Mike and Dana's hip turn video lesson

[asitlies]

So the number one golfer in the world has less nee flex in the right nee at the top of the swing than when he started. That states it self.

 

I really have no idea what Palmer was hitting during that photo, however the picture in the right of Badds is very good.

Mr Hogan had a very close look....

 

The picture of Badds would look a lot different if the cameraman was about 1 foot to the right in the picture at left. I don't think they are that far off - I think the shorts make it look like he is bending more - or that the long pants hide the knee flex - take your pick. It seems the biggest difference in the Badds pictures is that he has the club in a different position - some might say "laid off".

 

Here's a suggestion for every teacher from a guy who has taken a lot of lessons - have your students take lessons in shorts, so you can see their legs. In addition, I would think that when guys are talking about the legs, that THEY too should be wearing shorts so students can actually see the difference. I've had guys tell me to flex my knees more, and then I wrapped my pants legs tighter to show them where I am, and had them recant, saying that I had enough flex, but that the generous cut of my pants was hiding it.

 

I think if you're making a video and talking about the legs, you should wear shorts.

[dana dahlquist]

I think your not seeing that Hogans shoulders are square at his set up in this picture and your looking at his toe stance line is always closed to a degree. For the most part the backswing of Hogan and Badds is very close in these towo pictures. Not exact but very close.......

[JeffMann]

Bantamben

 

You imply that there are two different ways to turn the pelvis. I believe that there is only one way. The pelvis "rotates" in the backswiwng only because the right femoral head is moved to a different position - further left, rearwards (away from the ball-target line) and slightly upwards - as a result of movement of the right lower limb. The right lower limb straightens to a variable degree at the knee joint and the right thigh is thereby pushed leftwards and slightly upwards. The right knee is only capable of <10 degrees of rotary movement and therefore contributes only a little to the change in position of the right femoral head. The degree of rotation of the pelvis is determined by the degree of angulation of the right thigh to the left, and the more thre right thigh is pushed leftwards/rearwards => the greater the amount of pelvic rotation. A golfer can make it easier to turn the pelvis more by flaring the right foot outwards, because that realigns the ankle joint (which cannot rotate internally more than 10 degrees) and allows the entire right right lower limb to more easily establish a leftwards tlt (from the right foot to the right hip). Sam Snead maximises his hip rotation by allowing the right knee to straighten to a greater degree, while Tiger Woods/Sergio Garcia limit their hip rotation by limiting the degree of straightening of the right knee +/- keeping the right foot perpendicular to the ball-target line at address.

 

Jeff.

[JeffMann]

I tend to agree with Dana - I don't think that Badds has a more laid off clubshaft position than Ben Hogan, and I also believe that their end-backswing positions are very close to being identical.

 

Jeff.

[asitlies]

I haven't looked at comparable images of Hogan and Badds. I was referring to the two pictures of Badds. The picture of Hogan that was provided is from a very different angle than those of Badds - how can you make a comparison with these?

[bantamben]

Bantamben

 

You imply that there are two different ways to turn the pelvis. I believe that there is only one way. The pelvis "rotates" in the backswiwng only because the right femoral head is moved to a different position - further left, rearwards (away from the ball-target line) and slightly upwards - as a result of movement of the right lower limb. The right lower limb straightens to a variable degree at the knee joint and the right thigh is thereby pushed leftwards and slightly upwards. The right knee is only capable of <10 degrees of rotary movement and therefore contributes only a little to the change in position of the right femoral head. The degree of rotation of the pelvis is determined by the degree of angulation of the right thigh to the left, and the more thre right thigh is pushed leftwards/rearwards => the greater the amount of pelvic rotation. A golfer can make it easier to turn the pelvis more by flaring the right foot outwards, because that realigns the ankle joint (which cannot rotate internally more than 10 degrees) and allows the entire right right lower limb to more easily establish a leftwards tlt (from the right foot to the right hip). Sam Snead maximises his hip rotation by allowing the right knee to straighten to a greater degree, while Tiger Woods/Sergio Garcia limit their hip rotation by limiting the degree of straightening of the right knee +/- keeping the right foot perpendicular to the ball-target line at address.

 

Jeff.

