Do you throw or twist?

[Lefthook]

1 hour ago, Nard_S said:

Pertinent to a line of Bull.

 

WTF is 'horizontal hinging vs angled hinging' and how is a swinger adopting one exclusively and a hitter adopting the other exclusively?

 

Massive pile of manure.

 

These are pretty useful terms, actually.

 

It is dual horizontal hinging ...  it means that the club hinges horizontally - like a door. Face pointing out across the target line at P6, target at P7 and away from target line at P8. Constant loft. Angled hinging is when the club hinges on an inclined plane, e.g. the swing plane. The club face will then be at right angles to the plane at all times. No face rotation. Club face pointing down and out at P6, and up and in at P8.

Then there is vertical hinging where the club face is always aimed towards the target, or more correctly, the toe and the heel is always the same distance from the target. Requires manipulation. Of course it's the few inches through the ball that matters, but there will typically be traces of it further away from impact as well. 

 

Dual horizontal hinging has the longest travel and probably sets you up for most speed and the most aggressive release. But it is also (typically) a one-trajectory approach since the loft is more or less constant. Angled and vertical hinge goes from delofted to "add-lofted" and provides more options for working the ball, perhaps also better directional control if you can master it.

 

You can find hints of angled hinging in some of the best golfers, as well as dual horizontal hinging.... in their full swings.  Angled hinging towards vertical hinging is very common in putting. Greenside bunker shot typically benefits from some version of angled hinging, perhaps even vertical hinging. Club face pointing towards the sky after the ball is gone...

[Nard_S]

5 minutes ago, Lefthook said:

 

These are pretty useful terms, actually.

 

It is dual horizontal hinging ...  it means that the club hinges horizontally - like a door. Face pointing out across the target line at P6, target at P7 and away from target line at P8. Constant loft. Angled hinging is when the club hinges on an inclined plane, e.g. the swing plane. The club face will then be at right angles to the plane at all times. No face rotation. Club face pointing down and out at P6, and up and in at P8.

Then there is vertical hinging where the club face is always aimed towards the target, or more correctly, the toe and the heel is always the same distance from the target. Requires manipulation. Of course it's the few inches through the ball that matters, but there will typically be traces of it further away from impact as well. 

 

Dual horizontal hinging has the longest travel and probably sets you up for most speed and the most aggressive release. But it is also (typically) a one-trajectory approach since the loft is more or less constant. Angled and vertical hinge goes from delofted to "add-lofted" and provides more options for working the ball, perhaps also better directional control if you can master it.

 

You can find hints of angled hinging in some of the best golfers, as well as dual horizontal hinging.... in their full swings.  Angled hinging towards vertical hinging is very common in putting. Greenside bunker shot typically benefits from some version of angled hinging, perhaps even vertical hinging. Club face pointing towards the sky after the ball is gone...

Okay, but what does this have to do with defining a "Swinger" from a "Hitter". To my mind absolutely nothing. 

[Lefthook]

It has a lot to do with it. A swinger has dual horizontal hinging, a hitter uses angled hinging. A swing will close the face, so it has to be open before the release. A hit will keep the face however open or closed it was to begin with. The two variations require very different position at the top and different transitions.  If you try to hit from a swinger's position position at the top or swing from a hitter's position you will find trouble off the tee.

[Nard_S]

7 hours ago, Lefthook said:

It has a lot to do with it. A swinger has dual horizontal hinging, a hitter uses angled hinging. A swing will close the face, so it has to be open before the release. A hit will keep the face however open or closed it was to begin with. The two variations require very different position at the top and different transitions.  If you try to hit from a swinger's position position at the top or swing from a hitter's position you will find trouble off the tee.

 

You can have hitter mentality and  still use "dual horizontal hinging". It might not be the best of two you described but it can be done. Also, a Phil Mickelson probably fits the swinger M.O. in mechanics but he is undoubtedly has an aggressive hitter mentality. The list of "vs" is dog doo where the advocate cannot even explain it and does little to advance the conversation and understanding of the swing. 

Edited October 8, 2020 by Nard_S

[Lefthook]

I agree that you can swing and make an effort through the ball ... if that's what you mean with "hitters mentality". And as I wrote in a post higher up, I think that's pretty much what John Erickson did. He wanted effort, stability and firmness through the ball. 

 

And I am not married to TGM by any means, and the differentiation between hitting and swinging - as well as the understanding of what makes both patterns generate speed has some issues. Nevertheless, Homer Kelley provided quite a few terms that can be very useful regardless of which swing school you belong to.

