Who on tour has a Malaska type swing??

[baudi]

@ITG

And again Malaska is teaching to apply positive beta at the start of the downswing. Not halfway down.

IMHO MM basically only explains the redirection of the club follows the momentum the club which is mainly affected by its directed position in the top.

He has a preferred situation of a laid off position that will (re)-create an effortless approach of the head coming into the ball.

[iteachgolf]

@ITG

And again Malaska is teaching to apply positive beta at the start of the downswing. Not halfway down.

IMHO MM basically only explains the redirection of the club follows the momentum the club which is mainly affected by its directed position in the top.

He has a preferred situation of a laid off position that will (re)-create an effortless approach of the head coming into the ball.

 

Not sure your point. Video shows him prescribing positive beta kicking in immediately in transition. Which is exactly what I said. The video backs up what I’ve said.

[white03]

When did I say it wasn't?

 

You probably didn't. Your zeal for the semantics may make it seem as if you disagreed with Malaska across the board.

 

Don't you think since you see the effects of this tip out force late in downswing its reasonable to feel it start earlier to mitigate body rotation and shallowing .... especially for the get stuck golfer ?

 

It's not semantics. Most stuck golfers are steep early and shallow late. They tip out too early and dump it under in an effort to shallow out and can't square the face. They generally don't have enough negative beta in transition, not too much. Again the number of players who over shallow it in transition is a tiny percent of the population of golfers.

 

Like many actions taught to golfers - when you tell a student to give it positive Beta torque midway into the downswing they will often give it negative Beta torque from the transition to shallow a bit without even being told in preparation for the positive Beta torque they intend to apply around the midway point.

I would be willing to bet that most, and a huge majority at that, would walk away from the game if you gave them that instruction about tourque this and tourque that. You may be proving your knowledge, I have no idea, but you certainly are not teaching anything with that vocabulary.

 

AMEN Shilgy!!! he may be proving to some just how smart he is, but all I hear is non-sense that teaches me nothing

[TB07]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

[Yff Theos]

When did I say it wasn't?

 

You probably didn't. Your zeal for the semantics may make it seem as if you disagreed with Malaska across the board.

 

Don't you think since you see the effects of this tip out force late in downswing its reasonable to feel it start earlier to mitigate body rotation and shallowing .... especially for the get stuck golfer ?

 

It's not semantics. Most stuck golfers are steep early and shallow late. They tip out too early and dump it under in an effort to shallow out and can't square the face. They generally don't have enough negative beta in transition, not too much. Again the number of players who over shallow it in transition is a tiny percent of the population of golfers.

 

Like many actions taught to golfers - when you tell a student to give it positive Beta torque midway into the downswing they will often give it negative Beta torque from the transition to shallow a bit without even being told in preparation for the positive Beta torque they intend to apply around the midway point.

I would be willing to bet that most, and a huge majority at that, would walk away from the game if you gave them that instruction about tourque this and tourque that. You may be proving your knowledge, I have no idea, but you certainly are not teaching anything with that vocabulary.

 

Some pieces of info is for teachers, some for inquiring minds and some for ordinary golfers.

[Shilgy]

 

Like many actions taught to golfers - when you tell a student to give it positive Beta torque midway into the downswing they will often give it negative Beta torque from the transition to shallow a bit without even being told in preparation for the positive Beta torque they intend to apply around the midway point.

I would be willing to bet that most, and a huge majority at that, would walk away from the game if you gave them that instruction about tourque this and tourque that. You may be proving your knowledge, I have no idea, but you certainly are not teaching anything with that vocabulary.

 

Some pieces of info is for teachers, some for inquiring minds and some for ordinary golfers.

No question. And perhaps it is the way he framed his post but if you "tell a student to give it positive Beta torque midway into the downswing" how many students-even good players- will have a clue what the heck you are talking about?

[Shilgy]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

[Pinball Wizard]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

The other point missed is it could simply be nonsense from the start.

[Petunia Sprinkle]

Isn’t Beta Torque a Hungarian poet?

[Chote konez]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

It’s just shorthand for explaining things. Just like it’s easier to say “p6” than “the point in the downswing where the club is parallel to the ground”

[gvogel]

Here is an excerpt someone made from a lesson video he did...crappy video quality so turn up the volume.

