Mike and Dana's hip turn video lesson

[pb056]

seems like JM is tryin to provoke Dana into explaining the reasons why he swings it the way he does.

 

Comes across a veiled fishing expedition to get him to explain MORAD/TGM. Nothing else.

[Points]

As far as clubshaft angle of attacks, there is a wide range of them. Players like Lietzke, Craig Parry, Fulton Allem, and many other faders of the ball have a very steep or over the top look to their swing. Angle of attack changes as clubs change. A driver swing will not appear to be as steep as a short iron swing. This appearance is based on a consistent camera angle.

I have yet to see a top player with a driver have his left hip closer to the target at the top of his swing than at address. I have however seen players like Duval, Montgomerie, and Clark move their heads towards the target during the backswing. Throughout the history of the game, there have been many ideas regarding head movement or centeredness. They change and will continue to do so which means to me there is a certain range of acceptable motion.

I think the ultimate problem with Jeff's approach to all of this golf discussion is his perspective is fairly limited. Sure he has written some papers, read a few books, and visited several discussion sites. Does this qualify him as an expert? I think the comment by Jeff that he is a "miser" is very indicative of what he is willing to do in order to achieve some type of academic knowledge. On more than one occasion, he is made it very clear that he is neither a teacher nor a player. One of my favorite quotes is "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance"

[JeffMann]

Points - you wrote-: "I think the ultimate problem with Jeff's approach to all of this golf discussion is his perspective is fairly limited. Sure he has written some papers, read a few books, and visited several discussion sites. Does this qualify him as an expert?"

 

I have never claimed that I am an expert. However, I do pride myself on providing reasons for my golf instructional opinions. If my reasoned opinions regarding the biomechanics of the golf swing are faulty, then it should be easy for a forum member to demonstrate my errors. That's what I am waiting to see happen. So far, ALL criticism has been directed at my "suppposed" intentions rather than my biomechanical explanations. I am still waiting for someone to demonstrate that my biomechanical explanations are flawed.

 

Jeff.

[hoganfan924]

Hoganfan924

 

I am not surprised that you wouldn't offer any biomechanical reasons for rejecting my biomechanical explanations, and that you would only perpetuate your ad hominum attacks on my underlying intentions for discussing this "issue". If I labelled you paranoid or crazy, it is only because you are totally biased in your perspective - for example, when you state that "I want to provoke and not inform". I think that my posts are actually very informative from an explanatory perspective (although not your favored perspective).

 

If any forum member is actually going to address the biomechanical "issue" of the "optimum" clubshaft angle of attack, it is obviously not going to be you or Dana.

 

Jeff.

 

Perhaps Jeffmann, in addition to the reasons I listed earlier, it is also because the "optimum" clubshaft angle of attack is completely dependent on the club being used and the desired ballflight.

[dana dahlquist]

 

There you go more later, so we can stop the banter

[dana dahlquist]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fziP8fj9rI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaNLUdbEcMI

 

Ok done with this now.

Have a nice evening everyone.

[jeffy]

Consider this vide lesson by Mike McNary and Dana Dahlquist on the proper hip turn.

 

Hip turn video lesson

 

They claim that the proper hip turn involves a more upslanted hip turn (right hip higher than the left hip) during the backswing - rather than a horizontal hip turn. They cliam that it has a number of advantages.

 

First of all, by straightening the right leg in the backswing, they seemingly imply that it allows the right thigh to generate more power during the downswing. I am personally sceptical of ACTIVE right thigh movements being required for swing power generation in the full golf swing.

 

Secondly, they state that the shoulders become steeper in the backswing as a result of an upslanted hip turn maneuver during the backswing, and that it allows the shoulders to more easily turn down steeply during the downswing. However, if you look at Dana's DTL video sequence where he has a steeper backswing shoulder turn angle, you will note that his clubshaft comes slightly OTT (clubshaft passes above the right forearm and the clubhead get outside the hands) in the early downswing. So the question becomes - is that the best method of generating a steeper shoulder turn angle in the downswing while avoiding an OTT movement of the clubshaft?

 

Consider Sergio Garcia's approach.

 

See this swing video, and note how he turns his pelvis horizontally in both the backswing and downswing, and how he keeps his right knee slightly flexed throughout the backswing.

