| |
Main
Date: 13 Mar 2007 10:04:17
From: GaryC_47
Subject: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
Dave
Stop me if you've heard this one before:
I was searching through our archives, looking for the late 90's
issue of Golf Digest that contains the article that allegedly claims
that muscleback clubs have better mishit dispersion than cavity
backs, when I came across a couple of drills on delaying the release
in an story on power by Jane Crafter. I have incorporated those
drills into my spring training for the past three weeks and they
work quite well. The premise is that it's hard to delay the release
if you don't know how it should feel. (Unfortunately I wasn't able
to find the muscleback article, but we are missing a few issues, so
that search continues.)
Two-club drill: Grip two middle irons and take your normal stance.
Go to the top of your backswing. From the top, slowly swing down and
stop when your hands are about waist high, retaining the wristcock
angle. Hold this position for a few seconds. Then swing through
impact as fast as you can. This shows you where in the swing the
release should be for max power and also strengthens your wrists and
forearms.
Throw-ball drill: Set up over the ball, without a club, holding a
ball in the fingers of your right hand. Do a backswing with the
right side only (leave the left arm hanging) making sure you
complete your turn, your elbow is bent and your wrist is cocked - as
if you were holding a club. Using the downswing motion throw the
ball and try to hit the ball on the ground. You'll find that you
won't be able to hit the ball, or the vicinity of the ball, unless
you delay the release. This gives you the sensation of "waiting for
it." I have found that this exercise has helped me with my timing
as I sometimes fight a tendancy to get too fast after the
transition.
If you try these drills I'd be curious to know your results.
Gary
|
|
| |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 23:09:15
From: David Laville
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Tue, 13 2007 10:04:17 -0500, "GaryC_47"
<garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Dave
>
>Stop me if you've heard this one before:
>
>I was searching through our archives, looking for the late 90's
>issue of Golf Digest that contains the article that allegedly claims
>that muscleback clubs have better mishit dispersion than cavity
>backs,
I believe the article was from the late 80's and the author was Lew
Fishman or Fishburn or something similar.
>Two-club drill: Grip two middle irons and take your normal stance.
>Go to the top of your backswing. From the top, slowly swing down and
>stop when your hands are about waist high, retaining the wristcock
>angle. Hold this position for a few seconds. Then swing through
>impact as fast as you can. This shows you where in the swing the
>release should be for max power and also strengthens your wrists and
>forearms.
If you swing according to physics you don't need to physically retain
the wrist cock nor do you need to strengthen your wrist and forearms.
If fact trying to hold the angle will lead you down a path of golfing
woes. The angle is retained by swinging against the lag and drag of
the club.
>Throw-ball drill: Set up over the ball, without a club, holding a
>ball in the fingers of your right hand. Do a backswing with the
>right side only (leave the left arm hanging) making sure you
>complete your turn, your elbow is bent and your wrist is cocked - as
>if you were holding a club. Using the downswing motion throw the
>ball and try to hit the ball on the ground. You'll find that you
>won't be able to hit the ball, or the vicinity of the ball, unless
>you delay the release.
I should have stopped you because they've already heard it before,
from me. Throwing a ball with your right hand at a ball on the ground
is how a hitter directs the thrust of his #3 pressure point. It also
retains the angle the right wrist bend. So as you can see it's proper
technique that retains the angles not physical force.
David Laville, G.S.E.M.
The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor
TB-8982
|
| | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 23:51:02
From: GaryC_47
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"David Laville" <dlaville@worldnet.att.net > wrote in message
news:2vaev21msdei59ndaorlla4plqrsr58eqc@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 2007 10:04:17 -0500, "GaryC_47"
> <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Dave
>>
>>Stop me if you've heard this one before:
>>
>>I was searching through our archives, looking for the late 90's
>>issue of Golf Digest that contains the article that allegedly
>>claims
>>that muscleback clubs have better mishit dispersion than cavity
>>backs,
>
> I believe the article was from the late 80's and the author was
> Lew
> Fishman or Fishburn or something similar.
January 1988. May be difficult to locate that far back.
>
>>Two-club drill: Grip two middle irons and take your normal
>>stance.
>>Go to the top of your backswing. From the top, slowly swing down
>>and
>>stop when your hands are about waist high, retaining the wristcock
>>angle. Hold this position for a few seconds. Then swing through
>>impact as fast as you can. This shows you where in the swing the
>>release should be for max power and also strengthens your wrists
>>and
>>forearms.
>
> If you swing according to physics you don't need to physically
> retain
> the wrist cock nor do you need to strengthen your wrist and
> forearms.
> If fact trying to hold the angle will lead you down a path of
> golfing
> woes. The angle is retained by swinging against the lag and drag
> of
> the club.
I know that and I have previously posted to that effect. The point
of these two drills was to impart the feeling to the golfer (but you
neglected to quote that part of my post.) That is a common
teaching technique. There is nothing wrong with strengthening the
forearms and wrists so that's an added benefit of the drill.
>
>>Throw-ball drill: Set up over the ball, without a club, holding a
>>ball in the fingers of your right hand. Do a backswing with the
>>right side only (leave the left arm hanging) making sure you
>>complete your turn, your elbow is bent and your wrist is cocked -
>>as
>>if you were holding a club. Using the downswing motion throw the
>>ball and try to hit the ball on the ground. You'll find that you
>>won't be able to hit the ball, or the vicinity of the ball, unless
>>you delay the release.
>
> I should have stopped you because they've already heard it before,
> from me. Throwing a ball with your right hand at a ball on the
> ground
> is how a hitter directs the thrust of his #3 pressure point. It
> also
> retains the angle the right wrist bend. So as you can see it's
> proper
> technique that retains the angles not physical force.
>
I should have checked with you first so as not to waste everyone's
time and bandwidth. But I think it's easier to understand the way I
wrote it, anyway, and the result is the same.
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Mar 2007 04:19:19
From: David Laville
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Tue, 13 2007 23:51:02 -0500, "GaryC_47"
<garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>January 1988. May be difficult to locate that far back.
