"Lag" my first step for powerful swing progression

[GreatStrike]

[GreatStrike]

chipa - You had no idea you'd become such an instant celebrity, did you? 

[GuitarsGolfKY]

On 3/22/2021 at 3:53 PM, chipa said:

 

Hey it's just my perception. I have swung in the high 120's when I was in my 30's.

How old are you?

[GuitarsGolfKY]

Lol.  Damn I didn’t realize everyone was already busting his balls- I just saw that and thought who’s ever swing in upper 120s at 35- especially since we’re obviously talking at least 10-20 years ago

[chipa]

On 3/24/2021 at 9:24 PM, Nail_It said:

 

chipa - Clearly your right arm/hand is your primary power source, but I'm curious if you feel that you use your left arm to pull on your clubshaft during the downswing. Or, do you feel that your left arm is just used primarily to maintain your downswing circular arc.

 

Also, I'm curious to know - with your right-sided swing - if you feel that you are applying significant side force to the handle (grip) to drive the clubhead at/thru the ball (which is a hitting protocol), in lieu of a pulling force that is in-line (longitudinally) on the shaft (which is a swinging protocol).    

 

 

 

I just got back from the range and was thinking about your question so I wanted to respond. I did not take the radar because I had to take my daughters somewhere first and I forgot, haha.

 

First, I have been reading everyone's advice and have decided I need to try to fix my hooking and letting go of the club at the top. With that in mind I weakened my left hand grip by facing the back more towards the target and I also pulled my hands farther back in my stance closer to center.

 

Also, I am now actively pressing my hands together more firmly at address, so that my hands are not relaxed but not "hard" either.

 

Anyway with this new setup and more firm grip after about 45 min. of practicing I started to hit it long and straight w/o hooking it. In fact I was really able to rip through the ball with the right hand and no hooking, just a draw. It must be the weaker grip and setup plus the firmer grip.

 

As far as exerting force on the club with my right hand yes this is what I do its what I call lag or the resistance to the rotation of the club. However, in order to apply this force without hooking I have to first get my left hand into a good position extending away from the body so that my swing starts with the left hand pulling down and finishes with the right hand throwing the club through impact. If I don't get the left hand in this position is when I regrip and hook it really bad.

 

[GreatStrike]

3 hours ago, chipa said:

 

I just got back from the range and was thinking about your question so I wanted to respond. I did not take the radar because I had to take my daughters somewhere first and I forgot, haha.

 

First, I have been reading everyone's advice and have decided I need to try to fix my hooking and letting go of the club at the top. With that in mind I weakened my left hand grip by facing the back more towards the target and I also pulled my hands farther back in my stance closer to center.

 

Also, I am now actively pressing my hands together more firmly at address, so that my hands are not relaxed but not "hard" either.

 

Anyway with this new setup and more firm grip after about 45 min. of practicing I started to hit it long and straight w/o hooking it. In fact I was really able to rip through the ball with the right hand and no hooking, just a draw. It must be the weaker grip and setup plus the firmer grip.

 

As far as exerting force on the club with my right hand yes this is what I do its what I call lag or the resistance to the rotation of the club. However, in order to apply this force without hooking I have to first get my left hand into a good position extending away from the body so that my swing starts with the left hand pulling down and finishes with the right hand throwing the club through impact. If I don't get the left hand in this position is when I regrip and hook it really bad.

 

 

Yeah, your golf swing is certainly unorthodox for a number of reasons - starting with your arms and grip at setup to your very unique takeaway, to your extreme right-sided 'hitting' protocol through the ball, to your lax leg action, to your re-gripping on the downswing where you have a pronounced split grip at impact...to what appears to be no continuation of your hand path to follow a circular arc during the impact zone. As for the latter (which is why I asked about it), when a golfer's hand path doesn't continue to follow a [preferred wide] circular arc in the impact zone it tends to level out and move target-ward, which promotes a flip (and often the need to muscularly manipulate the clubface) at the bottom. It also eliminates the opportunity to use parasitic acceleration that substantially increases clubhead speed - at least in a sound, conventional 'swinging' golf swing. 