 

 

Also, note that he has a relatively horizontal shoulder turn in the backswing, but a much steeper shoulder turn angle in the downswing. How does he achieve a steeper shoulder turn angle in the downswing. I believe that it is the synergistic effect of two simultaneously-occurring movements at the start of the downswing - i) a hip shift-rotation move that squares the hips; and ii) a concomitant right shoulder dipping action (as if one side-leans the right shoulder down towards the right front trouser pocket with the intent of putting the right shoulder in the right front trouser side-pocket). This right shoulder movement is actually an attempt to drive the right shoulder down the RSP line - as shown in this photo.

 

 

In the first image, the green line depicts Sergio's horizontal shoulder turn angle at the end-backswing position. The yellow line is the RSP line - drawn from the right shoulder to the ball. In image 2, the yellow line is drawn across Sergio's shoulder turn angle, and that yellow line perfectly matches the yellow line in image 1 thus demonstrating that Sergio drives his right shoulder down the RSP line during the downswing.

 

I think that the advantage of Sergio's downswing action is that the clubshaft shallows out at the start of the downswing and passes through his right forearm (and not OTT - above the right forearm) during the downswing. By contrast, I think that Mike/Dana's approach may result in a slightly too steep clubshaft angle of attack during the downswing.

 

What do you think?

 

Jeff.

 

I think the clear risk of the Garcia approach for the less physically gifted golfers is that it could become too shallow. Sergio steepens his shoulders, downcocks dramatically in the downswing, and uses his lower body superbly to overcome the combination of a flattening armswing with a horizontal hip and shoulder turn.

 

The approach Dana and Mike endorse has the advantage of steepening the hips and shoulders during the backswing, so a compensation is not required in the downswing. A steep shoulder turn permits a more shallow arm swing, which reduces the likelihood of an OTT move. An OTT move most often occurs with a flat shoulder turn and a steep arm swing. It is the bane of the two-planer, not the one-planer, to use Hardy-speak.

 

I see no "biomechanical explanations" in your post that support any of your speculations. Of course, you don't provide any sequences of actual swings that are OTT by Dana, Mike, any of their students, or any other swings that utilize a steep shoulder turn for that matter. The notion that a steep shoulder turn is more susceptible to an OTT move than a horizontal turn is something you just made up; you provide no supporting evidence. If you could actually demonstrate that your opinions have merit, rather then just speculate about what might be, people might not hate you as much as they do.

[JeffMann]

Dana - I looked at Mike's swing, and I think that it is excellent. He has none of the "problems" that I was concerned about - left outer border of the pelvis being outside the left foot at the end-backswing position; or a steep shoulder turn in the backswing. He looks very similar to Tiger Woods, Ernie Els, and Nick Faldo in many respects - he has the same horizontal shoulder turn in the backswing and his pelvis rotates horizontally in the downswing. Therefore, I cannot fault his swing from a biomechanical perspective, because it is a very orthodox swing from my point of view.

 

Here is a comparison between Faldo, Woods. Els and McNary - at the end-backswing position.

 

 

The green lines shows that they all have similar degrees of pelvic tilt, and the red lines show a similar degree of horizontal shoulder turn angle in the backswing (any slight difference is due to variations in the degree of forward spinal tilt at the hips). I can see nothing unorthodox in Mike's swing from a down-the-line viewpoint.

 

Here is a frontal view of Mike's driver swing.

 

 

Again, I can see nothing wrong with his swing. Many features are very othodox. For example, he has slight rightwards spinal tilt at address and his head is behind the center of his stance.

 

During the backswing, he straightens his right leg more than Woods/Els/Faldo which causes his pelvis to move slightly leftwards, but the outer border of the left pelvis is still within the vertical limits of the left foot. That sllight variation in pelvic position is perfectly acceptable from my perspective - because he hasn't shifted his pelvis outside the vertical limits of his stance.

 

I note that his spine/upper torso is slightly more vertical at the end-backswing position than those other three golfers - presumably due to the straightening of the right leg, and slight subsequent uptilt of the right pelvis, which will cause the lumbar spine to be less right-oriented. By my arbitrary definitions, he still has a rightwards-centered backswing, which I favor.

 

On the downswing, he has a "firm left side" in the sense that the outer border of his left pelvis is still inside the vertical limit of his left foot. He obviously has less secondary axis tilt than Woods/Els - because his pelvis is already shifted slightly to the left at the end-backswing position.

