Sevam's swing theory discussion thread

[sevam1]

[quote name='DeNinny' post='1972420' date='Sep 25 2009, 10:23 PM']OK, I've passed the "add more than enough" phase with corkscrewing right foot. While it gave me a great power base, I also would turn it over too hard, resulting in a hook. I went lighter on the screw but then I couldn't do it as consistent and thus my swing wasn't as well. I've come to the conclusion that I prefer to start the screw just a hair before the top of my swing, which is how I've naturally done it anyway, before knowing it consciously. Now all I do at address is lift the outside of my right foot to put more pressure on the inside. Just curious Sevam1 or others if I am missing the point by not presetting it? It just feels more natural to transition into it, more rhythmic, if you will...[/quote]

You are not missing the point. You have it right. The point of the pretorque is that most people have no clue what it feels like to move into the right leg rotationally and to build pressure on the backswing and through transition. Instead they will move into a right leg that is not firm enough to support their action from the start and they therefor do not build any torque in that leg on the backswing. The pretorque at address establishes the feeling that you would otherwise want to build on the backswing. It gets you in tune with the proper use and motion of the right leg and helps to learn what it feels like. Once you know what it is and what it feels like, you can just do it dynamically as part of you swing. That is ideally where you want to get to with this.

Once you learn what it is and what it feels like, then the proper motion gets pretty much ingrained into your action. You don't have to think about it after a certain point.

Sevam1

[Callaway Ken]

[quote name='sevam1' post='1972770' date='Sep 26 2009, 07:00 AM'][quote name='DeNinny' post='1972420' date='Sep 25 2009, 10:23 PM']OK, I've passed the "add more than enough" phase with corkscrewing right foot. While it gave me a great power base, I also would turn it over too hard, resulting in a hook. I went lighter on the screw but then I couldn't do it as consistent and thus my swing wasn't as well. I've come to the conclusion that I prefer to start the screw just a hair before the top of my swing, which is how I've naturally done it anyway, before knowing it consciously. Now all I do at address is lift the outside of my right foot to put more pressure on the inside. Just curious Sevam1 or others if I am missing the point by not presetting it? It just feels more natural to transition into it, more rhythmic, if you will...[/quote]

You are not missing the point. You have it right. The point of the pretorque is that most people have no clue what it feels like to move into the right leg rotationally and to build pressure on the backswing and through transition. Instead they will move into a right leg that is not firm enough to support their action from the start and they therefor do not build any torque in that leg on the backswing. The pretorque at address establishes the feeling that you would otherwise want to build on the backswing. It gets you in tune with the proper use and motion of the right leg and helps to learn what it feels like. Once you know what it is and what it feels like, you can just do it dynamically as part of you swing. That is ideally where you want to get to with this.

Once you learn what it is and what it feels like, then the proper motion gets pretty much ingrained into your action. You don't have to think about it after a certain point.

Sevam1
[/quote]

Great post Mike!

[Callaway Ken]

Actually, let's see if I can make some sense of this for myself and maybe Mike can confirm or correct my thoughts.

I think that most people start with a mindset of:

Backswing: Rotate right

Downswing: rotate left

By thinking of the concept of resisting "right", your focus will always be "LEFT". The preloading and screwing down makes it almost impossible to get stuck right, and focuses all the energy in the direction of the shot, which is what you want.

Is that even close?

[downtoscratch]

Ken,
That's spot on, IMO. Focuses the energy in the direction of the target. dts

[Callaway Ken]

[quote name='downtoscratch' post='1972839' date='Sep 26 2009, 08:52 AM']Ken,
That's spot on, IMO. Focuses the energy in the direction of the target. dts[/quote]

Yeah... I thought so. At any rate, that's what I'm feeling and it's a good feeling too.

I've really been working on this concept a lot. It really fits into my swing and my "way of thinking" on the swing. Not foreign to me at all.

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='sevam1' post='1972770' date='Sep 26 2009, 07:00 AM']You are not missing the point. You have it right. The point of the pretorque is that most people have no clue what it feels like to move into the right leg rotationally and to build pressure on the backswing and through transition. Instead they will move into a right leg that is not firm enough to support their action from the start and they therefor do not build any torque in that leg on the backswing. The pretorque at address establishes the feeling that you would otherwise want to build on the backswing. It gets you in tune with the proper use and motion of the right leg and helps to learn what it feels like. Once you know what it is and what it feels like, you can just do it dynamically as part of you swing. That is ideally where you want to get to with this.

