Dana Dahlquist's Driver Swing

[JeffMann]

I am trying to understand Dana Dahlquist's driver swing style.

 

Here is a sequence of swing capture images from his online driver swing video (

)

 

 

I decided to study his driver swing because I wanted to see whether he had a similar leftwards-centered backswing swing style that Bennett/Plummer recommend. However, I can see NO evidence of a leftwards-centered backswing swing style. He has slight rightwards spinal tilt at address and has a rightwards spine/upper torso tilt at the end-backswing position. What surprised me, and what I have never seen before, is his shift of the pelvis AND upper torso/head to the left during the backswing. Note, at the end-backswing position, that his pelvis has shifted so far to the left that the outer border of his left pelvis is outside his left foot. I am wondering why he he chooses to shift his pelvis, upper torso, and head so far to the left during the backswing. I have never seen this degree of leftwards shift in another golfer.

 

For comparison-purposes, I am including the driver swing of Mac O'Grady and Mike Weir.

 

Mac O'Grady

 

 

Mike Weir

 

 

The green dots represent the upper and lower swing centers. The blue line represents the approximate position of the spine. The yellow arrowed line represents the vertical position of the head relative to the ground/stance.

 

Note that both Mac O'Grady and Mike Weir have the outer border of their front hip within the front foot at the end-backswing position. I think that this is an advantage, because it allows one to create a "firm left-side" (straightened left leg) to pivot against during the downswing - while easily acquiring a significant amount of secondary axis tilt (spinal tilt away from the target). By contrast, Dana canot shift his pelvis more laterally during the downswing, and he cannot easily establish as much secondary axis tilt. I personally think that he looks more cramped in the downswing with a too-steep clubshaft swingpath for a driver, and I am wondering why he adopts that driver swing style.

 

Hopefully, Dana will explain why he chooses to move his pelvis/torso/head so far leftwards in the downswing, and what's the potential advantges/disadvantages. Input from other forum members will also be appreciated.

 

Jeff.

[rosskoss]

I have that same move on my downswing and I don't consider it to be a positive.

 

It came about because I used to have a problem with my head racing ahead on the downswing thereby wrecking the swing. So I started focusing on holding my head back and that evolved into a backward push of the head, exactly like you see in the first image of Dana Dahlquist's.

 

Now, I'm trying to maintain the head as the top of my axis around which I spin and basically restrict the head motion to rotation around that axis. I'm also striving for more level eyes throughout the swing.

[dana dahlquist]

Over all the stance is a bit too close to each other. That is more the issue. Not that far off though for not caring about it. But by no means steep on the downswing, the ball went 290+

[uscheese]

Jeff,

 

How many hours a day do you spend trying to kill stack and tilt?

 

You certainly must have better things to do.

[hoganfan924]

Jeff,

 

1. That O'grady sequence is about 20 years old. He still uses that sequence in his schools to demonstrate the 10 positions in the swing that he likes to use to describe the swing. I think he's demonstrating a terrific swing in that sequence but he doesn't quite swing like that anymore. He now swings much more like the video of Dana. Trust me on that as I've got over 60 min. of video of Mac taken last August from his school. An no, I'm not going to post it.

 

2. Unless Dana is very tall and skinny, that video looks like it was compressed from widescreen to 4:3 by youtube. If so, of course it makes his swing look even narrower than it is.

 

3. If you want to understand Dana's swing, why would you not just PM him rather than "call him out" publicly? Granted, Dana posted his swing on youtube so maybe it's fair game. But why don't you post your swing and ask Dana for his comments?

 

IMHO, the Weir sequence shows exactly what Slicefixer has pointed out numerous times in various S&T threads - he has to achieve axis tilt at impact to shallow out the swing with a driver and get the ball on a reasonable trajectory, so guess what, his upper body and head are moving away from the target prior to impact. His axis tilt changes dramatically in the downswing. This is a result of having a stacked set up. The moving away from the target requires a Cf release, no way he can have a Cp release with his upper body retreating like that. Not good for consistency or being able to take one side out of play off the tee under pressure, as Parnevik demonstrated yesterday.

 

My $0.02

[dana dahlquist]

Ok here is some hip slide.

Nothen else handy atm.

 

 

[JeffMann]

Dana - so you are apparently saying that your stance was too narrow on that particular driver swing, and that the leftwards head/torso/pelvis shift is not a deliberate choice.

 

I also noted in another thread that you didn't like this backswing pivot action of Nick Faldo.