 

With your unusual arm/grip setup and your right-sided hitting method it's difficult to determine if you do actually incorporate a degree of parasitic acceleration by either pulling away with your sternum, or raising your lead shoulder, or straightening the lead leg, or pulling up (bending) your lead arm to pull radially on the clubshaft just prior to impact around P6.7. Your muscularly strong and contracted arm muscles actually prevents you from straightening your lead arm at setup, therefore it's difficult to figure out in a normal speed video what exactly you do, or don't do during your downswing. I was just curious if you had any particular key thoughts along that topic line.      

 

Your unique and unorthodox golf swing is one of those homemade golf swings put together many decades ago and it appears to be so ingrained that it shouldn't be messed with too much. If you ever tried to move to a more conventional 'swinging' golf swing it would probably feel so outlandishly ridiculous in comparison that you'd give up the game. And, you don't want that...   

 

       

Edited March 27, 2021 by Nail_It

[chipa]

1 hour ago, Nail_It said:

 

Yeah, your golf swing is certainly unorthodox for a number of reasons - starting with your arms and grip at setup to your very unique takeaway, to your extreme right-sided 'hitting' protocol through the ball, to your lax leg action, to your re-gripping on the downswing where you have a pronounced split grip at impact...to what appears to be no continuation of your hand path to follow a circular arc during the impact zone. As for the latter (which is why I asked about it), when a golfer's hand path doesn't continue to follow a [preferred wide] circular arc in the impact zone it tends to level out and move target-ward, which promotes a flip (and often the need to muscularly manipulate the clubface) at the bottom. It also eliminates the opportunity to use parasitic acceleration that substantially increases clubhead speed - at least in a sound, conventional 'swinging' golf swing. 

 

With your unusual arm/grip setup and your right-sided hitting method it's difficult to determine if you do actually incorporate a degree of parasitic acceleration by either pulling away with your sternum, or raising your lead shoulder, or pulling up (bending) your lead arm to pull radially on the clubshaft just prior to impact around P6.7. Your muscularly strong and contracted arm muscles actually prevents you from straightening your lead arm at setup, therefore it's difficult to figure out in a normal speed video what exactly you do, or don't do during your downswing. I was just curious if you had any particular key thoughts along that topic line.      

 

Your unique and unorthodox golf swing is one of those homemade golf swings put together many decades ago and it appears to be so ingrained that it shouldn't be messed with too much. If you ever tried to move to a more conventional 'swinging' golf swing it would probably feel so outlandishly ridiculous in comparison that you'd give up the game. And, you don't want that...   

 

       

 

It is definitely homemade but it doesn't mean it can't improve. The second golf video shows that my right hand didn't regrip in fact. Today I didn't regrip the club either plus I kept my hands lower during the takeaway due to the different setup. Not that plane makes a whole lot of difference on the way back. As I stated before my research indicates no amount of strength will enable someone with inefficient technique to generate high clubhead speeds of which I attain on occasion, which means at times my technique is better than the first video with the biggest difference being I don't regrip the club probably due to better left shoulder adduction and left arm extension which allows my right hand to get in a better position naturally.

 

One other point, while it may appear I don't use my legs a great deal the reality is I rebound vigorously off my right side and like to feel my right leg pressing off to start the swing, so I definitely feel my legs working significantly.

Edited March 27, 2021 by chipa

[GreatStrike]

58 minutes ago, chipa said:

One other point, while it may appear I don't use my legs a great deal the reality is I rebound vigorously off my right side and like to feel my right leg pressing off to start the swing, so I definitely feel my legs working significantly.

 

You don't appear to post-up on your lead leg at all, or use your lead leg to push against the ground to generate more power or to create parasitic acceleration. Both of your knees look quite lax to me as if they are merely followers. I'd guess pretty much all of your swing power comes from your arms without much upper body rotation drive - with your right arm being responsible for darn near 100%.  I get the impression that you are driving your right hand sideways on the clubshaft (grip) toward the target (a 'hitting' protocol) - instead of pulling inline on the clubshaft (a 'swinging' protocol) to keep it in a circular arc like you would if swinging a weight on the end of a string.  