Once you learn what it is and what it feels like, then the proper motion gets pretty much ingrained into your action. You don't have to think about it after a certain point.

Sevam1[/quote]

Moment, Mike. You used the word [b]pretorque[/b] which suggests something that is being done at address. Say, similar to the biokinetic idea of presetting the rear knee joint at address described in the BioThread and BGST forum.
I always understood that The Move of yours is an inentional screwing the rear foot into the ground [b]during the backswing phase[/b], which I personally disliked since it would bring a timing issue.
Here is the quote of my answer to Eight when he asked about my opinion about The Move which reflects perfectly the issue:
"if we speak about the deliberate screwing move (as per Sevam's theory) - no, it does not;
I believe, however, that there is such an element as "unintentional screwing" since the preset knee joint limits swaying to the right while the foot cannot turn thanks to shear forces. Say, on the ice, it neither would be possible to preset the joint, nor to screw the foot on request.
Seeking for absolute automatism in the motion excludes any deliberate motions, therefore, there is no place for ANY intentional moves or thoughts that bring timing issues into play."

That's why I lost interest with it. But maybe I was just misinformed ? I will be delighted to hear your explanations on this subject.

Cheers

[sevam1]

In the golf swing you need resistance in opposition to the direction that you want to move that clubhead. The idea is to build pressure on the backswing and to retain it through transition. In other words with the lower body you do not just want to wind things up and then unwind. You want to retain that resistance and opposition as you move back to the left and through the ball. The idea is to not give up what you are swinging against and that resistance is anchored in the ground through the feet. When you maintain the clockwise rotational pressure in the right foot as you transition left you are retaining the pressure that the upper body needs to leverage against as you unwind. In other words you want the top to unwind against the bottom. On the downswing there is a point beyond which the clockwise pressure can no longer be maintained and beyond which it is also no longer of any benefit. But you do not consciously do this. In fact you consciously resist until the resistance can no longer be maintained. The idea, in a nutshell, is to "let" this resistance disipate. Most importantly you do not "make" it go away with a consious reversal. Through the movement of the midsection back towards the target and the unwinding of the upper body the shift back to the target occurs. The clockwise tension essentially leaves the right foot at the same rate that the weight leaves if that makes sense.

[Dariusz J.]

Thanks, Gents, for your good attempts of explaining the issue for me, but I would prefer to hear it from Mike himself, if you don't mind.


[quote name='sevam1' post='1974172' date='Sep 27 2009, 05:23 AM']In the golf swing you need resistance in opposition to the direction that you want to move that clubhead. The idea is to build pressure on the backswing and to retain it through transition. In other words with the lower body you do not just want to wind things up and then unwind. You want to retain that resistance and opposition as you move back to the left and through the ball. The idea is to not give up what you are swinging against and that resistance is anchored in the ground through the feet. When you maintain the clockwise rotational pressure in the right foot as you transition left you are retaining the pressure that the upper body needs to leverage against as you unwind. In other words you want the top to unwind against the bottom. On the downswing there is a point beyond which the clockwise pressure can no longer be maintained and beyond which it is also no longer of any benefit. But you do not consciously do this. In fact you consciously resist until the resistance can no longer be maintained. The idea, in a nutshell, is to "let" this resitance disipate. Most importantly you do not "make" it go away with a consious reversal. Through the movement of the midsection back towards the target and the unwinding of the upper body the shift back to the target occurs. The clockwise tension essentially leaves the right foot leaves at the same rate that the weight leaves if that makes sense.[/quote]

Mike, I did not ask about the whole philosophy, but thanks for this post What I wanted to know is just the aspect of conscious or unconscious actions.

Let me ask again very simply for the sake of clarification and please answer it very simply as well, if you don't mind:

1. Is the pretorque done at address the only one conscious action of "screwing" the foot into the ground ?

2. How would you describe the pretorque element ? What joints are being pretorqued ? Are the limitations in the joint(s) achieved or not ?

