Metrics of a pro swing- Golftec and Dr. Neal

[Chunkitgood]

I just fairly recently discovered that Golftec had studied and had made available some of the metrics of pro level swings, such as shoulder angle at impact and the amount of movement of certain body parts.  One that really opened my eyes was shoulder angle at the top  (https://www.golftec.com/swingtru)(which apparently a Dr. Rob Neal has also studied and found even steeper than what Golftec found) and another was amount of shoulder and hip turn when the shaft is parallel to the ground in the backswing (https://www.golfdigest.com/story/the-one-move-every-pro-makes-anybody-can-do-itbut-most-of-us-dont) Frankly the people I see playing golf and practicing, even the better players, usually fall far short of these numbers.  I have done some work trying to match those numbers and am quite happy with the results.  It seems to me that those numbers are checks of two things in the backswing (duh, tilt and turn) that have to be done to avoid fairly extensive problems/compensations.

 

I’m aware of a couple of places where Golftec had put out numbers for what it called key positions, like in the links above, but am curious if more is available on their numbers or similar data from other people like Dr. Neal that is available to the public.

 

One thing interesting about Golftec’s numbers is that in every case, pros have more of what is being measured than everybody else.  More tilt at the top, more tilt at impact, more backward bend at the finish, etc.  I infer from this that almost everybody would do well if they figured out how to get “more” in these numbers and there is little risk of them overdoing it as long as they got “more” in all of them.  More shoulder tilt could probably mess you up if you don’t also turn them, but if you both tilt and turn them more, seems like good should come of it.
 

So, is there more of this sort of data out there?  Has/does anybody use(d) these numbers and with what results?  Does even Golftec really use them in lessons?  Are there numbers “propaganda” as one poster on this forum said?  In short, is this really useful stuff?  If not, why not?  If so why don’t more people use it?  Or if they do, how?  

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Chunkitgood said:

One thing interesting about Golftec’s numbers is that in every case, pros have more of what is being measured than everybody else.

 

They may have more of those things, but on others… they have a LOT less. Less lead shoulder/arm adduction. Less trail elbow bend. Less turn than many people I see (I've had people on my GEARS system that turn their hips over 65° in the backswing!), more sway, more thrust… more more more.

 

It's all about ranges… what might be an acceptable range?

 

1 hour ago, Chunkitgood said:

More tilt at the top, more tilt at impact, more backward bend at the finish, etc.  I infer from this that almost everybody would do well if they figured out how to get “more” in these numbers and there is little risk of them overdoing it as long as they got “more” in all of them.

 

I wouldn't go that far. There are a lot of people who already do some of those things too much, and there are "good" and "bad" ways to, for example, "get more tilt at impact."

 

1 hour ago, Chunkitgood said:

So, is there more of this sort of data out there?  Has/does anybody use(d) these numbers and with what results?  Does even Golftec really use them in lessons?  Are there numbers “propaganda” as one poster on this forum said?  In short, is this really useful stuff?  If not, why not?  If so why don’t more people use it?  Or if they do, how?  

 

People are using data like this (or better data) all the time. And measuring more than the stuff the GolfTec stuff does. Yes.

 

It's a pretty broad topic area, but if you want to talk about any specifics… that may be helpful.

[Valtiel]

2 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

I infer from this that almost everybody would do well if they figured out how to get “more” in these numbers and there is little risk of them overdoing it as long as they got “more” in all of them.  

 

20 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

They may have more of those things, but on others… they have a LOT less. Less lead shoulder/arm adduction. Less trail elbow bend. Less turn than many people I see (I've had people on my GEARS system that turn their hips over 65° in the backswing!), more sway, more thrust… more more more.

 

Yeah the "more" idea set off some immediate red flags because so many people have FAR too much of other things that would completely impede them from getting more of the "good" stuff here, and nothing about adding "more" in the right areas will do much to reduce the "too much" in the bad ones. The reason people lose their tilts at various stages of the swing isn't solved by just telling them to tilt more, because the tilt is being lost due to the aforementioned excesses. Over-rotation, over-extension, over-running....the average swing is plagued by "overs" in ways that need to be reigned in.