Write Golf Digest and tell them what you're looking for. They'll send
you a copy. They did for me.
>I know that and I have previously posted to that effect. The point
>of these two drills was to impart the feeling to the golfer (but you
>neglected to quote that part of my post.)
Because it was insignificant to what I was addressing. I was
addressing how swinging against lag and drag creates the wrist cock
and how you don't have to "hold" it. No where in my post did I
address feel.
>That is a common
>teaching technique. There is nothing wrong with strengthening the
>forearms and wrists so that's an added benefit of the drill.
So if we swing according to physics why is it a benefit to strengthen
something we don't use?
>I should have checked with you first so as not to waste everyone's
>time and bandwidth.
Maybe you should have.
> But I think it's easier to understand the way I
>wrote it, anyway, and the result is the same.
How do you know it's easier to understand, you have no idea what I
wrote about it previously?
David Laville, G.S.E.M.
The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor
TB-8982
|
| | | | |
Date: 20 Mar 2007 20:44:59
From: GaryC_47
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"David Laville" <dlaville@worldnet.att.net > wrote in message
news:ittev2pv97aqopfv60qcitr7pomfuqmrsi@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 2007 23:51:02 -0500, "GaryC_47"
> <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>January 1988. May be difficult to locate that far back.
>
> Write Golf Digest and tell them what you're looking for. They'll
> send
> you a copy. They did for me.
Yes, thanks. I have placed an order. I'm not sure any more if it is
relevant since I have now seen with my own eyes a robot doing the
comparison with a Trackman showing the results. No question about
the results. That and the fact that every other scientific document
I have seen points to the perimeter weighted club being "more
forgiving" leads me to believe that the Golf Digest article was
incorrect. And then there's the physics aspect of it, of course. I
doubt that even Golf Digest can break the laws of physics.
>
>>I know that and I have previously posted to that effect. The
>>point
>>of these two drills was to impart the feeling to the golfer (but
>>you
>>neglected to quote that part of my post.)
>
> Because it was insignificant to what I was addressing. I was
> addressing how swinging against lag and drag creates the wrist
> cock
> and how you don't have to "hold" it. No where in my post did I
> address feel.
It was significant to what I was addressing. In teaching it is
often important to get the student to "feel" what a move feels like,
depending of course on how the student learns. Some need to "see"
it, so video becomes important. But if you teach golf you are aware
of that.
>
>>That is a common
>>teaching technique. There is nothing wrong with strengthening the
>>forearms and wrists so that's an added benefit of the drill.
>
> So if we swing according to physics why is it a benefit to
> strengthen
> something we don't use?
Because, like it or not, the wrists and forearms are used when you
play golf. I played this weekend in rough that was so thick and
tough that my left wrist was aching after the round. Wish I was
stronger, so I am working on it.
>
>>I should have checked with you first so as not to waste everyone's
>>time and bandwidth.
>
> Maybe you should have.
Sarcasm to sarcasm. No need to comment further. It's not my goal to
fight with you.
>
>> But I think it's easier to understand the way I
>>wrote it, anyway, and the result is the same.
>
> How do you know it's easier to understand, you have no idea what I
> wrote about it previously?
It was just a cheap shot at your TGM terminology, which often is
difficult for the uninitiated to understand. But you know that. My
apologies.
Gary
|
| | | | | |
Date: 21 Mar 2007 02:21:57
From: David Laville
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Tue, 20 2007 20:44:59 -0500, "GaryC_47"
<garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>Yes, thanks. I have placed an order. I'm not sure any more if it is
>relevant since I have now seen with my own eyes a robot doing the
>comparison with a Trackman showing the results. No question about
>the results. That and the fact that every other scientific document
>I have seen points to the perimeter weighted club being "more
>forgiving" leads me to believe that the Golf Digest article was
>incorrect. And then there's the physics aspect of it, of course. I
>doubt that even Golf Digest can break the laws of physics.
What do they mean by more forgiven? Cavity backed clubs twist less on
off center hits giving the sensation the sweetspot is larger. Fact is
you can't increase the size of the sweetspot, only the illusion of it.
So by more forgiven do they mean the gin of error for missing the
sweetspot is more for a cavity back than blade?
The Golf Digest article concluded blades were twice as accurate as
cavity backs because of the perimeter weighting and that it worked
against the golfer rather than for him on off center hits. Honestly I
don't care. I like blades and hit near the sweetspot every time.
What type of club is more forgiving doesn't concern me.
>It was significant to what I was addressing. In teaching it is
>often important to get the student to "feel" what a move feels like,
>depending of course on how the student learns. Some need to "see"
>it, so video becomes important. But if you teach golf you are aware
>of that.
You can't teach feel. You teach the student a motion and let him
derive his own feel from that motion. What I feel you may not.
Mechanics produce, feel reproduces.
>Sarcasm to sarcasm. No need to comment further. It's not my goal to
>fight with you.
My point was don't think you're going to come in this group and knock
everyone's socks off with your knowledge. With all due respect I find
it to be nothing more than you can read on the other golf discussion
forums.
David Laville, G.S.E.M.
The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor
TB-8982
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 23 Mar 2007 17:04:47
From: GaryC_47
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"David Laville" <dlaville@worldnet.att.net > wrote in message
news:dm5103h00jviuddjon01nbpld72th84h0l@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 2007 20:44:59 -0500, "GaryC_47"
> <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Yes, thanks. I have placed an order. I'm not sure any more if it
>>is
>>relevant since I have now seen with my own eyes a robot doing the
>>comparison with a Trackman showing the results. No question about
>>the results. That and the fact that every other scientific
>>document
>>I have seen points to the perimeter weighted club being "more
>>forgiving" leads me to believe that the Golf Digest article was
>>incorrect. And then there's the physics aspect of it, of course. I
>>doubt that even Golf Digest can break the laws of physics.
>
> What do they mean by more forgiven? Cavity backed clubs twist
> less on
> off center hits giving the sensation the sweetspot is larger.