 

I feel like you are saying the same thing I am I was just trying to keep it simple. I do believe the hips can turn a certain degree while keeping the knees bent, just try it keep your knees bent and turn your hips as far as you can go without loosing flex in your knee's you will notice that it causes your legs to point to the right. I wouldnt reccomend this I would prefer just losing some flex in the right leg and gaining flex in the left oto get the seired amount of hip turn.

[ChrisM84]

I applaud you guys on all of your research. Shows alot of passion.

 

I doubt i would be able to hit the ball with half of that running through my head.

[dana dahlquist]

I applaud you guys on all of your research. Shows alot of passion.

 

I doubt i would be able to hit the ball with half of that running through my head.

Yes you are very right!

Keep a light heart on the subject matter

[wntbtw]

So the number one golfer in the world has less nee flex in the right nee at the top of the swing than when he started. That states it self.

 

I really have no idea what Palmer was hitting during that photo, however the picture in the right of Badds is very good.

Mr Hogan had a very close look....

 

 

I could be wrong, but it looks like Hogan is hitting from a downhill lie here, which, to me, would cause his right knee to be in a 'higher' position at the top than if he were hitting from a level lie. So this picture could be mis-leading...

[slicefixer]

All great players have a large amount of lateral motion in their swing. Foot movement is related to which club a player is hitting. A wedge will see a player with a much quieter lower body than a driver. With a driver I can think of lots of players whose left foot spins backwards, are on their toes at impact, etc.

 

Points, I understand what your saying, but, my point was/is that the "quieter" the legs the more "rotational" the pivot and since the golf swing is circular in nature the more "rotational" the pivot, and therefore the resulting golf swing, the better and more consistent/repeatable the player's golf swing.........

 

As you know (I think... :clapping:), I believe there are 2 different "modern" pivots that are effective in creating a consistent and powerful golf swing........I call them "turning OVER your right side (most common and Jim's preferred style) vs. "turning INtO your right side" (my preference as it reduces the number of moving parts, lateral movement, and is, for most anyway, the easiest to repeat shot for shot, day after day).......but, make no mistake, I do teach the proper "lateral shift/"bump" when it's in the individual player's best interest (more "natural".....easier to improve with quicker results).........ALL I really care is that the player "gets to their left side and then rotate around it" in the easiest/most consistent manner possible for the individual.........I just PREFER less lateral movement for the above mentioned reasons........

 

 

 

Anyway, as your a friend and, as I know your one of the absolute best teacher's on this or any other golf instruction board, I wanted to make myself "crystal clear"............:crazy:

[JeffMann]

I haven't looked at comparable images of Hogan and Badds. I was referring to the two pictures of Badds. The picture of Hogan that was provided is from a very different angle than those of Badds - how can you make a comparison with these?

 

The photo of Hogan was apparently taken from a point that is approximately 20-30 degrees off the DTL axis, and the one photo of Badds was apparently taken at about 10-15 degrees off the DTL axis. However, I cannot understand how it would distort one's ability to discern that Hogan moved his hips/shoulders in a similar manner to Badds. I don't have any difficulty mentally "correcting"for different camera angles by using one's baseline knowledge of human anatomy/biomechanics to "three-dimensionally project" where the body has to move, position itself, in space.

 

Jeff.

[hayam]

Jeffman,

 

I don't think you can say that. Its simply impossible to guess that way. to an x x x amount of *

Don't forget Camera Height.

 

Because, what ZOOM factor are the camera man using? All Gives a different Perspective. Can guess but not for sure.

[JeffMann]

Hayam - It is, of course, a guesstimation. However, for example, I can easily tell that Palmer's shoulder turn angle points "somewhwere" within 18" outside of the ball (which is steep) compared to Badds shoulder turn angle which points "somewhere" between 18"-72" outside of the ball (which is shallower). I can also estimate that Hogan's and Badd's pelvic turn angle is relatively horizontal (compared to Palmer's pelvic turn angle) - despite all the variations in camera angle.

 

Jeff.

[asitlies]

I don't have a program to draw lines and figure out angles, and I can't find my protractor at the moment... kidding. If you want to compare, I think you need to see things from the same angle. I would say that whoever took the Hogan picture was probably 15-20 YARDS away from him at the time using a zoom lens, which can distort. Even the two pictures of Badds are from, what appears to me to be, two different angles - albeit much closer to each other than the one using Mr. Hogan. If you are looking for minute differences or similarities, I think you need to have exacting information, that's all.

