MD/DC/VA Golfers - Twelve Monkeys Mental Divergence

[gsrjc]

> @siegel159 said:

> > @gsrjc said:

> > > @siegel159 said:

> > > > @FAbb said:

> > > > All the ground forces/lower body stuff that's really come to the forefront in golf is interesting, but hard to conceptualize how it's really best applied. You can't just have Joe Hacker out on the driving range trying to jump at the ball like JT.

> > >

> > > As a Joe Hacker who has tried to jump at the ball to generate more speed, can confirm. It usually just results in me almost falling over.

> > >

> > I can also confirm from a few swings yesterday with driver that trying to swing out of my shoes just creates a big banana ball that goes OB at Challedon. That place has OB everywhere. Nice and smooth controlled swing has proven to me on track man that I hit the center of the driver and the ball goes farther but I don’t know why I feel like I need to swing faster. Mental.

> >

>

> Well, I'll make a slight clarification. I've gotten way better at swinging out of my shoes on most shots. I think I've talked to Hoop and Domes about it, though I'm pretty sure Domes just thought I was being dumb. I'll hit the ball better when I'm going at like 95% as opposed to trying to hit a controlled shot.

Interesting. I think Domes can attest from yesterday that if I swing around 85% then I hit the ball better. We all have what works for us. Palmer was right when he said just swing your swing.

 

[dcmidnight]

> @FAbb said:

> https://www.golf.com/news/2019/08/19/want-more-fun-try-putting-your-pencil-down-and-stop-keeping-score/

> To each their own, but I see that approach as deluding ones self. I think it's sort of a mentally weak approach. Pretending (and that's all it'd be) I don't care about my score isn't going to magically make me have more fun. I feel like learning to enjoy the game and the experience, while also trying to put together the best score one can on any given day is such a huge part of the journey of golf. It doesn't matter if you're a +3 or a 30. You don't have to be constantly in pursuit of getting better, but there's no reason you can't go out and try to execute and score to the best of whatever your ability is.

 

If you want to have more fun, try mini golf. Or Top Golf. Or keeping some stats and a score so that you know what you have to work on so that the next time you go out you can possibly get better.

 

I actually love EAL's YouTube channel, I think there are a ton of good vids on there but...

 

[FabbVoice]

This article is among the dumbest things I've ever read. And for Golf magazine thats really saying something.

[/FabbVoice]

[gsrjc]

Sully-did you get the power package swing aid from Dan? That thing is great and has helped with my swing. I keep it attached to a PW and make swings in my office during the day. It has helped with my backswing and still working on the follow through after impact.

[dcmidnight]

Awesome round Sully, congrats. Sounds like things are really starting to come together.

[SullGolf]

On the 3rd hole I was talking to Hoop about the OB stakes. They are on both sides of the first 3 holes, which is pretty crappy if you ask me. But if those were woods instead of OB stakes, I wouldn't think twice about it. There's plenty of space. The 3rd hole stuck out at me the most, because there were white stakes on the right then it was someone's 100 yard deep back yard of pure mown grass before you get to their house. If you hit it 2 feet OB and see your ball nicely perched up and playable on short grass, you'd be irritated. That's just not natural.

[thechief16]

Really fun round yesterday with @Sterling_247 , competing in the Nextgen/City tour event out at International CC in Fairfax. I kinda felt bad to not make the Hive 4ball, but 15 minutes vs 1:15 to the course made it an easier decision. Event was scored as a 4ball (Gross) with winning twosome and winning team (they randomly, I assume, paired twosomes up to form teams where the team score was the sum of the 2 2some's gross best ball scores). I must admit, I'm a little baffled by why some of these guys would play in these events (like the two guys we played with, nether of whom broke 100). When you've got sticks like Sterling out there, what's the point of competing in a gross event? I guess maybe it isn't about the competition, but rather getting to play some of the courses?

 

Anyway, golf was good. Sterling was his usual self, bombing drives with fearless abandon (neither of us had ever seen the course before), blasting wedges and taking good runs at putts, even if they weren't going down that often. My game was a pleasant surprise, considering I hadn't golfed my own ball for 18 holes since Fathers Day. But I have had a lesson and been grinding at the range trying to get my lower body working better. And it seems to be paying off. Probably my best iron day in 10 years. Save a couple pulls on the front nine, they were going in the right direction and generally the right distance. Killed the 3 iron off the tee a couple times and was on all 4 par 3s, with 4i, 5i, 6i and 9i, including a CTP. Hit a bunch of partial PWs close (from the 110-125 range) and, burned like 3-4 edges on birdie putts, making one 10 footer. The only real blemish was a 3 putt double on 13 with my partner in his pocket, where I got too aggressive with a downhill 15 footer to try and save par, that I blew about 8 feet past. Tee game was inconsistent, as I am still trying to figure out how to hit a controllable fade with the new swing. But all my bad balls were find-able. Ended up posting a 78 that included the aforementioned double, then another disinterested double when I half-assed a 3 foot bogey putt (with partner already in for par). Only birdie was off a PW to 10 feet on a par 5 after having to gouge my second shot out of a bad lie just off the fairway.