> Fact is
> you can't increase the size of the sweetspot, only the illusion of
> it.
> So by more forgiven do they mean the gin of error for missing
> the
> sweetspot is more for a cavity back than blade?
>
> The Golf Digest article concluded blades were twice as accurate as
> cavity backs because of the perimeter weighting and that it worked
> against the golfer rather than for him on off center hits.
> Honestly I
> don't care. I like blades and hit near the sweetspot every time.
> What type of club is more forgiving doesn't concern me.
It's all about inertia isn't it? The Golf Digest article/study was
obviously flawed. But it was you, and your buddy Brad, who have been
using the GD article to further the misconception that blades are
more accurate than cavity backs on off-center hits. I'm sure you
aren't still using a blade putter are you? Anyway it appears that
you may be admitting that you may have been wrong to base your
arguments on
one 20 year old article when all the evidence, and science, says the
opposite.
>
>>It was significant to what I was addressing. In teaching it is
>>often important to get the student to "feel" what a move feels
>>like,
>>depending of course on how the student learns. Some need to "see"
>>it, so video becomes important. But if you teach golf you are
>>aware
>>of that.
>
> You can't teach feel. You teach the student a motion and let him
> derive his own feel from that motion. What I feel you may not.
> Mechanics produce, feel reproduces.
So you don't actually teach, then? I've asked you about that at
least twice in the past and you've ignored my question each time.
>
>>Sarcasm to sarcasm. No need to comment further. It's not my goal
>>to
>>fight with you.
>
> My point was don't think you're going to come in this group and
> knock
> everyone's socks off with your knowledge. With all due respect I
> find
> it to be nothing more than you can read on the other golf
> discussion
> forums.
What's your problem David? I have been reading RSG for more than 6
years and don't read other golf discussion boards. I could care less
about anyone's socks. My pursuits are more about personal enjoyment
than Internet competitiveness. I don't have a clue why you would
make such a rek, other than maybe you feel threatened as the
dogmatic guru of RSG? With "all due respect" you know nothing about
my knowledge but I assure you it is far more extensive than you see
here and it doesn't come from a book.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Apr 2007 22:55:14
From: David Laville
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Fri, 23 2007 17:04:47 -0500, "GaryC_47"
<garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>> The Golf Digest article concluded blades were twice as accurate as
>> cavity backs because of the perimeter weighting and that it worked
>> against the golfer rather than for him on off center hits.
>> Honestly I
>> don't care. I like blades and hit near the sweetspot every time.
>> What type of club is more forgiving doesn't concern me.
>
>It's all about inertia isn't it? The Golf Digest article/study was
>obviously flawed.
I don't believe it was because I haven't seen any other evidence to
the contrary. Do you have any evidence to show the GD article was
flawed? BTW, GD didn't conduct the test they only published the
findings. If you want to argue something at least know what you're
arguing.
>But it was you, and your buddy Brad, who have been
>using the GD article to further the misconception that blades are
>more accurate than cavity backs on off-center hits.
What misconception? I read the test results from an independent
testing company and that is what I go by. Like you I once believed
cavity backs were more accurate because of the keting hype.
However unlike you I was able to think for myself when I saw
contradicting evidence.
>I'm sure you
>aren't still using a blade putter are you?
No I don't but I thought we were talking about irons. Do you want to
stay on topic or change the subject?
>Anyway it appears that
>you may be admitting that you may have been wrong to base your
>arguments on
>one 20 year old article when all the evidence, and science, says the
>opposite.
What evidence? You keep talking about it and I keep waiting to see
it.
>> You can't teach feel. You teach the student a motion and let him
>> derive his own feel from that motion. What I feel you may not.
>> Mechanics produce, feel reproduces.
>
>So you don't actually teach, then? I've asked you about that at
>least twice in the past and you've ignored my question each time.
No I don't teach. I prefer not too.
>>>Sarcasm to sarcasm. No need to comment further. It's not my goal
>>>to
>>>fight with you.
>>
>> My point was don't think you're going to come in this group and
>> knock
>> everyone's socks off with your knowledge. With all due respect I
>> find
>> it to be nothing more than you can read on the other golf
>> discussion
>> forums.
>
>What's your problem David? I have been reading RSG for more than 6
>years and don't read other golf discussion boards.
I didn't say you did. I said your knowledge is nothing more than you
can read on the other golf discussion forums.
>My pursuits are more about personal enjoyment
>than Internet competitiveness.
Then why are you so concerned with what the GD article said and if
Brad and I are wrong? Didn't you just say your pursuits are more
about personal enjoyment?
> I don't have a clue why you would
>make such a rek, other than maybe you feel threatened as the
>dogmatic guru of RSG?
Threatened? Who's going to threaten me in this group? You, a guy
who believes keting hype and uses driving range theory based on
feel?
>With "all due respect" you know nothing about
>my knowledge but I assure you it is far more extensive than you see
>here
I sure hope so because I see very little here.
>and it doesn't come from a book.
No kidding, it comes from empirical knowledge based on feel that's why
you mentioned teaching by feel. Most of my knowledge comes from a book
and I'll debate you any day you want. In fact lets start now, tell me
everything you know about the right arm action in the swing, lets see
if there's anything I can't add to it.........
David Laville, G.S.E.M.
The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor
TB-8982
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Apr 2007 02:32:06
From: GaryC_47
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"David Laville" <dlaville@worldnet.att.net > wrote in message
news:1cm51359krj1ckv915cjnpmu28blr02slk@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 23 2007 17:04:47 -0500, "GaryC_47"
> <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> The Golf Digest article concluded blades were twice as accurate
>>> as
>>> cavity backs because of the perimeter weighting and that it
>>> worked
>>> against the golfer rather than for him on off center hits.
>>> Honestly I
>>> don't care. I like blades and hit near the sweetspot every
>>> time.
>>> What type of club is more forgiving doesn't concern me.
>>
>>It's all about inertia isn't it? The Golf Digest article/study
>>was
>>obviously flawed.