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

Finally, a player and teacher who knows what the true deal is and doesn't make it so complicated.. Tom has it right, simple sequence. Good video, thanks.

 

If you teach Tom's move to someone who comes over the top, that person would come over the top even more. It is effective for Tom because he had a huge lower body move and his club path was too far from in to out. But the good thing about his secret was that he straightened out his flight using his pivot in a different manner, not using his hands. The dog wagging the tail.

[Yff Theos]

Like many actions taught to golfers - when you tell a student to give it positive Beta torque midway into the downswing they will often give it negative Beta torque from the transition to shallow a bit without even being told in preparation for the positive Beta torque they intend to apply around the midway point.

I would be willing to bet that most, and a huge majority at that, would walk away from the game if you gave them that instruction about tourque this and tourque that. You may be proving your knowledge, I have no idea, but you certainly are not teaching anything with that vocabulary.

 

Some pieces of info is for teachers, some for inquiring minds and some for ordinary golfers.

No question. And perhaps it is the way he framed his post but if you "tell a student to give it positive Beta torque midway into the downswing" how many students-even good players- will have a clue what the heck you are talking about?

 

Yes. A good teacher should use the correct technical expression and then to explain it to his student using common language. After two or three repetitions the student will know the notion by heart. As someone said earlier - it is much more effective to use shorthands for explaining things provided both interlocutors know them.

[TB07]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

It has been phrased less technical. Hands should work out and down, not down, shaft should shallow not steepen, in order to make it easier to square the face.

 

Players who feel hands down and close and clubhead kicking out are the ones who shallow it early already.

[TB07]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

The other point missed is it could simply be nonsense from the start.

 

Again, it's non sense if you don't care about what's actually happening. These things have been researched and is out there for anyone to look at.

[Strike Force]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

The other point missed is it could simply be nonsense from the start.

 

Again, it's non sense if you don't care about what's actually happening. These things have been researched and is out there for anyone to look at.

 

Agree! Using the terms Alpha, Beta and Gamma to describe rotational force (or twist to an object) is not rocket science or even remotely complicated. It's actually very simple - that even a child should be able to understand...if they want to. It's a well-known means when describing the three different applications of movement of the golf club in the y, x and z axis.

 

And yes Shilgy, I'm sure that all instructors use different terminology language when teaching their students...unless of course the student is already fully aware of these torque terms.

 

 

 

Now some of you (that want to understand or care to learn) know what is being done by the tour players that 99% of amateurs don't even know to do.

 

These tour pros (below) are applying a healthy dose of both Beta and Gamma torque beginning about midway in their downswing (which as can be seen helps promote a raised or bowed lead wrist and ample shaft lean at impact).

 

 

[baudi]

@ITG

And again Malaska is teaching to apply positive beta at the start of the downswing. Not halfway down.

IMHO MM basically only explains the redirection of the club follows the momentum the club which is mainly affected by its directed position in the top.

He has a preferred situation of a laid off position that will (re)-create an effortless approach of the head coming into the ball.

 

Not sure your point. Video shows him prescribing positive beta kicking in immediately in transition. Which is exactly what I said. The video backs up what I've said.

 

MM also states that he wants to shallow the arms and let the club come out.

AND he refers to Garcia -who drops the club behind and then tumbles over.

 

If MM only starts with positive beta-torque motion he would hit his head.

The arms do come down first with a shift. That set the natural force for alpha torque . Yet very well he could agree to the fact that the sooner this rotary motion starts the better it is to prevent a flipping action. A longer action over longer time will set a more quiet move. I think feel, rhythm and timing will define the action. In 2035 Dr Sasho's students will have defined 3 more swingtypes which can be specifically tuned to body frame, forward bend angle, side bend, release type, hit or swing motion (avg, moderate, aggressive) and desired ball flight. .

 

The new speak of alpha,beta and gamma torque is okay with me but I will hardly use it to explain a swing. With data collection like My Swing or Kvest it will be a matter of time I guess.