 

Not all of us are doctors, either Mr.

baseline knowledge of human anatomy/biomechanics to "three-dimensionally project" where the body has to move, position itself, in space.

:clapping:

 

In addition, referring to the pictures of Badds, he is closer the camera in the "new" picture, and his shirt is distorting his belt (i.e. hip) line in the "old".

[hayam]

BUT we will be Assuming .

 

How about the golf is a game of inches, or maybe less. And 1* makes "some" difference

[golfer.61]

could someone please comment on the relationship of the hips and shoulders to the spine.....I like all the right angles...it just seems like rotation would be more natural.......

[dana dahlquist]

could someone please comment on the relationship of the hips and shoulders to the spine.....I like all the right angles...it just seems like rotation would be more natural.......

Your very right.

However look at things from an inclined angle like your swinging a baseball bat(keeping it simple) If you turned your hips level on an incline you head would move back and forward too much to keep your eyes still.

That is why the spine has to change and shift in the swing. Keeps the eyes and head still.

[Points]

I actually wasn't referring to the backswing at all. I think there is a far smaller amount of lateral motion on the backswing as compared to the downswing. I see all players make a rather large move forward as they approach impact. By forward I mean their lower body and upper body are more forward at impact than at address which in my opinion is not simply rotation. I think there are probably a few more than two pivot styles on the backswing. Annika, Faldo, Montgomerie, Woods, Hogan, etc. Snead and Hogan both moved there legs a lot much more than many of the quiet no turn/lower body swings I see many young kids trying today. I know that you will use any means necessary to get people better but words like "quiet" mean to me little to no movement which I do not believe are the function of the legs in the swing.

[dana dahlquist]

I actually wasn't referring to the backswing at all. I think there is a far smaller amount of lateral motion on the backswing as compared to the downswing. I see all players make a rather large move forward as they approach impact. By forward I mean their lower body and upper body are more forward at impact than at address which in my opinion is not simply rotation. I think there are probably a few more than two pivot styles on the backswing. Annika, Faldo, Montgomerie, Woods, Hogan, etc. Snead and Hogan both moved there legs a lot much more than many of the quiet no turn/lower body swings I see many young kids trying today. I know that you will use any means necessary to get people better but words like "quiet" mean to me little to no movement which I do not believe are the function of the legs in the swing.

Did th words quiet come out? If so I ment the smooth movement. However low body shift or transfers are very present. So yes the legs shall and will be active.

[slicefixer]

I actually wasn't referring to the backswing at all. I think there is a far smaller amount of lateral motion on the backswing as compared to the downswing. I see all players make a rather large move forward as they approach impact. By forward I mean their lower body and upper body are more forward at impact than at address which in my opinion is not simply rotation. I think there are probably a few more than two pivot styles on the backswing. Annika, Faldo, Montgomerie, Woods, Hogan, etc. Snead and Hogan both moved there legs a lot much more than many of the quiet no turn/lower body swings I see many young kids trying today. I know that you will use any means necessary to get people better but words like "quiet" mean to me little to no movement which I do not believe are the function of the legs in the swing.

 

 

I agree 100% with your message Points.......I certainly didn't mean to imply that there are only 2 types of effective pivots (there are probably dozens of possible combinations), but, that IMOP there are only 2 "types" of "rotationally based" pivots that are, IMOP, fundamentally sound and that result in "everything working together forward and around in the downswing with NO manipulation of the clubface being necessary to square the face".......

 

Please understand, MY opinions are based on what I've learned/observed/surmised as to the absolute most effecient way of swinging a golf club and are based on studying footage/reading/"visiting" in regards to the swings of folk's that I knew/know are GREAt ballstrikers (MY definition of a great ballstriker is a player who can move it both ways on demand, vary the trajectory a LOt on demand, almost always hit it solid with compression, have the left side of the course 100% defeated, and that can do it under pressure).........

