Best exercises for golf performance?

[phizzy30]

Just now, chigolfer1 said:

 

you don't have to be a gym rat to be strong.  some are naturally strong, some are doing what you did.  No one's discounting you living and working on a farm.  I bet if you did go to the gym though and lifted for about a month, you'd be doing a heavier deadlift than a lot of people.   Same with guys that dunk that don't really lift.  put them in a gym and have them deadlift for a month and they're doing a ton of weight.   Sprinters are much stronger than I'm sure the general public understands.   They are strong.   It's not an accident that you can convert someone's squat to their vertical.   In short, athletes are strong.  (of course, some are better at putting that strength to work in a short amount of time explosively, etc., but that's a deeper discussion than is necessary here)

 

 

 

There's always going to be one or two exercises where said person is going to be especially strong in the gym simply due to genetics.  Same thing goes for muscle size.  My bench numbers are horrible considering what I can squat and deadlift but I'm not worried because a big bench isn't necessary for golf. 

[jda]

If any of you are iFit treadmill people and not super advanced in strength and/or core/cardio, then there is a series called French Polynesia Bootcamp Series where the trainer runs you some and then does nearly full body weight in between.  It is not super advanced, but will work work the whole body, get the core and there are even a few workouts with some sprint intervals to hit your core really well.  I did a few of these the other day and thought that it would be a good mention to folks looking to start out.  Well worth 30 minutes.  Add in some wrist exercises and you probably add a few yards in a few weeks.

 

If you can handle not losing your form, then smashing hundreds of golf balls can make you stronger.  The problem is that most people get tired, lose their form and one of their weaker body parts goes out with injury.  Oblique, for example... or losing their legs and suffer a upper body injury trying to compensate.  I do not recommend this unless you have tremendous discipline or are already in shape.  It can really work for those who can do it.  In baseball/softball, we swung heavier bats, but this is harder with golf.

[PhillipG78]

Former strength and conditioning coach here, TPI is great for golf specific training. Unless you have an inherent weakness forearm training does little to improve swing speed for golf and baseball and many studies have shown this 

[JetSpeed79]

I’ve mainly been ripping phone books in half and pulling jumbo jets with a rope. Works great. Def recommend. 

[phizzy30]

16 minutes ago, PhillipG78 said:

Former strength and conditioning coach here, TPI is great for golf specific training. Unless you have an inherent weakness forearm training does little to improve swing speed for golf and baseball and many studies have shown this 

I agree.  Forearm training for golf is mainly for helping the golfer with hitting out of thick rough. 

[Albatross Dreamer]

On 6/16/2023 at 8:19 AM, bladehunter said:

Excellent advice.  Having been a runner in my past  and having a 14 year old who runs cross country and track I can attest.  His team has  access to periodic testing and I’ve seen his Vo2 max raised several times and I believe it’s due to their coach working in 2 days of hill speed work a week.  .  
 

in my opinion this advice ^ combined with almost any daily stretching or band routine you can name will help the golf swing.  Add in regular stationary bike work and you can not only swing better , but you can walk and play.   I get around 7 miles walking with moderate or greater strain according to whoop in 18 holes of golf.  More people should strive to walk this game.  It’s a sport if you walk it and keep pace.  In my opinion people work too much on being bigger. Not at all on any endurance. Slim and flexible beats bulky guys who max out lifting weekly , any day.  

I'm inclined to disagree with the last part. IMO most people should be focusing on adding strength and muscle mass. Grip strength, muscle mass and leg strength are all better predictors of longevity than cardiovascular endurance. You're also highlighting two extremes. Most people on this site will never be bulky no matter how much they lift, especially as someone gets older. Once you get past newbie gains adding more muscle takes A LOT of work unless you have freak genetics or doing drugs. It takes less time than people think in the gym if you're a newbie or even if looking to maintain/slightly improve. Now I agree people don't need to be maxing out every week, but strength is more important than flexibility provided you have above a minimal amount of flexibility. I do agree people should aim to get a fair amount of steps per day, probably 7,000+ for most, if physically able. Whether that's on the golf course or not is obviously dependent on a variety of factors.

