Post by imperfectgolfer on Mar 28, 2015 10:54:10 GMT -5
Richie Hunt has a blog called 3 jack blog and he writes informatively, and in a very level-headed way, about many topics related to the golf swing. In particular, he shows a high level of understanding regarding topics related to clubmaking and the topic of statistics related to the PGA tour performance of professional golfers, and he writes about these topics in a very informative manner. However, for some unknown reason, he seems to be incapable of understanding golf swing biomechanics. He has recently hitched his intellectual wagon re: golf swing biomechanics to KM's wagon train, and he is basically becoming the equivalent of a KM-groupie (KM-follower). Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to appreciate the fact that KM's opinions re: golf swing biomechanics are highly flawed and he is seemingly incapable of understanding why KM's opinions are biomechanically invalid.
In this thread, I will provide some examples of RH's lack of understanding of sound golf swing biomechanics.
See this 3jack blog.
3jack.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-dangers-of-looking-for-feels.html
In that blog, he talks about this video produced by Christo Garcia.
The video features Lee Namba who wants to acquire a more rotary pivot action (similar to the rotary pattern manifested by Keegan Bradley). Lee obviously doesn't understand golf biomechanics and he attempts to acquire a more rotary pivot action by "feel". RH is correctly critical of this approach and he correctly infers that "feel" must be preferably based on sound golf swing mechanics/biomechanics. The problem is that RH himself doesn't know what's sound golf swing biomechanics when it comes to the topic of a rotary style of pelvic motion.
RH states the following-: "First, let’s get to what Christo is essentially trying to work on and in effect, what Lee has been working on.
Christo is trying to get more pelvis rotation in the downswing into impact. It appears he understands that part of the issue is he ‘goat humps’ (aka early extension) and that prevents him from getting more pelvis rotation.
Christo has also been trying to get more lateral side bend of the torso in order to help with that pelvic rotation."
RH then posted this image from Phil Cheetham's PhD dissertation paper, and the 2nd image shows a golfer with a more open pelvis and more right lateral bend.
RH then wrongheadedly states-: "The idea behind the lateral side bend is that when done correctly and the hips are level (or the rear hip is higher than the front hip)…this creates an action where the pelvis will automatically rotate more."
In other words, RH is implying that pelvic rotary motion during the downswing is driven by the golfer first acquiring right lateral bend, which can then induce a rotary pelvic motion. This wrongheaded belief is derived from KM's personal interpretation of Serge Gracovetsky's "spine engine" belief-system - that the "spine engine" primarily drives the pelvic rotation that starts the downswing's kinematic pivot action. I have shown that this personal KM-belief is highly flawed, and without biomechanical merit, in topics number 1 and 6 of this review paper - perfectgolfswingreview.net/spinalmotion.htm
RH also stated the following regarding the acquisition of correct golf swing mechanics-:
"In Homer Kelley’s The Golfing Machine, he states that it is better to learn mechanics thru feel instead of feel thru mechanics. What this means is that Kelley believes that if you incorporate the right mechanics in your swing, you can eventually develop how that feels to YOU and then use those feels to replicate those mechanics.
Kelley advised that the golfer should start with ‘basic motion’ and work on that until they incorporate all of the mechanics properly on a consistent basis. Then Kelley advised to move onto ‘acquired motion’ and finally to ‘total motion.’
The difference we are seeing today between Kelley’s recommendation and what neurologist and skill acquisition experts is that they modern day neurologists and skill acquisition experts prefer that the golfer utilize swings at very slow speed and make sure they are utilizing the correct mechanics as the golfer swings the club slowly. When the golfer does use the right mechanics, then they make the swing a little faster and keep ramping up the speed as they get the mechanics correctly."
