|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 25, 2012 22:45:52 GMT -5
See this Jeffy thread. jeffygolf.com/showthread.php?466-More-hilarity-at-The-Land-of-the-Blind-Bo-Van-PeltJeffy and other Jeffy-forum members think that Lia's comments are crazy! I agree 100%. Lia wrote-: "I wouldn't call that tumble either. I'd call that a swing that relies on a limited arm swing and an even more limited pivot that's there just to support the arm swing. Stays on top of the sweetspot the whole way. Any more pivot and he'd be left of Pelosi and left with no tour card." I am always amazed how many BM-groupies "think" about golf swing mechanics/biomechanics. How can an intelligent golfer make vague/ill-defined comments like "an even more limited pivot that is just there to support the arm swing" and "stays on top of the sweetspot the whole way". Here is a face-on view of Bo van Pelt's swing. Starting at 0.28 minutes - note how actively he starts the downswing with an active pelvic motion. If that is not an active pivot action swing, then I obviously cannot interpret golf swing videos. Why would an even more active pivot action cause BvP to "swing too far left"? I have no idea what "staying on top of the sweetspot means", and I can easily imagine that Lia would have great difficulty explaining that "idea". Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 25, 2012 23:01:45 GMT -5
Lia added this comment -: "The tumble involves pronounced shaft steepening and concurrent face closing."
I have never quite understood what BM-groupies mean by the term "tumble", but why should a "tumble action" cause the clubface to close? I can imagine a golfer slotting his club between P4 and P5.5 in such a way that the clubshaft steepens (due to the way that the entire power package is biomechanically moved in 3-D space), but why should that close the clubface relative to the clubhead arc if the golfer maintains a FLW and intact LAFW?
Jeff.
|
|