If we all had a nickel for every time someone shared a swing where their backswing gets all the way to parallel with a short iron with 50*+ of hip rotation then we could all take a vacation. 😅

Edited June 21, 2023 by Valtiel

[Soloman1]

I have the tour ranges for many angles and rotations for driver and 6-iron.

 

Averages are meaningless.

 

2 + 7 + 4 + 9 + 3+ 6 = 5.1

 

No one was 5.1.

[Nels55]

44 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

I have the tour ranges for many angles and rotations for driver and 6-iron.

 

Averages are meaningless.

 

2 + 7 + 4 + 9 + 3+ 6 = 5.1

 

No one was 5.1.

You might want to check your addition!  LOL I know what you mean which is that (2+7+4+9+3+6) / 6 = 5.167 which is the average of the angles.  

 

Anyway, I agree that chasing tour averages is not such a good idea!  Much better to find the best way for individual person to swing which could be similar to some tour pro but will probably never be the same as the tour average.

[golfarb1]

2 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

I have the tour ranges for many angles and rotations for driver and 6-iron.

 

Averages are meaningless.

 

2 + 7 + 4 + 9 + 3+ 6 = 5.1

 

No one was 5.1.

Using averages  without standard deviations to analyze data is intellectually sloppy.

For example the driver AOA for PGA tour players is ~ -(1.5 degrees ) .

Rory Mcilroy’s driver AOA is +(4 to 5) . 
 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by golfarb1

[golfarb1]

5 hours ago, iacas said:

 

They may have more of those things, but on others… they have a LOT less. Less lead shoulder/arm adduction. Less trail elbow bend. Less turn than many people I see (I've had people on my GEARS system that turn their hips over 65° in the backswing!), more sway, more thrust… more more more.

 

It's all about ranges… what might be an acceptable range?

 

 

I wouldn't go that far. There are a lot of people who already do some of those things too much, and there are "good" and "bad" ways to, for example, "get more tilt at impact."

 

 

People are using data like this (or better data) all the time. And measuring more than the stuff the GolfTec stuff does. Yes.

 

It's a pretty broad topic area, but if you want to talk about any specifics… that may be helpful.

Hip rotation is defined as motion of the femur( thigh bone) relative to the pelvis .

. External hip rotation is rotation of the femur away from the midline of the body , while internal hip rotation is rotation of the femur towards the midline of the body.

Normal  maximum range of internal hip rotation is 45degrees .

Normal maximum range of external hip rotation is 50 degrees. 
I do not know what your Gears data is measuring  at 65 degrees  of hip turn , but unless your subject is many standard deviations higher than normal it sure is not hip rotation . 

Edited June 21, 2023 by golfarb1

[iacas]

5 hours ago, golfarb1 said:

Hip rotation is defined as motion of the femur( thigh bone) relative to the pelvis.

…

I do not know what your Gears data is measuring  at 65 degrees  of hip turn , but unless your subject is many standard deviations higher than normal it sure is not hip rotation . 

 

I suspect you know that's not what I meant by "hip rotation." The OP called it "hip turn," you could call it "pelvis turn" or "pelvis rotation."

[Zitlow]

Looks like Golftec is jumping on the "trust the science" bandwagon. Move over AMG guy, there's a new sheriff in town. 

 

This guy cracks me up. 

 

[tthomasgolfer605]

The difference between the average 'amateur' and a tour pro is about 20 mph clubhead speed. Why these people compare pros to ams' positions is getting ridiculous. Ams were born to play golf. Pros were born to play golf at a much different level. I've seen people who don't the speed to even get a wedge airborne. 

[Zitlow]

58 minutes ago, tthomasgolfer605 said:

The difference between the average 'amateur' and a tour pro is about 20 mph clubhead speed. Why these people compare pros to ams' positions is getting ridiculous. Ams were born to play golf. Pros were born to play golf at a much different level. I've seen people who don't the speed to even get a wedge airborne. 