3. Taking into account the answer to my first question is "NO", which was obvious for me starting the time we discussed it - what exactly are the conscious and unconscious elements in The Move ?

Cheers

[sevam1]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='1974186' date='Sep 27 2009, 07:03 AM']Mike, I did not ask about the whole philosophy, but thanks for this post What I wanted to know is just the aspect of conscious or unconscious actions.

Let me ask again very simply for the sake of clarification and please answer it very simply as well, if you don't mind:

1. Is the pretorque done at address the only one conscious action of "screwing" the foot into the ground ? [color="#0000ff"]Not really because that feeling of firmness moves up the whole right leg. It is felt most strongly from the calf down and into the foot but that intention is felt to one degree or another throughout the body.[/color]

2. How would you describe the pretorque element ? What joints are being pretorqued ? Are the limitations in the joint(s) achieved or not ? [color="#0000ff"]I feel rotational pressure in the feet and that the right ankle joint is firmed. Not immobilized, but firmed. There is a similar feeling in the right knee and hip joints although to lesser degrees. The absolute limitations on the joints are not achieved and cannot be achieved in my opinion without the risk of injury that comes with allowing a joint to "lock out". Rather it is muscular tension around the joints that is delivering the limitation and restricting the action at these joints. I want the joints in the right leg to move, but in a very narrow range. In other words I want everything to feel firm but not locked. Locking the joints has a negative effect on balance and also brings the potential for injury into the equation in my opinion. I would say that I am testing the safe practical limits of the joints in terms of resistance.[/color]

3. Taking into account the answer to my first question is "NO", which was obvious for me starting the time we discussed it - what exactly are the conscious and unconscious elements in The Move ? [color="#0000ff"]The primary concious element is giving the live tension in the body a direction and to set up your intention on the backswing. In essence I want to set myself up to swing into and around the right leg on the backswing. The body is a complex chain of levers as you know but I am focussing at address primarily on the long levers. The legs!

As the backswing progresses it reaches a point where it cannot progress further without either a loss of balance or a loss of torque. The concious move then is to bend the body through the navel back towards the target to preserve balance. The effect of this is also to reverse the motion of the upper body. This is transition of course and it can happen either as a conscious action to reverse the motion by bending the body and moving the middle targetward or because you have turned so deeply on the backswing that you simply find yourself moving the other way which is both a biomechanical matter and a subconcious reaction of the body to preserve balance. In that instance it feels as if the right hip is basically oscillating over the right foot. In either case the targetward move is happening without the lower body tension immediately unwinding.
[/color]
[color="#0000ff"]The problem that I have with discussing concious and unconcious actions is that they change depending on the shot. You do not always want to or need to hit the ball as hard as you can. So on a 3/4 shot for instance the reversal is a more conscious action with the hips than when one tries to hit a 300 yard drive because things tend get maxxed out for obvious reasons when one makes a fuller swing and so motions can be taken towards the end of their limits. Unfortunately the playing of golf requires a variety of shots from varying lies and swinging "balls out" all the time is not the way that golf is best played. We can, however, learn a great deal and feel the proper order of things by taking things to the max. This is where the greatest opportunities for "automaticity" lie. I use the legs essentially the same way for just about every shot and using and being in tune with the tensions in the legs and feet is what I am cueing on. What is going on upstairs will vary more. The smaller swings require more conscious control but I would say that we learn the order best from full swings taken to their max. In other words the biokinetic limitations that you and I both idealize are an asset that we unfortunately cannot always tap into because we are not always using the whole chain. I hope this makes sense. In my own mind and in my golf swing I am trying to reduce a very complex chain into a focus on a very small number of motivators. In a perfect world my only thoughts would be of the feet, the navel and the hands.
[/color]
Cheers[/quote]


Sevam1

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='sevam1' post='1974229' date='Sep 27 2009, 08:26 AM'][quote name='Dariusz J.' post='1974186' date='Sep 27 2009, 07:03 AM']Mike, I did not ask about the whole philosophy, but thanks for this post What I wanted to know is just the aspect of conscious or unconscious actions.

