO) in the instruction game and have greater and greater success as time goes on. Your resume should have more weight than it does. I'm also not impressed with any Magazine list ... that should carry less weight.

 

Did Bottlecap undersell some of the GolfWRX members who are instructors ... sure. But is that all you keyed in on from the above quoted posts ? My request and BC's general accusation of thread derailment. Come now.

 

Not derailing a thread. I have my opinion on the move and his comments on gravity. I think practicing that move will hurt as many players as it’d help. It will absolutely help some players. It’s also the opposite of what many players need to feel. I said as much, I simply was discussing how the club will not shallow unless he golfer makes it happen. For players that don’t make that happen the “Malaska move” will more often than not make the issue worse. The move will help players who drop the club under because they pivot incorrectly and tilt too much too soon.

 

I never said he sucked nor did I ever say he couldn’t help anyone. He’s obviously a successful teacher. I don’t attack the messenger or the individual and don’t make things personal. I always just discuss the information and swing at hand. But this is a forum where people can talk about swings and give their opinion. And letting people know that information is inaccurate or damaging to players with certain tendencies is valuable input IMO.

 

And I wasn’t just talking about me. Guys that are on those magazine list do and have posted on here and write articles for this site.