The more complicated teachers make it sound the more lessons they sell. 

 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, tthomasgolfer605 said:

The difference between the average 'amateur' and a tour pro is about 20 mph clubhead speed. Why these people compare pros to ams' positions is getting ridiculous. Ams were born to play golf. Pros were born to play golf at a much different level. I've seen people who don't the speed to even get a wedge airborne. 

 

That's not accurate. Certainly not across the board. Except for the 65-year-old woman I taught today, everyone has swung a 7I over 82 MPH (and the one who was 82 to 83 is a 55-year-old guy). Tour average is about 90 to 91.

 

Pros are often doing LESS in the golf swing, and are more efficient in doing so, than amateurs.

 

19 minutes ago, Zitlow said:

The more complicated teachers make it sound the more lessons they sell. 

 

 

That's not accurate, either.

[tthomasgolfer605]

30 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

That's not accurate. Certainly not across the board. Except for the 65-year-old woman I taught today, everyone has swung a 7I over 82 MPH (and the one who was 82 to 83 is a 55-year-old guy). Tour average is about 90 to 91.

 

Pros are often doing LESS in the golf swing, and are more efficient in doing so, than amateurs.

 

 

That's not accurate, either.

I'm speaking of driver swing speed. I play with average golfers a lot. The major difference between our scores is due to speed. If I'm 80 yards ahead of them, the game becomes a lot easier. More versatility with irons and short game too. 

[RoyalTroon]

3 hours ago, Zitlow said:

Looks like Golftec is jumping on the "trust the science" bandwagon. Move over AMG guy, there's a new sheriff in town.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Zitlow said:

The more complicated teachers make it sound the more lessons they sell.

 

Marketing 101.  Hello swarm, meet industry.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, tthomasgolfer605 said:

I'm speaking of driver swing speed.

 

Their clubhead speed is similarly fast with the driver. Low 100s to 110s. It's not mid-90s or 20 MPH slower. Swing speed is not the thing holding golfers back the most.

[tthomasgolfer605]

38 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

Their clubhead speed is similarly fast with the driver. Low 100s to 110s. It's not mid-90s or 20 MPH slower. Swing speed is not the thing holding golfers back the most.

So, trackman is lying? 

[iacas]

17 minutes ago, tthomasgolfer605 said:

So, trackman is lying? 

 

I'm talking about my students. Swinging 20 MPH slower is not the biggest thing holding them back, and many of them are nearly as fast (with some faster) than Tour players.

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by iacas

[tthomasgolfer605]

30 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

I'm talking about my students. Swinging 20 MPH slower is not the biggest thing holding them back, and many of them are nearly as fast (with some faster) than Tour players.

 

I think I know what’s holding them back. 

[iacas]

3 hours ago, tthomasgolfer605 said:

I think I know what’s holding them back. 

 

Sure you do.

[dekez]

I recently signed up for some lessons at Golftec.  I like the concept, because I have always struggled understanding the optimal swing.  Especially the takeaway.  Things like if you move your arms up and down, and also left to right, and also whether you turn them.  And where any of those is true, when.

 

It's hard to visualize a swing that happens in 3D in pictures that are 2D.  This is where Golftec and Athletic Motion Golf help.  They put those "dots" on your major joints so you can see what's going on.

 

We shall see how this works out for this hack, but I am a visual learner and I like what I see so far.

 

 

[Mono]

On 6/20/2023 at 6:12 PM, Chunkitgood said:

I just fairly recently discovered that Golftec had studied and had made available some of the metrics of pro level swings, such as shoulder angle at impact and the amount of movement of certain body parts.  One that really opened my eyes was shoulder angle at the top  (https://www.golftec.com/swingtru)(which apparently a Dr. Rob Neal has also studied and found even steeper than what Golftec found) and another was amount of shoulder and hip turn when the shaft is parallel to the ground in the backswing (https://www.golfdigest.com/story/the-one-move-every-pro-makes-anybody-can-do-itbut-most-of-us-dont) Frankly the people I see playing golf and practicing, even the better players, usually fall far short of these numbers.  I have done some work trying to match those numbers and am quite happy with the results.  It seems to me that those numbers are checks of two things in the backswing (duh, tilt and turn) that have to be done to avoid fairly extensive problems/compensations.