 

Here is an afterthought: Peter Croker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqTgmVL4RGk&ab_channel=GolfLessonsOnline

[iteachgolf]

@ITG

And again Malaska is teaching to apply positive beta at the start of the downswing. Not halfway down.

IMHO MM basically only explains the redirection of the club follows the momentum the club which is mainly affected by its directed position in the top.

He has a preferred situation of a laid off position that will (re)-create an effortless approach of the head coming into the ball.

 

Not sure your point. Video shows him prescribing positive beta kicking in immediately in transition. Which is exactly what I said. The video backs up what I've said.

 

MM also states that he wants to shallow the arms and let the club come out.

AND he refers to Garcia -who drops the club behind and then tumbles over.

 

If MM only starts with positive beta-torque motion he would hit his head.

The arms do come down first with a shift. That set the natural force for alpha torque . Yet very well he could agree to the fact that the sooner this rotary motion starts the better it is to prevent a flipping action. A longer action over longer time will set a more quiet move. I think feel, rhythm and timing will define the action. In 2035 Dr Sasho's students will have defined 3 more swingtypes which can be specifically tuned to body frame, forward bend angle, side bend, release type, hit or swing motion (avg, moderate, aggressive) and desired ball flight. .

 

The new speak of alpha,beta and gamma torque is okay with me but I will hardly use it to explain a swing. With data collection like My Swing or Kvest it will be a matter of time I guess.

 

Here is an afterthought: Peter Croker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqTgmVL4RGk&ab_channel=GolfLessonsOnline

 

Nah you’re wrong. He absolutely is starting positive beta immediately. It’s just not only the beta torque. The club is steepening as his arms are pulling the handle down and it’s steepening from the moment he starts down in every demonstration.

 

He can refer to Sergio all he wants but Sergio isn’t doing what he’s explaining.

[TB07]

Also, anyone who u derstands these concepts doesn't use that terminology in an actual lesson. They use it when discussing theories that are simply incorrect.

[baudi]

@ITG - i do not agree (yet) but I respect your style and patience so I liked your post. :rockon:

[Strike Force]

 

[Strike Force]

[media=]

[/media]

 

[iteachgolf]

@ITG - i do not agree (yet) but I respect your style and patience so I liked your post. :rockon:

 

That’s your right. But Malaska in his own swing doesn’t shallow it enough in transition and hen has to shallow late by dumping his wrist angles and ends up flipping at it at impact. His swing method is based on working around his own tendencies when if he was shallower earlier he’d have an easier time, and could pivot correctly through the ball. He has to stay in flexion to try and move low point forward and steepen the club because he’s so dumped under late in the downswing.

 

[Pinball Wizard]

Here is an excerpt someone made from a lesson video he did...crappy video quality so turn up the volume.

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

Finally, a player and teacher who knows what the true deal is and doesn't make it so complicated.. Tom has it right, simple sequence. Good video, thanks.

 

If you teach Tom's move to someone who comes over the top, that person would come over the top even more. It is effective for Tom because he had a huge lower body move and his club path was too far from in to out. But the good thing about his secret was that he straightened out his flight using his pivot in a different manner, not using his hands. The dog wagging the tail.

 

Probably for a while that someone may be more over the top until they sorted out what's happening sequence wise, but just because one is over the top of things would not necessarily mean Watson's advice would not be a step in the right direction, in my opinion- it all depends on what is causing the bad issues to begin with. There was nothing necessarily wrong with Watson's path, he chose to change it, just like Pavin could have chosen Watson's approach. It's just a matter of matching parts and choosing your preference based on what you bring to the table.

[TB07]

Here is an excerpt someone made from a lesson video he did...crappy video quality so turn up the volume.

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

Finally, a player and teacher who knows what the true deal is and doesn't make it so complicated.. Tom has it right, simple sequence. Good video, thanks.

 

If you teach Tom's move to someone who comes over the top, that person would come over the top even more. It is effective for Tom because he had a huge lower body move and his club path was too far from in to out. But the good thing about his secret was that he straightened out his flight using his pivot in a different manner, not using his hands. The dog wagging the tail.