The problem with the i) HK and the ii) slow-mo approach is they are not necessarily based on a "correct" understanding of golf swing biomechanics. Homer Kelly never discussed the topic of golf swing biomechanics in his TGM book and he simply described different patterns of mechanical actions regarding different body parts. For example, he described pelvic motion as being a hip turn. So, his rotary style of hip turn was labelled standard (10-14-A) which he defined as follows-: "The Standard Hip Turn (of any length) is a free turn in both directions with a weight shift in both directions." Homer Kelley never described the biomechanics of how a golfer should perform a pelvic rotary motion (which can be performed with/without any weight shift). Therefore, Homer Kelley (and his TGM golf instructor-followers) have no set of intellectual guidelines on how to biomechanically execute a pelvic rotary motion. RH's second idea that one can learn to perform the pelvic rotary motion by slow motion practice has validity if a golfer already knows what's the correct biomechanical approach. But, what if the golfer doesn't know how to biomechanically perform a pelvic rotary motion in the most biomechanically-optimum manner?
RH then attempts to demonstrate the biomechanically-correct approach for Lee. He first starts off by showing that a golfer must have anterior pelvic tilt to correctly perform a rotary pelvic motion and he states that a "goat-humping" pelvic motion creates posterior pelvic tilt, which makes a rotary pelvic motion impossible. I agree with RH on this point.
RH then argues further-: "I also believe that Lee had been working hard on trying to externally rotate the right shoulder in order to drive the elbow forward, much like Keegan Bradley does and Ben Hogan used to do. But with the ‘goat hump’ move, that helped stall the pelvis rotation and therefore the right shoulder would go from external to internal rotation. Now with the anterior pelvic tilt which he used to ‘make room for his arms to swing under his torso’ he can now rotate the pelvis instead of sliding it and he can now sustain that right shoulder external rotation and drive the right elbow more forward into impact. I also believe that the right shoulder external rotation aids in the lateral side bend which is why we see much more lateral side bend in the after photo of Lee’s swing."
I think that RH's reasoning is wrongheaded. His wrongheaded reasoning obviously comes directly from KM/Jeffy and he even uses the same anatomically wrong terminology (referring to external rotation of the right shoulder rather than external rotation of the right humerus). I agree that anterior pelvic tilt is a necessary requisite for a rotary pelvic motion, but its presence doesn't causally produce a rotary pelvic motion. Also, external rotation of the right humerus cannot causally facilitate right lateral bend. I think that he has his biomechanical reasoning ass-backwards. I believe that a primary pelvic rotary motion (produced by the 6 lateral pelvic rotator muscles) between P4 and P5.5/6 gets the pelvis more open than the upper torso (thorax) and that allows a golfer to increasingly acquire right lateral bend between P5.5 and P7 and the biomechanical phenomenon of right lateral bend (combined with anterior pelvic tilt) allows a golfer to drive his right elbow into its correct pitch location in front of the right hip by P5.5-6. However, right lateral bend doesn't causally produce a pitch elbow motion, which is produced by an active right arm adduction maneuver that happens simultaneously/independently between P4 and P6, and it should happen while the golfer is performing a pelvic rotary motion in a biomechanically-correct manner (which RH never describes).
RH then ends his blog piece with the following comments-:
"The issue with getting somebody like Christo (or anybody else) to translate this is that their brain may not make sense of ‘make room for your arms to swing under his torso’ that Lee used. And he could very well end up trying to make the arms swing under the torso and not get the anterior pelvic tilt in order to do so. Nor may another golfer have the right shoulder external rotation to go along with it. So, in the end another golfer may just be chasing those feels/visuals and because they don’t quite understand all of the mechanics they never quite get to where they want to be.
I tend to believe this is more where modern day golf instruction is moving to…understanding the science of motor skill and skill acquisition learning and applying that to golf. Unfortunately, the golf magazines and TV shows will still give away ‘swing tips’ which usually consist of feels and visuals which only enable golfers to continue to chase feels/visuals even more without any permanent improvement and still having to go to the range all of the time."
I agree with RH that chasing "feels" and "visuals' will not necessarily be useful because the golfer doesn't understand the underlying mechanics. However, RH cannot possibly offer any rational guidance to golfers like Lee about this "rotary pelvic motion" topic - because he personally doesn't understand how a golfer biomechanically rotates the pelvis at the start of the downswing.
To demonstrate RH's ignorance regarding this issue - look at this Jeffy-forum thread started by RH.
jeffygolf.com/showthread.php?1451-Couple-of-Lower-Body-Questions
In his first post, RH asks the following question-: "The other question I have is on the downswing....when do we go from left leg external rotation to left leg internal rotation? Should we get external rotation first with the 'squat' and then go into internal rotation?"