 

We ended up winning the 2some with an even par, 71 (2 birdies and that damn double) and team events, Sterling took a skin and I took a CTP. So all in all, a positive outcome. The experience was less than thrilling at times, though. We got hit with 3 lightening delays totaling between 45-50 minutes. Not the necessarily course's fault -- they have an automated system that detects lightning in the area, and pulls you off the course. And they had us on the paths, presumably to protect the grass in the heat. The two guys were were paired with with, while certainly pleasant gentlemen, were less accomplished golfers who didn't seem to have a lot of interest in watching where their terrible shots went, so a lot of time was spent helping them hunt for their balls. But the course itself was in great condition -- green were rolling smoothly, very few bare patches and its a great set up. Par 71 (only 1 par 5 on the front) with a good amount of water to be avoided. Par 4s were of varying length (none really long), but required accuracy -- I'd say they favored a fade as most of the water was on the left and the doglegs were left to right. Par 3s were pretty stout -- 200, 175, 155, 185 from the black (second from back tees) and 2 of the 3 fives were reachable with a good drive.

[gsrjc]

> @SullGolf said:

> On the 3rd hole I was talking to Hoop about the OB stakes. They are on both sides of the first 3 holes, which is pretty crappy if you ask me. But if those were woods instead of OB stakes, I wouldn't think twice about it. There's plenty of space. The 3rd hole stuck out at me the most, because there were white stakes on the right then it was someone's 100 yard deep back yard of pure mown grass before you get to their house. If you hit it 2 feet OB and see your ball nicely perched up and playable on short grass, you'd be irritated. That's just not natural.

 

I believe that happened to Domes on either the third or fourth hole on the left side where the two kids were out selling golf balls. He hit a great little draw and literally landed inches on the left side of the white stakes. Perfect shot to the green and the ball was sitting up. I don’t think anyone has mentioned but the rough was killer. Very tough to hit out of and couldn’t find balls. Greens were receptive to the ball but folks before us didn’t fix their ball marks at all.

[baddomes]

Siegel - I don't think that's dumb. I think it's smart to use whatever swing you need to use to hit the golf ball solidly the highest percentage of the swings you make.

 

The OOB was annoying yesterday, but it was even more annoying that you couldn't see the stakes from the tees a few times. I hit one that was out by less than a foot on #3 (left), but that was only about 10 yards left of my line. If I'd have known the stakes were there from the tee I wouldn't have picked that line, or that club.

 

Good event yesterday. Nice hang in the grill afterwards. Excellent round by Sull/Hoop. I've been on one of those fourball teams that just has everything fall into place, and it's a great feeling. Can have good short/medium-term effects on one's individual golf game as well. Sull and Hoop should be feeling pretty confident after that.

 

me and gsrjc ham and egged it pretty well too. My differential ended up being my handicap index, and I think he played a few shots worse than his, but we ended up 62 net. He made some clutch pars when I was out of the hole, and I did the same. We weren't that far off Sull/Hoop on the front nine, but we ran out of gas a little on the back and they pulled away.

 

[XHoop24]

> @SullGolf said:

> Oh boy. Good day at the course yesterday.

>

> When I was on vacation the previous week I was feeling really good about my ball striking. Right before that I started working with a training aid I saw on iTeach's instagram, and it's really working for me. I'll say more if I can turn it in to something sustainable and this isn't just a flash in the pan.

>

> I boasted to Hoop the night before that I was going to shoot 78, but triple on the first felt like that was gone. Backed that up by hitting it in to the trees on the second hole, but got a lucky bounce and ended up in the fairway. Then it was on. Hit a 6 iron from 175 to about 8 feet and sunk it for birdie. Didn't look back. Minus one toe shank straight in to the woods on 13, I played completely stress free golf.