 

 

What is wrong with his backswing pivot action? How does it differ from Mike Weir's backswing pivot action?

 

Jeff.

[JeffMann]

Hoganfan

 

You write with respect to Mike Weir-: " His axis tilt changes dramatically in the downswing. This is a result of having a stacked set up."

 

What do you mean that he has a stacked setup?

 

In what way is his setup more stacked than Mike Finney's driver swing?

 

See - Mike Finney Driver Swing Video

 

Also, see the capture images of his address/end-backswing.

 

 

Also, what is the supposed necessary causal connection between a "stacked setup" and a "dramatic change in axis tilt in the downswing"?

 

Jeff.

[dana dahlquist]

Its more about his lack of connection of his right arm than anything else. That is a big thing is why faldo does not hit it out of his shadow. That is a huge part in the pivot

I have alot of pics of him over the years, some from japan and his right arm is way too bend and rotated for my taste.

But who am I too say do I have a green jakcet in my closet? All I know is Mac during that era smoked it off the tee.

[hoganfan924]

Weir gets too "on top of" of the ball in both driver set-up and backswing because of his S&T mechanics. i.e. he's too steep. He then has to generate axis tilt to shallow out the swing and to be able to get the ball on a sufficiently high trajectory. If not, he'll just hit very low bullets.

 

Weir has more weight distributed onto his front leg and less axis tilt at address than Finney. Just look at the angles of their legs. Finney's set-up to my eye is OK, but I wouldn't consider it to be ideal for a driver. IMO, his right hip is too high and right foot too flared open. And it looks (without being able to measure it) that his axis tilt is lacking a bit (I think ideal is more around 8 -10 deg.). I do like his top of BS position.

 

BTW, in the sequence you posted of Dana, he shows the same tendency as Weir, just to a lesser degree (of the head moving away from the target in the downswing)

[Points]

As far as Mike Weir goes, he has always tended to set up with a little weight on his front foot with all clubs. Like most all players on the PGA Tour, his head is further back with a driver than it was at set up.

I am not sure what the motivation behind Jeff's attacks/observations. From what I have read on the internet, he doesn't teach golf nor does he play at a very high level. I do not mean this as a personal attack only stating facts. From best I can tell, he hasn't taken lessons from any big teachers or talked with many tour players. Having said that, he is completely correct in stating that no players left hip is further forward at the top of the swing than at address with a driver. Assuming the camera doesn't move in Dana's swing, I would say this is an odd move with a driver.

As far as Faldo goes, I don't believe it was his pivot that caused him to be short. Some players are short hitters and when you reach a certain age it becomes difficult to add speed to the swing. Faldo didn't get any real boost when the ball and driver's changed. Faldo was great ball striker and very good putter.

[hoganfan924]

Having said that, he is completely correct in stating that no players left hip is further forward at the top of the swing than at address with a driver. Assuming the camera doesn't move in Dana's swing, I would say this is an odd move with a driver.

 

I agree that it's unconventional, but it is what O'grady, Plummer & Bennett teach.

[dlygrisse]

Its more about his lack of connection of his right arm than anything else. That is a big thing is why faldo does not hit it out of his shadow. That is a huge part in the pivot

I have alot of pics of him over the years, some from japan and his right arm is way too bend and rotated for my taste.

But who am I too say do I have a green jakcet in my closet? All I know is Mac during that era smoked it off the tee.

 

I dont understand your comments? Are you saying that he needs more width in his swing?

[dana dahlquist]

Not say he was a bad striker of the ball. But he did not rip it like he could had. But as I said before its not all about the swing its how many majors he won..

Mabey Ill take a video of my drive this week and post it up. low ball and high ball

[dana dahlquist]

Its more about his lack of connection of his right arm than anything else. That is a big thing is why faldo does not hit it out of his shadow. That is a huge part in the pivot

I have alot of pics of him over the years, some from japan and his right arm is way too bend and rotated for my taste.

But who am I too say do I have a green jakcet in my closet? All I know is Mac during that era smoked it off the tee.

 

I dont understand your comments? Are you saying that he needs more width in his swing?

He needs to reconnect his right arm sooner and straighten it on the downswing Passive BTW so his order is better.

[christhebigsmokemoss]

Dana, i think your swing looks superb. The still shots you posted are the closest ive seen to the great man himself!

Nice work.

 

Wish P2 was more simple! Its killing me!

[dana dahlquist]

Thax bro, keep up the good work over there in England.