[blehnhard]

Nail It, you have indicated that you favor the Swingrite as a training device. I have both the old version (manual reset) and the newer version (auto reset, also heavier and shorter). I find that to "click" the device at higher settings, I have to begin ulnar deviation earlier in the DS, just after transition. Trying to make in click just past the point that the shaft is at last parallel before impact. Your thoughts?

Edited October 8, 2020 by blehnhard

[GreatStrike]

6 hours ago, blehnhard said:

Nail It, you have indicated that you favor the Swingrite as a training device. I have both the old version (manual reset) and the newer version (auto reset, also heavier and shorter). I find that to "click" the device at higher settings, I have to begin ulnar deviation earlier in the DS, just after transition. Trying to make in click just past the point that the shaft is at last parallel before impact. Your thoughts?

 

Bruce,

 

First, let me explain why I like the SwingRite training device. For a 'swinging' golf swing I like such a training device that indicates or measures the amount of inward-outward (centrifugal-centripetal force) energy. There are a number of these types of devices - some similar to the SwingRite training device and some with sliding balls on a shaft, etc. The reason why I like these particular types of devices is because with a 'swinging' golf swing the golfer is interested in producing maximum centrifugal-centripetal force energy in lieu of producing maximum clubhead speed in the direction of the target using physical effort - the two directions being ~90° divergent - the former being a 'swinging' pattern and the latter being a 'hitting' pattern. Most amateur handicap golfers are either hitters or a combination of both swinging and hitting, the latter never being good. This is why most amateur golfers don't like these type of devices that measure the outward energy - just like they don't like the Medicus 'hinged' training devices.   

 

It could be that the two SwingRite devices (original/older vs. the newer model) have different spring or weighting mechanisms, which release or resist differently. As for your puzzlement as to why you find it necessary to release early (begin ulnar deviation) or cast in order to make the device click at the correct time - I'd really have to see how you are swinging the device. It may be a matter of the device itself, or it may be how you are swinging it. With your career of playing professional tour golf and being a club pro when younger I presume you still have a decent golf swing. If I'm not mistaken I think you acknowledged that you had a hitters golf swing when younger and you have been seeking to move into a swinger of the club. If you are truly 'swinging' the SwingRite device, then centrifugal-centripetal force is going to make it click at the correct time (near impact) when you have the device set less than your swing energy limit 'if' it's working as designed and not messed up. But, if your golf swing is a 'hitting' golf swing (applying side pressure to the handle/grip of the clubshaft) then this type of training device is not going to react the same as when the golfer truly 'swings' it. In other words, the SwingRite training device is for swingers of the golf club, not for hitters and not for golfers that try to do both - the latter being the vast majority of amateur handicap golfers. 

 

I would surmise that the reason you need to "begin ulnar deviation earlier in the DS" is because your golf swing is either [still] a 'hitting' golf swing or, you are between your old hitters pattern and the new swinging pattern. That's just a wild guess!  It could be that you are in-between patterns like so many amateur golfers - that being a combination of both swinging and hitting (some may call it "switting", which is never good).

 

To make things a bit clearer for others that may be reading this - when you have a 'hitting' golf swing the golfer needs to 'drive' the load (clubshaft pressured on its side) right from the top, which is quite different from how a swinger 'drags' the load (clubshaft pulled lengthwise or longitudinally) smoothly and deliberately from the top. In other words, the swinger get's his speed from physics (centrifugal-centripetal force energy) which starts out gently and smoothly, but really explodes right near impact as the larger circular arc the butt end of the club had been traveling becomes a tighter or smaller circular arc curve (a.k.a. the 'endless belt' concept) deep in the downswing. On the other hand, the hitter drives the golf club from the top with pressure applied to the side of the clubshaft and he uses his strength and brawn to generate speed which is a buildup beginning right from the top...and his delivery travel is not in a circular arc like the swinger but instead it is more of a direct line. Two very different patterns and protocols, which I view as ~90° divergent in comparison.

 

My guess, Bruce, is that you are either still using a hitter's swing or the SwingRite device you have may have a gummed-up or defective spring mechanism.

 

I hope you are doing well and staying healthy.

 

I hope this makes sense and helps...    

      

Edited October 8, 2020 by Nail_It

[b_f_c_99]

The medicus promotes a ridiculously slow backswing which is not helpful when swinging the club with authority.  The Tour Tempo stuff shows a very good relationship between how quick the backswing is and how fast you swing the club.  The guys you see on tv do not have slow backswings.  It may appear that way but that is more of an illusion because their tempo is good.