 

Probably for a while that someone may be more over the top until they sorted out what's happening sequence wise, but just because one is over the top of things would not necessarily mean Watson's advice would not be a step in the right direction, in my opinion- it all depends on what is causing the bad issues to begin with. There was nothing necessarily wrong with Watson's path, he chose to change it, just like Pavin could have chosen Watson's approach. It's just a matter of matching parts and choosing your preference based on what you bring to the table.

 

And steepening the shaft early doesn't match with the hands being in and low at impact. They are opposite

[ajax5184]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

The other point missed is it could simply be nonsense from the start.

 

Again, it's non sense if you don't care about what's actually happening. These things have been researched and is out there for anyone to look at.

 

Agree! Using the terms Alpha, Beta and Gamma to describe rotational force (or twist to an object) is not rocket science or even remotely complicated. It's actually very simple - that even a child should be able to understand...if they want to. It's a well-known means when describing the three different applications of movement of the golf club in the y, x and z axis.

 

And yes Shilgy, I'm sure that all instructors use different terminology language when teaching their students...unless of course the student is already fully aware of these torque terms.

 

 

 

Now some of you (that want to understand or care to learn) know what is being done by the tour players that 99% of amateurs don't even know to do.

 

These tour pros (below) are applying a healthy dose of both Beta and Gamma torque beginning about midway in their downswing (which as can be seen helps promote a raised or bowed lead wrist and ample shaft lean at impact).

 

 

 

Beta comes from forearm rotation? So negative beta in transition to shallow, then positive beta around P6? Is this the impact snap move?

[TB07]

Forearms contribute but it's not the only contributor. If club is behind hands AROUND P6 it will assist in positive beta without excessive muscular effort.

[Pinball Wizard]

Here is an excerpt someone made from a lesson video he did...crappy video quality so turn up the volume.

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

Finally, a player and teacher who knows what the true deal is and doesn't make it so complicated.. Tom has it right, simple sequence. Good video, thanks.

 

If you teach Tom's move to someone who comes over the top, that person would come over the top even more. It is effective for Tom because he had a huge lower body move and his club path was too far from in to out. But the good thing about his secret was that he straightened out his flight using his pivot in a different manner, not using his hands. The dog wagging the tail.

 

Probably for a while that someone may be more over the top until they sorted out what's happening sequence wise, but just because one is over the top of things would not necessarily mean Watson's advice would not be a step in the right direction, in my opinion- it all depends on what is causing the bad issues to begin with. There was nothing necessarily wrong with Watson's path, he chose to change it, just like Pavin could have chosen Watson's approach. It's just a matter of matching parts and choosing your preference based on what you bring to the table.

 

And steepening the shaft early doesn't match with the hands being in and low at impact. They are opposite

 

Shoulder work as Watson is showing may, or may not, steepen the shaft early, it depends on a few things.

[Shilgy]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

It's just shorthand for explaining things. Just like it's easier to say "p6" than "the point in the downswing where the club is parallel to the ground"

Sure it is-for guys that use such verbiage. For the normal guy-heck I bet I could poll the under 4 caps at my club, many of them plus's- and none/very few you have a clue what this tourque biz is or the P's for that matter.

[golfer07840]

Peak Tiger

 

 

 

Yup, there it is. Thats from the Haney era, yes?

No, pretty sure 2000. Butch was on the show with Tiger. Hank was in the background writing notes for any future publications.

 

Yup. Heres the video...

 

http://youtu.be/xOecUNBV_Q0

Back in the good one days of when Golf Channel did something other than re-air Tin Cup

[MPStrat]

If you say it's non sense you either don't understand it or don't want to.

You missed one-don't need to. Way too technical verbiage for most players. In my opinion of course. But you guys can discuss amongst yourselves that way and it makes sense. To most players seeking to improve it should be phrased less technically.

 

It's just shorthand for explaining things. Just like it's easier to say "p6" than "the point in the downswing where the club is parallel to the ground"

Sure it is-for guys that use such verbiage. For the normal guy-heck I bet I could poll the under 4 caps at my club, many of them plus's- and none/very few you have a clue what this tourque biz is or the P's for that matter.

 

And they don’t need to know anything about it. But if they’re in a thread on golfwrx discussing the merits of a popular swing theory, it would help them understand the discussion.