 

With no posting-up on your lead leg, and no apparent use of parasitic acceleration pull-up to help increase your low point and provide adequate shaft lean, and with your unique hand position and wrist action...I suspect you feel much more comfortable with the ball on a tee in lieu of a bare or tight lie. 

 

As for your right-sided arm swing, you are in good company with Mike Austin - though his swing was broadly conventional. Whatever works for you...   

 

    

[chipa]

11 minutes ago, Nail_It said:

 

You don't appear to post-up on your lead leg at all, or use your lead leg to push against the ground to generate more power or to create parasitic acceleration. Both of your knees look quite lax to me as if they are merely followers. I'd guess pretty much all of your swing power comes from your arms without much upper body rotation drive - with your right arm being responsible for darn near 100%.  I get the impression that you are driving your right hand sideways on the clubshaft (grip) toward the target (a 'hitting' protocol) - instead of pulling inline on the clubshaft (a 'swinging' protocol) to keep it in a circular arc like you would if swinging a weight on the end of a string.  

 

With no posting-up on your lead leg, and no apparent use of parasitic acceleration pull-up to help increase your low point and provide adequate shaft lean, and with your unique hand position and wrist action...I suspect you feel much more comfortable with the ball on a tee in lieu of a bare or tight lie. 

 

As for your right-sided arm swing, you are in good company with Mike Austin - though his swing was broadly conventional. Whatever works for you...   

 

    

 

I was referring to the other video I posted where my hands don't separate. I can also assure you in this video I am pushing hard off my back leg.

[GreatStrike]

35 minutes ago, chipa said:

 

I was referring to the other video I posted where my hands don't separate. I can also assure you in this video I am pushing hard off my back leg.

 

But no posting-up or pushing against the ground with the lead leg, right? 

[chipa]

2 hours ago, Nail_It said:

 

But no posting-up or pushing against the ground with the lead leg, right? 

 

It supports my weight but no I don't hit against a firm left leg but a lot of good golfers have or had their lead leg bent at impact. There is no way to generate high clubhead speed without the legs. Even if the legs don't appear to move a lot they still act as a base, that is simple physics. Some instructors state that most of the swing velocity comes from the right hand and the legs have little to do with it, but the test for this theory is to sit in a chair with the legs in the air and swing, or try the same standing on ice. It's simple physics - I'm an engineer if you didn't know haha.

[80sFredriksson]

Enjoyed the thread 👍 You seem like a really good dude Chipa, keep up the grind

[GreatStrike]

15 hours ago, chipa said:

 

It supports my weight but no I don't hit against a firm left leg but a lot of good golfers have or had their lead leg bent at impact. There is no way to generate high clubhead speed without the legs. Even if the legs don't appear to move a lot they still act as a base, that is simple physics. Some instructors state that most of the swing velocity comes from the right hand and the legs have little to do with it, but the test for this theory is to sit in a chair with the legs in the air and swing, or try the same standing on ice. It's simple physics - I'm an engineer if you didn't know haha.

 

Actually, you can get pretty close to normal clubhead speed and distance when swinging with your knees on the ground, which eliminates the legs from helping and gives them only a supporting role with a connection to the ground - with probably only 10% - 15% less speed and distance at most. 

 