 

On 6/16/2023 at 12:47 PM, bladehunter said:

Sure. But strong is a relative term.  Most use it when talking gym reps.  And I find that to translate pretty poorly to the real world.  Some of it is genetics.  ( read - a lot ).  And can’t be learned.  But I’m biased.  I’m 25 years from any gym.  But living on a farm and running a fab shop means gym day everyday.  That’s all I do is press this , push that , lift this and run , etc.  

 

 last gym rat who worked for me was trying to push a 87 mustang up a small incline into the shop.  He wasn’t moving it.  It honestly irritates me because I had done that very thing 100 times.  And I’m 43. He is 25.  I came up behind him and said move. And I grabbed it by the lower rear bumper and drove it in like pushing a blocking sled in football.  That’s what I mean by nature.  Being 6-3 with a huge wing span and thighs like hideki is just how it’s is .    I regularly see a 19 or more strain on whoop for the day , if you’re familiar with its metrics.  That’s burning as much as 5200 calories in a day.  including off days.  And a resting heart rate average of 59 bpm.   Before My doctor was on me to work out.just because  of my age , and  Because I said I don’t.  After seeing 6 months of whoop data he said “ please slow down “. 😂.  
 

I guess my point is , it’s individual person dependent.   All of it.  

As proven by this post. You didn't push the car because you were flexible, but because you're strong. Most people talk strength in gym reps because that's the best way they have to create a similar stimulus to your daily routine. Someone that sits at a desk all day needs to try to replicate the strength you have from a lifetime of daily work in a small amount of time. The reason strength doesn't always transfer is due to the SAID principle. So it's entirely possible you have better "real world strength" (and maybe know how to use your body better) than some gym bro. Also depends on the gym work people do. Most people would benefit from doing a variety of things such as movement/athletic work, mobility, strength training, and things such as pushing cars/sleds. 

 

On 6/16/2023 at 12:49 PM, Fuscinator said:

This reminded me of a thread from about twelve years ago (maybe longer) on Dan John's forum discussing snatch grip deadlifts from a 4in. box (see pic below). Some of the throwers in the thread (hammer, discuss, javelin) even said they did these instead of squats (you can imagine the great gnashin' o' teeth). They're what got me to a 405lb. deadlift when I still lifting (I do Yoga instead now). Doing these as singles is a good strategy for those who want to get stronger while minimizing bulk. As they have a greater range of motion than conventional and especially sumo deadlifts, they are less likely to take away from one's flexibility.

Dan John is awesome! However, I would caution most people on this site against doing this exercise unless they really know what they're doing. Most people don't need to be doing regular barbell deadlifts let alone snatch grip deadlifts let alone deficit snatch grip deadlifts from a risk/benefit standpoint if just looking to generally get stronger. Using the snatch grip is great for strengthening multiple parts of the body though, so doing some snatch grip RDLs can be a good replacement. As mentioned above most people don't need to be worried about adding bulk. Not to mention training in certain rep ranges carries more risk than others.

Edited June 18, 2023 by Albatross Dreamer

[Albatross Dreamer]

21 hours ago, phizzy30 said:

There's always going to be one or two exercises where said person is going to be especially strong in the gym simply due to genetics.  Same thing goes for muscle size.  My bench numbers are horrible considering what I can squat and deadlift but I'm not worried because a big bench isn't necessary for golf. 

I was/am the same way. Granted didn't train bench as much either due to sports played. Was always funny when people were getting on Kevin Durants case about not being able to bench 185 lbs. Fiber type plays a large role as well. Many people don't realize nutrition/calories plays as much a role if not more than lifting when it comes to adding muscle. Someone isn't gonna add a whole lot if not in a decent calorie excess unless a newbie. For many training to add muscle is really training not to lose it after a certain age. I wonder how many people would be better served focusing more on a well-rounded strength & movement program that checks a lot of boxes vs worrying about golf specifically. Not saying either way is right or wrong, more of a thought question.

[bladehunter]

44 minutes ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

Gonna disagree with the last part. Most people should be focusing on adding strength and muscle mass. Grip strength, muscle mass and leg strength are all better predictors of longevity than cardiovascular endurance. You're also highlighting two extremes. Most people on this site will never be bulky no matter how much they lift, especially as someone gets older. Once you get past newbie gains adding more muscle takes A LOT of work unless you have freak genetics or doing drugs. It takes less time than people think in the gym if you're a newbie or even if looking to maintain/slightly improve. Now I agree people don't need to be maxing out every week, but strength is more important than flexibility provided you have above a minimal amount of flexibility.

