The Malaska Move?

[RobertBaron]

TBF you’re basing his move on him showing how it works in relation to specifically Sergio’s swing. 
 

It’s too late to tip at P6. Gravity and momentum will have already affected the swing and you’ll have to compensate to catch the clubhead up. 

[johnrobison]

On 4/27/2021 at 12:05 PM, alj92 said:

Throughout the course of the day, I probably spend 30-40 minutes consuming some sort of instructional golf content, whether it be through YouTube or Instagram. 

 

I am unsure of any videos where students visibly (swing and body language) appear to be more shocked/convinced of any teaching more than the Malaska "move". 

 

As someone who takes frequently lessons, the a-ha moment of finding something is incredibly rewarding and exciting which is why I am intrigued by how many people (female, male, old, young, pro, amateur) seem to light up in these videos. While I get some of it is production and emphasizing those moments, it just does not seem like a gimmick. 

 

I have tried to implement it and get the "feel" probably a dozen times in the last couple of years over a few hundred swings and just can never seem to get it. Either my trail shoulder moves towards the ball, or I get extremely wristy with the swing. 

 

Has anyone on here had success with the move? Is it worth pursuing? I am just a little dumbfounded how I can get nowhere close to what he is suggesting to do. 

Are you sure you need to apply the feel that he's prescribing? Are you too laid off?

 

The danger with how MM describes that move is that he claims it's a reaction to the forces of gravity - the club head is being pulled down and, therefore, the golfer has to counteract the gravitational pull. This would mean that every golfer has to do that. But it's not true - the force of gravity is insignificant in the golf swing - his understanding of physics is misleading. And if it was true, why is it that the overwhelming majority of golfers are too steep rather than too shallow?

 

So I'm just cautioning that before you go chasing this feel, you understand what it's about and whether it's a proper prescription for your swing tendencies.

[johnrobison]

.

Edited May 7, 2021 by johnrobison
DP

[RobertBaron]

1 hour ago, johnrobison said:

 

 

The danger with how MM describes that move is that he claims it's a reaction to the forces of gravity - the club head is being pulled down and, therefore, the golfer has to counteract the gravitational pull. This would mean that every golfer has to do that. But it's not true - the force of gravity is insignificant in the golf swing - his understanding of physics is misleading. And if it was true, why is it that the overwhelming majority of golfers are too steep rather than too shallow?

Because gravity is pulling the club down during the backswing also causing most players to be too “shallow” in the backswing (ie too flat, sucking it inside, letting the club get behind them, etc) forcing them to compensate on the downswing by getting steep or hoisting the club OTT to get back to the ball. 
 

It’s kinda why the Malaska move is a bit of misnomer because it’s not just one downswing feel. It applies to the backswing as well. 

[johnrobison]

I don't believe that the effect of gravity on the club is causing flat/inside/behind backswings. I believe it's a misunderstanding of how the club should move. 

 

And I'm not trying to be provocative or contentious about this. I think it's fundamentally important to understand what's happening before prescribing a feel or move or something.

Edited May 7, 2021 by johnrobison

[MonteScheinblum]

Gravity and the golf swing.

 

Of course gravity affects it.  However, it’s like a plane flying level.  The force of the engine overwhelms gravity.

 

The same is true of the swing.  Other forces negate gravity enough that we can basically discount it.

[indianagolf2]

Ty monte...

[mudge]

10 hours ago, RobertBaron said:

Because gravity is pulling the club down during the backswing also causing most players to be too “shallow” in the backswing (ie too flat, sucking it inside, letting the club get behind them, etc) forcing them to compensate on the downswing by getting steep or hoisting the club OTT to get back to the ball. 
 

It’s kinda why the Malaska move is a bit of misnomer because it’s not just one downswing feel. It applies to the backswing as well. 

How does gravity contribute to sucking it inside on the backswing?

[dap]

12 hours ago, johnrobison said:

I don't believe that the effect of gravity on the club is causing flat/inside/behind backswings. I believe it's a misunderstanding of how the club should move. 

 

And I'm not trying to be provocative or contentious about this. I think it's fundamentally important to understand what's happening before prescribing a feel or move or something.

I agree Malaska uses a flawed physics concept to validate his move.

 

I don’t believe players being laid off or steep in transition is a misunderstanding of how the club should move. It’s a reaction to how they prefer to release the club. Sergio Garcia likes to tip the club into impact kicking the club head out with the hands moving in close to the body. The laying off is a natural reaction to that. 

 

Another player like Phil Mickelson doesn’t tip the shaft. His hands at impact are more away from his body. Being a little steep in transition is a reaction to that.

 

If you are steep in transition, tipping the shaft is not compatible. 

[DShepley]

9 hours ago, dap said:

I agree Malaska uses a flawed physics concept to validate his move.

