Do you need a "perfect" swing to be really good?

[GaijinGolfer]

Even the guys who play on tour dont have a perfect swing. They swings are all a little bit different. If you needed to have a, "perfect swing" in order to be good at this game, youd think those guys would all have indentical swings.

As long as the swing you have is one that you can repeat and its reasonably straight and advances the ball far enough to allow you to score well, who cares if the mechanics arent perfect.

Look at Kenny Perry. Im sure a lot of swing coaches would tell him that his swing is all wrong, but guess what, it gets the job done.

[longbutter]

I have always practiced with a purpose with my irons and driver. And came to realize last year that I didn't have the same focus when I was working on my short game and even more so with the putter. I started focusing more and more with my wedge practice and thing got better much faster. but the putter was still an issue after my 79 putts in two days at the NC amatuer I reached out for help. Juan05 who posts here responded with some great idea and drill to evaluate my putting weaknesses and I started to really work at it. I had mariginal improvement, but was starting to understand more and more why I was so bad in the past. I do keep track of all of my stats and it is very clear that my putter is holding me back. I have already put a lot of work in this year and I will getting my first formal lesson of any sort soon from David Orr. I am hoping with his methodology we will be able to find my true weakness on the green and put a plan together to move to the next level. I may check out that book I love reading golf books especially ones that are about focus and not focused on mechanics.

[dfw1500]

Dan ,

 

I have asked this questione before .

 

Why than rotary palyers with left release likes of , Immelman ..., Mahan ,campbell, leonard ( Texas camp mostly ) struggle ... and not win as often as they should .

You are going to say putting ... but these guys are good putters ...

 

Thanks ....

 

There are MANY factors that go into them winning on a more regular basis, but IMOP all of the guys you have mentioned win, but do so with a short game that is inferior to their long game (Leonard apart when on!!!!!!)......all of these guys are relatively slight guys and hit the ball GOOD distanes with excellent dispersion which to me shows they have a blend of power and accuracy.

 

I know you have picked out these few but, what about the likes of, Sergio, Harrington, Kim, Stenson, Karlson, Villegas, Westwood etc etc etc.........these have all had GREAT success in the last 12/18months and incoporate a rotary action/release ;)

 

Cheers Dan

[beachgrovejunior]

I think nowadays almost everyone looks rotational, Majority looks like it, basically no one other than mahan and garcia really release left though, the rest still crossover big time

[Ezgolfer]

I know you have picked out these few but, what about the likes of, Sergio, Harrington, Kim, Stenson, Karlson, Villegas, Westwood etc etc etc.........these have all had GREAT success in the last 12/18months and incoporate a rotary action/release

 

 

 

The players you mentioned are not classic example of rotary swing . Lot of players release left .....(Westwood excluded)

However DTL slingers with the likes of Vijay Singh and Mickelson don't have shortage of tournament wins either. ;)

[tigerphan]

What do you think the guys on the pga tour min. distence with a driver need to be to make it, like 250 yards carry?

[Deadpool_25]

What do you think the guys on the pga tour min. distence with a driver need to be to make it, like 250 yards carry?

 

Don't think in terms of distance; think in terms of clubhead speed. Minimum is probably somewhere around 101 - 103 clubhead speed with a driver. Tour average is 112. The guys near the top are around 124 - 125ish. The guys near the bottom around around 101ish.

[Deadpool_25]

The players you mentioned are not classic example of rotary swing . Lot of players release left .....(Westwood excluded)

However DTL slingers with the likes of Vijay Singh and Mickelson don't have shortage of tournament wins either. ;)

 

Ezgolfer, you're trying to equate a the quality of a swing style to winning but that's an inappropriate comparison. There are FAR too many factors involved in actually winning. Were they MAKING putts? Were they on a hot streak with their short game? Was someone else on a hot streak in ANY part of their game? Did he get any good bounces or bad bounces? Did anyone else? What's going on in their personal life? Is Tiger in the field? ( ;) ) How do they react emotionally under pressure? How well do they control their emotions overall? How well to they stragegize and manage the course? Was their caddy on his/her game? Etc. If someday there's one style of swing that absolutely dominates over all others, it'll be perfectly obvious. People who use that style will ALWAYS be at the top of the ball-striking stats. Until then, the merits of a swing cannot be measured in the "wins" stat.