Let me ask again very simply for the sake of clarification and please answer it very simply as well, if you don't mind:

1. Is the pretorque done at address the only one conscious action of "screwing" the foot into the ground ? [color="#0000ff"]Not really because that feeling of firmness moves up the whole right leg. It is felt most strongly from the calf down and into the foot but that intention is felt to one degree or another throughout the body.[/color]

[b]OK, got your way of thinking. But why do you think that the joint that has already met the limitation brings firmness ? The limitation is a static one and there is something as dynamic overtorquing possible, something that one can greatly benefit from without dangering the very joint, which many sport disciplines prove. Overtorquing is very useful especially when one wants to change the orientation of the motion - it acts like a spring totally intentionally. Your point would be valid if the human structure is very fragile. But, although it's not like gum, it is not made of glass either Besides I discussed this issue in the SPC concept description.
Secondly, while it is true that firmness moves up the very leg, it moves it up without necessity of straightening of the rear leg to the maximum - what exactly was in case of Hogan. What I found is this is the only one possibility to let the rear hip joint get deep enough without straightening the rear knee. If you, say, leave the room for knee rotation, your rear leg either will straighten too much when you want to achieve this deep hip or you are forced to move the weight to the rear foot too much. I'd suggest you just to try the pretorquing/presetting to the limits at address - just as experiment. I wonder what you will find, Mike. Not because I want to say my knowledge is superior, but exactly because of what I personally found visibly different in your own action compared to Hogan's. [/b]


2. How would you describe the pretorque element ? What joints are being pretorqued ? Are the limitations in the joint(s) achieved or not ? [color="#0000ff"]I feel rotational pressure in the feet and that the right ankle joint is firmed. Not immobilized, but firmed. There is a similar feeling in the right knee and hip joints although to lesser degrees. The absolute limitations on the joints are not achieved and cannot be achieved in my opinion without the risk of injury that comes with allowing a joint to "lock out". Rather it is muscular tension around the joints that is delivering the limitation and restricting the action at these joints. I want the joints in the right leg to move, but in a very narrow range. In other words I want everything to feel firm but not locked. Locking the joints has a negative effect on balance and also brings the potential for injury into the equation in my opinion. I would say that I am testing the safe practical limits of the joints in terms of resistance.[/color]

[b]Good. I practically answered it writing my comment to the point no.1, however, I would like to add that although I am not competitive enough to go into the muscular level, I'd never trust muscles more than joints for obvious reasons. Moreover, while I agree completely with you as regards locking the joints, we need to differ the scenario of achieving the static limitation only and the scenario where the static limitation is the border and there is no possibility of increasing the limit dynamically without injuring the joint. Say, when you lock the knee straight to the maximum, it has practically no room to go further; OTOH, when we talk about knee rotation, the room left is not small at all.[/b]

3. Taking into account the answer to my first question is "NO", which was obvious for me starting the time we discussed it - what exactly are the conscious and unconscious elements in The Move ? [color="#0000ff"]The primary concious element is giving the live tension in the body a direction and to set up your intention on the backswing. In essence I want to set myself up to swing into and around the right leg on the backswing. The body is a complex chain of levers as you know but I am focussing at address primarily on the long levers. The legs!
The problem that I have with discussing concious and unconcious actions is that they change depending on the shot. You do not always want to or need to hit the ball as hard as you can. So on a 3/4 shot for instance the reversal is a more conscious action with the hips than when one tries to hit a 300 yard drive because things tend get maxxed out for obvious reasons when one makes a fuller swing and so motions can be taken towards the end of their limits. Unfortunately the playing of golf requires a variety of shots from varying lies and swinging "balls out" all the time is not the way that golf is best played. We can, however, learn a great deal and feel the proper order of things by taking things to the max. This is where the greatest opportunities for "automaticity" lie. I use the legs essentially the same way for just about every shot and using and being in tune with the tensions in the legs and feet is what I am cueing on. What is going on upstairs will vary more. The smaller swings require more conscious control but I would say that we learn the order best from full swings taken to their max. In other words the biokinetic limitations that you and I both idealize are an asset that we unfortunately cannot always tap into because we are not always using the whole chain. I hope this makes sense. In my own mind and in my golf swing I am trying to reduce a very complex chain into a focus on a very small number of motivators. In a perfect world my only thoughts would be of the feet, the navel and the hands.
[/color]

