New AMG Shallowing Video - Wow...

[Red4282]

13 minutes ago, MPStrat said:

One of the ways to get shaft lean with EE and no rotation is by sliding the lead hip way out past the lead ankle and pulling the hands forward. Not the most ideal IMO. 

True, i guess thats a way. Extremely hard to control low point with a slide so yea that would not be ideal in my mind

[johnrobison]

1 hour ago, MPStrat said:

The entire AMG pros vs ams video series is about chasing a look 

 

Hardly. They're about how pros move to hit the ball so well vs amateurs - not hitting the ball as well - who are often doing close to the exact opposite (or think that they should be). That's not looks.

[MPStrat]

Just now, johnrobison said:

Hardly. They're about how pros move to hit the ball so well vs amateurs - not hitting the ball as well - who are often doing close to the exact opposite (or think that they should be). That's not looks.

I agree. That’s the point I was making. The desire to look more like one of the best in the world in your swing is technically chasing a look, but there very well might be some merit to that. 

[johnrobison]

7 minutes ago, MPStrat said:

I agree. That’s the point I was making. The desire to look more like one of the best in the world in your swing is technically chasing a look, but there very well might be some merit to that. 

That's not what I said, though. It's not about getting ams to look like the pros - it's getting them to move like the pros.

[MPStrat]

1 minute ago, johnrobison said:

That's not what I said, though. It's not about getting ams to look like the pros - it's getting them to move like the pros.

Explain the difference. Chasing a look is the desire to move in a way that is in the ballpark of the best in the world. That’s my definition of chasing a look. And even by my definition, I don’t always think it’s the right thing, but often, it is. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

1 hour ago, MPStrat said:

One of the ways to get shaft lean with EE and no rotation is by sliding the lead hip way out past the lead ankle and pulling the hands forward. Not the most ideal IMO. 

 

1 hour ago, Red4282 said:

True, i guess thats a way. Extremely hard to control low point with a slide so yea that would not be ideal in my mind

 

I used to seriously resemble those remarks. 

 

It got a lot better after I saw Monte. 

[Nels55]

2 hours ago, Red4282 said:

And quite honestly all instruction could be considered the same. I do have an honest question for anyone in this thread. In that brian gay pictures you posted… when you are that square at impact, and some EE, how are these players achieving less dynamic loft/shaft lean at impact? Only way i can see is more bowing of lead wrist? I was always under the impression the more rotated and less EE allows you to deliver less dynamic loft, because your not having to throw the arms to make up for the EE.

Pros all achieve 'y' impact with the lead arm and shaft in a straight line or bowed forward a bit.  Larry Rinker has no problem doing this with his extreme upper core swing.  His students may find it more difficult though.  

 

A lot of shaft lean is not necessarily better.  In "The Big Miss" Hank Haney talks about how he was always trying to get Tiger to impact with a the shaft vertical as he believed that Tiger had better control of distance that way.  LOL I have known a few guys with super strong grips who could hit 150 or more yard 9 irons no problem.  The real problem as that their 4 iron went about 150 yards if they were lucky.   

[ThinkingPlus]

6 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

Pros all achieve 'y' impact with the lead arm and shaft in a straight line or bowed forward a bit.  Larry Rinker has no problem doing this with his extreme upper core swing.  His students may find it more difficult though.  

 

A lot of shaft lean is not necessarily better.  In "The Big Miss" Hank Haney talks about how he was always trying to get Tiger to impact with a the shaft vertical as he believed that Tiger had better control of distance that way.  LOL I have known a few guys with super strong grips who could hit 150 or more yard 9 irons no problem.  The real problem as that their 4 iron went about 150 yards if they were lucky.   

Shaft lean should be somewhat a function of CHS. More CHS allows for more shaft lean. However, too much shaft lean with too little CHS (as you indicated in your example) leads to 20 ft apex rifle shots. Not very playable unless you are in the trees.

[Red4282]

1 hour ago, johnrobison said:

That's not what I said, though. It's not about getting ams to look like the pros - it's getting them to move like the pros.

Yea move like a pro based on a visual youtube video. Like seriously…the irony

 

26 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

 

I used to seriously resemble those remarks. 

 

It got a lot better after I saw Monte. 

Im sure you did. Every reputable instructor has success stories doing lots and lots of different things. Thats not the point though. A lateral slide *usually* results in poor low point control and fat/thin city. One of the best things i ever did was get rid of some of my excessive slide. Much more consistent ball striking.

 

24 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

Pros all achieve 'y' impact with the lead arm and shaft in a straight line or bowed forward a bit.  Larry Rinker has no problem doing this with his extreme upper core swing.  His students may find it more difficult though.  

 

A lot of shaft lean is not necessarily better.  In "The Big Miss" Hank Haney talks about how he was always trying to get Tiger to impact with a the shaft vertical as he believed that Tiger had better control of distance that way.  LOL I have known a few guys with super strong grips who could hit 150 or more yard 9 irons no problem.  The real problem as that their 4 iron went about 150 yards if they were lucky.   

Yes, crazy shaft lean is not needed. But when talking ams vs pros, thats a massive difference. I was just curiously inquiring, are we just saying screw it, your not a pro so you dont need shaft lean?