>

> On 18 I knew I needed par for 79, hit a good drive that found the left rough, and I then topped my iron shot about 40 yards. I was fuming. Hit an okay 100 yard wedge to about 20 feet. Drained the 20-footer for par. First time breaking 80 since 2015. Four bogeys, a double, a triple, and a birdie.

>

> Lost two off the tee and made triple and double on those two holes. Chipped twice, wedged once (on 18), and frutted twice. So 11 GIR plus 2 fringes. Two of those GIR were really long range, but I had a lot of putts inside 20 feet for birdie. Definitely could have dropped a few more for birdie, but made a few mid-range par putts to offset it. Felt really good with an iron in my heads. Felt really good with a putter in my hands, though my stats weren't great (35 putts, two 3-putts from long range). Inside 20 feet I felt like I was going to drain it. Wasn't great off the tee when I needed to hit it long and straight, which could be a challenge at Bethpage.

>

> Hoop was playing solid too. He had a couple X's that tanked his score, but was playing awesome for a best ball partner. On 1 we both hit it OB, but he came back and sank the 2nd ball birdie for a 6/5 that kept us on track early. Then he made 3 others, including a slam dunked pitch shot on 6 that damaged the cup a bit. After 1 we never had a hole where we were both in trouble. Never made a net bogey. I just went back and looked at the card and we were 71 gross, which is pretty **** astounding for a 10 and 14 cap.

>

 

Can confirm that Sull did call his shot the night before with an IG chat stating he was going to shoot a 78 :) After the start on 1 (both our initial tee shots OB), I was already thinking about how it was another Hive event with a middle of the pack finish. But Sull and I both had looks for bird on 2, with Sully draining his. I made an absolute bomb on 3, all the sudden we were 3 under (net) after three and it was on. Sull was fairways and greens all day and as a team we were looking at birdie putts all day and rarely had to scramble for our pars. Good hang after the round with solid wings and a beer. Enjoyable, albeit very hot, Hive event.

[willboyrd]

> @gsrjc said:

> > @SullGolf said:

> > On the 3rd hole I was talking to Hoop about the OB stakes. They are on both sides of the first 3 holes, which is pretty crappy if you ask me. But if those were woods instead of OB stakes, I wouldn't think twice about it. There's plenty of space. The 3rd hole stuck out at me the most, because there were white stakes on the right then it was someone's 100 yard deep back yard of pure mown grass before you get to their house. If you hit it 2 feet OB and see your ball nicely perched up and playable on short grass, you'd be irritated. That's just not natural.

>

> I believe that happened to Domes on either the third or fourth hole on the left side where the two kids were out selling golf balls. He hit a great little draw and literally landed inches on the left side of the white stakes. Perfect shot to the green and the ball was sitting up. I don’t think anyone has mentioned but the rough was killer. Very tough to hit out of and couldn’t find balls. Greens were receptive to the ball but folks before us didn’t fix their ball marks at all.

 

Played with Sully and Hoops and they played just incredibly well. Really not that much ham&egging as much as just extremely solid play throughout. They might have really only had 3 or 4 foul ball tee shots between the both of them, which is really solid for their indexes.

 

Dan and I claimed the DFL title after a fairly promising start. I had a few total brain fart shots coupled with some yippy 2 foot missed putts. Dan struggled throughout but that dude was a blast to play with, kept things light and was a great hang.

 

First time playing Challedon. The layout was ok. I think the 4th hole was about 40 yards uphill to a tree-lined dog leg left and left sloping fairway. Short hole but just really strange and didn't really fit the look of the rest of the course.

 

There was also a hole on the back that had the tee box on the extreme right and you were essentially hitting around a tree about 125 out to get it in the fairway. This hole was also one of the longer par 4s we played, which made it sort of weird to have a tee box that turned it into a positional hole that needed a big fade to get more than 220 off the tee.

[SullGolf]

On 3, I hit 6 iron, 4 wood, wedge. I think 6 iron was too much club and I should have hit 7. Even ignoring the OB stakes, that's a bad hole. Terrible risk/reward balance. The only time I'd ever pull driver there is in a scramble.

[willboyrd]

> @SullGolf said:

> On 3, I hit 6 iron, 4 wood, wedge. I think 6 iron was too much club and I should have hit 7. Even ignoring the OB stakes, that's a bad hole. Terrible risk/reward balance. The only time I'd ever pull driver there is in a scramble.

 

I made a comment to Dan on that hole that I automatically hate ANY hole that calls for you to hit more club on your second shot than your tee shot.

[misplacedtexan83]

Dang.. calling his round before and everyone is saying great round Sully.