[Tyler Durden]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

[Furrankee]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

 

 

Because this is a swing theory that just popularized itself within a half year, with a sport in existance for 200+ years.

 

Whatever helps golfers sustain the lag...

[Tyler Durden]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

 

 

Because this is a swing theory that just popularized itself within a half year, with a sport in existance for 200+ years.

 

Whatever helps golfers sustain the lag...

If you believe that this swing was only popularized within a half year, you either need to 1) bone up on the history of swing thought and theory, or 2) let everyone else here on this forum know what you've been smoking. :beruo:

[hoganfan924]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

 

Because this is a swing forum?

 

Dana has done a fine job of mastering his MORAD swing and I'll bet he's doing a fine job of teaching it as well.

[Furrankee]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

 

 

Because this is a swing theory that just popularized itself within a half year, with a sport in existance for 200+ years.

 

Whatever helps golfers sustain the lag...

If you believe that this swing was only popularized within a half year, you either need to 1) bone up on the history of swing thought and theory, or 2) let everyone else here on this forum know what you've been smoking. :beruo:

 

 

Have you personally ever heard about the S&T 10 years ago? 5 years ago? Even 2 years ago? Even before it was published in the Golf Digest article? It may have been known, yes. But it wasn't popularized to the mass public until recently.

[Tyler Durden]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

 

 

Because this is a swing theory that just popularized itself within a half year, with a sport in existance for 200+ years.

 

Whatever helps golfers sustain the lag...

If you believe that this swing was only popularized within a half year, you either need to 1) bone up on the history of swing thought and theory, or 2) let everyone else here on this forum know what you've been smoking. :beruo:

 

 

Have you personally ever heard about the S&T 10 years ago? 5 years ago? Even 2 years ago? Even before it was published in the Golf Digest article? It may have been known, yes. But it wasn't popularized to the mass public until recently.

Yes, I agree with you that "S&T" per se has not been known to the masses until the Golf Digest articles of late. But, S&T is just a microcosm of a whole swing philosophy that has been around for quite some time now.

[Furrankee]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

 

 

Because this is a swing theory that just popularized itself within a half year, with a sport in existance for 200+ years.

 

Whatever helps golfers sustain the lag...

If you believe that this swing was only popularized within a half year, you either need to 1) bone up on the history of swing thought and theory, or 2) let everyone else here on this forum know what you've been smoking. :beruo:

 

 

Have you personally ever heard about the S&T 10 years ago? 5 years ago? Even 2 years ago? Even before it was published in the Golf Digest article? It may have been known, yes. But it wasn't popularized to the mass public until recently.

Yes, I agree with you that "S&T" per se has not been known to the masses until the Golf Digest articles of late. But, S&T is just a microcosm of a whole swing philosophy that has been around for quite some time now.

 

My gooddness. It never was a microcosm of a whole swing philosophy.

 

It was an 'aspect' of a swing from a photo of a Ben Hogan or a Sam Snead, that someone looked at. They then used it as a stepping stone for a new swing theory.

 

Cmon, how else are desperate teaching pros going to make money? Let's get to the root of the problem here.

[Machinegolfer]

First of all, Stack and Tilt is MORAD + TGM PERIOD...Do you REALLY THINK BENNETT AND PLUMMER GIVE A HOOT WHAT ITS CALLED the reason it even has a name is becuase golf digest made them pick one...do you know how they picked it? asked the players whom they teach to come up with a list and pick the best one...DESPERATE TEACHERS? are you joking, bennett and plummer are two of the most brilliant instructors around..do u think harmon or leadbetter can control the closing rate of your clubface...i think not

[jcjr34]

Jeffman, I'm taking a look at the 3 swing sequences you have posted and may have a simple solution on how Dana achieves this move. It looks like it's not Dana that's shifting, but more the camera has shifted slightly. Take a look at the background in the first two frames and notice the difference in the background, specifically the space between his head and the tall trees to the left and the spacing of the bunkers vs the hips. I eyeballed it, but it looks like the separation is the same. Just my observation.

By the way Dana.. Nice swing!

[JeffMann]

Hoganfan 924

 

You write with respect to the leftwards shift of Dana's head/torso/pelvis in the backswing-: "I agree that it's unconventional, but it is what O'grady, Plummer & Bennett teach."