In a 'swinging' golf swing the right arm and hand basically only provides structure for the swing - with the lead arm and physics of the double pendulum flail lever system that swings in a circle providing most of the speed and energy. Attempting to use the right side in a 'swinging' golf swing adds practically no help whatsoever, and almost always destroys the centripetal↔centrifugal force 'swing'. It's much like what would happen if swinging a weight around on the end of a string using one hand or pivot point and then you tried adding a second force down the string a little distance - it would destroy the 'swing' and the weight would fall out of its 'swinging' orbit. In a 'hitting' type golf swing (like yours) the right side is responsible for the speed and power primarily by using muscular manipulation to drive the clubhead target-ward (in lieu of continuing in the form of a circle) into the ball by straightening and thrusting the right arm like a piston. A 'swing' pulls on the clubshaft longitudinally or in-line in the direction the shaft is pointing throughout the swing, which creates a stretch tension just like the tension on the string that's swinging the weight - no stretch tension equals no swing. Contrarily, a 'hitting' type swing applies force to the side of the shaft (handle/grip) for which the shaft responds like a lever to drive the clubhead into the ball - much like a lumberjack uses his axe or a machete is used to chop undergrowth in a rain forest. The two completely different methods are mutually exclusive as these two forces are ~90° divergent (conflicting) to the another, yet that doesn't prevent most amateur golfers from trying their best to combine many elements of both methods into their golf swings, which results in disaster.   

 

Sitting in a chair with legs in the air or standing on ice only eliminates your connection with the ground - it does nothing to prove how much the legs themselves contribute, or don't contribute, to the swing. You need a connection with the ground during [at least] the powering stage of the swing whether you use your legs, or not.        

 

 

Edited March 28, 2021 by Nail_It
grammar

[chipa]

7 hours ago, Nail_It said:

 

Actually, you can get pretty close to normal clubhead speed and distance when swinging with your knees on the ground, which eliminates the legs from helping and gives them only a supporting role with a connection to the ground - with probably only 10% - 15% less speed and distance at most. 

 

In a 'swinging' golf swing the right arm and hand basically only provides structure for the swing - with the lead arm and physics of the double pendulum flail lever system that swings in a circle providing most of the speed and energy. Attempting to use the right side in a 'swinging' golf swing adds practically no help whatsoever, and almost always destroys the centripetal↔centrifugal force 'swing'. It's much like what would happen if swinging a weight around on the end of a string using one hand or pivot point and then you tried adding a second force down the string a little distance - it would destroy the 'swing' and the weight would fall out of its 'swinging' orbit. In a 'hitting' type golf swing (like yours) the right side is responsible for the speed and power primarily by using muscular manipulation to drive the clubhead target-ward (in lieu of continuing in the form of a circle) into the ball by straightening and thrusting the right arm like a piston. A 'swing' pulls on the clubshaft longitudinally or in-line in the direction the shaft is pointing throughout the swing, which creates a stretch tension just like the tension on the string that's swinging the weight - no stretch tension equals no swing. Contrarily, a 'hitting' type swing applies force to the side of the shaft (handle/grip) for which the shaft responds like a lever to drive the clubhead into the ball - much like a lumberjack uses his axe or a machete is used to chop undergrowth in a rain forest. The two completely different methods are mutually exclusive as these two forces are ~90° divergent (conflicting) to the another, yet that doesn't prevent most amateur golfers from trying their best to combine many elements of both methods into their golf swings, which results in disaster.   

 

Sitting in a chair with legs in the air or standing on ice only eliminates your connection with the ground - it does nothing to prove how much the legs themselves contribute, or don't contribute, to the swing. You need a connection with the ground during [at least] the powering stage of the swing whether you use your legs, or not.        

 

 

 

With all due respect buddy your theories, while common, of the explanation of the physics of the golf swing is not complete nor completely accurate. I'm sure you are an effective teacher nonetheless. Also, this doesn't make my swing method any more valid nor do I pretend to understand all the dynamics and forces involved in the swing either only that my perspective of the golf swing is limited to the classical physics laws that I was trained in.

Edited March 28, 2021 by chipa

[unpc]

Remarkable restraint in the face of blatant sibling rivalry.

[TheDeanAbides]

After all the banter, this thread has now developed into an interesting discussion on the physics of the swing. Glad I popped my head back in.

[GoTime]

Chipa plays in Sqairz and is a student of the Jack Hamm philosophy on golf. There, I said it. 

[chipa]

5 hours ago, TheDeanAbides said:

After all the banter, this thread has now developed into an interesting discussion on the physics of the swing. Glad I popped my head back in.

 

I have as of yet seen a swing theory that uses more than 20% physics, such as push here pull there, etc.