>
> I don't believe it was because I haven't seen any other evidence
> to
> the contrary. Do you have any evidence to show the GD article was
> flawed? BTW, GD didn't conduct the test they only published the
> findings. If you want to argue something at least know what
> you're
> arguing.
Physics, David. Science. Logic. Higher MOI resists twisting more on
off center hits resulting in better accuracy. That applies to tennis
rackets, baseball bats, square headed drivers and hammers. If you
can't see that...
I haven't received my copy of the article from GD yet so I went
looking for it on the net and I found a very similar thread to this
one in the google archives of rsg.
Here's what you wrote 6 years ago.
"This is the test results some of you asked about. With the help of
True Temper's swing machine and a major golf club manufacturer that
carried both blades and cavity backs in its line of clubs test were
conducted on center and off center hits. The test did not specify
the
manufacturer or line of clubs used. The test used two 5-irons of
standard length, TT Dynamic Gold S300 shafts, lofts of 29.25
degrees,
lies of 60 degrees and swing weights of D-1.
Cavity back and blade irons produced the same results in shot
accuracy
when hit on the sweet spot, the exception was the cavity backs had a
slight distance advantage of less than three yards. However, shots
hit on the toe of cavity backed irons landed up to 30 yards right of
the intended target. This compares to the blade irons which landed
20 yards to the right of target. Shots hit on the heel the cavity
back clubs produced shots up to 50 yards left of the target, whereas
the blades were only 20 yards off-line to the left."
The clubs are not identified. The testing methodology is not
detailed. The numbers don't make sense.
>
>>But it was you, and your buddy Brad, who have been
>>using the GD article to further the misconception that blades are
>>more accurate than cavity backs on off-center hits.
>
> What misconception? I read the test results from an independent
> testing company and that is what I go by. Like you I once
> believed
> cavity backs were more accurate because of the keting hype.
> However unlike you I was able to think for myself when I saw
> contradicting evidence.
I will disregard your obvious personal affront.
I have posted on my website scanned excerpts from two papers which
were published in the "Golf the Scientific Way" 1994 edition which I
have quoted from previously. One is by Titleist senior R&D
engineers, the second by the engineer in charge of golf club R&D for
Mizuno. You can view them at http://pages.infinit.net/garyc/
Please take the trouble to read those two articles. There are more
that reach the same conclusions if you still think that it is
keting hype. Remember these two articles are from the premier
"blade" OEM's. I'm interested to hear your comments. Compare the
number of yards off-line from the Titleist tests to your GD tests.
Size of the club head also affects accuracy. It isn't in the part of
the article I posted, but the Titleist tests showed that a 17%
increase in club face size resulted in a 20% increase in accuracy,
measured in terms of landing area. So larger, perimeter weighted,
cavity back clubs, the so called "game improvement clubs", are
logically more "forgiving" than blades.
>
>>I'm sure you
>>aren't still using a blade putter are you?
>
> No I don't but I thought we were talking about irons. Do you want
> to
> stay on topic or change the subject?
Moment of Inertia applies the same to iron heads as it does to
putter heads and wood heads as I'm sure you know. Topic has not
changed. Please don't play word games.
>
>>Anyway it appears that
>>you may be admitting that you may have been wrong to base your
>>arguments on
>>one 20 year old article when all the evidence, and science, says
>>the
>>opposite.
>
> What evidence? You keep talking about it and I keep waiting to
> see
> it.
Read the articles.
I've also witnessed a robot comparison test, using a Trackman to
plot ball flight and dispersion, two weeks ago in Phoenix.
>
>>> You can't teach feel. You teach the student a motion and let
>>> him
>>> derive his own feel from that motion. What I feel you may not.
>>> Mechanics produce, feel reproduces.
>>
>>So you don't actually teach, then? I've asked you about that at
>>least twice in the past and you've ignored my question each time.
>
> No I don't teach. I prefer not too.
That explains a lot.
>
>>>>Sarcasm to sarcasm. No need to comment further. It's not my goal
>>>>to
>>>>fight with you.
>>>
>>> My point was don't think you're going to come in this group and
>>> knock
>>> everyone's socks off with your knowledge. With all due respect
>>> I
>>> find
>>> it to be nothing more than you can read on the other golf
>>> discussion
>>> forums.
>>
>>What's your problem David? I have been reading RSG for more than
>>6
>>years and don't read other golf discussion boards.
>
> I didn't say you did. I said your knowledge is nothing more than
> you
> can read on the other golf discussion forums.
>
>>My pursuits are more about personal enjoyment
>>than Internet competitiveness.
>
> Then why are you so concerned with what the GD article said and if
> Brad and I are wrong? Didn't you just say your pursuits are more
> about personal enjoyment?
I'd prefer not to participate in this kind of discussion, but I felt
what you were saying was incorrect. I know how concerned you are
about your credibility.
>
>> I don't have a clue why you would
>>make such a rek, other than maybe you feel threatened as the
>>dogmatic guru of RSG?
>
> Threatened? Who's going to threaten me in this group? You, a
> guy
> who believes keting hype and uses driving range theory based on
> feel?
>
>>With "all due respect" you know nothing about
>>my knowledge but I assure you it is far more extensive than you
>>see
>>here
>
> I sure hope so because I see very little here.
>
>>and it doesn't come from a book.
>
> No kidding, it comes from empirical knowledge based on feel that's
> why
> you mentioned teaching by feel. Most of my knowledge comes from a
> book
> and I'll debate you any day you want. In fact lets start now,
> tell me
> everything you know about the right arm action in the swing, lets
> see
> if there's anything I can't add to it.........
When I mentioned feel I stated that "some" students learn better
that way. Some don't. See, if you taught you would know that. I've
read books as well, for theory, but the most practical knowledge has
come from experience with both teachers and students.
I'd say the right arm serves to connect the right hand to the right
shoulder. Can you add to that?
I have no interest in debating with you. I'm sure you know that
little book backwards by now and I don't pretend to know all that
stuff and it's already rather unpleasant reading your disparaging
reks, out of context quotes, etc. So no thanks, you win that
one.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Apr 2007 00:57:59
From: David Laville
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 02:32:06 -0400, "GaryC_47"
<garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>The clubs are not identified.