 

As proven by this post. You didn't push the car because you were flexible, but because you're strong. Most people talk strength in gym reps because that's the best way they have to create a similar stimulus to your daily routine. Someone that sits at a desk all day needs to try to replicate the strength you have from a lifetime of daily work in a small amount of time. The reason strength doesn't always transfer is due to the SAID principle. So it's entirely possible you have better "real world strength" (and maybe know how to use your body better) than some gym bro. Also depends on the gym work people do. Most people would benefit from doing a variety of things such as movement/athletic work, mobility, strength training, and things such as pushing cars/sleds. 

 

Dan John is awesome! However, I would caution most people on this site against doing this exercise unless they really know what they're doing. Most people don't need to be doing regular barbell deadlifts let alone snatch grip deadlifts let alone deficit snatch grip deadlifts from a risk/benefit standpoint if just looking to generally get stronger. Using the snatch grip is great for strengthening multiple parts of the body though, so doing some snatch grip RDLs can be a good replacement. As mentioned above most people don't need to be worried about adding bulk. Not to mention training in certain rep ranges carries more risk than others.

I suppose.  I don’t have the education by which to argue. So I won’t.  I only have a study on me.  But my mind does go back to the one example that glares in my mind.  Tiger 1.0 vs tiger after he bulked.  I wish we could play both scenarios out and see. id bet a lot that he incurs less injury as 1.0 both swing and body.  The more he lifted the more injury that came. Is it coincidence?  I’m open to the argument.  But I don’t see how it can be proven either way.  
 

I guess what I’m asking is this.  In my youth until early 20s I was a sprinter at the highest levels available to me. (400m 4x400 relay) and a high jumper.  6ft6 was my one time high 6-4 being cleared many times.  ( I was not the best on my team in that ) This was in the middle to late 90s.    As a team or individually we never lifted a weight.  It was thought of as detrimental to speed to add weight.  We worked in the road on endurance and we worked on hills for speed and drive strength.  We jumped higher by jumping daily.  Same for basketball.  We absolutely didn’t lift. Was thought to be harmful to a good stroke ( shot).  Only the football players and wrestlers lifted basically … 

 

So now with a 14 year old following after me in each sport ( not a sprinter a mile runner ) they lift a lot.  And it worries me honestly.  I see it as probably maxing out performance now , but ultimately leading to more injury .  I have tons of miles on my legs , knees hips etc.  Probably 10x the average 43 year old.  And I have no injury or pain that’s a normal part of my day. Yet my 14 year old has been diagnosed with Osgood schlatter s disease ( which is knee pain in a growing kid who’s highly active in sports ) and has had the pocket in one hip drained of fluid already.  I forget the name of the procedure. He ms doing a combo of 7 miles a day road work and 6-10 on a stationary bike at 35 % resistance in the evening.  .  He was doing 11 miles a day on the road in the evening with a cross fit workout 4 morning a week.  It’s not prescribed by his coaches.  It’s his own recipe to compete.  He’s running a 4.40 ish mile as a freshman last season.  We saw the state champ run 4.12 to win and a competing freshman in our region ran 4.25 to finish second in the state.    In my opinion they’re bumping up against injury every day.  I don’t believe that’s the best long term path. But it is what you have to do to compete.  
 

So now it seems to be that whoever gets injured less. Or at the right times ..wins. But that injury is treated as inevitable.    I ran sub 50 second 400m for 5 of my 6 years of training and sub 49 one year and never had an injury.  And still don’t.    So you see why my mind is biased.  I hear it preached that lifting prevents injury.  Yet my experience combined with my kid  is the exact opposite.  And as I say that. I still understand that genetics rule the day.  And I might just be lucky.   Which is why I said it’s person to person dependent.  Not arguing. Just giving you my view and context.  
 