 

While bookies in Vegas are sending out enforcers.

 

Good shooting brother

[2moreTerps]

> @TheCityGame said:

 

> I also think it's a totally ridiculous thing to measure. It's one of those things that great players do just the right amount of but they could do more if that was the goal. They could squat down to the ground, and jump 3 feet in the air if they wanted, but they couldn't hit a golf ball very well. They could also probably turn their bodies more degrees, and they could use 48 inch driver shafts to all generate more speed. They'd end up looking like long drive champs and they'd suck at golf.

>

 

my opinions are only theoretical but I don't think I agree with this. I think that as people use force plates for actual information they'll figure out what actually helps generate power. it's why guys are doing squats right? gotta have stronger legs to drive harder

 

[top.h]

> @SullGolf said:

> On 3, I hit 6 iron, 4 wood, wedge. I think 6 iron was too much club and I should have hit 7. Even ignoring the OB stakes, that's a bad hole. Terrible risk/reward balance. The only time I'd ever pull driver there is in a scramble.

 

3 was an absolute goob of a hole. There's a ton of OB left, short left. Then, there's that huge pond that is a collection area right around 200 yards, but it stretched to 258 to the far reeds (so call it 262 to carry). I dont know how many people playing the golds are going to look at that and say, sure, yeah, i'm carrying that - even when its downhill. So the smart play is what, hitting your 165 club? And then you're a million miles from the green and wait - there is still a TON of OB left. yuck.

 

[willboyrd]

> @"top.h" said:

> > @SullGolf said:

> > On 3, I hit 6 iron, 4 wood, wedge. I think 6 iron was too much club and I should have hit 7. Even ignoring the OB stakes, that's a bad hole. Terrible risk/reward balance. The only time I'd ever pull driver there is in a scramble.

>

> 3 was an absolute goob of a hole. There's a ton of OB left, short left. Then, there's that huge pond that is a collection area right around 200 yards, but it stretched to 258 to the far reeds (so call it 262 to carry). I dont know how many people playing the golds are going to look at that and say, sure, yeah, i'm carrying that - even when its downhill. So the smart play is what, hitting your 165 club? And then you're a million miles from the green and wait - there is still a TON of OB left. yuck.

>

 

That little SOB of a tree on the right got me on my 2nd. Ball was sitting way down in the middle of the fairway (yeah, you read that correctly) and had a funky lie but managed to hit a pretty solid hybrid towards the right rough line. Took two hops right and bam, right behind a tree from like 98 with a massive, deep bunker between me and the green. Absolute jail.

 

Never had experienced a true fairway flyer until yesterday.

[TheCityGame]

> @2moreTerps said:

> > @TheCityGame said:

>

> > I also think it's a totally ridiculous thing to measure. It's one of those things that great players do just the right amount of but they could do more if that was the goal. They could squat down to the ground, and jump 3 feet in the air if they wanted, but they couldn't hit a golf ball very well. They could also probably turn their bodies more degrees, and they could use 48 inch driver shafts to all generate more speed. They'd end up looking like long drive champs and they'd suck at golf.

> >

>

> my opinions are only theoretical but I don't think I agree with this. I think that as people use force plates for actual information they'll figure out what actually helps generate power. it's why guys are doing squats right? gotta have stronger legs to drive harder

>

>

Not what I'm saying.

 

1) Yes, ground forces are important in the swing. All other things being equal, a bigger push will generate higher speed. It translates up through the body.

 

2) No one is out there just trying to maximize ground forces. It's done in conjunction with maintaining other aspects of the golf swing. Any golfer could generate higher ground forces at the expense of a good swing.

 

3) Showing how far a guy's heel is off the ground, while his toe is still on the ground, is a very stupid visual representation of "ground forces". (where this all began)

[misplacedtexan83]

> @TheCityGame said:

> > @2moreTerps said:

> > > @TheCityGame said:

> >

> > > I also think it's a totally ridiculous thing to measure. It's one of those things that great players do just the right amount of but they could do more if that was the goal. They could squat down to the ground, and jump 3 feet in the air if they wanted, but they couldn't hit a golf ball very well. They could also probably turn their bodies more degrees, and they could use 48 inch driver shafts to all generate more speed. They'd end up looking like long drive champs and they'd suck at golf.

> > >

> >

> > my opinions are only theoretical but I don't think I agree with this. I think that as people use force plates for actual information they'll figure out what actually helps generate power. it's why guys are doing squats right? gotta have stronger legs to drive harder

> >

> >

> Not what I'm saying.