How can RH ask such an inane question? How can any golfer claim to understand golf swing biomechanics regarding the topic of the downswing's rotary pelvic motion (that initiates the downswing's kinematic sequence) if he doesn't clearly understand why left leg external rotation must precede left leg internal rotation? I will provide a biomechanical explanation in a future post.
Jeff.
In this thread, I will provide some examples of RH's lack of understanding of sound golf swing biomechanics.
See this 3jack blog.
3jack.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-dangers-of-looking-for-feels.html
In that blog, he talks about this video produced by Christo Garcia.
The video features Lee Namba who wants to acquire a more rotary pivot action (similar to the rotary pattern manifested by Keegan Bradley). Lee obviously doesn't understand golf biomechanics and he attempts to acquire a more rotary pivot action by "feel". RH is correctly critical of this approach and he correctly infers that "feel" must be preferably based on sound golf swing mechanics/biomechanics. The problem is that RH himself doesn't know what's sound golf swing biomechanics when it comes to the topic of a rotary style of pelvic motion.
RH states the following-: "First, let’s get to what Christo is essentially trying to work on and in effect, what Lee has been working on.
Christo is trying to get more pelvis rotation in the downswing into impact. It appears he understands that part of the issue is he ‘goat humps’ (aka early extension) and that prevents him from getting more pelvis rotation.
Christo has also been trying to get more lateral side bend of the torso in order to help with that pelvic rotation."
RH then posted this image from Phil Cheetham's PhD dissertation paper, and the 2nd image shows a golfer with a more open pelvis and more right lateral bend.
RH then wrongheadedly states-: "The idea behind the lateral side bend is that when done correctly and the hips are level (or the rear hip is higher than the front hip)…this creates an action where the pelvis will automatically rotate more."
In other words, RH is implying that pelvic rotary motion during the downswing is driven by the golfer first acquiring right lateral bend, which can then induce a rotary pelvic motion. This wrongheaded belief is derived from KM's personal interpretation of Serge Gracovetsky's "spine engine" belief-system - that the "spine engine" primarily drives the pelvic rotation that starts the downswing's kinematic pivot action. I have shown that this personal KM-belief is highly flawed, and without biomechanical merit, in topics number 1 and 6 of this review paper - perfectgolfswingreview.net/spinalmotion.htm
RH also stated the following regarding the acquisition of correct golf swing mechanics-:
"In Homer Kelley’s The Golfing Machine, he states that it is better to learn mechanics thru feel instead of feel thru mechanics. What this means is that Kelley believes that if you incorporate the right mechanics in your swing, you can eventually develop how that feels to YOU and then use those feels to replicate those mechanics.
Kelley advised that the golfer should start with ‘basic motion’ and work on that until they incorporate all of the mechanics properly on a consistent basis. Then Kelley advised to move onto ‘acquired motion’ and finally to ‘total motion.’
The difference we are seeing today between Kelley’s recommendation and what neurologist and skill acquisition experts is that they modern day neurologists and skill acquisition experts prefer that the golfer utilize swings at very slow speed and make sure they are utilizing the correct mechanics as the golfer swings the club slowly. When the golfer does use the right mechanics, then they make the swing a little faster and keep ramping up the speed as they get the mechanics correctly."
The problem with the i) HK and the ii) slow-mo approach is they are not necessarily based on a "correct" understanding of golf swing biomechanics. Homer Kelly never discussed the topic of golf swing biomechanics in his TGM book and he simply described different patterns of mechanical actions regarding different body parts. For example, he described pelvic motion as being a hip turn. So, his rotary style of hip turn was labelled standard (10-14-A) which he defined as follows-: "The Standard Hip Turn (of any length) is a free turn in both directions with a weight shift in both directions." Homer Kelley never described the biomechanics of how a golfer should perform a pelvic rotary motion (which can be performed with/without any weight shift). Therefore, Homer Kelley (and his TGM golf instructor-followers) have no set of intellectual guidelines on how to biomechanically execute a pelvic rotary motion. RH's second idea that one can learn to perform the pelvic rotary motion by slow motion practice has validity if a golfer already knows what's the correct biomechanical approach. But, what if the golfer doesn't know how to biomechanically perform a pelvic rotary motion in the most biomechanically-optimum manner?