[phizzy30]

22 minutes ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

I was/am the same way. Granted didn't train bench as much either due to sports played. Was always funny when people were getting on Kevin Durants case about not being able to bench 185 lbs. Fiber type plays a large role as well. Many people don't realize nutrition/calories plays as much a role if not more than lifting when it comes to adding muscle. Someone isn't gonna add a whole lot if not in a decent calorie excess unless a newbie. For many training to add muscle is really training not to lose it after a certain age. I wonder how many people would be better served focusing more on a well-rounded strength & movement program that checks a lot of boxes vs worrying about golf specifically. Not saying either way is right or wrong, more of a thought question.

I used to bench, squat and dead lift a lot more weight when I was training for my body building shows in my 20's and early 30's.  I'm about to turn 43 soon and age and injuries have slowed me down quite a bit.  I look at it this way.  Try to be as strong as possible for your age but at the same time, be mindful of your limitations and listen to your body.  I have clients that I do golf specific programs for if they ask for it.  These tend to be the ones that are elite high school/college golfers or my buddy who plays on the Mackenzie Tour.  Otherwise, I like the well rounded program for clients that do golf but aren't as skilled.  More functional strength based stuff.  

Edited June 18, 2023 by phizzy30

[chigolfer1]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

I suppose.  I don’t have the education by which to argue. So I won’t.  I only have a study on me.  But my mind does go back to the one example that glares in my mind.  Tiger 1.0 vs tiger after he bulked.  I wish we could play both scenarios out and see. id bet a lot that he incurs less injury as 1.0 both swing and body.  The more he lifted the more injury that came. Is it coincidence?  I’m open to the argument.  But I don’t see how it can be proven either way.  
 

I guess what I’m asking is this.  In my youth until early 20s I was a sprinter at the highest levels available to me. (400m 4x400 relay) and a high jumper.  6ft6 was my one time high 6-4 being cleared many times.  ( I was not the best on my team in that ) This was in the middle to late 90s.    As a team or individually we never lifted a weight.  It was thought of as detrimental to speed to add weight.  We worked in the road on endurance and we worked on hills for speed and drive strength.  We jumped higher by jumping daily.  Same for basketball.  We absolutely didn’t lift. Was thought to be harmful to a good stroke ( shot).  Only the football players and wrestlers lifted basically … 

 

So now with a 14 year old following after me in each sport ( not a sprinter a mile runner ) they lift a lot.  And it worries me honestly.  I see it as probably maxing out performance now , but ultimately leading to more injury .  I have tons of miles on my legs , knees hips etc.  Probably 10x the average 43 year old.  And I have no injury or pain that’s a normal part of my day. Yet my 14 year old has been diagnosed with Osgood schlatter s disease ( which is knee pain in a growing kid who’s highly active in sports ) and has had the pocket in one hip drained of fluid already.  I forget the name of the procedure. He ms doing a combo of 7 miles a day road work and 6-10 on a stationary bike at 35 % resistance in the evening.  .  He was doing 11 miles a day on the road in the evening with a cross fit workout 4 morning a week.  It’s not prescribed by his coaches.  It’s his own recipe to compete.  He’s running a 4.40 ish mile as a freshman last season.  We saw the state champ run 4.12 to win and a competing freshman in our region ran 4.25 to finish second in the state.    In my opinion they’re bumping up against injury every day.  I don’t believe that’s the best long term path. But it is what you have to do to compete.  
 

So now it seems to be that whoever gets injured less. Or at the right times ..wins. But that injury is treated as inevitable.    I ran sub 50 second 400m for 5 of my 6 years of training and sub 49 one year and never had an injury.  And still don’t.    So you see why my mind is biased.  I hear it preached that lifting prevents injury.  Yet my experience combined with my kid  is the exact opposite.  And as I say that. I still understand that genetics rule the day.  And I might just be lucky.   Which is why I said it’s person to person dependent.  Not arguing. Just giving you my view and context.  
 

 

You're conflating "bulking" with getting stronger.   They are two different focuses.  Granted, as you gain strength, you going to add some muscle mass and weight but, for instance, the holy grail for sprinters is adding strength with little gained weight.

[Albatross Dreamer]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

I suppose.  I don’t have the education by which to argue. So I won’t.  I only have a study on me.  But my mind does go back to the one example that glares in my mind.  Tiger 1.0 vs tiger after he bulked.  I wish we could play both scenarios out and see. id bet a lot that he incurs less injury as 1.0 both swing and body.  The more he lifted the more injury that came. Is it coincidence?  I’m open to the argument.  But I don’t see how it can be proven either way.  
 