 

The biggest flaws are the ignorance of stored energy in the muscles and tendons in the beginning of the swing that are released later and the sometimes almost complete absence of understanding the importance of the legs even if they don't appear to provide significant force.

 

I'm not saying I understand the swing better than some of the better instructors, but the reality is the reason why their method works is not based on classical physics that engineers and scientists use every day to build complex systems.

[wagolfer7]

On 3/27/2021 at 12:04 PM, chipa said:

 

First, I have been reading everyone's advice and have decided I need to try to fix my hooking and letting go of the club at the top. With that in mind I weakened my left hand grip by facing the back more towards the target and I also pulled my hands farther back in my stance closer to center.

 

 

 

Man @chipa - you just keep impressing.  When this thing first started, I didn't think you would consider any of the comments / ideas on your swing.  Good for you, for being open to consider some other options and thoughts from others.  Hope the grind treats you well sir.  Good luck!    

[Krt22]

42 minutes ago, chipa said:

 

 

I'm not saying I understand the swing better than some of the better instructors, but the reality is the reason why their method works is not based on classical physics that engineers and scientists use every day to build complex systems.

Except it is. There is tons of work in this area and with 3D capture, force plates, hack motion, etc. What actually happens in good swings can be measured directly, such that there is zero conjecture on what is really going on. There is a reason why so many instructors teach a very similar action (Pivot driven, extend in the back swing, flex is transition, use the arms/wrists to manage the shaft plane and face, extend through impact)

 

 But understanding the physics and properly applying them to build a functional, repeatable, and mechanically sound swing are two very different things.

[wagolfer7]

12 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

 But understanding the physics and properly applying them to build a functional, repeatable, and mechanically sound swing are two very different things.

 

This is such a true thing.  And a frustrating one.  I couldn't believe how far backwards I went with my actual swing, as my so called "knowledge" of the golf swing went up.  The more I thought I learned and understood, the more I jacked up my golf swing.  

 

Had to go back to the old-school methods of just going after results for awhile, to get it honed back in.  With that being said,  the knowledge certainly has helped, but it was in a lot more indirect way than I could of ever imagined.  

 

There are so many swing killers out there, that make a lot of golf instruction not work properly.  Which sends a lot of us golf enthusiasts down the rabbit hole.      

[Krt22]

4 minutes ago, wagolfer7 said:

 

This is such a true thing.  And a frustrating one.  I couldn't believe how far backwards I went with my actual swing, as my so called "knowledge" of the golf swing went up.  The more I thought I learned and understood, the more I jacked up my golf swing.  

 

Had to go back to the old-school methods of just going after results for awhile, to get it honed back in.  With that being said,  the knowledge certainly has helped, but it was in a lot more indirect way than I could of ever imagined.  

 

There are so many swing killers out there, that make a lot of golf instruction not work properly.  Which sends a lot of us golf enthusiasts down the rabbit hole.      

You and me both. I would not say I really went backwards, but I would say progression was much more difficult and nuanced than I had ever imagined. I think we are conditioned to assume the more we consume the more we will improve, but the improvement (and setbacks) come in chunks.

 

 Sort of like putting together a complicated puzzle, 85% of the work yields very little progress towards completing the final picture, while towards the end much less effort is required to progress towards finishing. Sometimes it's easy to ignore that first 85%, when in reality it was the most important part since it was building the foundation that made putting together the last few pieces easier

 

Although when it comes to golf, the biggest "Swing killer" tends to be the golfers themselves IMHO. Golf is one of the most individual and ego driven sports there is, this applies on the course, on the internet, and on the lesson tee lol.

[chipa]

31 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Except it is. There is tons of work in this area and with 3D capture, force plates, hack motion, etc. What actually happens in good swings can be measured directly, such that there is zero conjecture on what is really going on. There is a reason why so many instructors teach a very similar action (Pivot driven, extend in the back swing, flex is transition, use the arms/wrists to manage the shaft plane and face, extend through impact)

 

 But understanding the physics and properly applying them to build a functional, repeatable, and mechanically sound swing are two very different things.