[b]I agree here 100 % with you. Moreover, I have no choice not to agree because despite my big belief in automatisation, I am perfectly aware that great players must perform conscious actions in order to shape shots, using less-than-full swings, etc. This is why I always repeat - learn biomechanics as much as you can but above it learn the finesse know-how from true players. My studies can't offer much more than just a pattern that I regard as biokinetically sound. What I find really great in your answer is that the base (legs action) remains the same and the conscious actions refer to the upper body. It brings a belief that the main physical rules (shear forces, gravity impact, swinging from the ground up, etc.) are treated the same way by our conscious mind, what probably let our subconscious mind act the same in this section. IMO, it is VERY IMPORTANT.[/b]

Cheers[/quote]


Sevam1
[/quote]

Thanks for the discussion, Mike. This is EXACTLY what I wanted to know.

Cheers

[Callaway Ken]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='1974186' date='Sep 27 2009, 07:03 AM']Thanks, Gents, for your good attempts of explaining the issue for me, but I would prefer to hear it from Mike himself, if you don't mind.[/quote]

Sorry Dariusz J. I should learn to speak when spoken to. I apologize.

CK

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='Callaway Ken' post='1974366' date='Sep 27 2009, 10:42 AM'][quote name='Dariusz J.' post='1974186' date='Sep 27 2009, 07:03 AM']Thanks, Gents, for your good attempts of explaining the issue for me, but I would prefer to hear it from Mike himself, if you don't mind.[/quote]

Sorry Dariusz J. I should learn to speak when spoken to. I apologize.

CK
[/quote]

No, Ken. I am sorry that I had to write that sentence due to my persistence in being objective science follower. Always hear the inventor, not the translators...

Cheers

[Diz]

[quote name='sevam1' post='1974172' date='Sep 27 2009, 05:23 AM']In the golf swing you need resistance in opposition to the direction that you want to move that clubhead. The idea is to build pressure on the backswing and to retain it through transition. In other words with the lower body you do not just want to wind things up and then unwind. You want to retain that resistance and opposition as you move back to the left and through the ball. The idea is to not give up what you are swinging against and that resistance is anchored in the ground through the feet. When you maintain the clockwise rotational pressure in the right foot as you transition left you are retaining the pressure that the upper body needs to leverage against as you unwind. In other words you want the top to unwind against the bottom. On the downswing there is a point beyond which the clockwise pressure can no longer be maintained and beyond which it is also no longer of any benefit. But you do not consciously do this. In fact you consciously resist until the resistance can no longer be maintained. The idea, in a nutshell, is to "let" this resistance disipate. Most importantly you do not "make" it go away with a consious reversal. Through the movement of the midsection back towards the target and the unwinding of the upper body the shift back to the target occurs. The clockwise tension essentially leaves the right foot at the same rate that the weight leaves if that makes sense.[/quote]


So True....great post...once you get this feeling of resistance in those feet you have it:)

[Tupperwolf]

I've been struggling over the past couple of days with my driving. I've been doing everything with the driver but skying it and topping it. Duck hooks, pull slices, everything but a decent drive. So today I spent a little time working on my pivot. I hit a bunch of drives, none of them really great. Then I dumped a few balls on the grass and started hitting some 2 irons. OK, a little weak, some weak fades, having a hard time shaping my shots. Lots of mishits and poor trajectory.

Then, because my mind was wandering, and I had been reading some Sevam1 threads earlier this weekend, as well as today, I thought about The Secret again. I've experimented with The Secret a few times but haven't permanently ingrained it into my swing.

I started making a few swings with my feet screwed into the ground, really feeling the support and the tension in my muscles, my knees kicked in slightly to support my pivot.

IMMEDIATELY I started hitting that 2 iron-hybrid like I have never hit a long iron before. The sound of impact was immediately different. Crisper, sweeter, the ball hanging onto the face before rocketing off into the distance. I was able to take a more aggressive tempo and just turn back and through the ball without thinking about my club path or plane at allgt. I was hitting it hard and shaping shots. Low, high, left, right, all in perfect control. The face of my club had a perfect ball-sized circle in the middle of the sweet spot where I had been crushing the grass (light rough at the range) against the balls.