I guess what I’m asking is this.  In my youth until early 20s I was a sprinter at the highest levels available to me. (400m 4x400 relay) and a high jumper.  6ft6 was my one time high 6-4 being cleared many times.  ( I was not the best on my team in that ) This was in the middle to late 90s.    As a team or individually we never lifted a weight.  It was thought of as detrimental to speed to add weight.  We worked in the road on endurance and we worked on hills for speed and drive strength.  We jumped higher by jumping daily.  Same for basketball.  We absolutely didn’t lift. Was thought to be harmful to a good stroke ( shot).  Only the football players and wrestlers lifted basically … 

 

So now with a 14 year old following after me in each sport ( not a sprinter a mile runner ) they lift a lot.  And it worries me honestly.  I see it as probably maxing out performance now , but ultimately leading to more injury .  I have tons of miles on my legs , knees hips etc.  Probably 10x the average 43 year old.  And I have no injury or pain that’s a normal part of my day. Yet my 14 year old has been diagnosed with Osgood schlatter s disease ( which is knee pain in a growing kid who’s highly active in sports ) and has had the pocket in one hip drained of fluid already.  I forget the name of the procedure. He ms doing a combo of 7 miles a day road work and 6-10 on a stationary bike at 35 % resistance in the evening.  .  He was doing 11 miles a day on the road in the evening with a cross fit workout 4 morning a week.  It’s not prescribed by his coaches.  It’s his own recipe to compete.  He’s running a 4.40 ish mile as a freshman last season.  We saw the state champ run 4.12 to win and a competing freshman in our region ran 4.25 to finish second in the state.    In my opinion they’re bumping up against injury every day.  I don’t believe that’s the best long term path. But it is what you have to do to compete.  
 

So now it seems to be that whoever gets injured less. Or at the right times ..wins. But that injury is treated as inevitable.    I ran sub 50 second 400m for 5 of my 6 years of training and sub 49 one year and never had an injury.  And still don’t.    So you see why my mind is biased.  I hear it preached that lifting prevents injury.  Yet my experience combined with my kid  is the exact opposite.  And as I say that. I still understand that genetics rule the day.  And I might just be lucky.   Which is why I said it’s person to person dependent.  Not arguing. Just giving you my view and context.  
 

Lots of good points here and I pretty much agree with everything. Don't really have any interest in arguing either, just casual discussion. I do have a background in this area, which I only say to share that these are things that I've thought about/done for many years. This is a very nuanced topic that can be hard to cover all the context too so appreciate you sharing yours!

 

Tiger is a great case study. Let's say in 1997 when he won the Masters he was 160lbs. Then after all the bulking up he's 185. If they're not exact numbers that's fine, either way he put on roughly that much weight. To cover your point the short amount of time he put that weight on and the type of training he was doing were not conducive to playing better golf IMO. However, it "may" have still been beneficial from a performance and longevity standpoint to add weight over time. For example, let's say he added 5-10 lbs in the first year of weight training just from being new to it and also fully growing into his frame. Then he added 1-2 lbs per year from proper performance training and natural development in his 20s topping out at 180-185lbs. To me this would have had a high chance of helping him maintain his performance over time without having to chase muscle specifically. If I was his performance coach I'd also be tracking things like ROM, swing speed, etc etc to find out when he's peaked and getting stronger or adding muscle wouldn't be beneficial. Every person has an optimal range so that's why high level athletes should be tracking Key Performance Indicators for their training programs, both on the course and off.

 

100% agree most youth athletes in general overtrain. I'll PM you in case you want to go further in the weeks on this since that's whole big rabbit hole. But to keep it relevant to the topic, there's a point of diminishing returns for strength training- more isn't always better. For many athletes it also doesn't have to be the primary focus of their training but rather complementary. With jumping for example, adding more weight and strength is beneficial as long as your strength to bodyweight ratio is going up and you're able to maintain or improve your explosive ability. For a golfer adding more strength and/or muscle is beneficial until the point that it affects either your technique or "speed" to keep it general.