 

That's a start. Nonetheless, I believe it is a stretch from a physics standpoint to say there is no doubt regarding the swing.

[Krt22]

1 minute ago, chipa said:

 

That's a start. Nonetheless, I believe it is a stretch from a physics standpoint to say there is no doubt regarding the swing.

There is definitely still more to be understood, I am by no means saying that it's a done deal, but it's not nearly as much of a mystery as it used to be. At the same time, I would not consider an engineer to be an expert on the subject just because they understand some of the physics, nor would that make them any more qualified at teaching/learning golf. Not to mention you are a civil engineer, your expertise is in statics, not dynamics. I'm a mechanical engineer, but I don't pretend to be more knowledgeable than the guys with PhDs in biomechanics, nor do I sidestep the importance of a good instructor. 

[pinhigh27]

20 minutes ago, chipa said:

 

That's a start. Nonetheless, I believe it is a stretch from a physics standpoint to say there is no doubt regarding the swing.

It's not that there's no doubt but there are generally good things you can do and generally bad things. 

 

If you look at tour players you see a pretty decent range of functional movements that let people hit it far and precise. 

 

[chipa]

38 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

There is definitely still more to be understood, I am by no means saying that it's a done deal, but it's not nearly as much of a mystery as it used to be. At the same time, I would not consider an engineer to be an expert on the subject just because they understand some of the physics, nor would that make them any more qualified at teaching/learning golf. Not to mention you are a civil engineer, your expertise is in statics, not dynamics. I'm a mechanical engineer, but I don't pretend to be more knowledgeable than the guys with PhDs in biomechanics, nor do I sidestep the importance of a good instructor. 

 

For the record I never stated I was an expert in understanding the swing or applying it only that when I see an instructor promoting obvious blatant errors in supposed physics it does call into question there understanding of the physics behind the golf swing. This doesn't mean that they can't be an effective teacher, only they don't really understand why their method works anymore than a monkey understands how he can leap tree to tree so easily, haha.

[glk]

research in golf has really ramped up this century and in particular the last decade.  Just some of the folks I’m aware of mike Duffey, Sasho McKenzie, dr kwon, Nesbit, Scott Lynn, cheetham.   All pretty much using modeling, 3D, force plates, etc in their work.    Most associated with an instructor - most notable is como with both kwon(he has coauthored research papers) and McKenzie.      Coach camps are being held to translate information to golf instructors.     Some golf instructor themselves have gotten involved in research work short of writing papers - ridyard in wedges and Orr in putting come to mind.

 

Easy to find most of this stuff on the net.

Edited March 29, 2021 by glk

[golfsticks]

1 hour ago, Krt22 said:

There is definitely still more to be understood, I am by no means saying that it's a done deal, but it's not nearly as much of a mystery as it used to be. 

 

It's never been a mystery, it's always been a game of acquiring and analyzing real estate in precise increments, nothing more, nothing less, using instinctual skills refined by repetition, reflection,  and resilience. 

 

This boy has the best swing on WRX. 

 

 

[wagolfer7]

3 minutes ago, golfsticks said:

 

It's never been a mystery, it's always been a game of acquiring and analyzing real estate in precise increments, nothing more, nothing less, using instinctual skills refined by repetition, reflection,  and resilience. 

 

This boy has the best swing on WRX. 

 

 

 

Obviously this dude has been buried on YT watching videos 😄  

 

No question the thing between our ears gets in the way.  Take the blue pill and free your mind!  

[Krt22]

40 minutes ago, chipa said:

 

For the record I never stated I was an expert in understanding the swing or applying it only that when I see an instructor promoting obvious blatant errors in supposed physics it does call into question there understanding of the physics behind the golf swing. This doesn't mean that they can't be an effective teacher, only they don't really understand why their method works anymore than a monkey understands how he can leap tree to tree so easily, haha.

Can you give explicit example of where they are wrong and your physics is right? Your whole premise of what makes is based on your own personal opinion of "lag", which isn't actually part of classical physics, so it's a bit hard to see what physics you are actually using to support your position.