 

While I've spent lots of hours studying basically any and all great player's golf swings attempting to figure out what made them "tick," I've learned the most from a few select ballstrikers as they do/did have quite a bit in common (mostly from hip high to hip high/"9 to 3")..... Basically, I've focused my energy trying to figure out the common denominators of great ballstrikers (Hogan/Snead/trevino/Bolt/Knudson/Moe Norman/Venturi/1980's O'Grady, and young guy's like toms/Sergio/Immelman, Furyk, etc., etc., etc.) ........then implementing these few "common denominators" into my teaching "philosophy" which is "to eliminate as many UNNECESSARY moving parts as is possible"......"create a SIMPLE swing based on sound fundamentals and based on more "rotational" movement and less "lateral" movement........less "side to side and more around".............

 

For example, Nicklaus/Monty are 2 great players (lumping them together is a disservice to Mr. Nicklaus) who, IMOP, aren't/weren't great ballstrikers.......VERY good, absolutely, but not great IMOP.......so I spent my time studying their swings to figure out why Monty has always been a low fader (in college he was a LOOOOW slicer) and why Nicklaus was a poor short iron player, at least relative to other great players......Why Ollie has been a poor driver......why Daly hit it so far.......why Player tended to hook it a bit at times.......How Gay Brewer/Miller Barber/Furyk made their swings work and HOW did they work.....compensations........common

denominators with more conventional swings, etc. etc. etc.......

 

As for "lateral" movement..................

 

I just figured out a way to achieve the same impact characteristics as all great ballstrikers, but reduce the amount of lateral motion necessay to transfer....and what lateral there is FEELS like it's all "rotation"......but, all of my good swinger's have the same "look" as all great swings, just with less "lateral" and, as a result, less "space" being created between where the outside of the right hip/thigh were at the top and where they are at impact......we do it 100% with the set up......

 

You know how Mr. Hogan's lower trunk/hips "floated" a bit then "settle into his left hip" just as his arms/upper body conclude the backswing.......we just eliminate the "float" (I couldn't/can't figure out any viable reason for it) and set up more where Mr. Hogan ended up at the conclusion of his backswing "turn".....do it all by setting up a certain way which allows the player to FEEL like all they do is "turn back and turn through"......but, they do move laterally a bit......just don't consciously focus on it as it happens more "naturally"/easily as a reaction to the backswing pivot......basically eliminates Jim's "bump" thought which I found resulted in a lot of really good players getting underneath and too far inside.....myself included......

 

As for the legs, I by no means am stating that they don't have a place in a great golf swing, just that they are FAR from the most important part and that a GREAt golf swing can be created and ingrained with basically nothing from mid thigh down being overly "active".......In my experience with good players "the legs" do more to destroy a good golf swing than to create one........

 

JMOP........ :clapping: :crazy:

[asitlies]

Good post.

[iteachgolf]

i would agrre that the legs provide more of a supporting role lagging way behind in importance to clubface and clubshaft control. if you can consistently compress the ball with the clubface square at the moment of seperation nothing else matters. the legs can help the better play do this effectively, but most people who read this board would just confuse and screw themselves up by focusing on the lower body over solid contact and controlling the clubface.

[scores]

Hi Slice

 

About seven yrs ago I took lessons from a pro all inside on video. He said the same thingyour legs are in your way... u r right leg was driving so hard it pushed my left leg out.

 

How he got me from doing this was ---> straighten u r right leg on the way down: matter of fact he wanted me to straighten both legs on the way down until we could get my head to stop dipping:

 

Now I can see how close you guys are!!

 

I bet a bunch of video and a 30 pack all of you guys would have a lot of fun picking apart swings.

 

I apreciate all the time and work you have put into this web site!

[hayam]

Well. I gave myself a chance with this swing.. from std pivot to S&T . Few months into it.

 

I have several chronic case of Herniated Disc with once=twice yearly occurance. Is it bad for the back? Its not, because, after getting into the details with proper guidance from Dana , friend and forum,They were very open, and generous with their knowledge, ask to take a look at my swing, Didn't really expect much from it really. But now, I have just enough knowledge to know something about this swing and I have excellent experience.