[blehnhard]

I can hit balls fine with the old style medics 5 iron (1 hinge) which indicates a definite swinging pattern. 

[GreatStrike]

1 hour ago, blehnhard said:

I can hit balls fine with the old style medics 5 iron (1 hinge) which indicates a definite swinging pattern. 

 

Bruce - Then I totally agree with you...that you have a 'swinging' golf swing if you can hit balls with a Medicus golf club. I suspect the SwingRite you have is likely gummed-up or rusty, not allowing the mechanism to freely and easily work as it should. Just a guess...

 

I'm curious - was it fairly easy for you to changeover from your 'hitting' golf swing you had when competing on tour to a 'swinging' golf swing?

 

Edited October 8, 2020 by Nail_It

[blehnhard]

No question that I had strong hitting tendencies during my competitive career. Both as a club pro and my 6 years playing on the senior tour and continuing until about 6 years ago. Just 1 month shy of 78 now.

Right hip issues (replaced in May 2016) and general aging were major factors in making the change. I am significantly shorter than I  was 6 years ago. Driver speed currently in low 90's at best. 

Have only played 7 times since March due to Covid concerns. 74 in August at 6600 yds and 76 in September at 6300 yds.

Had a solid practice session yesterday using swinging technique. Soft arms and wrists, load right side, then free flowing motion to left with no additional effort thru release (at least on most swings).

I think my desire to try to regain lost distance causes me to try to "add" at the bottom at times.

Have enjoyed this thread as well as Monte's "No Turn Cast' thread.

[johnrobison]

22 hours ago, Nail_It said:

 

Being a 'switter', a combination of 'swinging' and 'hitting' is never good.  The two protocols are so extreme, they are for all purposes mutually exclusive. The natural physics action from centrifugal-centripetal force in a 'swinging' golf swing due to the 'endless belt' (late downswing) that produces dramatic speed and force cannot be helped or aided by trying to add to that force. That's why Dan Martin said that once the handle gets down below the waist (at the level of the 'endless belt') just 'let it ride'...because what's about to happen is on full automatic mode and is explosive beyond imagination.

 

Here are the differences in swinging versus hitting protocols. As you can see they are all mutually exclusive, thus trying to incorporate elements from one protocol into the other causes pure catastrophic results, but that doesn't stop the typical amateur golfer to try, and try and continue to try to do just that...  

 

Swinging vs. Hitting

 

Pull (from the lead side) vs. Pull (from the trail side)

Longitudinal Acceleration vs. Radial Acceleration

Lengthwise or Telescoping or Longitudinal (Stretching Shaft) vs. Bending or Pre-Stressed (Pressuring Side of Shaft)

Acceleration ‘At’ the Ball vs. Acceleration ‘Through’ the Ball

Rope vs. Axe Handle

Cracking a Whip vs. Driving a Hammer

Centrifugal-Centripetal Force vs. Muscular Thrust

Whirl Back vs. Muscular Carry Back

Quick vs. Strong

Stretched Tensioned Muscles vs. Contracted Muscles

Left Leg Post Up vs. Right Leg Drive

Loose vs. Stiff

Pitch Basic Stroke vs. Punch Basic Stroke

Pivot Based Rotation vs. Thrust Based Drive

Right Shoulder Flywheel vs. Right Shoulder Backstop (Launching Pad)

Pivot Thrust (Momentum Transfer) vs. Power Package Thrust

End vs. Top

Dump on the Ball vs. Clubhead Throws the Ball

Full Circular Arc from Top vs. Straight at the Ball Cutting Off Arc

Top Arc vs. Straight Line Thrust

Arc of Approach vs. Angle of Approach

Start Down Smoothly vs. Start Down Very Slowly & Heavy

Standard Wrist Action vs. Single Wrist Action

Sequenced Release vs. Simultaneous Release

Right Palm 'On Plane' vs. Plane 'Through' Right Palm

Left Arm for Path & Power vs. Left Arm for Path & Right Arm for Power

Wrist Action vs. Hand Motion

Drag Loading vs. Drive Loading

Throw Out vs. Drive Out

Start Up and Release Swivel vs. No Swivel (Except After Follow-Through)

Wrist Throw vs. Right Arm Throw

Wheel Rim vs. Wheel Track

Horizontal Hinging vs. Angled Hinging

Full Roll Feel vs. No Roll Feel

Draw vs. Fade

On-Line vs. Cross Line

Plane Line Rotation vs. Grip Rotation

Soft Hands vs. Firmer Hands

      

Ya, but Mike is no "typical amateur" and if he says he's a switter, I believe he's a switter.