They don't have to be identified. They were testing blade vs cavity
back not brand vs. brand.
>The testing methodology is not
>detailed.
You were reading my quick over view of the article not the article
itself.
>The numbers don't make sense.
Because they don't support the conclusion you want.
>I have posted on my website scanned excerpts from two papers which
>were published in the "Golf the Scientific Way" 1994 edition which I
>have quoted from previously. One is by Titleist senior R&D
>engineers, the second by the engineer in charge of golf club R&D for
>Mizuno. You can view them at http://pages.infinit.net/garyc/
I read the article and no where were the clubs used identified.
Neither was the testing methodology. Why do you hold my results to
different standards than yours?
>Please take the trouble to read those two articles. There are more
>that reach the same conclusions if you still think that it is
>keting hype. Remember these two articles are from the premier
>"blade" OEM's. I'm interested to hear your comments. Compare the
>number of yards off-line from the Titleist tests to your GD tests.
Yes, your results were from OEM's; Titleist and Mizuno. Both of
these companies manufacturer blades and are trying to expand sales by
selling game improvement clubs, aka cavity backs, to high handicap
golfers. The GD article was by an independent testing company. I'll
stick with the results from an independent company over those from
club companies who can gain profit from the results.
>> No I don't teach. I prefer not too.
>
>That explains a lot.
It explains I have no desire to teach. I don't like it.
>When I mentioned feel I stated that "some" students learn better
>that way. Some don't. See, if you taught you would know that.
I don't have to teach to know teaching by feel is useless. The
pressure from the shaft on top of the swing feels different to a
hitter and swinger. Do you know the difference in the feel?
> I've
>read books as well, for theory,
That's the problem, you read books for theory rather than fact.
>but the most practical knowledge has
>come from experience with both teachers and students.
In this practical knowledge did you learn about the pressure at the
top the swing and how hitters and swingers use it differently? I'm
all ears......
>I'd say the right arm serves to connect the right hand to the right
>shoulder. Can you add to that?
I asked you to tell me everything you knew about the right arm action
in the swing. If the only thing you can tell me is the right arm
serves to connect the right hand to the right shoulder than you're
more clueless than I thought.
David Laville, G.S.E.M.
The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor
TB-8982
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 21:15:51
From: glfnaz
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"GaryC_47" <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:LaLJh.49198$df3.1338838@wagner.videotron.net...
>
> "David Laville" <dlaville@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:2vaev21msdei59ndaorlla4plqrsr58eqc@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 13 2007 10:04:17 -0500, "GaryC_47"
>> <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>Stop me if you've heard this one before:
>>>
>>>I was searching through our archives, looking for the late 90's
>>>issue of Golf Digest that contains the article that allegedly claims
>>>that muscleback clubs have better mishit dispersion than cavity
>>>backs,
>>
>> I believe the article was from the late 80's and the author was Lew
>> Fishman or Fishburn or something similar.
>
> January 1988. May be difficult to locate that far back.
>
>>
>>>Two-club drill: Grip two middle irons and take your normal stance.
>>>Go to the top of your backswing. From the top, slowly swing down and
>>>stop when your hands are about waist high, retaining the wristcock
>>>angle. Hold this position for a few seconds. Then swing through
>>>impact as fast as you can. This shows you where in the swing the
>>>release should be for max power and also strengthens your wrists and
>>>forearms.
>>
>> If you swing according to physics you don't need to physically retain
>> the wrist cock nor do you need to strengthen your wrist and forearms.
>> If fact trying to hold the angle will lead you down a path of golfing
>> woes. The angle is retained by swinging against the lag and drag of
>> the club.
>
> I know that and I have previously posted to that effect. The point of
> these two drills was to impart the feeling to the golfer (but you
> neglected to quote that part of my post.) That is a common teaching
> technique. There is nothing wrong with strengthening the forearms and
> wrists so that's an added benefit of the drill.
>
>>
>>>Throw-ball drill: Set up over the ball, without a club, holding a
>>>ball in the fingers of your right hand. Do a backswing with the
>>>right side only (leave the left arm hanging) making sure you
>>>complete your turn, your elbow is bent and your wrist is cocked - as
>>>if you were holding a club. Using the downswing motion throw the
>>>ball and try to hit the ball on the ground. You'll find that you
>>>won't be able to hit the ball, or the vicinity of the ball, unless
>>>you delay the release.
>>
>> I should have stopped you because they've already heard it before,
>> from me. Throwing a ball with your right hand at a ball on the ground
>> is how a hitter directs the thrust of his #3 pressure point. It also
>> retains the angle the right wrist bend. So as you can see it's proper
>> technique that retains the angles not physical force.
>>
>
> I should have checked with you first so as not to waste everyone's time
> and bandwidth. But I think it's easier to understand the way I wrote it,
> anyway, and the result is the same.
No, what you wrote was wrong.
You suggested the person cock the rt wrist. In fact, the rt wrist doesn't
cock--it bends, as David Laville correctly stated.
If the rt wrist cocks, it takes the sweet spot off the plane.
|
| |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 18:06:48
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"GaryC_47" <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:H3zJh.37100$df3.1016682@wagner.videotron.net...
> Dave
>
> Stop me if you've heard this one before:
>
> I was searching through our archives, looking for the late 90's
> issue of Golf Digest that contains the article that allegedly claims
> that muscleback clubs have better mishit dispersion than cavity
> backs, when I came across a couple of drills on delaying the release
> in an story on power by Jane Crafter. I have incorporated those
> drills into my spring training for the past three weeks and they
> work quite well. The premise is that it's hard to delay the release
> if you don't know how it should feel. (Unfortunately I wasn't able
> to find the muscleback article, but we are missing a few issues, so
> that search continues.)
>
> Two-club drill: Grip two middle irons and take your normal stance.