 

Are you seriously arguing that this choice is deliberate, when Dana hasn't acknowledged that it is a deliberate choice in his driver swing? Dana only stated that his stance was very narrow. If it is a deliberate choice in O'Grady's and B/P's teaching, could you please explain why it is biomechanically advantageous to shift one's pelvis so far to the left during the backswing that the outer border of the left pelvis is outside the left foot at the end-backswing position - for a driver swing? Also, the leftwards pelvic shift produces a concomitant shift of the upper torso and head. What is the biomechanical advantage of that leftwards head/torso shift in a driver swing?

 

Jeff.

[hoganfan924]

Hoganfan 924

 

You write with respect to the leftwards shift of Dana's head/torso/pelvis in the backswing-: "I agree that it's unconventional, but it is what O'grady, Plummer & Bennett teach."

 

Are you seriously arguing that this choice is deliberate, when Dana hasn't acknowledged that it is a deliberate choice in his driver swing? Dana only stated that his stance was very narrow. If it is a deliberate choice in O'Grady's and B/P's teaching, could you please explain why it is biomechanically advantageous to shift one's pelvis so far to the left during the backswing that the outer border of the left pelvis is outside the left foot at the end-backswing position - for a driver swing? Also, the leftwards pelvic shift produces a concomitant shift of the upper torso and head. What is the biomechanical advantage of that leftwards head/torso shift in a driver swing?

 

Jeff.

 

Yes, it is deliberate and I won't "argue" that it is advantageous because I don't believe that it is. I only know what O'grady teaches (and what Plummer/Bennett advocated in 2 GD articles) and how he swings the club himself, which Dana has done an admirable job emulating.

[Machinegolfer]

Hoganfan 924

 

You write with respect to the leftwards shift of Dana's head/torso/pelvis in the backswing-: "I agree that it's unconventional, but it is what O'grady, Plummer & Bennett teach."

 

Are you seriously arguing that this choice is deliberate, when Dana hasn't acknowledged that it is a deliberate choice in his driver swing? Dana only stated that his stance was very narrow. If it is a deliberate choice in O'Grady's and B/P's teaching, could you please explain why it is biomechanically advantageous to shift one's pelvis so far to the left during the backswing that the outer border of the left pelvis is outside the left foot at the end-backswing position - for a driver swing? Also, the leftwards pelvic shift produces a concomitant shift of the upper torso and head. What is the biomechanical advantage of that leftwards head/torso shift in a driver swing?

 

 

Jeff.

 

shiftless hip turn with rotated shoulder allows for pitch elbow, on the downswing dana is releasing his forward tilt, utilizing vertical force from the grouund up to "torque" each joint which is actually creating a faster swing then turning his body as fast as he can in a rotary motion...forward tilt is then replaced by a side tilt

[Tyler Durden]

I personally think Dana's swing is excellent, it's precisely what I would like my swing to resemble. What I don't get is why people who subsribe to different theories of the swing feel that it's their duty to criticize oppossing theories. From my understanding, the whole point of the golf swing is to have the club face in a reasonably good position at impact in order to produce the desired results. How the club face gets there can happen in a variety of ways, the most important point being that it gets there and that it happens consistently. I think that's what everyone is striving for. Just my 2 cents. :russian_roulette:

 

 

Because this is a swing theory that just popularized itself within a half year, with a sport in existance for 200+ years.

 

Whatever helps golfers sustain the lag...

If you believe that this swing was only popularized within a half year, you either need to 1) bone up on the history of swing thought and theory, or 2) let everyone else here on this forum know what you've been smoking. :beruo:

 

 

Have you personally ever heard about the S&T 10 years ago? 5 years ago? Even 2 years ago? Even before it was published in the Golf Digest article? It may have been known, yes. But it wasn't popularized to the mass public until recently.

Yes, I agree with you that "S&T" per se has not been known to the masses until the Golf Digest articles of late. But, S&T is just a microcosm of a whole swing philosophy that has been around for quite some time now.

 

My gooddness. It never was a microcosm of a whole swing philosophy.

 

It was an 'aspect' of a swing from a photo of a Ben Hogan or a Sam Snead, that someone looked at. They then used it as a stepping stone for a new swing theory.

 

Cmon, how else are desperate teaching pros going to make money? Let's get to the root of the problem here.

 

To say that MORAD or TGM are simply derived from an 'aspect' of a swing photo taken from Snead or Hogan is asinine in more ways than one. Please, enlighten the rest of us neophytes with your infinite wisdom and let us know what that single 'aspect' is. I simply made a comment that I subscribe to the theory that there's more than one way to skin a cat, and then you go off on a tangent regarding how this is solely a gimmick for golf pros to make money. Give me a break.