Didn't mishit a single shot. Went and did a loop of about 6 holes on the course and easily made 6 GIR. Picked up 10 yards on all of my irons by screwing my feet into the ground and making an aggressive, hard turn. Have never been able to turn like that through the ball without my hips going crazy! Hit my driver on 18 and it was like a rocket launcher. 8-10 yards longer than I've ever hit a tee shot on that hole.

I can't believe I had forgotten about ingraining this into my swing. From now on it's going to be a priority. Next week I'm getting a new camera, and I can't wait to check out the difference it makes, although the results speak for themselves!

[phillypete]

I had been working on slicefixer's method, when stumbled on "the move".

Sevam1's pre-torque seems to be the missing link. The some of the ball coming off the clubface completely changed. My ball flight is lower and stronger with a ridiculous amount of spin.

The change hasn't been without issue. First, it took me two or three sky balls off the drive before I learned that I have to tee the ball a bit lower.

Also I had two different misses pull hooks and push fades. They didn't creep up often, I'm sure it was me messing something up, but I am having trouble diagnosing problems with this new swing. What could be causing these misses?

[sevam1]

[quote name='phillypete' post='1977426' date='Sep 28 2009, 11:24 PM']I had been working on slicefixer's method, when stumbled on "the move".

Sevam1's pre-torque seems to be the missing link. The some of the ball coming off the clubface completely changed. My ball flight is lower and stronger with a ridiculous amount of spin.

The change hasn't been without issue. First, it took me two or three sky balls off the drive before I learned that I have to tee the ball a bit lower.

Also I had two different misses pull hooks and push fades. They didn't creep up often, I'm sure it was me messing something up, but I am having trouble diagnosing problems with this new swing. What could be causing these misses?[/quote]

You might be just overcooking the move a hair, but more likely you are not moving the middle (the navel) laterally towards the target as you unwind the hips. This is not a big move, but an important one. If there is not a slight bend through the middle with the hips leading the parade as you move forward then you are going to end up either out and over top of it a bit or swinging with a hangback move. Pushes and pulls result. Feeling yourself shorten slightly or compress vertically as you start to move left in transition is a good feeling that lets you know that you are leading the downswing through the middle of your body while maintaining your leverage with the ground and unwinding in sequence as opposed to a top down move or spinning out because you let go of the pressure you worked to create on the backswing too early.

Hope this helps.
Sevam1

[Diz]

Feeling yourself shorten slightly or compress vertically as you start to move left in transition is a good feeling that lets you know that you are leading the downswing through the middle of your body while maintaining your leverage with the ground and unwinding in sequence as opposed to a top down move or spinning out because you let go of the pressure you worked to create on the backswing too early.[quote][/quote]

Sevam...when u told me this I a while back I didnt really understand until now...this makes a 5'10 guy like me keep it up with the bigboys:) I try to compress or supress linear and pop up, maybe thats not the right terminology but thats what I feel... Im starting to believe the pivot is the true engine of the swing and let the club find its way

Thanks for help on the grip ( The only pressure in my LH grip is thumb and index) I grip the last 3 fingers with less pressure now...really seemed to help things..

Thanks

Bro.

[Tupperwolf]

Mike,

Today I shot even par at my home course using The Move.

Thank you.

[Blackfinn]

Read all 10 pages. Just want to make sure I grasp the pre-torque concept fully:

At set-up, you should have slight pre-torque in your right foot, and progressively increase the amount of torque during the backswing.

It would seem by progressively increasing the "torque," you naturally "squat" a bit (for lack of a better term) as you are screwing yourself down into the dirt at or near the top of the backswing. Then during the downswing, your left leg is rising above your left hip as you "un-coil." Is this correct?

Thanks.

[sevam1]

That is pretty much what it is about.

Sevam1

[Manchild]

After reading this thread and some of the youtube vids, I think I have actually played with Mike a few times. Small world!