 

I don’t believe players being laid off or steep in transition is a misunderstanding of how the club should move. It’s a reaction to how they prefer to release the club. Sergio Garcia likes to tip the club into impact kicking the club head out with the hands moving in close to the body. The laying off is a natural reaction to that. 

 

Another player like Phil Mickelson doesn’t tip the shaft. His hands at impact are more away from his body. Being a little steep in transition is a reaction to that.

 

If you are steep in transition, tipping the shaft is not compatible. 

This!  The Malaska move requires the hands to travel on a different path than a player with a stall and rolling release.  Both types work, but the fundamentals / body motion for each are very different.  Mixing these fundamentals leads to poorer ball striking.  If you are a player who pulls your lead arm towards the ball in the downswing, it will be very, very difficult to learn how to do the Malaska pattern and take a very long time and dedicated practice to change your motor patterns.  In my opinion, you are better off to learn the compatible fundamentals that make a rolling release effective.  learn from the players who make this work, Phil, Bubba, JT, Speith, Jack etc, and stop trying to be Hogan, Sergio, Rory and DJ.

[RobertBaron]

On 5/7/2021 at 7:24 PM, mudge said:

How does gravity contribute to sucking it inside on the backswing?

To be honest I’m pretty terrible at physics so bear with my explanation (probably best to find one of the Malaska videos where he talks about the corners of the swing)

 

Anyway, the long and short of it is, the weight of the club and the forces applied to the club during the swing want to lay the shaft flat both in the backswing and again in transition. If you don’t counteract those forces the club will drop behind the hands and the weight and momentum will pull the lead side up. Taking that all the way too the top will look very inside or flat. Either way, without counteracting those forces you have to hoist the club OTT or getting super stuck and have to stand and flip to try and square the club face. 
 

basically, The Malaska Move is tipping the shaft vertical both in the takeaway and the transition. People tend to only focus on the transition aspect and get all weirded out about getting steep. I’d guess those people probably lay the club down during the backswing and are forced to get steep on the backswing. So yea if both parts of swing aren’t matched up as Malaska proscribes then the Move will probably cause problems. I just think people only see 1 part of the move and don’t know or understand that it’s actually more than just a transition move. 
 

 

[jc4birdie]

On 4/29/2021 at 7:48 AM, glk said:

Mike Malaysia in his journey to be a tour pro was taught to really lay the club down and flex the lead wrist in transition and get arms moving out toward ball early versus down - this required him to get very open etc - something he couldn’t do successfully (not everyone is a dj or Jon rahm) - and his tour career never happen.

 

Thus his strong bias toward any transition move that lays the club down a lot and the counter “feel” of tipping the shaft - should be called the malaska feel not move.

 

unfortunately the biggest issue most ams face is a steep shaft in transition and so attempting to do the move and not feel can lead to really screwed up swings.  Folks that are steep don’t need to be more steep.   And the ams that shallow but have other issues certainly don’t need to be getting steep.   All due to misunderstanding YouTube videos.

 

malaska’s shallowing move he advocates is pretty much the same as the AMG guys demo in their video.   And this move has prerequisites in the backswing to make it work.    People would be better off ignoring the so called move.

 

 

Agree.  I tend to think that if you get the trail elbow connected in the sidearm/underarm position at the delivery position, you've basically done the Malaska feel, b/c you've offset the natural desire of the club in motion wanting to fall so shallow as to be headed to the ground behind you.  MM is correct; you do have to offset the force....but that tipping move isn't something you actually DO...if FEELING as if that is what you're doing helps you hit the slot in delivery, then great.  I think MM himself alludes to the "move" can't even be seen in his swing.  That's because he doesn't actually DO it, IMHO.

 

It's kinda like years ago trying to fix an inside takeaway.  You feel like Furyk on 'roids, but that isn't what is really  happening. 

 

[liquorandpoker]

My perspective is that the Malaska move is actually a progression of:

1. Lowering the plane the shaft is on from the elevated position at the top of the backswing more towards the shaft plane required at impact

THEN

2. Nudging the clubhead along this proper swing plane into impact (tipping it out)

 

The body moves out of the way and along with the clubhead rather than feeling as though it is pulling ahead or powering the swing.  The goal is to get the momentum of the club directed along the correct path and move the body along with it.

 

If you are steep at the top / hands high it will likely require more drop to find the correct plane and a bit of a lay down move before tipping the club out.

 

I have found a great deal of success using Malaska's methods.  Though I'm sure it isn't for everyone.  My first post on Malaska is linked below for anyone interested.