[GreatStrike]

23 minutes ago, blehnhard said:

No question that I had strong hitting tendencies during my competitive career. Both as a club pro and my 6 years playing on the senior tour and continuing until about 6 years ago. Just 1 month shy of 78 now.

Right hip issues (replaced in May 2016) and general aging were major factors in making the change. I am significantly shorter than I  was 6 years ago. Driver speed currently in low 90's at best. 

Have only played 7 times since March due to Covid concerns. 74 in August at 6600 yds and 76 in September at 6300 yds.

Had a solid practice session yesterday using swinging technique. Soft arms and wrists, load right side, then free flowing motion to left with no additional effort thru release (at least on most swings).

I think my desire to try to regain lost distance causes me to try to "add" at the bottom at times.

Have enjoyed this thread as well as Monte's "No Turn Cast' thread.

 

Yeah, adding at the bottom when swinging rarely works out well, and it actually destroys the 'swing' as well as clubface control. Trying to add at the bottom is a natural tendency for hitters, former-hitters, and most amateurs. About the only ones that don't try to add at the bottom are the golfers that started out as swingers or have fully changed over to swinging. I'm sure it takes some people longer than others to fully convert...and of course some never can. Good luck with it...

 

Nice to hear that you have enjoyed this thread...   

[Lefthook]

It depends on how you add.

 

I recognize that phrase "add" from Ben Doyle's video. Which is pretty good. But his way isn't the only one.

[PJ1120]

 

[GreatStrike]

1 hour ago, Lefthook said:

It depends on how you add.

 

I recognize that phrase "add" from Ben Doyle's video. Which is pretty good. But his way isn't the only one.

 

Tell me - 'what' is added, and 'how' is it added? And, since you say there is more than one way to add at the bottom of a 'swinging' golf swing that uses centrifugal↔centripetal force, what are the different ways? 

 

In a centrifugal↔centripetal force golf swing the hands cannot add speed because trying will interfere with 'the swing' (which is what practically all handicap golfers do)...and attempting to add speed by purposely increasing arm speed will cause the body rotation to stall because you've messed up the order of sequence, which in-turn causes disastrous results to a 'swing'.  

 

Edited October 9, 2020 by Nail_It

[PJ1120]

What I like about the above McNary video is how smoothly he coasts/surfs to his lead side while keeping the left shoulder down. A real eye opener for those of us that like to drop that right shoulder and aggressively slide the left hip.

[GreatStrike]

On 10/8/2020 at 1:09 PM, Nail_It said:

First, let me explain why I like the SwingRite training device. For a 'swinging' golf swing I like such a training device that indicates or measures the amount of inward-outward (centrifugal-centripetal force) energy. There are a number of these types of devices - some similar to the SwingRite training device and some with sliding balls on a shaft, etc. The reason why I like these particular types of devices is because with a 'swinging' golf swing the golfer is interested in producing maximum centrifugal-centripetal force energy in lieu of producing maximum clubhead speed in the direction of the target using physical effort - the two directions being ~90° divergent - the former being a 'swinging' pattern and the latter being a 'hitting' pattern. Most amateur handicap golfers are either hitters or a combination of both swinging and hitting, the latter never being good. This is why most amateur golfers don't like these type of devices that measure the outward energy - just like they don't like the Medicus 'hinged' training devices.   

 

To make things a bit clearer for others that may be reading this - when you have a 'hitting' golf swing the golfer needs to 'drive' the load (clubshaft pressured on its side) right from the top, which is quite different from how a swinger 'drags' the load (clubshaft pulled lengthwise or longitudinally) smoothly and deliberately from the top. In other words, the swinger get's his speed from physics (centrifugal-centripetal force energy) which starts out gently and smoothly, but really explodes right near impact as the larger circular arc the butt end of the club had been traveling becomes a tighter or smaller circular arc curve (a.k.a. the 'endless belt' concept) deep in the downswing. On the other hand, the hitter drives the golf club from the top with pressure applied to the side of the clubshaft and he uses his strength and brawn to generate speed which is a buildup beginning right from the top...and his delivery travel is not in a circular arc like the swinger but instead it is more of a direct line. Two very different patterns and protocols, which I view as ~90° divergent in comparison.

 

I hope this makes sense and helps...    

      

 

The primary reason the golf swing is so difficult to learn in my opinion is because it's only natural and instinctive for people to try to manhandle the golf club like a lumberjack swinging an axe. They view it as the only way there is to swing the golf club. In their mind it is the 'only way' - because they don't recognize that there is any other way. That's the problem in a nutshell. When children take up the game they don't have the strength to manhandle the golf club like adults typically are inclined to do, so when children get the golf bug in their blood they'll learn on their own how to swing a golf club the way it was designed to be swung hundreds of years ago. 