[rhythx]

Hi,

Just wanted to stop to say thanks for your e-book. The right foot loading definitely unlocked some things for me. I've been studying Hogan's "Modern Fundamentals of Golf" for almost 10 years now, driving range at least 3 times a week, and I can't believe that I found something new in your E-book. Well worth the purchase price. PS, not sure if this is right, but I found it incredibly important to not allow my right foot to start anywhere close to flared out. Now, I've been almost pointing my right toes slight left of straight ahead, just so I can feel the twist force develop into my foot, and up into my knee.

I was really stuck lately, because I felt like I really couldn't generate power by simply yanking my left hip backward like Hogan says in the book. And if I allowed my right hip to shoot forward at all, I'd end up with uncannily reliable shanks. Now that I've felt this twist into my right foot (hopefully the same twist you're talking about!) no more shanks and suddenly a lot more effortless power.

Regards,

Stephen Evans

www.swingfreak.com

[savydan]

New website coming to [url="http://www.secretinthedirt.com"]www.secretinthedirt.com[/url]

[Banjo Bob]

Hey Guys,

I have just recently returned to Mike’s book and I wanted to ask a question regarding golf shoes.

Now I know the books talks about Hogan slipping on the Tee at Olympic and re reading this made me remember something from the world match play championship in 1999.

I remember Sergio Garcia hitting a driver when his back foot slipped at impact and the ball sailed into the trees on the left, Garcia then ripped of his shoes ripping off his right shoe and threw it at an advertisement hoarding.

This made me think about Hogan slipping and the move etc!

My question regarding shoes; I think in the original “The move” thread Mike talked about steel spikes and different shoes but I wanted to ask if anyone could recommend a few pairs to try that have soft spikes that offer excellent resitance to the move?

Sorry if I have taken the thread of topic in anyway.

Regards

BB

[psd]

[quote name='Banjo Bob' post='2053828' date='Nov 9 2009, 08:31 AM']Hey Guys,

I have just recently returned to Mike's book and I wanted to ask a question regarding golf shoes.

Now I know the books talks about Hogan slipping on the Tee at Olympic and re reading this made me remember something from the world match play championship in 1999.

I remember Sergio Garcia hitting a driver when his back foot slipped at impact and the ball sailed into the trees on the left, Garcia then ripped of his shoes ripping off his right shoe and threw it at an advertisement hoarding.

This made me think about Hogan slipping and the move etc!

My question regarding shoes; I think in the original "The move" thread Mike talked about steel spikes and different shoes but I wanted to ask if anyone could recommend a few pairs to try that have soft spikes that offer excellent resitance to the move?

Sorry if I have taken the thread of topic in anyway.

Regards

BB[/quote]

Banjo Bob - I have found from my own experience that a shoe that has a very rigid sole and leather upper, like the Foot Joys Classics (unfortunately discontinued), work best. I have a pair of Reel Fit as well and while they are far more comfortable, then tend to be less firm in the upper and have a much softer insole.

As far as grip is concerned, Champ is my preference. Once again, very stable, maybe not quite as comfortable than a softer spike, but it offerrs greater resistance.

This is just my own experience. Not a plug for Foot Joys. But if I were to buy a new pair of shoes, I would look at one with a more traditional leather upper and more rigid sole.

[bioman]

[quote name='sevam1' post='1977609' date='Sep 28 2009, 10:38 PM'][quote name='phillypete' post='1977426' date='Sep 28 2009, 11:24 PM']I had been working on slicefixer's method, when stumbled on "the move".

Sevam1's pre-torque seems to be the missing link. The some of the ball coming off the clubface completely changed. My ball flight is lower and stronger with a ridiculous amount of spin.

The change hasn't been without issue. First, it took me two or three sky balls off the drive before I learned that I have to tee the ball a bit lower.

Also I had two different misses pull hooks and push fades. They didn't creep up often, I'm sure it was me messing something up, but I am having trouble diagnosing problems with this new swing. What could be causing these misses?[/quote]

You might be just overcooking the move a hair, but more likely you are not moving the middle (the navel) laterally towards the target as you unwind the hips. This is not a big move, but an important one. If there is not a slight bend through the middle with the hips leading the parade as you move forward then you are going to end up either out and over top of it a bit or swinging with a hangback move. Pushes and pulls result. Feeling yourself shorten slightly or compress vertically as you start to move left in transition is a good feeling that lets you know that you are leading the downswing through the middle of your body while maintaining your leverage with the ground and unwinding in sequence as opposed to a top down move or spinning out because you let go of the pressure you worked to create on the backswing too early.