> Go to the top of your backswing. From the top, slowly swing down and
> stop when your hands are about waist high, retaining the wristcock
> angle. Hold this position for a few seconds. Then swing through
> impact as fast as you can. This shows you where in the swing the
> release should be for max power and also strengthens your wrists and
> forearms.
>
> Throw-ball drill: Set up over the ball, without a club, holding a
> ball in the fingers of your right hand. Do a backswing with the
> right side only (leave the left arm hanging) making sure you
> complete your turn, your elbow is bent and your wrist is cocked - as
> if you were holding a club. Using the downswing motion throw the
> ball and try to hit the ball on the ground. You'll find that you
> won't be able to hit the ball, or the vicinity of the ball, unless
> you delay the release. This gives you the sensation of "waiting for
> it." I have found that this exercise has helped me with my timing
> as I sometimes fight a tendancy to get too fast after the
> transition.
>
> If you try these drills I'd be curious to know your results.
>
> Gary
>
Thanks, Gary. If you ever run across the article, I'd be interested. I've
heard it referenced, but have never read it. And it is interesting that the
most data that I have is a 1990's muscleback (Hogan Apex Channelback) vs. a
1990's cavity back (Tommy Armour Silver Scots).
Right now I've got a strategy that I'm working on regarding release. It is
based on the interesting observation that my release timing is quite good
with my practice swing. The basic steps are:
1) There is some 'just plain wrong' body motion in my 'real swing'. I
believe that it is a result of compensations to better accomodate my 'real
swing' flaws. But I also believe that these motions make a proper release
almost impossible. So fix this first.
2) "Sneak up" on the problem. I seem to be able to hit partial wedge shots
with a decent release (or at least a decent impact position). So I'm going
to make the longest LW swing I can with a proper release and work on making
that swing incrementally hit the ball further. But #1 has to be fixed first.
I like the idea of combining a pump drill with a heavy club. I don't know if
it will solve my problem, but it is very useful I believe. The ball throw
thing is probably 'too much different' from a real swing to help me - but it
may well help others. Heck, I can make all the "good" practice swings in the
world. But they seem to have no closer relationship to my real swing than
does Tiger Woods' practice swing have a meaningful relationship to my real
swing.
David Laville made an interesting suggestion a while back. It was to just
take a wedge (or whatever) and just throw the butt end into the ground.
Forgot hitting the ball right - just try to drive the butt into the ground.
I would have sworn that I did this. But when I looked on video I was really
surprised at what I saw. My release was the same but I had this HUGE hold
off in my follow through. What you sense and what really is are often very
different.
But if I don't make progress in a few months I will say to hell with it.
I've been dorking with my swing for way too long now. It may well just be
time to learn to hit the ball as best I can with what I've got. Nobody has a
perfect swing.
Thanks.
dave
|
| | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 17:45:47
From: GaryC_47
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote in message
news:YKBJh.9460$PL.3454@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "GaryC_47" <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:H3zJh.37100$df3.1016682@wagner.videotron.net...
>> Dave
>>
>> Stop me if you've heard this one before:
>>
>> I was searching through our archives, looking for the late 90's
>> issue of Golf Digest that contains the article that allegedly
>> claims
>> that muscleback clubs have better mishit dispersion than cavity
>> backs, when I came across a couple of drills on delaying the
>> release
>> in an story on power by Jane Crafter. I have incorporated those
>> drills into my spring training for the past three weeks and they
>> work quite well. The premise is that it's hard to delay the
>> release
>> if you don't know how it should feel. (Unfortunately I wasn't
>> able
>> to find the muscleback article, but we are missing a few issues,
>> so
>> that search continues.)
>>
>> Two-club drill: Grip two middle irons and take your normal
>> stance.
>> Go to the top of your backswing. From the top, slowly swing down
>> and
>> stop when your hands are about waist high, retaining the
>> wristcock
>> angle. Hold this position for a few seconds. Then swing through
>> impact as fast as you can. This shows you where in the swing the
>> release should be for max power and also strengthens your wrists
>> and
>> forearms.
>>
>> Throw-ball drill: Set up over the ball, without a club, holding
>> a
>> ball in the fingers of your right hand. Do a backswing with the
>> right side only (leave the left arm hanging) making sure you
>> complete your turn, your elbow is bent and your wrist is cocked -
>> as
>> if you were holding a club. Using the downswing motion throw the
>> ball and try to hit the ball on the ground. You'll find that you
>> won't be able to hit the ball, or the vicinity of the ball,
>> unless
>> you delay the release. This gives you the sensation of "waiting
>> for
>> it." I have found that this exercise has helped me with my
>> timing
>> as I sometimes fight a tendancy to get too fast after the
>> transition.
>>
>> If you try these drills I'd be curious to know your results.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>
> Thanks, Gary. If you ever run across the article, I'd be
> interested. I've
> heard it referenced, but have never read it. And it is interesting
> that the
> most data that I have is a 1990's muscleback (Hogan Apex
> Channelback) vs. a
> 1990's cavity back (Tommy Armour Silver Scots).
When I find it I'll let you know.
>
> Right now I've got a strategy that I'm working on regarding
> release. It is
> based on the interesting observation that my release timing is
> quite good
> with my practice swing. The basic steps are:
>
> 1) There is some 'just plain wrong' body motion in my 'real
> swing'. I
> believe that it is a result of compensations to better accomodate
> my 'real
> swing' flaws. But I also believe that these motions make a proper
> release
> almost impossible. So fix this first.
Do you have a new swing video since your leg problem is resolved?
I've never seen a complete swing from setup to finish, nor a swing
from the side, down the line. I suspect that you are too upright,
don't have enough knee flex and possibly have too wide a stance.
Your right foot is clearly too square - could be open about 15-20
deg to allow you to turn back better. Can't see your grip properly.
If you'd send me a couple of avi's I'd like to look at them in
detail. There's no such thing as "just plain wrong" - just "some
adjustments required."
>
> 2) "Sneak up" on the problem. I seem to be able to hit partial
> wedge shots
> with a decent release (or at least a decent impact position). So
> I'm going
> to make the longest LW swing I can with a proper release and work
> on making
> that swing incrementally hit the ball further. But #1 has to be
> fixed first.