RH then attempts to demonstrate the biomechanically-correct approach for Lee. He first starts off by showing that a golfer must have anterior pelvic tilt to correctly perform a rotary pelvic motion and he states that a "goat-humping" pelvic motion creates posterior pelvic tilt, which makes a rotary pelvic motion impossible. I agree with RH on this point.
RH then argues further-: "I also believe that Lee had been working hard on trying to externally rotate the right shoulder in order to drive the elbow forward, much like Keegan Bradley does and Ben Hogan used to do. But with the ‘goat hump’ move, that helped stall the pelvis rotation and therefore the right shoulder would go from external to internal rotation. Now with the anterior pelvic tilt which he used to ‘make room for his arms to swing under his torso’ he can now rotate the pelvis instead of sliding it and he can now sustain that right shoulder external rotation and drive the right elbow more forward into impact. I also believe that the right shoulder external rotation aids in the lateral side bend which is why we see much more lateral side bend in the after photo of Lee’s swing."
I think that RH's reasoning is wrongheaded. His wrongheaded reasoning obviously comes directly from KM/Jeffy and he even uses the same anatomically wrong terminology (referring to external rotation of the right shoulder rather than external rotation of the right humerus). I agree that anterior pelvic tilt is a necessary requisite for a rotary pelvic motion, but its presence doesn't causally produce a rotary pelvic motion. Also, external rotation of the right humerus cannot causally facilitate right lateral bend. I think that he has his biomechanical reasoning ass-backwards. I believe that a primary pelvic rotary motion (produced by the 6 lateral pelvic rotator muscles) between P4 and P5.5/6 gets the pelvis more open than the upper torso (thorax) and that allows a golfer to increasingly acquire right lateral bend between P5.5 and P7 and the biomechanical phenomenon of right lateral bend (combined with anterior pelvic tilt) allows a golfer to drive his right elbow into its correct pitch location in front of the right hip by P5.5-6. However, right lateral bend doesn't causally produce a pitch elbow motion, which is produced by an active right arm adduction maneuver that happens simultaneously/independently between P4 and P6, and it should happen while the golfer is performing a pelvic rotary motion in a biomechanically-correct manner (which RH never describes).
RH then ends his blog piece with the following comments-:
"The issue with getting somebody like Christo (or anybody else) to translate this is that their brain may not make sense of ‘make room for your arms to swing under his torso’ that Lee used. And he could very well end up trying to make the arms swing under the torso and not get the anterior pelvic tilt in order to do so. Nor may another golfer have the right shoulder external rotation to go along with it. So, in the end another golfer may just be chasing those feels/visuals and because they don’t quite understand all of the mechanics they never quite get to where they want to be.
I tend to believe this is more where modern day golf instruction is moving to…understanding the science of motor skill and skill acquisition learning and applying that to golf. Unfortunately, the golf magazines and TV shows will still give away ‘swing tips’ which usually consist of feels and visuals which only enable golfers to continue to chase feels/visuals even more without any permanent improvement and still having to go to the range all of the time."
I agree with RH that chasing "feels" and "visuals' will not necessarily be useful because the golfer doesn't understand the underlying mechanics. However, RH cannot possibly offer any rational guidance to golfers like Lee about this "rotary pelvic motion" topic - because he personally doesn't understand how a golfer biomechanically rotates the pelvis at the start of the downswing.
To demonstrate RH's ignorance regarding this issue - look at this Jeffy-forum thread started by RH.
jeffygolf.com/showthread.php?1451-Couple-of-Lower-Body-Questions
In his first post, RH asks the following question-: "The other question I have is on the downswing....when do we go from left leg external rotation to left leg internal rotation? Should we get external rotation first with the 'squat' and then go into internal rotation?"
How can RH ask such an inane question? How can any golfer claim to understand golf swing biomechanics regarding the topic of the downswing's rotary pelvic motion (that initiates the downswing's kinematic sequence) if he doesn't clearly understand why left leg external rotation must precede left leg internal rotation? I will provide a biomechanical explanation in a future post.
Jeff.