 

One of the biggest hurdles that amateur golfers face is accepting the fact that there is another way, and little do they know that it is almost always the better way, to swing a golf club. One problem is actually getting them to learn that a golfer can either use his strength and brawn to move the golf club and manipulate the clubface, or a golfer can use the physics of centrifugal↔centripetal force to literally swing the golf club the way it was designed to be used and let that design and the centrifugal↔centripetal force to square the clubface for him. Most golfers do not realize that when 'swinging' a golf club the golfer does not have to make any manipulative effort to square the clubface, which is one of the three major problems for amateur golfers that try hitting; along with lack of clubhead speed and consistently. (Have you ever seen a weight being swung around on the end of a string not be consistent?) But sadly there's more to the problem than just informing the golfer that there's a hitting method and there's a swinging method. The bigger problem as I see it is actually getting the golfer to understand and to accept that swinging a golf club using centrifugal↔centripetal force is the easiest way, the most powerful way (for all but a select few), the most accurate way, and the most consistent way to swing a golf club and play this great game.  

 

Centrifugal↔centripetal force is such a strange and unseen phenomena that it's difficult for most people to perceive how it can be used to smash a golf ball far and true to a distant target. The perspective of a golfer applying his muscular force to hit a golf ball just makes more sense to most people. But, the truth of the matter is - that viewpoint is counterintuitive. Common sense tells us that a 6'2" 210lb triathlete with bulging muscles should be able to easily produce massively higher clubhead speed than a 4'11" 90lb teenage girl. So, what's the trick when the girl miraculously outdrives him every single time and she hits her clubs 30-50 yards further than he does, and she is deadly accurate and consistent compared to him. What's up with him working so hard and sweating so much, but she acts like it's nothing. How can she be a scratch golfer and the guy struggles to shoot in the 80s? The difference is in the technique - he is a hitter and shouldn't be...and she knows how to 'swing' the golf club the way it was meant to be used. It's just that simple! How the golf club was designed with its weighting and offset clubhead, it is made to be swung using centrifugal↔centripetal force and the clubface squared naturally without assistance or manipulation, not to be slung like an axe and muscularly manipulated to square the clubface.            

 

Understanding how centrifugal↔centripetal force works in the golf swing just adds to the mystery and difficulty most people have in understanding and accepting how it can possibly be better than heaving the golf club through various positions using a hitting method. The early downswing of a 'swinging' golf swing is where the golfer needs to just get it started in the right way because it is the result of the [so-called] 'endless belt' event deep in the downswing where the real magic automatically happens without any involvement whatsoever from the golfer. In fact, any involvement once the downswing has begun is what destroys a centrifugal↔centripetal force swing, which is quite the opposite of what a hitter must do. Any extra oomph the golfer thinks he can time well enough (in the tiny fraction of a second) to add something at the bottom in an effort to increase speed or force will certainly disrupt the swing. It is this strong urge or desire for the golfer to add unnecessary help to the downswing that upsets the centrifugal↔centripetal force. If the golfer can (a)start the downswing smoothly with a lengthwise (longitudinal) pulling of the clubshaft in a circular arc, and (b)not interfere in any way during the downswing, and (c)not try to add anything at the bottom - then the golfer is well on his or her way to experiencing what a golf 'swing' really feels like and the miraculous (almost unbelievable) results that it produces.   

  

Edited October 9, 2020 by Nail_It

[b_f_c_99]

It seems to me most people view hitting the ball as an up and down motion, hitting or swinging down at the ball.  Or the view it as a sideways  sweeping motion where it feels like your swinging your hands from hip to hip. These philosophies have very different fundamentals. And the don’t really mix together.

[Nard_S]

Decent "hitters" do not possess any of the faulty mechanics that are arbitrarily ascribed to them in this thread. 

[GreatStrike]

21 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Decent "hitters" do not possess any of the faulty mechanics that are arbitrarily ascribed to them in this thread. 

 

You have overlooked the essence of the topic. The heart of the matter is the handicap amateur golfer that can't hit (and shouldn't be trying to use a 'hitting' golf swing) and the handicap amateur golfer that doesn't know how to make a 'swinging' golf swing, and the handicap amateur golfer that tries to incorporate both a hitting and swinging protocol...which covers 99% of all handicap amateur golfers. It is not about the very small percentage of amateur golfers that are able to use a 'hitting' golf swing effectively with good results, and nor is it about the small percentage of amateur golfers that use a 'swinging' golf swing which is always effective with outstanding results. Decent hitters are excluded, just like swingers are excluded from the discussion in this thread - it is all the others that possess the faulty mechanics that makes them neither a good hitter nor a good swinger... 

