Post by imperfectgolfer on Apr 12, 2011 10:43:36 GMT -5
I recently viewed an online video lesson given by Spencer Huggins to a forum member (at a cost of $25). It was extremely well done, and it is the best swing analysis that I have seen performed by a golf instructor, who is obviously very TGM-knowledgeable. At a cost of $25, it is a steal!
I do not personally know Spencer Huggins, but he represents the type of knowledgeable golf instructor that I can readily admire. Here is his home page.
Thanks Jeff for the kind words! ironically I did teach with Dan last year for 3 months in San Diego and we both come from a similar background. I became an AI right before Dan and we've come up together, but I've been mainly influenced by David during my time with him, Mac, TGM and of course a little self study. I totally respect Dan as he's a close friend , but my time at Campbell gave me lots of opportunity!
I think that it is a superb swing and it epitomizes the swing style that I recommend on my golf website. You seem to have a rightwards-centralised backswing action swing style - where your simply rotate around your rightwards tilted spine. I see no evidence of any arch-extension of the thoracic spine that is seen in Foley/S&T golfers.
You seem to have a traditional TGM swinger's action where you employ a takeaway swivel action, release swivel action and a HH action. You seem to be tracing the baseline of the inclined plane (ball-target line) and therefore you have an on-plane swing, and I do not see any "artificial" attempt to use a CP-release or any "swinging left" phenomenon (a recent fad among certain golfers).
You seem to have a Hoganesque rotary pelvic motion and I do not see any S&T "butt-tuck-under-the spine" pelvic thrust action in your pelvic motion.
Do you agree with my description of your swing?
Considering that you have worked with Dan C, what are your opinions regarding the S&T swing? What do you think of my concerns regarding the back-unfriendly nature of the S&T swing, which is expressed in this review paper?
Thanks Jeff - glad you like my swing. I will clarify a little bit, I'm not sure I have as much swivel as you're seeing. I have a pretty turned grip (almost 45 degrees at times) 10-2-D style, which eliminates most of the start up swivel and release swivel associated with a 10-2-B grip. I also do you use an angled hinge so by TGM terms I don't have a finish swivel that rolls to the plane, exits more vertically. I do stay more centered as I have a MORAD background also. I wouldn't say it is my preference for everyone, but if someone is capable, I like centered. CP comes very tough to me because I have a hard time shifting down to the elbow plane, that's why you won't see me doing it. I will say the MORAD CP pattern is very very difficult for 95% of the population. It requires a great of deal of rhythm, sequencing, shifting, turning, and doing all those at proper speeds that start at different places...like I said, tough!
I did work with Dan, but like I said, nearly 99% of what I know has come from David, Mac, and TGM. Dan is a great teacher and I know most associate him with S&T, but he is very good at teaching the same way I do with multiple patterns and taking what you've got. Interestingly enough, the S&T pattern I teach (the few times I do) is much different from the very exaggerated look you see now. Mike actually worked for David, so David knows all the same stuff and saw the pattern be developed. It was actually much, much closer to MORAD then we see now as it has become somewhat distorted to the public a great deal because of golf forums. For instance, 6" of hip slide turned into 12", extend and stand up turned in to push your hips as far forward as humanly possible and extend. If you watch David's S&T pattern, it produces the same shot pattern, but within the original design. This by no means is a shot at S&T, it's simply an observation I've noticed with golf forums and information being shared in small pieces. The difference between CP, CF, Inline, and S&T patterns is much more minimal then people make it out to be. All in all, I have never personally seen someone have any trouble performing S&T, but I can totally see how if someone just makes an interpretation of the information without the proper demonstration and instruction, it 100% can lead to back trouble. I've had folks though that swing totally 90's style, that don't release there pelvis properly though and will run into the same issue.
Long story short, I've been very blessed at Campbell to learn a lot during my time there the last 3 1/2 years, I teach a combination of what someone brings me, there physical capabilities, and a little bit of there preference. I love talking and teaching golf swing, but most importantly to me is that there is still a "game" involved that we love to forget about - that's what it's all about!
Post by imperfectgolfer on Apr 14, 2011 10:57:38 GMT -5
Thanks for replying.
I agree that you must use less PA#3 because you use a stronger left hand grip, which implies that you have already pronated your left forearm at address. Nonetheless, from a biomechanical perspective, you are still using a swinger's takeaway swivel/release swivel action in your swing.
I also strongly prefer a centralised pivot action - like your swing and C Schwartzel's swing, Jason Day's swing and Adam Scott's swing. However, you/they are not vertical-centralised or leftwards-centralised as seen in the S&T swing.
You wrote-: "For instance, 6" of hip slide turned into 12", extend and stand up turned in to push your hips as far forward as humanly possible and extend."
I do not know who you believe is responsible for that "belief". I personally believe that it comes directly from B/P and his S&T affiliated instructors (eg. David Wedzik). B/P state in their book that one must thrust the pelvis left-laterally as far as it can go, and David Wedzik produced these S&T instructional videos.
I agree there is certainly a "swivel", just thought we were talking TGM terms. I would guess you kind of answered your own question about S&T a little. The only thing I would point out is if you asked Andy the actual numbers for hip slide, it wouldn't be as far forward as possible. There is an alignment for it, I think the danger saying that though is the average golf takes that 'feeling' and turns it into an actual swing. Many times I will do that with someone where I "spectrum" a problem by having them do an extreme, but once the correct alignment is getting close in swing we dial it down.
So I guess what I'm saying is, many of the forum readers take the feeling and make it real eventually....thereby overdoing it.
thought I would put my two cents in. I am another person with whom Spencer is working == also from Richie's forum. It was my lesson that Jeff M was commenting on in the first place that got this thread going. I think Spencer is terrific and VERY flexible. I love you Jeff but you have to give up this fixation with S&T. I agree there is a book and a video and what both show is pretty much what Jeff describes and derides -- with good reason. But the truth is there is also a 'practice' of teaching it that I assume is much more variable and flexible and open ended. All good instruction -- whatever the theory -- has this feature. It just has to in order to survive. That said, I came to Spencer somewhat MORADish and with a lot of TGM instruction and knowledge. I have found Spencer unparalleled in his flexibility, understanding and appreciation of what he is working with. He is also very positive -- which is not how I am inclined to treat myself. I sent him three sets of videos today so that we could choose a pattern together and build from the fundamentals of that pattern. He gave me his opinion, was open minded, and frankly convincing. I will send a video along to show what we have chosen and later an explanation of why