 

https://forums.golfwrx.com/topic/1214932-mike-malaska-getting-the-club-in-front-of-you-made-easy/?do=findComment&comment=23480571

 

[liquorandpoker]

6:30ish of this video you can see the club shaft plane drop as his elbow comes closer to his side then he begins to tip it out.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMCO7CeVNA0

[Hilts1969]

On 6/3/2021 at 6:09 AM, liquorandpoker said:

6:30ish of this video you can see the club shaft plane drop as his elbow comes closer to his side then he begins to tip it out.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMCO7CeVNA0

 

It’s basically straightening the right arm and leaving wrist angles alone for a split second, see also AMG getting hands below shoulder turn. Even pivot only guys like Milo Lines actually admit they are getting width by extending right arm. Even though they say pivot shallows the club(it doesn’t)Left shoulder off chest Monte Justin Rose etc...  different ways to do it or explain it.

 

All about sequencing, some are more keen on shallowing with wrists as well as the arms. Some want more rotation early which needs more shallowing.

 

personally setting the wrists and arm shallowing while holding the right shoulder back/high is probably easier. 

[TurnDog69]

Does it stand to reason that the Malaska move would work better for higher level players with a dumped under downswing? 

 

I know it's not always the case, but I've typically heard higher level players have the under plane/hook miss and this would seem to be a direct combat of that. But idk, just musing. It's always seemed to me to be more trouble than it's worth for the number of players that don't "get it"

[skraly]

You have to understand that the feel of the shaft standing more upright and the head of the shaft tipping out and the hands going in is not what happens when you put the swing in dynamic motion. Malaska never said that it does.  Trying to reach certain, static, positions is a fool’s errand.  When the swing is in dynamic motion if you feel that the shaft is dropping to the inside you almost certainly will end up to much in to out and frequently getting stuck.   When in dynamic motion, the feel of the head of the shaft going out as the hands go down will give an on plane swing that requires no manipulation.  It’s just what you need to feel in order for the swing to be on plane.  As has been said over and over, feel isn’t real.

[reefrash1043]

I have tried it a bunch of times and it always made me super steep. Probably doing it wrong but it didn't work for me. Love Mike though, great communicator and has a lot of knowledge about the swing. 

[KMeloney]

On 6/7/2021 at 10:40 AM, TurnDog69 said:

Does it stand to reason that the Malaska move would work better for higher level players with a dumped under downswing? 

 

I know it's not always the case, but I've typically heard higher level players have the under plane/hook miss and this would seem to be a direct combat of that. But idk, just musing. It's always seemed to me to be more trouble than it's worth for the number of players that don't "get it"

 

Reviving this thread with this reply, but it looks like you hadn't gotten a response to your question. I can't speak for players who are at a higher level than I am (I'm a 7.5 at the moment), but for me this absolutely is an anti-dumped-under/stuck inside move/feel. It has gotten me right back on plane, and taken the hooks and blocks that come from trying to square the face (from being too far inside) out of the equation. 

 

 

[Zitlow]

I like his concept. He's hitting it with the weight of the clubhead and using his pivot for position instead of flinging his arms or body at it. 

[KMeloney]

1 hour ago, Zitlow said:

I like his concept. He's hitting it with the weight of the clubhead and using his pivot for position instead of flinging his arms or body at it. 

 

Agreed. There's a ton of "leverage," for lack of a better term. The feeling of leveraging the handle down and in so that it kicks the head out and down into the ball feels so different than any different approach. It just feels like it must LOOK all wrong -- but I'm sure it doesn't.

[liquorandpoker]

This move improved my game big time.

 

If you teach your hands the moves the body will react properly most of the time

[KMeloney]

13 hours ago, liquorandpoker said:

This move improved my game big time.

 

If you teach your hands the moves the body will react properly most of the time

 

I think that's true, too. I've always pivoted poorly, but moving the club this way seems to promote a more natural pivot.

[MysteryV]

I've been experimenting with the Malaska move for the last day or so in an attempt to get my lead shoulder off my chin a bit earlier.  I tend to get stuck, the hips go too early, and use a high left shoulder to shallow.

 

Incorporating The Malaska move a bit helps me to get the left shoulder working down, and the hands working across the body a bit better.  With all the focusing on shallowing the last few years - I find that this is a nice way to add some steepness to my shoulders - and get unstuck.

 

That said, I also visualize it as happening at waist height rather than an over the top chop.

 

It definitely puts a bit more stress on the lead shoulder however.

 

My $0.02.  

[baudi]

3 hours ago, Billywhizz said:

There is no need to incorporate the  'Malaska Move'  if you use the physics of the passive clubface squaring torque described by Dr Sasho Mackenzie which I posted recently in other threads.

Would you please link to these posts?

The nomenclature of 1)  passive clubface AND 2) squaring torque 

sounds interesting enough to read about.  

 

Thanks.

[baudi]

Thanks, read this paper long time ago.  

I was more focused on the used terminology.  

6 hours ago, Billywhizz said:

if you use the physics of the passive clubface squaring torque described by Dr Sasho Mackenzie which I posted recently in other threads. 

which I misinterpreted (sorry) as a contamination of:

3 hours ago, baudi said:

The nomenclature of 1)  passive clubface AND 2) squaring torque 

Had surgery today.. 🤪