   

Edited October 9, 2020 by Nail_It

[Nard_S]

25 minutes ago, Nail_It said:

 

You have overlooked the essence of the topic. The heart of the matter is the handicap amateur golfer that can't hit (and shouldn't be trying to use a 'hitting' golf swing) and the handicap amateur golfer that doesn't know how to make a 'swinging' golf swing, and the handicap amateur golfer that tries to incorporate both a hitting and swinging protocol...which covers 99% of all handicap amateur golfers. It is not about the very small percentage of amateur golfers that are able to use a 'hitting' golf swing effectively with good results, and nor is it about the small percentage of amateur golfers that use a 'swinging' golf swing which is always effective with outstanding results. Decent hitters are excluded, just like swingers are excluded from the discussion in this thread - it is all the others that possess the faulty mechanics that makes them neither a good hitter nor a good swinger... 

   

The essence of being a swinger or hitter is how & in what manner peak power is applied. Hitters are early peak, swingers are late peak. You're delineating between swingers and hacks. If someone is on the bunny hill of this game and they have a hit impulse to their innate swing, it might be a greater disaster to encourage them to become a "swinger" instead of embracing their natural tendency and work from there.

[b_f_c_99]

30 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

The essence of being a swinger or hitter is how & in what manner peak power is applied. Hitters are early peak, swingers are late peak. You're delineating between swingers and hacks. If someone is on the bunny hill of this game and they have a hit impulse to their innate swing, it might be a greater disaster to encourage them to become a "swinger" instead of embracing their natural tendency and work from there.

I completely agree!  It is almost impossible to change someone’s natural instinct. Many a pga tour player has tried and ended up off the tour.   Instruction should be about recognizing a persons athletic instinct and then working on fundamentals that support  that.  Twenty years ago I was a solid 1 handicap that putted horribly. Then instruction on the internet started showing up.  Most of that instruction is high quality and when they explain it it all makes sense and they are without a doubt correct in what the are teaching.  However if your natural instinct doesn’t line up with whatever theory is being espoused you get to go on a twenty year journey of trying things out.  And with great effort you can make lots of things work well enough but not really improve, just stay the same in a different way.  Nail Its musings has that same feel to me,  and I agree with much of what he has said, but if it doesn’t line up with persons instinct confusion will ensue.  You will not turn hitters into swingers or vice versa.  They may have times when they can pull it off but they will always gravitate back to instinct.

Edited October 10, 2020 by b_f_c_99

[GreatStrike]

2 hours ago, Nard_S said:

The essence of being a swinger or hitter is how & in what manner peak power is applied. Hitters are early peak, swingers are late peak. You're delineating between swingers and hacks. If someone is on the bunny hill of this game and they have a hit impulse to their innate swing, it might be a greater disaster to encourage them to become a "swinger" instead of embracing their natural tendency and work from there.

 

We agree! If you are teaching a child, you definitely teach them how to swing the golf club, not hit with it. If you are teaching a female in all likelihood you teach them to swing the golf club, not hit with it. If you are teaching a young male, or a male that is just plain fed-up with trying to make his golf swing work, then you have to try to determine if they have the physical sensitivity, the patience and the demeanor to learn the somewhat fragile characteristics of a 'swinging' golf swing. It's not for everyone - just like a 'hitting' golf swing is not for everyone. Some male golfers would be absolutely terrible candidates to learn a 'swinging' golf swing because they are like a bull in a china shop. They'd be good at bashing down a brick wall with a sledge hammer but absolutely terrible at fly fishing or freehand pinstriping a car. I totally agree that if someone (almost certainly a male) has a strong hit impulse and shows no personality trait that would tend to make you believe he would be a good candidate to learn a 'swinging' golf swing, then by all means it probably would be a greater disaster to encourage them to become a swinger instead of embracing their natural tendency to remain a hitter. 