 

Most of us would benefit from 2-3 days of training with some combination of warm-up/mobility, movement and/or explosive work, strength training & cardio. How much of each depends on the person and their goals and preferences. For someone like you who's very active daily and has a great base maybe it's filling in some gaps. For someone else who works at a desk and wasn't active growing up maybe it's a bit more.

[PhillipG78]

11 hours ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

I'm inclined to disagree with the last part. IMO most people should be focusing on adding strength and muscle mass. Grip strength, muscle mass and leg strength are all better predictors of longevity than cardiovascular endurance. You're also highlighting two extremes. Most people on this site will never be bulky no matter how much they lift, especially as someone gets older. Once you get past newbie gains adding more muscle takes A LOT of work unless you have freak genetics or doing drugs. It takes less time than people think in the gym if you're a newbie or even if looking to maintain/slightly improve. Now I agree people don't need to be maxing out every week, but strength is more important than flexibility provided you have above a minimal amount of flexibility. I do agree people should aim to get a fair amount of steps per day, probably 7,000+ for most, if physically able. Whether that's on the golf course or not is obviously dependent on a variety of factors.

 

As proven by this post. You didn't push the car because you were flexible, but because you're strong. Most people talk strength in gym reps because that's the best way they have to create a similar stimulus to your daily routine. Someone that sits at a desk all day needs to try to replicate the strength you have from a lifetime of daily work in a small amount of time. The reason strength doesn't always transfer is due to the SAID principle. So it's entirely possible you have better "real world strength" (and maybe know how to use your body better) than some gym bro. Also depends on the gym work people do. Most people would benefit from doing a variety of things such as movement/athletic work, mobility, strength training, and things such as pushing cars/sleds. 

 

Dan John is awesome! However, I would caution most people on this site against doing this exercise unless they really know what they're doing. Most people don't need to be doing regular barbell deadlifts let alone snatch grip deadlifts let alone deficit snatch grip deadlifts from a risk/benefit standpoint if just looking to generally get stronger. Using the snatch grip is great for strengthening multiple parts of the body though, so doing some snatch grip RDLs can be a good replacement. As mentioned above most people don't need to be worried about adding bulk. Not to mention training in certain rep ranges carries more risk than others.

Dan John’s training is great for throwers in track and field, not so much golfers. 

[PhillipG78]

8 hours ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

Lots of good points here and I pretty much agree with everything. Don't really have any interest in arguing either, just casual discussion. I do have a background in this area, which I only say to share that these are things that I've thought about/done for many years. This is a very nuanced topic that can be hard to cover all the context too so appreciate you sharing yours!

 

Tiger is a great case study. Let's say in 1997 when he won the Masters he was 160lbs. Then after all the bulking up he's 185. If they're not exact numbers that's fine, either way he put on roughly that much weight. To cover your point the short amount of time he put that weight on and the type of training he was doing were not conducive to playing better golf IMO. However, it "may" have still been beneficial from a performance and longevity standpoint to add weight over time. For example, let's say he added 5-10 lbs in the first year of weight training just from being new to it and also fully growing into his frame. Then he added 1-2 lbs per year from proper performance training and natural development in his 20s topping out at 180-185lbs. To me this would have had a high chance of helping him maintain his performance over time without having to chase muscle specifically. If I was his performance coach I'd also be tracking things like ROM, swing speed, etc etc to find out when he's peaked and getting stronger or adding muscle wouldn't be beneficial. Every person has an optimal range so that's why high level athletes should be tracking Key Performance Indicators for their training programs, both on the course and off.

 

100% agree most youth athletes in general overtrain. I'll PM you in case you want to go further in the weeks on this since that's whole big rabbit hole. But to keep it relevant to the topic, there's a point of diminishing returns for strength training- more isn't always better. For many athletes it also doesn't have to be the primary focus of their training but rather complementary. With jumping for example, adding more weight and strength is beneficial as long as your strength to bodyweight ratio is going up and you're able to maintain or improve your explosive ability. For a golfer adding more strength and/or muscle is beneficial until the point that it affects either your technique or "speed" to keep it general.

 

Most of us would benefit from 2-3 days of training with some combination of warm-up/mobility, movement and/or explosive work, strength training & cardio. How much of each depends on the person and their goals and preferences. For someone like you who's very active daily and has a great base maybe it's filling in some gaps. For someone else who works at a desk and wasn't active growing up maybe it's a bit more.