>

> 1) Yes, ground forces are important in the swing. All other things being equal, a bigger push will generate higher speed. It translates up through the body.

>

> 2) No one is out there just trying to maximize ground forces. It's done in conjunction with maintaining other aspects of the golf swing. Any golfer could generate higher ground forces at the expense of a good swing.

>

> 3) Showing how far a guy's heel is off the ground, while his toe is still on the ground, is a very stupid visual representation of "ground forces". (where this all began)

 

Pretty much you are saying..

 

The information they are talking about is not backed up by a person with his heel off the ground to the extent JT is displaying

 

Can we agree that his force has been transferred from said ground and the result is his toe being firmly planted into the ground?

 

[FAbb]

> @2moreTerps said:

> > @TheCityGame said:

>

> > I also think it's a totally ridiculous thing to measure. It's one of those things that great players do just the right amount of but they could do more if that was the goal. They could squat down to the ground, and jump 3 feet in the air if they wanted, but they couldn't hit a golf ball very well. They could also probably turn their bodies more degrees, and they could use 48 inch driver shafts to all generate more speed. They'd end up looking like long drive champs and they'd suck at golf.

> >

>

> my opinions are only theoretical but I don't think I agree with this. I think that as people use force plates for actual information they'll figure out what actually helps generate power. it's why guys are doing squats right? gotta have stronger legs to drive harder

>

>

 

It seems like an evolution of studying and teaching the pivot. I think that's a good thing. We can measure exactly what the player is doing, and try to identify commonalities among better players.

 

How that actually gets applied has got to be more complicated. You may be able to take the less skilled golfer and say, "hey, let's get your pressure to the left side earlier in the transition" or whatever. That's not really any different than things that have been taught forever. But you can't go trying to teach everybody to pivot like JT. From stuff I've seen, it's not like there's even a single dominant pressure trace among highly skilled golfers. There are at least a few different ones, which seem to have their own pluses and minuses. Say the trace JT exhibits the greatest potential for speed - you can't just decided you want to pivot like JT if it's totally incompatible with the way you currently swing the club. You're gonna destroy yourself.

 

I really wonder how much of it generates power, versus supports speed. You can squat, and rotate as hard as you want, but is that really making the club move fast? I'd say no, it's not. It's like those things are just helping get the golfer into a position where they can rip at the ball as hard as they want.

[misplacedtexan83]

I think city was onto something.. most pros can twist/turn beyond what a lot of us can’t..

 

On top of applying that with “using the ground” .. boom

 

Heck watch bubbas move..

[SullGolf]

Tangential to the discussion, but those boditrak mats are pretty cool. I've only used it a few times, but found it to be great at developing balance both at address and in motion.

They are shockingly expensive though (~$3k). No idea what's under the hood there, but it seems like something you should be able to get at a much cheaper price point.

[misplacedtexan83]

> @SullGolf said:

> Tangential to the discussion, but those boditrak mats are pretty cool. I've only used it a few times, but found it to be great at developing balance both at address and in motion.

> They are shockingly expensive though (~$3k). No idea what's under the hood there, but it seems like something you should be able to get at a much cheaper price point.

 

GG has a drill where the student puts their right foot on a sliding disc..

 

Assuming this might be a cheaper option transferring the weight ?.?.?

[TheCityGame]

I would like to see more Player vs Player in this kind of analysis.

 

For instance, the guy says, "JT probably has twice body weight on that front foot in down swing."

 

Well, what does Brooks have? He never really comes off the ground but he seems to pound it. Does he get 2x body weight? If so, maybe this indicates JT has bad mechanics?

 

Pat Reed is sort of "average" in driving distance and his left unweights. Maybe the left foot loosening is just a characteristic of guys who get the weight BACK to the back foot to hit up rather than an indication that they're generating so much power that they come off the ground.

 

That's about all I want to discuss golf swings. I was just saying that I thought the graphic was dumb.

[misplacedtexan83]

> @TheCityGame said:

> I would like to see more Player vs Player in this kind of analysis.

>

> For instance, the guy says, "JT probably has twice body weight on that front foot in down swing."

>

> Well, what does Brooks have? He never really comes off the ground but he seems to pound it. Does he get 2x body weight? If so, maybe this indicates JT has bad mechanics?

>

> Pat Reed is sort of "average" in driving distance and his left unweights. Maybe the left foot loosening is just a characteristic of guys who get the weight BACK to the back foot to hit up rather than an indication that they're generating so much power that they come off the ground.