 

I think the broadest stat you can look at and get any value is the ball striking statistic. Even then it's not perfect. One player with a certain style might be really weak and his stat will suffer from a lack of driving distance. Another with the same swing style might be just "off" (which happens) and not be "doing the swing" very well. He may suffer in his accuracy stats.

[Ezgolfer]

You are correct to some extent deadpool .

 

GIR may be . In the realworld of results , no one checks those details .

 

People still circle around Butch Harmon for swing fixes ,even though tiger wins because of short game and putting.

 

 

I have heard it many times that rotary swing is the best under pressure . The true testamonial would be to see the results of people who are on tour and have good short game.

 

Hell you can screw up 25 tournaments with all those variables of short game and Tiger factor still win the rest ( there is a million dollar ontest everyweek).

 

So that consistency being spoken should be reflected someway in end results .

 

Your ball striking is directly related proprotional to your short game . You knock the ball closer to the hole , your putting stats would be better.

 

 

Justin leonard has a stellar short game and should have very good tournament results given his less moving part and consistent swing under pressure . On the other hand Kenney Perry probably does better with lift stop and drop swing and will have more wins .

 

Just debating ,why the results don't reflect what 's being preached even in the case of player with very good short game .

[Deadpool_25]

You are correct to some extent deadpool .

 

GIR may be . In the realworld of results , no one checks those details .

 

People still circle around Butch Harmon for swing fixes ,even though tiger wins because of short game and putting.

 

 

I have heard it many times that rotary swing is the best under pressure . The true testamonial would be to see the results of people who are on tour and have good short game.

 

Hell you can screw up 25 tournaments with all those variables of short game and Tiger factor still win the rest ( there is a million dollar ontest everyweek).

 

So that consistency being spoken should be reflected someway in end results .

 

Your ball striking is directly related proprotional to your short game . You knock the ball closer to the hole , your putting stats would be better.

 

 

Justin leonard has a stellar short game and should have very good tournament results given his less moving part and consistent swing under pressure . On the other hand Kenney Perry probably does better with lift stop and drop swing and will have more wins .

 

Just debating ,why the results don't reflect what 's being preached even in the case of player with very good short game .

 

We aren't talking about the real world of results though. We're debating swing theory...I think. ;) When talking about the performance of different swings you can't look at wins. Period. GIR is definitely better IMO. To be best you'd have to start looking at things like proximity to hole from various distances and such. Regardless, it doesn't really matter because once you get to a Tour level, you're talking about very small differences that have more to do with the players than their adopted swing theories. At that level, as at the higher amateur levels, it's probably more about...can you hit it well enough to score well.

 

It should be understood that just because a given swing is theoretically better, that doesn't mean a person (or many people) can't succeed just as well or better with a "technically inferior" swing. Once you find you can strike it well enough to hit about 7 out of 10 fairways and 6-7 out of 10 greens, your swing, no matter how it looks, is probably good enough...which is pretty much the point of this whole thread. ;)

 

ETA: A friend of mine was talking about the trip he took to see Butch Harmon in Vegas. He spent 6 hours there over 2 days. He said he now understands why Butch is the #1 teacher in the world. This guy is a very good player. I think it's not easy to understand how good an instructor is until you go actually see them. I think Butch Harmon was well into the Top 100 before Tiger. Remember, he was teaching Greg Norman when he was at the top of his game and Butch and Tiger only split due to personal differences...not because Butch wasn't a great teacher.

[birly-shirly]

Your ball striking is directly related proprotional to your short game . You knock the ball closer to the hole , your putting stats would be better.

 

That depends on what stats you look at. Putts per GIR might go down, but hitting more GIR means chipping/pitching to fewer greens, so putts per round is as likely to rise

[Deadpool_25]

Your ball striking is directly related proprotional to your short game . You knock the ball closer to the hole , your putting stats would be better.

 

That depends on what stats you look at. Putts per GIR might go down, but hitting more GIR means chipping/pitching to fewer greens, so putts per round is as likely to rise

 

That line was strange to me too. Your short game might be affected by your ball striking, but your ball striking isn't really affected by your short game. In the context of this discussion I don't see the relationship.

[Ezgolfer]

My bad.....

 

Directly proportional was a loose word.

 

Ball striking can affect your putting stats.

[Deadpool_25]

My bad.....

 

Directly proportional was a loose word.

 

Ball striking can affect your putting stats.

 

Gotcha. And you're right. But putting stats are 100% irrelevant to this thread which is about the swing. ;) :friends:

[trionz420]

case and point jim furyk