 

In summary, the differences between Mike's swing and those three PGA golfers is so small as to be insignificant. I still cannot understand why Mike chooses to shift the pelvis slightly leftwards during the backswing and I cannot envisage any biomechanical advantages. I personally prefer Woods/Els/ Faldo's approach of maintaining a slight flex in the right knee and avoiding any shift of the pelvis to the left. However, the differences are very small from my perspective.

 

Unfortunately, you MORAD guys are seemingly unwilling to explain your swing style choices publically, so I will probably never discover why Mike favors a small degree of leftwards pelvic shift during the backswing.

 

Jeff.

[JeffMann]

Jeffy - you wrote-: "I see no "biomechanical explanations" in your post that support any of your speculations. Of course, you don't provide any sequences of actual swings that are OTT by Dana, Mike, any of their students, or any other swings that utilize a steep shoulder turn for that matter."

 

I couldn't provide any swings by Dana/Mike with a steep shoulder turn angle, because I haven't discoverd any. I have just posted my analysis of Mike's driver swing and he does not have a steep shoulder turn angle. So, I have nothing to criticise. Dana/Mike talk of a steep shoulder turn angle in that video lesson, but I haven't seen that phenomenon in their "real life" swings.

 

My criticism was directed at the "idea" of a steep shoulder turn angle in the backswing - because I believe that an OTT move is more likely if the hands are higher, and closer to the toe line, at the end-backswing position. However, as I have previously stated, the down-the-line images of Mike do not show an unusually steep shoulder turn angle, so I am not at all surprised that he doesn't come OTT. He has the traditional hip squaring action that shallows his clubshaft at the start of the downswing, and he looks as perfectly on plane as many PGA tour golfers.

 

Jeff.

[dana dahlquist]

For future looks at pictures make sure the camera is always at the same vantage point in relation to the golfer.

Note to see what shot they are hitting. This makes it easy for the student to get understanding on how to set up for it everytime.

The best way to get the numbers is with K-vest or I club.

However looking at motion is the biggest factor it is the basis for good teachers, IE having the eye for it.

[jeffy]

My criticism was directed at the "idea" of a steep shoulder turn angle in the backswing - because I believe that an OTT move is more likely if the hands are higher, and closer to the toe line, at the end-backswing position. However, as I have previously stated, the down-the-line images of Mike do not show an unusually steep shoulder turn angle, so I am not at all surprised that he doesn't come OTT.

Jeff.

 

Why would a good golf swing with a steep shoulder turn be prone to causing the hands to be "higher, and closer to the toe line"? You never established this as a valid premise, yet you go ahead and challenge Dana and Mike as if it is an established fact. That kind of disrespectful behavior is what makes you so annoying.

 

Where the hands go is determined by the plane the arms swing on. A steep shoulder turn is more compatible with a deep, relatively flat armswing: matching them up in this way makes an OTT easier to avoid. Steep shoulders with steeper arms would be prone to an OTT move, just as horizontal shoulders with steeper arms. Hardy explains this in "The Plane Truth for Golfers", a book you have claimed to have read 20+ times. I suggest you read it again if you failed to grasp a concept this important.

[JeffMann]

Jeffy - a steeper shoulder turn is usually associated with a steeper arm position if the position of the arms is nearly parallel to the shoulder plane angle - which is the position demonstrated by Dana/Mike in their video lesson.

 

 

With the hands over the right shoulder - as demonstrated in this video - the hands are much more likely to come OTT compared to a flatter shoulder turn angle and an equivalently flat arm plane.

 

If anybody is disrespectful it's you, because you incorrectly presumed that I was was referring to a steeper shoulder turn and flat arm position, which is NOT what Mike/Dana were talking about in their video lesson. That's what makes you so annoying. You simply want to attack with me without first inquiring whether I was referrring to a steeper shoulder shoulder angle + an equivalently steep arm angle, or not. Why didn't you simply ask me about my "true" position BEFORE attacking me?

 

Jeff

[hayam]

Jeffy - a steeper shoulder turn is usually associated with a steeper arm position if the position of the arms is nearly parallel to the shoulder plane angle - which is the position demonstrated by Dana/Mike in their video lesson.

 

 

With the hands over the right shoulder - as demonstrated in this video - the hands are much more likely to come OTT compared to a flatter shoulder turn angle and an equivalently flat arm plane.