 

I’m aware of a couple of places where Golftec had put out numbers for what it called key positions, like in the links above, but am curious if more is available on their numbers or similar data from other people like Dr. Neal that is available to the public.

 

One thing interesting about Golftec’s numbers is that in every case, pros have more of what is being measured than everybody else.  More tilt at the top, more tilt at impact, more backward bend at the finish, etc.  I infer from this that almost everybody would do well if they figured out how to get “more” in these numbers and there is little risk of them overdoing it as long as they got “more” in all of them.  More shoulder tilt could probably mess you up if you don’t also turn them, but if you both tilt and turn them more, seems like good should come of it.
 

So, is there more of this sort of data out there?  Has/does anybody use(d) these numbers and with what results?  Does even Golftec really use them in lessons?  Are there numbers “propaganda” as one poster on this forum said?  In short, is this really useful stuff?  If not, why not?  If so why don’t more people use it?  Or if they do, how?  

 

i'm probably a little late to this one, but yes GT uses those numbers in their lessons, their newish camera system is pretty sweet - it calibrates those angles without all the hassle of a full 3d suit - though that system offers less data than a lot of 3d systems

 

people use it less b/c 3d a- costs 'alot' and b - i'm sure has a steep learning curve - it's a lot to learn

 

as far as 'is it useful' i suppose that depends on 'alot' of factors - like what kind of learner is the student, overtime i think you'll see a lot more of these systems with a lot more coaches that understand it and how best to utilize it - we are likely in the early stages of systems, affordability and understanding - you see a lot of back and forth on this forum on what the data means for how to swing from coaches who have the systems

 

i used to race bikes - in the late 90s powermeters (for measuring training and racing) and the software analysis that came with it became much more affordable (from $15k to $1K almost overnight) - at the time almost every endurance athlete trained by heartrate and 'feel' - the power meter changed all that dramatically - kids these days know their power numbers inside out - there are few if any coaches left that don't understand training by power - and you have a lot more cyclist turning professional at 19 right out of juniors (re they are much further along at the same age today vs 30 years ago, but i digress - that maybe parenting!)

 

i doubt that 3d analysis and launch monitors are the end of the innovation for teaching golf - you'll likely see a power measuring system in the grip soon 

 

 

[Chunkitgood]

“It is difficult to understand why statisticians commonly limit their inquiries to Averages, and do not revel in more comprehensive views. Their souls seem as dull to the charm of variety as that of the native of one of our flat English counties, whose retrospect of Switzerland was that, if its mountains could be thrown into its lakes, two nuisances would be got rid of at once.”
 

Sir Francis Galton quoted in Freedman’s text on statistics, which then goes on to explain exactly why statisticians pay so much attention to averages.

 

The average elevation of Switzerland is higher than the average elevation of the Maldives, which is why people ski in Switzerland and scuba in the Maldives.  I suspect the average height of NBA players has something to do with their being in the NBA.  And that people who can and do tilt in the frontal plane while turning do better at golf.

 

The difference is, in road racing, the entire pro world went to power meters, I almost bought one myself total weekend rider that I am, but golf?  

 

My personal conclusion is that the hard part of golf is exactly the act(s) of simultaneously tilting in the frontal plane (which is necessarily connected with hip movement in that same plane) and turning in the transverse plane.  Evolution has designed man such that it is easy to turn, relatively hard to tilt, so people want to play golf by mostly turning.  Some people do it pretty well that way, but the people who do it best on average tilt more according to the numbers I have seen…while also having turned more when the the shaft is parallel in the backswing.