People should actively avoid training and practicing like Tiger, he destroyed his body. 

[PhillipG78]

14 hours ago, phizzy30 said:

I agree.  Forearm training for golf is mainly for helping the golfer with hitting out of thick rough. 

Forearm training won’t help that. 

[jonsnow]

On 6/18/2023 at 6:59 AM, JetSpeed79 said:

I’ve mainly been ripping phone books in half and pulling jumbo jets with a rope. Works great. Def recommend. 

If you live somewhere there's not a commercial airport nearby, say Sea Island, can you get a good workout by pulling private jets? Just increase the reps?

[chigolfer1]

On 6/18/2023 at 8:19 AM, Albatross Dreamer said:

I'm inclined to disagree with the last part. IMO most people should be focusing on adding strength and muscle mass. Grip strength, muscle mass and leg strength are all better predictors of longevity than cardiovascular endurance. You're also highlighting two extremes. Most people on this site will never be bulky no matter how much they lift, especially as someone gets older. Once you get past newbie gains adding more muscle takes A LOT of work unless you have freak genetics or doing drugs. It takes less time than people think in the gym if you're a newbie or even if looking to maintain/slightly improve. Now I agree people don't need to be maxing out every week, but strength is more important than flexibility provided you have above a minimal amount of flexibility. I do agree people should aim to get a fair amount of steps per day, probably 7,000+ for most, if physically able. Whether that's on the golf course or not is obviously dependent on a variety of factors.

 

As proven by this post. You didn't push the car because you were flexible, but because you're strong. Most people talk strength in gym reps because that's the best way they have to create a similar stimulus to your daily routine. Someone that sits at a desk all day needs to try to replicate the strength you have from a lifetime of daily work in a small amount of time. The reason strength doesn't always transfer is due to the SAID principle. So it's entirely possible you have better "real world strength" (and maybe know how to use your body better) than some gym bro. Also depends on the gym work people do. Most people would benefit from doing a variety of things such as movement/athletic work, mobility, strength training, and things such as pushing cars/sleds. 

 

Dan John is awesome! However, I would caution most people on this site against doing this exercise unless they really know what they're doing. Most people don't need to be doing regular barbell deadlifts let alone snatch grip deadlifts let alone deficit snatch grip deadlifts from a risk/benefit standpoint if just looking to generally get stronger. Using the snatch grip is great for strengthening multiple parts of the body though, so doing some snatch grip RDLs can be a good replacement. As mentioned above most people don't need to be worried about adding bulk. Not to mention training in certain rep ranges carries more risk than others.

 

Great post.  I hope people didn't brush by this.  I'm sure there are studies that have things like VO2 max first but, either way, these are always near the top.

 

"Grip strength, muscle mass and leg strength are all better predictors of longevity than cardiovascular endurance"

 

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by chigolfer1

[JetSpeed79]

1 hour ago, jonsnow said:

If you live somewhere there's not a commercial airport nearby, say Sea Island, can you get a good workout by pulling private jets? Just increase the reps?

Exactly. Or even busses or semis. Hell, these days a phone book is harder to find than a jumbo jet. 😂

[PhillipG78]

The average recreational golfer would be better served by focusing on improving mobility and range of motion in their thoracic spine and shoulders and hip, low back and ankle mobility and improving core strength. If they improved mobility, strengthened their core and glutes they’d probably get 10-15mph improvement just by not getting in the way of their own mechanics. 

Edited June 19, 2023 by PhillipG78

[chigolfer1]

5 minutes ago, PhillipG78 said:

The average recreational golfer would be better served by focusing on improving mobility and range of motion in their thoracic spine and shoulders and hip, low back and ankle mobility and improving core strength. If they improved mobility, strengthened their core and glutes they’d probably get 10-15mph improvement just by not getting in the way of their own mechanics. 

 

and guess what exercises do that?  😉

[Albatross Dreamer]

20 hours ago, PhillipG78 said:

People should actively avoid training and practicing like Tiger, he destroyed his body. 

That was what I said. Not sure if you're agreeing with me or it wasn't clear. Yes, people shouldn't train like Tiger did. Then again it probably wasn't golf training or even heavy training/adding weight that did him in, but training like he was gonna be a navy seal.