 

If anybody is disrespectful it's you, because you incorrectly presumed that I was was referring to a steeper shoulder turn and flat arm position, which is NOT what Mike/Dana were talking about in their video lesson. That's what makes you so annoying. You simply want to attack with me without first inquiring whether I was referrring to a steeper shoulder shoulder angle + an equivalently steep arm angle, or not. Why didn't you simply ask me about my "true" position BEFORE attacking me?

 

Jeff

 

Pretty obvious you don't understand why they do that.

 

The hand go OTT.. does not matter at all, what matters is the clubshaft ON PLANE. With the "correct" setup , this would be solved.

 

This case the arms need not go into position because they already FIT into position... think about that as another advantage of this model.

[JeffMann]

Hayam - you are correct. I don't understand why they do that. Why doesn't it matter if the hands go over the top, which will cause the clubshaft to approach the ball from above the hands? How can the clubshaft be on plane if it is coming down from ABOVE the hands, which are coming OTT?

 

Jeff.

[hayam]

most important is the shaft.. because it determines direction of where the ball goes. AND the face angle , where the ball leaves the face, the force + face angle will impart spin.

 

My answer to you, try to understand Sweet spot plane... and there are different loading patterns.

 

And can u explain why the hand and clubshaft have to be inline? THe club shaft approaches the ball between the shoulder and the elbow in most full swing.

 

BUT I do not think that understanding still will not help to explain why they do that so I think your heading somewhere colder...

[jeffy]

Jeffy - a steeper shoulder turn is usually associated with a steeper arm position if the position of the arms is nearly parallel to the shoulder plane angle - which is the position demonstrated by Dana/Mike in their video lesson.

 

With the hands over the right shoulder - as demonstrated in this video - the hands are much more likely to come OTT compared to a flatter shoulder turn angle and an equivalently flat arm plane.

 

If anybody is disrespectful it's you, because you incorrectly presumed that I was was referring to a steeper shoulder turn and flat arm position, which is NOT what Mike/Dana were talking about in their video lesson. That's what makes you so annoying. You simply want to attack with me without first inquiring whether I was referrring to a steeper shoulder shoulder angle + an equivalently steep arm angle, or not. Why didn't you simply ask me about my "true" position BEFORE attacking me?

 

Jeff

 

 

"a steeper shoulder turn is usually associated with a steeper arm position if the position of the arms is nearly parallel to the shoulder plane angle - which is the position demonstrated by Dana/Mike in their video lesson."

 

Really? You are flat out wrong and are just making that up. I have never seen a good one-plane swing where a line drawn through the shoulders at the top aims at the ball: that plane usually extends well into the 48" zone beyond the ball that Hardy talks about. In contrast, it is quite typical for a two-plane swing to have the left arm in line with ball at the top, which is obviously a much steeper armswing. Therefore, a steeper arm position is "usually associated" with a more horizontal shoulder turn. Again, if you had paid attention to Hardy, you'd know that. Seriously, you read "The Plane Truth for Golfers" TWENTY TIMES?

 

"With the hands over the right shoulder - as demonstrated in this video - the hands are much more likely to come OTT compared to a flatter shoulder turn angle and an equivalently flat arm plane."

 

Yes, a flatter shoulder turn with an equally flat armswing would not be likely to come OTT: it would, however, be very likely to be too shallow and under the plane, and no doubt have horrible impact, untenable for good golf. What Dana and Mike describe is much more likely to result in good golf shots. Again, you flaunt your ignorance.

 

"...I was referrring to a steeper shoulder shoulder angle + an equivalently steep arm angle,... Why didn't you simply ask me about my "true" position BEFORE attacking me?"

 

Turns out that I did understand your "true" ill-informed position. Please, do everyone a favor and cease your foolish posts. You must have better uses for your time.

[JeffMann]

Hayam

 

I have never stated that that the hands and clubshaft have to be in line.

 

We partially agree on one point - that the clubshaft should come down at an angle between the right shoulder and right elbow. However, I have noticed that most PGA tour players don't have the clubshaft cut across the upper 1/3 of the right upper arm. They usually have a flatter clubshaft plane - where the clubshaft cuts across the lower half of the right upper arm.

 

Look at the images that Dana posted of Mike McNary hitting a driver. Note that the clubshaft cuts across the lower half of his right upper arm. Then, in the next frame it is line with his right forearm. That represents a good clubshaft attack angle from my perspective. Interestingly, I have noticed that the clubshaft cuts across the lower half of the right upper arm even when PGA tour players hit short irons.