Hope this helps.
Sevam1
[/quote]

Mike,


When you talk about the naval moving towards the target, is that along with the hips moving in a lateral motion targetward as well?  Or is it independently?

If you could only concentrate on one thing, right foot screw'd in or naval moving laterally, what would it be?  What I mean is, which is the more important fundamental concept to start with.  Thanks.

[juansky]

Take a look at Hogan in the pictures below. You'll notice the slight movement of the core/naval away from the target and most noticeably the head position, and also the slight squat. This sliding aspect of Hogan's swing is the kick start to the swings momentum that puts the whole swing into action from beginning to follow through. It is one swift uninterrupted motion. It is also very important to have a wide stance, the wider the stance, the more core rotation is used. The narrower the stance, the less the core is engaged and arms take over. Hogan in the pictures below is well planted to accept the shift of momentum with full control of his balance no matter how hard he hits the ball.

[phillypete]

[quote name='psd' post='2053890' date='Nov 9 2009, 09:26 AM'][quote name='Banjo Bob' post='2053828' date='Nov 9 2009, 08:31 AM']Hey Guys,

I have just recently returned to Mike's book and I wanted to ask a question regarding golf shoes.

Now I know the books talks about Hogan slipping on the Tee at Olympic and re reading this made me remember something from the world match play championship in 1999.

I remember Sergio Garcia hitting a driver when his back foot slipped at impact and the ball sailed into the trees on the left, Garcia then ripped of his shoes ripping off his right shoe and threw it at an advertisement hoarding.

This made me think about Hogan slipping and the move etc!

My question regarding shoes; I think in the original "The move" thread Mike talked about steel spikes and different shoes but I wanted to ask if anyone could recommend a few pairs to try that have soft spikes that offer excellent resitance to the move?

Sorry if I have taken the thread of topic in anyway.

Regards

BB[/quote]

Banjo Bob - I have found from my own experience that a shoe that has a very rigid sole and leather upper, like the Foot Joys Classics (unfortunately discontinued), work best. I have a pair of Reel Fit as well and while they are far more comfortable, then tend to be less firm in the upper and have a much softer insole.

[/quote]

I think leather soled shoes provide better traction. The modern style shoes tend to have all sorts of clutter that sticks out from the bottom, which (imo) takes away from the effectiveness of the spike.

The idea of the spike is to consentrate all the weight over as small of an area as possible (in the old days a nail point) to drive it into the ground. Then to rely on the combined side area of the spike against the soil to resist the movement of the foot.

All those plastic features on the bottom of the new style shoes just take away from the weight that could be applied to the spike head.

[bioman]

[quote name='juansky' post='2056023' date='Nov 10 2009, 08:22 AM']Take a look at Hogan in the pictures below. You'll notice the slight movement of the core/naval away from the target and most noticeably the head position, and also the slight squat. This sliding aspect of Hogan's swing is the kick start to the swings momentum that puts the whole swing into action from beginning to follow through. It is one swift uninterrupted motion. It is also very important to have a wide stance, the wider the stance, the more core rotation is used. The narrower the stance, the less the core is engaged and arms take over. Hogan in the pictures below is well planted to accept the shift of momentum with full control of his balance no matter how hard he hits the ball.[/quote]

Thanks. Is the squat important on the backswing? I also noticed that some people talk about squatting a bit on the start of the downswing. How is this initiated and what should be the swing thought?

Also, when you are digging in clockwise with your right foot, on the start of the downswing, how is the weight transfer best started? Do you push off that torqued right foot, slide your midsection or push out your left leg?

Lastly, is the left leg suppose to be straight at impact or still slightly flexed?

[farmer]

As an older player, the pretorque and set makes it really hard to get a good turn and to maintain good timing. Have I missed something or is there an answer? On another site, I spent a month hunched over a monitor watching the videos, which I enjoy, but I'm not sure at 59 it will work for me. Maybe the hunching over was the problem however.