 

Baseball pitchers, quarterbacks, tennis players, people throwing hand grenades…all tilt their shoulders.  I detect a pattern, and speculate that what we call athleticism may involve the ability to tilt while doing something else.

 

But that’s just me, could be my preconception, although it’s not so much pre- as post a certain amount of thought, observation, generally looking around the net, and swinging a club.  I’ll think about it.

 

Thanks for all the replies and good luck to all.

[Moss Hopper]

On 7/6/2023 at 3:01 PM, dekez said:

I recently signed up for some lessons at Golftec.  I like the concept, because I have always struggled understanding the optimal swing.  Especially the takeaway.  Things like if you move your arms up and down, and also left to right, and also whether you turn them.  And where any of those is true, when.

 

It's hard to visualize a swing that happens in 3D in pictures that are 2D.  This is where Golftec and Athletic Motion Golf help.  They put those "dots" on your major joints so you can see what's going on.

 

We shall see how this works out for this hack, but I am a visual learner and I like what I see so far.

 

 

So how is it going? I did a swing eval and will start lessons in Oct.

[dekez]

11 hours ago, Moss Hopper said:

So how is it going? I did a swing eval and will start lessons in Oct.

I have had 4 lessons so far.  It was a struggle after the first three.  Our focus is to change my swing from an outside in / early extension to an inside out.  Early extension is when you move your hips towards the ball on the downswing.  There was improvement after each session but my scores got way worse, which is expected I guess when you are making a swing change.

 

Finally, after the 4th lesson I feel Iike I am making a good leap forward.  I shot my best score in a long time this weekend.  The lessons helped, but I also watched the video set below (Peter Cowens).  Peter's video explained what the teacher has been telling me better than he could.  The wrist c0ck, hinge, and downswing in particular.  Check it out (it's a 3 part):

 

 

[Moss Hopper]

On 8/15/2023 at 8:23 AM, dekez said:

I have had 4 lessons so far.  It was a struggle after the first three.  Our focus is to change my swing from an outside in / early extension to an inside out.  Early extension is when you move your hips towards the ball on the downswing.  There was improvement after each session but my scores got way worse, which is expected I guess when you are making a swing change.

 

Finally, after the 4th lesson I feel Iike I am making a good leap forward.  I shot my best score in a long time this weekend.  The lessons helped, but I also watched the video set below (Peter Cowens).  Peter's video explained what the teacher has been telling me better than he could.  The wrist c0ck, hinge, and downswing in particular.  Check it out (it's a 3 part):

 

 

Thanks dekez.  I was diagnosed with a two way miss and poor alignment (shoulders open and everything else closed). He wants me swinging inside out to hit a push draw.  He gave me this drill to set up with alignment sticks to work on before the lessons start.

 

 

He really likes Ernie Els so I have been trying to watch vids of him.

[ferrispgm]

Data for tour players should be used as a general measurement of improvement....The avg tour numbers are their avg numbers because of a myriad of things.  In general, you can't isolate shoulder tilt or hip sway and say "that's what I need to do to be better".  You may need more tilt in your shoulders because that tilt is what allows you to make contact with the ball.  You may only rotate your pelvis 20* because forcing more rotation will get you out of sequence.  It's the same concept as chasing LM numbers....It's not good.  You use them as a general measurement of improvement when working on something else. 

 

Good example, working on getting arms started sooner and you happen to get measured after working on it for a few and notice your hips are getting more open at impact yet your arms are more synced to that rotation.  Bad example: "I'm only 15* open at impact, tour players are 36* open..I need to force my hips open more so I can hit it like them".  

[dekez]

2 hours ago, Moss Hopper said:

Thanks dekez.  I was diagnosed with a two way miss and poor alignment (shoulders open and everything else closed). He wants me swinging inside out to hit a push draw.  He gave me this drill to set up with alignment sticks to work on before the lessons start.

 

 

He really likes Ernie Els so I have been trying to watch vids of him.

Good luck. As you know, it's a process.  Keep us posted!