[Albatross Dreamer]

1 hour ago, PhillipG78 said:

The average recreational golfer would be better served by focusing on improving mobility and range of motion in their thoracic spine and shoulders and hip, low back and ankle mobility and improving core strength. If they improved mobility, strengthened their core and glutes they’d probably get 10-15mph improvement just by not getting in the way of their own mechanics. 

Mobility training and strength training aren't mutually exclusive, and in fact complement each other like @chigolfer1 said.

[chigolfer1]

9 minutes ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

Mobility training and strength training aren't mutually exclusive, and in fact complement each other like @chigolfer1 said.

 

full range of motion squat is like a lifelong functional exercise that essentially works practically everything he mentioned.

[miamistomp]

 American kettle bell swing or medicine ball around the world slam

[PhillipG78]

1 hour ago, Albatross Dreamer said:

Mobility training and strength training aren't mutually exclusive, and in fact complement each other like @chigolfer1 said.

Not sure what in my post said implied they are mutually exclusive. 

[PhillipG78]

2 hours ago, chigolfer1 said:

 

and guess what exercises do that?  😉

For most people pt based stuff, the average person can’t squat or bench properly if their life depended on it. FYI the squat is a terrible glute exercise for most people, if done properly it’s mostly a quad heavy lift. 

Edited June 19, 2023 by PhillipG78

[PhillipG78]

Heavy lifting when you’re immobile and and have bad mechanics is like putting a 500hp engine in a Miata with a stock transmission and drive train. All you’re gonna do is destroy the car. For pro golfers finishing seconds means losing out on 500k, if doing snatches and snatch grip deadlifts and split jerks improved golf performance than PGA pros would be doing them. There’s a reason golf pros train the way they do, and focus on hip and ankle mobility, thoracic mobility and core strength. World class strength athletes spend a ridiculous amount of time on fundamentals of thoracic mobility, ankle mobility and hip mobility. World class Olympic lifters have flexibility on par with full time yoga instructors. If you can’t do an unweighted asian squat bare foot, you’re better off focusing on mobility and core first. Once you have mobility and flexibility add in external loads like barbell squats and trapbar deadlifts. 

Edited June 19, 2023 by PhillipG78

[chigolfer1]

1 hour ago, PhillipG78 said:

For most people pt based stuff, the average person can’t squat or bench properly if their life depended on it. FYI the squat is a terrible glute exercise for most people, if done properly it’s mostly a quad heavy lift. 

 

This just isn't true if done properly.  and, there's no reason someone without an obvious physical issue can't do a full range of motion squat properly. And, if they don't have an obvious physical issue, then it's a great exercise to learn how to do properly as it's the best functional exercise there is.

[PhillipG78]

4 hours ago, chigolfer1 said:

 

This just isn't true if done properly.  and, there's no reason someone without an obvious physical issue can't do a full range of motion squat properly. And, if they don't have an obvious physical issue, then it's a great exercise to learn how to do properly as it's the best functional exercise there is.

Almost no one squats properly and most people have limited biomechanics so they can’t squat properly. You’re basing your opinions off what? 

[phizzy30]

12 hours ago, PhillipG78 said:

For most people pt based stuff, the average person can’t squat or bench properly if their life depended on it. FYI the squat is a terrible glute exercise for most people, if done properly it’s mostly a quad heavy lift. 

Exactly.  This is why I include hip thrusts and mule kicks for my clients.  The ladies love doing them and it makes some of my male clients uncomfortable, lol.   

[golfarb1]

On 6/18/2023 at 5:04 AM, phizzy30 said:

I agree.  Forearm training for golf is mainly for helping the golfer with hitting out of thick rough. 

These 5 files come from “Super Speed Squeeze .”Obviously they are trying to monetize the idea of increasing forearm/wrist strength to achieve more distance in golf .

If I remember correctly Monte’s  grip strength was consistent with the high levels achieved by LD competitors . 
NO ONE can argue that hand/ wrist /forearm strength is the only or even the most important factor in swing speed . But the numbers from the below data seem to indicate that amateur golfers would benefit from stronger 

hands/wrists /forearms .

 

Edited June 20, 2023 by golfarb1