[johnrobison]

6 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Yea move like a pro based on a visual youtube video. Like seriously…the irony

No irony at all. They also use words and demonstrate how to move. Kinda how golf instruction works.

[johnrobison]

1 hour ago, MPStrat said:

Explain the difference. Chasing a look is the desire to move in a way that is in the ballpark of the best in the world. That’s my definition of chasing a look. And even by my definition, I don’t always think it’s the right thing, but often, it is. 

I can have my hands left of the target line at P8 and still make a very bad move to get there. So I matched "a look" that I was chasing but not because I was enacting the correct movements

[Red4282]

2 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

No irony at all. They also use words and demonstrate how to move. Kinda how golf instruction works.

So then, listen to the video with your eyes closed and tell me how well that works.

[Red4282]

4 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

I can have my hands left of the target line at P8 and still make a very bad move to get there. So I matched "a look" that I was chasing but not because I was enacting the correct movements

I think we are more in agreement than disagreement. Just like i said the term “shallowing” is chasing a look. All instruction is chasing a look. The y at impact, is another.  Im still confused tho by the trying to move like a pro when we have already determined most of us arent capable of that. 

[MPStrat]

4 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

I can have my hands left of the target line at P8 and still make a very bad move to get there. So I matched "a look" that I was chasing but not because I was enacting the correct movements

Do you really think that’s what I was suggesting lol? I didn’t say “attention all mid handicaps: copy what you see pros do on video” or “you suck if you don’t look like Adam Scott at impact”

 

The advice in my original post mentioned seeking the best information possible to help achieve your goals. 

 

Although experimentation can be fun and there is definitely some things to be learned in doing that, like I’ve said 10 times already: For most, DIY is the road to nowhere. 

[tthomasgolfer605]

9 hours ago, Rdailey9108 said:

Clement is definitely a very strong grip but what's wrong with Malaska. Seems like he teaches a stronger lead hand grip (according to how your arms hang) and a neutral trail hand.

Malaska teaches to put the grip into the middle knuckle of the fingers on lead hand.  No bueno and fore left. 

[johnrobison]

Alright, so I don't get what's meant by "chasing a look", then. I interpret it to mean that you want to see yourself in a specific position at a certain moment, regardless of how you got there and what happens next.

[Golf_Goof]

Shallowing isn’t a look - it’s a delivery path that results in better ball flight compared to a steeper path. Particularly with ams. 

[MPStrat]

12 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

Alright, so I don't get what's meant by "chasing a look", then. I interpret it to mean that you want to see yourself in a specific position at a certain moment, regardless of how you got there and what happens next.

Checkpoints on video are just that. Same with 3D data. But if 49 out of the top 50 players in the world do something, it might be worth some investigation. That’s not chasing a look, that’s doing your due diligence.

[MPStrat]

22 minutes ago, Golf_Goof said:

Shallowing isn’t a look - it’s a delivery path that results in better ball flight compared to a steeper path. Particularly with ams. 

It really depends. 
 

First of all shallow-ing is different than being shallow at any given point in the swing. It’s possible to have a shallow delivery without much actual shallowing. It’s also possible to have a steep delivery with a huge shallowing move. 

 

But they key point here is that if you can’t/don’t rotate as much as Adam Scott you probably shouldn’t deliver the club like he does 

 

Thats the big head scratcher. If most people are “upper core” and give it the old Larry Rinker, why are we encouraging the delivery positions of players who have significant body rotation at impact?
 

Can someone answer that question for me?  

[Red4282]

55 minutes ago, Golf_Goof said:

Shallowing isn’t a look - it’s a delivery path that results in better ball flight compared to a steeper path. Particularly with ams. 

It is a look. We all agree what it means and its benefits. But you cant know what shallowing “looks” like until you you define it visually, shaft pointed at or outside ball line at p5.  Its a visual checkpoint. 

Edited March 5, 2023 by Red4282

[Zitlow]

For the people who are implementing this in their swings how many noticed an appreciable change in their ball striking for the better? 

[Nard_S]

 

21 minutes ago, MPStrat said:

why are we encouraging the delivery positions of players who have significant body rotation at impact?
 

Can someone answer that question for me?  

because the act of getting "open" is in itself a shallowing move.

 

4 minutes ago, Zitlow said:

For the people who are implementing this in their swings how many noticed an appreciable change in their ball striking for the better? 

I adopted this a few years ago, my GIR's rose like 50% and added a full club on distance.

 

Here's the thing, the but:

 

Not sure there's any point in doing rapid arm lowering or a throw from top if you're just going to stall hips to square at impact. Solid hip clearing and rapid arm throw go together. The catch is neither are easy to implement and then to match together is another headache.  Been working on both for years myself. Have had serious confusion on tilts. This topic clears that up a bit for me.

 

It's 100% hypocritical to say ''square hips fine but passive arms not".  Both not ideal, at all,  but much of times less than perfect is all there is, so let's agree on that. Let's not pretend this outlier is better than that outlier., just because it's my outlier. 