>

> That's about all I want to discuss golf swings. I was just saying that I thought the graphic was dumb.

 

I was just interested in your thoughts.. it would be awesome to see that definitely

 

I wonder if JT is getting talked about so much, besides him winning. Is because he is 150 wet but hitting... bombs

 

[dcmidnight]

> @misplacedtexan83 said:

> > @SullGolf said:

> > Tangential to the discussion, but those boditrak mats are pretty cool. I've only used it a few times, but found it to be great at developing balance both at address and in motion.

> > They are shockingly expensive though (~$3k). No idea what's under the hood there, but it seems like something you should be able to get at a much cheaper price point.

>

> GG has a drill where the student puts their right foot on a sliding disc..

>

> Assuming this might be a cheaper option transferring the weight ?.?.?

 

Larry Cheung started this drill a while ago too, I noticed he brought it back for a recent video. But he uses a piece of cardboard. I'm sure GG will sell you a magic "sliding disc" for $499 if someone wanted one though.

 

LC has some great stuff on his YT channel - I think he works with or is loosely affiliated with the guys from TXG.

[gsrjc]

> @misplacedtexan83 said:

> > @TheCityGame said:

> > I would like to see more Player vs Player in this kind of analysis.

> >

> > For instance, the guy says, "JT probably has twice body weight on that front foot in down swing."

> >

> > Well, what does Brooks have? He never really comes off the ground but he seems to pound it. Does he get 2x body weight? If so, maybe this indicates JT has bad mechanics?

> >

> > Pat Reed is sort of "average" in driving distance and his left unweights. Maybe the left foot loosening is just a characteristic of guys who get the weight BACK to the back foot to hit up rather than an indication that they're generating so much power that they come off the ground.

> >

> > That's about all I want to discuss golf swings. I was just saying that I thought the graphic was dumb.

>

> I was just interested in your thoughts.. it would be awesome to see that definitely

>

> I wonder if JT is getting talked about so much, besides him winning. Is because he is 150 wet but hitting... bombs

>

Rickie hits it far as well and he doesn’t seem to go all out and I believe he is using a shorter driver shaft too. Something like 43”.

 

[misplacedtexan83]

> @dcmidnight said:

> > @misplacedtexan83 said:

> > > @SullGolf said:

> > > Tangential to the discussion, but those boditrak mats are pretty cool. I've only used it a few times, but found it to be great at developing balance both at address and in motion.

> > > They are shockingly expensive though (~$3k). No idea what's under the hood there, but it seems like something you should be able to get at a much cheaper price point.

> >

> > GG has a drill where the student puts their right foot on a sliding disc..

> >

> > Assuming this might be a cheaper option transferring the weight ?.?.?

>

> Larry Cheung started this drill a while ago too, I noticed he brought it back for a recent video. But he uses a piece of cardboard. I'm sure GG will sell you a magic "sliding disc" for $499 if you wanted one though.

>

> LC has some great stuff on his YT channel - I think he works with or is loosely affiliated with the guys from TXG.

 

Heck I’ll sell you Callaway logo box for only 20 bucks — tour issue ;)

 

 

[FAbb]

I think we'd all have more fun playing golf if we stopped keeping score, and tried to create pressure traces more like JT.

[dcmidnight]

[misplacedtexan83]

> @gsrjc said:

> > @misplacedtexan83 said:

> > > @TheCityGame said:

> > > I would like to see more Player vs Player in this kind of analysis.

> > >

> > > For instance, the guy says, "JT probably has twice body weight on that front foot in down swing."

> > >

> > > Well, what does Brooks have? He never really comes off the ground but he seems to pound it. Does he get 2x body weight? If so, maybe this indicates JT has bad mechanics?

> > >

> > > Pat Reed is sort of "average" in driving distance and his left unweights. Maybe the left foot loosening is just a characteristic of guys who get the weight BACK to the back foot to hit up rather than an indication that they're generating so much power that they come off the ground.

> > >

> > > That's about all I want to discuss golf swings. I was just saying that I thought the graphic was dumb.

> >

> > I was just interested in your thoughts.. it would be awesome to see that definitely

> >

> > I wonder if JT is getting talked about so much, besides him winning. Is because he is 150 wet but hitting... bombs

> >

> Rickie hits it far as well and he doesn’t seem to go all out and I believe he is using a shorter driver shaft too. Something like 43”.

>

He still that short?

 

Heck Jimmy Walker went 42.5 for a Hawaii tourney.

 

I still think it’s their flexibility side of things that generates a lot of speed