      

Edited October 10, 2020 by Nail_It

[GreatStrike]

2 hours ago, b_f_c_99 said:

I completely agree!  It is almost impossible to change someone’s natural instinct. Many a pga tour player has tried and ended up off the tour.   Instruction should be about recognizing a persons athletic instinct and then working on fundamentals that supposition that.  Twenty years ago I was a solid 1 handicap that putted horribly. Then instruction on the internet started showing up.  Most of that instruction is high quality and when they explain it it all makes sense and they are without a doubt correct in what the are teaching.  However if your natural instinct doesn’t line up with whatever theory is being espoused you get to go on a twenty year journey of trying things out.  And with great effort you can make lots of things work well enough but not really improve just stay the same in a different way.  Nail Its musings has that same feel to me,  and I agree with much of what he has said, but if it doesn’t line up with persons instinct confusion will ensue.  You will not turn hitters into swingers or vice versa.  They may have times when they can pull it off but they will always gravitate back to instinct.

 

...musings! 

 

I think there is definitely a significant percentage of handicap golfers that have hitting traits (which by the way are the majority of handicap golfers) that could convert to 'swinging' and they would become a much better golfer very quickly. However, I think there are very few handicap golfers that are primarily swingers (with some hitting tendencies that causes them some issues) that would be better with a 'hitting' golf swing...or would even be good candidates to convert to 'hitting'.   

 

 

Edited October 10, 2020 by Nail_It

[b_f_c_99]

1 hour ago, Nail_It said:

 

...musings! 

 

I think there is definitely a significant percentage of handicap golfers that have hitting traits (which by the way are the majority of handicap golfers) that could convert to 'swinging' and they would become a much better golfer very quickly. However, I think there are very few handicap golfers that are primarily swingers (with some hitting tendencies that causes them some issues) that would be better with a 'hitting' golf swing...or would even be good candidates to convert to 'hitting'.   

 

 

Don’t take my comments wrong because your posts have been lengthy, thoughtful and informative.  However this started out as a do you throw or twist?  You originally started with right handed swing control as superior to left handed which using your dominant hand would be a pretty good indicator of a hitting bias.  Then morphed into all sorts of different online instructors with all sorts of different drills, culminating in the guy from be better golf that has made an online presence in trying out everyones thoughts hoping to stop his major fault of standing up in the backswing and coming over the top.   I would call that musings.

[moehogan]

And somebody must have left the pickle jar open back on page 5 ... OMG!!!

 

[GreatStrike]

3 hours ago, b_f_c_99 said:

Don’t take my comments wrong because your posts have been lengthy, thoughtful and informative.  However this started out as a do you throw or twist?  You originally started with right handed swing control as superior to left handed which using your dominant hand would be a pretty good indicator of a hitting bias.  Then morphed into all sorts of different online instructors with all sorts of different drills, culminating in the guy from be better golf that has made an online presence in trying out everyones thoughts hoping to stop his major fault of standing up in the backswing and coming over the top.   I would call that musings.

 

As a matter of fact you will find without much research effort that the right-handed swing control that was discussed earlier in this thread was declared only best for golfers that were extremely right side dominant and could literally do nothing with their left side when it came to swinging a golf club. That was mentioned many times with strong emphasis. 

 

The title of this thread is actually very appropriate, because it describes in two words a wide array of what golfers do when they swing a golf club. There's a good bit of throwing and a good bit of twisting, and it literally comes from all parts of the body as well as the golf club itself - some with good results and some with not so good results. The only thing lacking is 'positions'; because it seems most golfers seek to [want to] put themselves in certain positions, most being unnatural and not beneficial.

 

Maybe the next topic we should cover relevant to throwing and twisting could be weight shift/transfer, X-Factor backswing torque, shoulder turn, squatting down, jumping up, forearm rotation or shallowing the club. No, on second thought that probably wouldn't be a good idea...because then I'd have to come up with something else snazzy like 'opening the 🥒 pickle jar' (which I know moehogan liked reading about ) - and besides you shouldn't have to worry about any of those things anyway. Maybe we should discuss how to get rid of a chicken-winging 🐓, having the club laid-off or across-the line. Or that nasty over-the-top move so many golfers have from throwing (there's that word again) the right arm or right shoulder out at the start of the downswing. So many things...          

 

I think it would be interesting to have a female golfer add her comments and advice on what she has found to be important in acquiring a sound golf swing because in all likelihood that should also help the guys.  Some of the best discoveries you'll find is by watching the LPGA players and the AJGA juniors. Most can't get away with anything short of having a sound golf swing...  

 

Anyway, thanks for the nice comment! I appreciate that. I'm glad to know my musings have been information... 