 

My experience leads me to believe P4 in full optimized glory, is what makes all this happen. but it's also not enough to have great positions, you need the impulses and rapid sequential firings of muscles. Speaking for me alone, that part is the hardest. Initiating a rapid firing earlier than I'm anywhere used to doing. A video, 3D geometry and a pile of lessons doesn't resolve this. Hard work does.

[Red4282]

23 minutes ago, MPStrat said:

It really depends. 
 

First of all shallow-ing is different than being shallow at any given point in the swing. It’s possible to have a shallow delivery without much actual shallowing. It’s also possible to have a steep delivery with a huge shallowing move. 

 

But they key point here is that if you can’t/don’t rotate as much as Adam Scott you probably shouldn’t deliver the club like he does 

 

Thats the big head scratcher. If most people are “upper core” and give it the old Larry Rinker, why are we encouraging the delivery positions of players who have significant body rotation at impact?
 

Can someone answer that question for me?  

Ill add to this as id like to understand a bit more myself. From my understanding a body rotated swing enables you to have much less face rotation, and it stays square to the plane longer. Ive honestly never heard of this rinker guy so i looked him up and first video, he is encouraging this no rotation and arms swing and i see two “flaws” or drawbacks right off the bat. He achieves  shaft lean, but by the sliding stuff already been discussed. Second, look at that rate of rotation of the face… oh my. 

 

 

Im not saying you cant play golf like this, or you cant even get better doing some of this stuff.
 

This thread sure is fun. Swing like a pro and learn how they do it, but wait dont swing like a pro, because you cant. Chasing looks is case by case apparently, even though if you are watching youtube and filming your swing, its ok because they explain the right way to chase that look. Which the “right way” is get this, checkmarked by visual confirmation. 

[MPStrat]

10 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

 

because the act of getting "open" is in itself a shallowing move.

 

3D geometry and a pile of lessons doesn't resolve this. Hard work does.

On these two points..

 

1. Now someone is speaking my language lol. AMG says the body is a steepener.

I say yes and no. Body rotation encourages the COM to kick behind if the player isn’t strangling the club. It absolutely influences shallow-ing. This is one of several massive missing links in their “shallowing” video.

 

But to be fair to them, body rotation is a left piece. Meaning all things being equal, it will pull the swing direction left.  

 

2. 3D data and a pile of lessons doesn’t resolve this. But it’s the teachers job to plant the seed and get things moving in the right direction. From that point, there is almost nothing they can do. It’s up to the player to take it and run. Understand it on their own terms. Taking ownership. 

[tthomasgolfer605]

Forget Gankas, Milo and AMG. This is the move I want. 

[MPStrat]

28 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Ill add to this as id like to understand a bit more myself. From my understanding a body rotated swing enables you to have much less face rotation, and it stays square to the plane longer. Ive honestly never heard of this rinker guy so i looked him up and first video, he is encouraging this no rotation and arms swing and i see two “flaws” or drawbacks right off the bat. He achieves  shaft lean, but by the sliding stuff already been discussed. Second, look at that rate of rotation of the face… oh my. 

 

There are a few different ways to look at this.
 

Higher rate of closure isn’t necessarily worse. There are even some positives. More speed being one big advantage. Rory has a much higher rate of closure than Brooks Koepka. Rory is arguably the best driver of the ball in the modern equipment era. 
 

I think where you can get in trouble is high rate of closure + square hips. Rory would not fall into this category. To your point, rotation helps to make the face more stable regardless of release style — it can help in keeping the face to path somewhat reasonable.

[Golf_Goof]

8 hours ago, Red4282 said:

It is a look. We all agree what it means and its benefits. But you cant know what shallowing “looks” like until you you define it visually, shaft pointed at or outside ball line at p5.  Its a visual checkpoint. 

 

No one ought to care how they look at a checkpoint; what matters is ball flight relative to other patterns. A video still is not the only useful metric imo.

[Golfbeat]

12 hours ago, MPStrat said:

It really depends. 
 

First of all shallow-ing is different than being shallow at any given point in the swing. It’s possible to have a shallow delivery without much actual shallowing. It’s also possible to have a steep delivery with a huge shallowing move. 

 

But they key point here is that if you can’t/don’t rotate as much as Adam Scott you probably shouldn’t deliver the club like he does 

 

Thats the big head scratcher. If most people are “upper core” and give it the old Larry Rinker, why are we encouraging the delivery positions of players who have significant body rotation at impact?
 

Can someone answer that question for me?  

 

I am always surprised that nobody talks about the influence of the position of the club face. In my opinion, almost all "non pro" no body rotations are caused by a club face which has not been properly squared in time.

 

Start with trying to hit straight shots with an exaggerated closed club face and soon 90% of people that so-called cannot rotate will be able to rotate just fine.

[baudi]

I hope this thread will pass 100p.

First this drill. I like it. Just turn the volume down.

 

 

[RoyalTroon]

11 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Ill add to this as id like to understand a bit more myself. From my understanding a body rotated swing enables you to have much less face rotation, and it stays square to the plane longer. 

 

A body rotation sequence is part, but not the biggest contributor to slowing closure, and it's square to the rotation and has nothing to do with artificial planes.