>
> I like the idea of combining a pump drill with a heavy club. I
> don't know if
> it will solve my problem, but it is very useful I believe. The
> ball throw
> thing is probably 'too much different' from a real swing to help
> me - but it
> may well help others. Heck, I can make all the "good" practice
> swings in the
> world. But they seem to have no closer relationship to my real
> swing than
> does Tiger Woods' practice swing have a meaningful relationship to
> my real
> swing.
Actually the ball throw thing is probably more useful than the pump
drill. Don't worry about it being different from a real swing - it
isn't. Just try it. You can do it in the backyard anytime. Start by
throwing a ball against the wall then bend over and throw it at the
ground. Make sure you transfer your weight and turn.
>
> David Laville made an interesting suggestion a while back. It was
> to just
> take a wedge (or whatever) and just throw the butt end into the
> ground.
> Forgot hitting the ball right - just try to drive the butt into
> the ground.
That's a similar move to the ball throw.
>
> I would have sworn that I did this. But when I looked on video I
> was really
> surprised at what I saw. My release was the same but I had this
> HUGE hold
> off in my follow through. What you sense and what really is are
> often very
> different.
>
> But if I don't make progress in a few months I will say to hell
> with it.
> I've been dorking with my swing for way too long now. It may well
> just be
> time to learn to hit the ball as best I can with what I've got.
> Nobody has a
> perfect swing.
>
You're such a challenge :)
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 23:41:37
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"GaryC_47" <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:CQFJh.111959$1%3.1385419@weber.videotron.net...
>
> "Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote in message
> news:YKBJh.9460$PL.3454@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "GaryC_47" <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:H3zJh.37100$df3.1016682@wagner.videotron.net...
> >> Dave
> >>
> >> Stop me if you've heard this one before:
> >>
> >> I was searching through our archives, looking for the late 90's
> >> issue of Golf Digest that contains the article that allegedly
> >> claims
> >> that muscleback clubs have better mishit dispersion than cavity
> >> backs, when I came across a couple of drills on delaying the
> >> release
> >> in an story on power by Jane Crafter. I have incorporated those
> >> drills into my spring training for the past three weeks and they
> >> work quite well. The premise is that it's hard to delay the
> >> release
> >> if you don't know how it should feel. (Unfortunately I wasn't
> >> able
> >> to find the muscleback article, but we are missing a few issues,
> >> so
> >> that search continues.)
> >>
> >> Two-club drill: Grip two middle irons and take your normal
> >> stance.
> >> Go to the top of your backswing. From the top, slowly swing down
> >> and
> >> stop when your hands are about waist high, retaining the
> >> wristcock
> >> angle. Hold this position for a few seconds. Then swing through
> >> impact as fast as you can. This shows you where in the swing the
> >> release should be for max power and also strengthens your wrists
> >> and
> >> forearms.
> >>
> >> Throw-ball drill: Set up over the ball, without a club, holding
> >> a
> >> ball in the fingers of your right hand. Do a backswing with the
> >> right side only (leave the left arm hanging) making sure you
> >> complete your turn, your elbow is bent and your wrist is cocked -
> >> as
> >> if you were holding a club. Using the downswing motion throw the
> >> ball and try to hit the ball on the ground. You'll find that you
> >> won't be able to hit the ball, or the vicinity of the ball,
> >> unless
> >> you delay the release. This gives you the sensation of "waiting
> >> for
> >> it." I have found that this exercise has helped me with my
> >> timing
> >> as I sometimes fight a tendancy to get too fast after the
> >> transition.
> >>
> >> If you try these drills I'd be curious to know your results.
> >>
> >> Gary
> >>
> >
> > Thanks, Gary. If you ever run across the article, I'd be
> > interested. I've
> > heard it referenced, but have never read it. And it is interesting
> > that the
> > most data that I have is a 1990's muscleback (Hogan Apex
> > Channelback) vs. a
> > 1990's cavity back (Tommy Armour Silver Scots).
>
> When I find it I'll let you know.
>
> >
> > Right now I've got a strategy that I'm working on regarding
> > release. It is
> > based on the interesting observation that my release timing is
> > quite good
> > with my practice swing. The basic steps are:
> >
> > 1) There is some 'just plain wrong' body motion in my 'real
> > swing'. I
> > believe that it is a result of compensations to better accomodate
> > my 'real
> > swing' flaws. But I also believe that these motions make a proper
> > release
> > almost impossible. So fix this first.
>
> Do you have a new swing video since your leg problem is resolved?
> I've never seen a complete swing from setup to finish, nor a swing
> from the side, down the line. I suspect that you are too upright,
> don't have enough knee flex and possibly have too wide a stance.
> Your right foot is clearly too square - could be open about 15-20
> deg to allow you to turn back better. Can't see your grip properly.
> If you'd send me a couple of avi's I'd like to look at them in
> detail. There's no such thing as "just plain wrong" - just "some
> adjustments required."
>
SNIP
Gary, I'll meet you halfway here as I am pretty much on a path that I think
is best, although my confidence in achieving serious improvement is less
than 25%. I don't have a "know problem", I have a "do problem".
Below are two swing sequences where "RSwing" is a real swing at a real golf
ball (using a 3i replacement hybrid with a 3i-like shaft"). PSwing is a
practice swing with the same club and no ball.
The differences are painfully obvious. I have totally failed at trying to
"take my practice swing to the golf ball". And I have tried a lot of things.
My practice swing relates to my real swing just like my practice swing
relates to my free throw shooting. They are totally different and working on
one has little to nothing to do with the other. I tend to view drills for
myself similarly, despite the fact that I think that for the golfing
population at large they can be useful.
So I'm taking the differences between the two swings a piece at a time. The
body rotation issue should leap out at you when you look at the two swings.
The "green tee" thing is set to horizontally cross the top of my head and
vertically intersect my nose at address. It is interesting that the little
head rise flaw shows up in both swings. I'm working on that despite the fact
that it shows up both swings.