 

Here is a photo of Ernie Els hitting a pitching wedge.

 

 

Note that the clubshaft cuts across the lower third of his upper arm. The angle relative to the ground is steeper - because he adopts a more bent-over posture when hitting short irons and stands closer to the ball.

 

This following photo represents my position regarding the "red zone" - where the clubshaft should NOT be at that point-in-time in the downswing, because it would signify a too-steep clubshaft angle of attack.

 

 

Think of the game of tennis. When a tennis player wants to hit a slice (in order to DECREASE forward power) he brings the racket from above-down and cuts across the ball. That's what would happen if a golfer allowed his clubshaft to be in the "red zone" - it would be equivalent to a slice action, which is not a powerful way to hit a golf ball. A tennis player who wants to generate INCREASED forwward power would hit the ball with the racket travelling more horizontally. It is obviously not possible to have such a shallow angle of attack when hitting a golf ball, but most PGA tour players have a relatively shallow angle of attack. They do not slice-chop down on the ball when hitting standard (non-specialised) shots.

 

Jeff.

[dana dahlquist]

That photo of badds is when he was a bit too wild with the driver do you have a new one of him?

His linkage was was too steep.

[JeffMann]

Jeffy wrote -: ""a steeper shoulder turn is usually associated with a steeper arm position if the position of the arms is nearly parallel to the shoulder plane angle - which is the position demonstrated by Dana/Mike in their video lesson."

 

Really? You are flat out wrong and are just making that up".

 

Jeffy claims that I am making this up.

 

Here again is the video sequence from Mike/Dana's hip turn video.

 

 

Note that the left arm is approximately parallel to the shoulder turn angle in image 1.

 

Jeffy also wrote-: "Yes, a flatter shoulder turn with an equally flat armswing would not be likely to come OTT: it would, however, be very likely to be too shallow and under the plane, and no doubt have horrible impact, untenable for good golf."

 

Note that Mike McNary has a flat shoulder turn angle AND a flat arm angle at the end-backswing position in this next photo from the sequence of images that Dana posted, and his downswing definitely wasn't shallow and underplane.

 

 

Jeff.

[dana dahlquist]

No matter were the club is or is not at the top of the backswing there has been many examples with the great golfers over the years. That you can shallow a shaft out on the down swing several ways.

In my picture, its not square on BTW. The right arm would drop the shaft down. Exaple would be Miller Barber to Ray Floyd.

 

Point is there are so many ways to do it, you just have to make sure that yours fits you..I think both of you are getting to the same point...

[JeffMann]

Dana - I don't have a good down-the-line video of Badds "new" swing when hitting a driver. I can understand why you think that he was a little too steep in his "old" driver swing.

 

I found this down-the-line video of Badds driving with a fairway wood. Does it help you?

 

Badds fairway wood drive

 

Jeff.

[dana dahlquist]

Yep thanks good way to show every one that the right arm was on plane at impact.

[fats]

Dana,

 

I see the shot Badds hit in that clip went straight, but I don't like to see the face shut down so quickly...looks wrong to me...what am I missing?

[dana dahlquist]

Yes, Im not sure really what he was trying to do shape wise. Is not the same as it was in the US Open a few months later, it was much better there imo. But then again, got to look at alot of swings over the day, or on the range to get an idea.

[jeffy]

Jeffy wrote -: ""a steeper shoulder turn is usually associated with a steeper arm position if the position of the arms is nearly parallel to the shoulder plane angle - which is the position demonstrated by Dana/Mike in their video lesson."

 

Really? You are flat out wrong and are just making that up".

 

Jeffy claims that I am making this up.

 

Here again is the video sequence from Mike/Dana's hip turn video.

 

Note that the left arm is approximately parallel to the shoulder turn angle in image 1.

 

Why do you consider Dana's left arm to be "steep"? Just because it is in-line with a "steep" shoulder turn? That doesn't prove anything.

 

Jeffy also wrote-: "Yes, a flatter shoulder turn with an equally flat armswing would not be likely to come OTT: it would, however, be very likely to be too shallow and under the plane, and no doubt have horrible impact, untenable for good golf."

 

Note that Mike McNary has a flat shoulder turn angle AND a flat arm angle at the end-backswing position in this next photo from the sequence of images that Dana posted, and his downswing definitely wasn't shallow and underplane.