 

With enough undesttanding to properly execute, I realised, this pivot really makes very good use sense of biomechanics and at no time, my torso, or anypart of my body is stretched or stressed . Which is amazing. When I use my old pivot, My neck or hip join or lower back have some chance of getting injured. I can tell you guys something. Whoever tell you that this swing is bad for your back. its BS, Its not, you need to get proper knowledge though. In fact its much better for my back. Reason is simple, the shoulder and HIPS relatively turn perpendicular to the spine. The neck stays in place. and there is not lateral moves, no problem with neck too. On the contrary , lateral moves , or not allowing the knees to straighten and bend will stress the joint, the knees have to bend outwards etc... so.. IMHO less lateral , = less stress. My Experience..Do not assume because its not understood.

 

Furthermore,

 

AM I hitting it much better? .. Yes..

 

Is it easier to execute?Yes. And feel much better control.More consistent? I feel yes. ( after enough guidance)

 

Powerful? better compression definitely, better momentum transfer, much better distance control. BUT , not yet going further than my Old swing.. With some new knowledge... I think it should be possible to bring my average distance up soon. Lately I had heard comments that my swing looks more effortless, and the sound of venturi effect increased..

 

There are still some poor alignment and bad habits to sort out but ... OK... I am a believer now. Works for a 30 lbs overweight guy with bad joints. I had fun being the guinee pig . Well I tried it and I personally prefer this pivot than my old one.

[jeffy]

Jeffy - it is a waste of time arguing with you. We cannot even agree on what is steep, and what is not steep.

 

How about accepting the following challlenge, considering that you think I am a fool who cannot hit a golf ball?

 

The challenge. Fly over to Salt Lake City some weekend in spring for a golf compettion against me. We will play 36 holes a day at the Salt Lake City airport golf course over two days for a total of 72 holes. Each hole will potentially be worth 3 points - 1 point for gross score, 1 point for GIR and 1 point for FIR - and each point will be worth $10. That means that you could potentially win $30 per hole if you beat me in FIR, GIR and gross score; and you could potentially win $2,160 over the 72 hole competition. After the competition, we will post the final results in this forum.

 

Jeff.

 

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, but I was sent to Gitmo for two weeks because of my last post. I guess the Marshall's don't like me calling you a "fool", even though...oh, never mind.

 

Regarding your so-called "challenge", it doesn't show a lot of insight into what motivates me. Why on earth would I travel to Salt Lake City, stay over for two, maybe three, nights (lot's of night life there) and spend two of the relatively few days a year I devote to playing golf with you? For the opportunity to "potentially win $2,160"?

 

Let's do the math: round-trip airfare, hotels, greens fees, rental car, etc. could easily be $800 or so (just a guess). Let's say I average 10 fairways and 6 greens a round, and you miss every fairway and green; in that case I stand to win $640 on those bets. Of course, you will be able, I assume, to find a few fairways and hit a green or two, let's say 5 and 2, respectively, per round, which would bring my winnings on those two bets down to just $360. If I win every hole, which I will concede is not likely, that's another $720. All told, I "might" win $1,080, versus expenses of $800, to net $280. Since I bill clients at a minimum rate of $670 per hour, that's equal to about 25 minutes of work. None too appealing considering it would involve spending about 20 hours with you (I'm sure you spend a lot of time looking for balls and are very slow on the greens).

 

If you want to play for money and show off your swing, you can fly to New York and we can play a round at my club, but you'll need to pay the greens fee as well as your caddy (I'll make sure you get one of our finest), which will run you about $200 all-in. We can play for any stakes you like, PROVIDED, you first establish a legitimate handicap and post video of your swing: I don't play anyone for money without first knowing something about their game.

 

We could also meet in a neutral location during one of my golf trips, and play a round there, perhaps in March when I plan to be in Scottsdale.

 

Of course, what would be much more worthwhile for you is to travel to Long Beach and attend one of Dana's three day schools. If you plan carefully, you can probably do it all-in for a little over $2,000. BTW, his advice to "learn how to play catch" is good advice for you: a powerful, dynamic golf swing is very athletic: since you claim to be unathletic and inflexible, perhaps more time in the gym developing some athleticism would be more worthwhile then preparing any more "critical review papers". Then you might be able to experience what you can now only read and write about.

 

BTW, I'm 52 years old. If you estimated 20's to 30's based on my YouTube videos, I'm quite flattered.

[MWL]

You could televise the event live on golfWRX..