Trust me - minor adjustments like setup are not a solution to this issue,
whether my current setup is correct or not.
The links are
http://members.tripod.com/DaveLeeMn/PSwing.jpg
http://members.tripod.com/DaveLeeMn/RSwing.jpg
Thanks for the input/interest.
dave
ps. Much of this might well be due to (IMHO) exceptionally poor
proprioceptive senses. This came to my attention after working with my
(remote) teaching pro on intermediate wedges. Much like Pelz he suggested
calibration of a "7:30 on the clock" backswing shot, 9:00, 10:30, and full
swing. My 9:00 swing is basically 10:20 where my 10:30 swing is about
10:30. I do hit the ball a good 15 yards different with these two swings,
they are consistently very slightly different. and my sense is that they are
of much different length. But they look identical short of close video
examination (that just isn't what I sense). FWIW, I'm not particularly
uncoordinated - in fact probably above average in that respect. But my
proprioceptive senses seem to me to be poor, regardless.
|
| | | | |
Date: 14 Mar 2007 09:03:36
From: GaryC_47
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote in message
news:REGJh.12569$Jl.11366@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
snip
>
> Trust me - minor adjustments like setup are not a solution to this
> issue,
> whether my current setup is correct or not.
>
Trust me Dave. Setup is not a minor adjustment. It's the key to the
entire swing.
BTW it looks like you are locking your right leg at the top of the
backswing. I gotta go catch a plane.
Gary
|
| | | | | |
Date: 14 Mar 2007 19:24:12
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"GaryC_47" <garyc_48_minus_1@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1hTJh.131674$1%3.1706379@weber.videotron.net...
>
> "Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote in message
> news:REGJh.12569$Jl.11366@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> snip
> >
> > Trust me - minor adjustments like setup are not a solution to this
> > issue,
> > whether my current setup is correct or not.
> >
>
> Trust me Dave. Setup is not a minor adjustment. It's the key to the
> entire swing.
>
> BTW it looks like you are locking your right leg at the top of the
> backswing. I gotta go catch a plane.
>
> Gary
>
>
Didn't mean to say that setup is minor. Just saying that I do what I do with
any setup you give me (stick my left big toe in my right ear - whatever).
I'm interested in your right leg comment.
http://members.tripod.com/DaveLeeMn/Top.jpg
is a better picture (taken at a different time).
dave
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 14 Mar 2007 23:12:23
From: David Laville
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Wed, 14 2007 19:24:12 GMT, "Dave Lee"
<DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote:
>Didn't mean to say that setup is minor. Just saying that I do what I do with
>any setup you give me (stick my left big toe in my right ear - whatever).
>
>I'm interested in your right leg comment.
>
>http://members.tripod.com/DaveLeeMn/Top.jpg
>
>is a better picture (taken at a different time).
If it's the same amount of flex you had at address there isn't a
problem.
David Laville, G.S.E.M.
The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor
TB-8982
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 14 Mar 2007 23:20:59
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"David Laville" <dlaville@worldnet.att.net > wrote in message
news:n90hv29p6ef47epsp7ioul7lb7649vnnkj@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 14 2007 19:24:12 GMT, "Dave Lee"
> <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote:
>
> >Didn't mean to say that setup is minor. Just saying that I do what I do
with
> >any setup you give me (stick my left big toe in my right ear - whatever).
> >
> >I'm interested in your right leg comment.
> >
> >http://members.tripod.com/DaveLeeMn/Top.jpg
> >
> >is a better picture (taken at a different time).
>
> If it's the same amount of flex you had at address there isn't a
> problem.
>
snip
They are pretty much the same - thanks.
dave
|
| | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 12:20:39
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Tue, 13 2007 18:06:48 GMT, "Dave Lee"
<DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote:
>1) There is some 'just plain wrong' body motion in my 'real swing'. I
>believe that it is a result of compensations to better accomodate my 'real
>swing' flaws. But I also believe that these motions make a proper release
>almost impossible. So fix this first.
In a couple of hours I will be taking a 9 hole playing lesson. I
wonder if my "real" swing is noticeably different from my range swing.
If there is a difference that is not a result of playing a full round,
the pro should notice.
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 21:48:02
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
"Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net > wrote in message
news:3nqdv25vrvkokd03kgaa5d70qgqqsmiqbk@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 2007 18:06:48 GMT, "Dave Lee"
> <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote:
>
> >1) There is some 'just plain wrong' body motion in my 'real swing'. I
> >believe that it is a result of compensations to better accomodate my
'real
> >swing' flaws. But I also believe that these motions make a proper release
> >almost impossible. So fix this first.
>
> In a couple of hours I will be taking a 9 hole playing lesson. I
> wonder if my "real" swing is noticeably different from my range swing.
> If there is a difference that is not a result of playing a full round,
> the pro should notice.
For me my 'real swing' on the range and course are the same. The
differentiation comes with practice swings - no ball.
dave
|
| | | | |
Date: 14 Mar 2007 09:01:51
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Search for the perfect release - ping Dave Lee
|
On Tue, 13 2007 21:48:02 GMT, "Dave Lee"
<DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote:
>> In a couple of hours I will be taking a 9 hole playing lesson. I
>> wonder if my "real" swing is noticeably different from my range swing.
>> If there is a difference that is not a result of playing a full round,
>> the pro should notice.
>
>For me my 'real swing' on the range and course are the same. The
>differentiation comes with practice swings - no ball.
My pro will give me a write-up tonight after work. Some of his
observations and recommendations yesterday's playing lesson include:
Take a real loose swing with good follow-through - this isn't supposed
to be like my real swing - it is a mindless swing to loosen myself up.
I had a couple of chips and a putt which were decelerating. Sometimes
when I think about other stuff I forget this.
The pin is farther away than most bogey golfers think - especially for
chips.
We really worked at estimating adjusted distances.
Remember to accelerate when hitting short shots. Choke down to
adjust a half club and swing my normal swing.
|
|