 

Oh, I get it: Mike says that he wants a "steep" shoulder turn, but it is really "flat". I don't consider Mike's shoulders to be flat, particularly for a driver, as they point within the "48" zone" Hardy describes as appropriate for a one-plane swing: a "flat" shoulder turn would point further out. But I guess in your world, when Hardy, Bennett and Plummer, and Dana and Mike say they want "steep" shoulders, they really mean "flat". Thanks for clearing that up.

 

BTW, please post an image of some good one-plane golfers with what you consider a "steep" shoulder turn with a driver, and let's compare the angle of their armswings to a representative group of two-plane players, and let's see which group has "steeper" arms.

[Points]

I think that footage is from the Memorial which was two weeks before the Open. After reading this post, I am a little confused as to what we are actually talking about anymore. JeffMann are you stating that an Over the Top swing move cannot play good to great golf? Secondly, you state that the over the top move cannot be a power move. Are these statements your contention.

[JeffMann]

Points

 

I think that one can play "good" golf with an OTT move if one makes certain additional compensatory moves. Jim Suttie discusses this entire issue in his book "Your Perfect Swing". He discusses "upper body players" who don't have the flexibility for the standard lower body golf swing. A prime example of an upper body player would be Craig Stadler and Craig Parry. Those players essentially use theirr upper body as hitters, rather than swingers, and they usually come OTT.

 

Here is a photo of Craig Parry from that book.

 

 

Note that Craig has a large amount of mid-upper body bulk, which makes it difficult to be a lower body swinger like Tiger Woods. Therefore, Craig has chosen to use the "upper body dive" swing style, which I previously described. It is obviously possible to learn to hit the ball well using that swing style, especially if one makes compensatory moves to prevent pulling the ball left. For example, upper body players may adopt a closed stance, so that their out-to-in clubhead swingpath doesn't cut across the ball so much. They may also hold the clubface open through impact to prevent pulling the ball left.

 

Although it is possible to use the upper body swing style with its OTT swing action, most PGA tour players use the lower body swing style exemplified by Ben Hogan and Tiger Woods. I definitely think that the lower body swing style with its shallow angle of attack will create greater swing power.

 

Jeff.

[JeffMann]

Jeffy - our arguments always become circular, and non-productive, because we live in a different mental universe.

 

You write-:

 

"Why do you consider Dana's left arm to be "steep"? Just because it is in-line with a "steep" shoulder turn? That doesn't prove anything."

 

I think it proves everything.

 

Statement 1: The shoulder turn angle is steep.

 

Statement 2: The left arm is on roughly the same plane as the shoulder turn angle.

 

Statement 3: Therefore, one can use deductive logic to conclude that the left arm plane is steep. (statement 3 follows deductively from statements 1 and 2).

 

I think that proves that the left arm is steep, and that is all that I claimed regarding that swing video capture image sequence.

 

You write-: "Oh, I get it: Mike says that he wants a "steep" shoulder turn, but it is really "flat". I don't consider Mike's shoulders to be flat, particularly for a driver, as they point within the "48" zone" Hardy describes as appropriate for a one-plane swing: a "flat" shoulder turn would point further out. But I guess in your world, when Hardy, Bennett and Plummer, and Dana and Mike say they want "steep" shoulders, they really mean "flat". Thanks for clearing that up."

 

Don't blame me for the disparity/incongruity between Mike/Dana's swing video lesson, which specifically states that one should have a steep shoulder turn, and the "real life" fact that Mike's "real life" swing doesn't have a steep shoulder turn. Dana may be able to explain that incongruity/disparity. I am simply an observer, who comments on his observations.

 

Jeff.

[Points]

Both Parry and Stadler have a tremendous amount of lower body or forward motion in their swing so why is this an uppper body swing? Both players metioned, do no look that different from a face one view as compared to Tiger. Secondly, there are other players who are not thick chested which use this same stlye. Last I checked Stadler hit it out their pretty far compared to his peers which goes against the idea that this cannot a power move.

[scores]

Hi jeff mann

 

you talk about

 

 

""a steeper shoulder turn is usually associated with a steeper arm position"

 

I just don't think the shoulders remain steep as you swing through the ball..as well as the arms.. Again I am just trying to learn.

I think the club has to shallow out somewhere???