 

Edited October 10, 2020 by Nail_It

[80sFredriksson]

8 hours ago, Nail_It said:

 

The primary reason the golf swing is so difficult to learn in my opinion is because it's only natural and instinctive for people to try to manhandle the golf club like a lumberjack swinging an axe. They view it as the only way there is to swing the golf club. In their mind it is the 'only way' - because they don't recognize that there is any other way. That's the problem in a nutshell. When children take up the game they don't have the strength to manhandle the golf club like adults typically are inclined to do, so when children get the golf bug in their blood they'll learn on their own how to swing a golf club the way it was designed to be swung hundreds of years ago. 

 

One of the biggest hurdles that amateur golfers face is accepting the fact that there is another way, and little do they know that it is almost always the better way, to swing a golf club. One problem is actually getting them to learn that a golfer can either use his strength and brawn to move the golf club and manipulate the clubface, or a golfer can use the physics of centrifugal↔centripetal force to literally swing the golf club the way it was designed to be used and let that design and the centrifugal↔centripetal force to square the clubface for him. Most golfers do not realize that when 'swinging' a golf club the golfer does not have to make any manipulative effort to square the clubface, which is one of the three major problems for amateur golfers that try hitting; along with lack of clubhead speed and consistently. (Have you ever seen a weight being swung around on the end of a string not be consistent?) But sadly there's more to the problem than just informing the golfer that there's a hitting method and there's a swinging method. The bigger problem as I see it is actually getting the golfer to understand and to accept that swinging a golf club using centrifugal↔centripetal force is the easiest way, the most powerful way (for all but a select few), the most accurate way, and the most consistent way to swing a golf club and play this great game.  

 

Centrifugal↔centripetal force is such a strange and unseen phenomena that it's difficult for most people to perceive how it can be used to smash a golf ball far and true to a distant target. The perspective of a golfer applying his muscular force to hit a golf ball just makes more sense to most people. But, the truth of the matter is - that viewpoint is counterintuitive. Common sense tells us that a 6'2" 210lb triathlete with bulging muscles should be able to easily produce massively higher clubhead speed than a 4'11" 90lb teenage girl. So, what's the trick when the girl miraculously outdrives him every single time and she hits her clubs 30-50 yards further than he does, and she is deadly accurate and consistent compared to him. What's up with him working so hard and sweating so much, but she acts like it's nothing. How can she be a scratch golfer and the guy struggles to shoot in the 80s? The difference is in the technique - he is a hitter and shouldn't be...and she knows how to 'swing' the golf club the way it was meant to be used. It's just that simple! How the golf club was designed with its weighting and offset clubhead, it is made to be swung using centrifugal↔centripetal force and the clubface squared naturally without assistance or manipulation, not to be slung like an axe and muscularly manipulated to square the clubface.            

 

Understanding how centrifugal↔centripetal force works in the golf swing just adds to the mystery and difficulty most people have in understanding and accepting how it can possibly be better than heaving the golf club through various positions using a hitting method. The early downswing of a 'swinging' golf swing is where the golfer needs to just get it started in the right way because it is the result of the [so-called] 'endless belt' event deep in the downswing where the real magic automatically happens without any involvement whatsoever from the golfer. In fact, any involvement once the downswing has begun is what destroys a centrifugal↔centripetal force swing, which is quite the opposite of what a hitter must do. Any extra oomph the golfer thinks he can time well enough (in the tiny fraction of a second) to add something at the bottom in an effort to increase speed or force will certainly disrupt the swing. It is this strong urge or desire for the golfer to add unnecessary help to the downswing that upsets the centrifugal↔centripetal force. If the golfer can (a)start the downswing smoothly with a lengthwise (longitudinal) pulling of the clubshaft in a circular arc, and (b)not interfere in any way during the downswing, and (c)not try to add anything at the bottom - then the golfer is well on his or her way to experiencing what a golf 'swing' really feels like and the miraculous (almost unbelievable) results that it produces.   

  

Pull like pulling down with your lead hand or pull by rotating the body?

[Lefthook]

On 10/9/2020 at 1:43 AM, Nail_It said:

 

Tell me - 'what' is added, and 'how' is it added? And, since you say there is more than one way to add at the bottom of a 'swinging' golf swing that uses centrifugal↔centripetal force, what are the different ways? 

 

In a centrifugal↔centripetal force golf swing the hands cannot add speed because trying will interfere with 'the swing' (which is what practically all handicap golfers do)...and attempting to add speed by purposely increasing arm speed will cause the body rotation to stall because you've messed up the order of sequence, which in-turn causes disastrous results to a 'swing'.  

 

 

First, centripetal force doesn't produce swing speed. It only keeps an object moving in circle at constant speed....

 

If you have good pivot-hands connection you can "add" by simply turning hard through the ball.