|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 17, 2020 10:41:17 GMT -5
Watch this Mike Malaska video on "where does speed come from?". MM believes that clubhead speed comes from the hands and arms. Note that he demonstrates a right wrist straightening action when he first talks about increasing clubhead speed. Then he demonstrates a fast hand crossover hand release action through impact using his two hands - and he claims that it is the main source of clubhead speed in a full golf swing action. I, of course, disagree with MM and I think that his golf instructional approach is very wrongheaded when it applies to the golf swing action used by pro golfers. I believe that pro golfers use a TGM swinging action powered by a pivot action and that swing power is derived from the sequential release of PA#4 => PA#2 and that very little additional clubhead speed is gained by using a hand crossover release action rather than a DH-hand release action (as used by Cameron Champ). Cameron Champ is one of the longest drivers in the PGA tour, and there is no hand crossover release phenomenon, or right wrist straightening action, through impact in his driver golf swing action. Here are capture images showing how Cameron Champ releases PA#4 => PA#2 with an active pivot action. Here are capture images showing that Cameron Champ does not use a hand crossover release action, and/or an active right wrist straightening action, through impact. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by utahgolfer on Feb 18, 2020 11:43:21 GMT -5
It is also interesting how MM makes light of the core (torso) and its influence in generating swing speed. Basically, MM is saying that all meaningful swing speed comes from the release of PA#2 and 3, even though an elite golf swing is clearly highlighted with torso/core rotation. Do you think this is a case of "out of sight, out of mind?" It seems like a golfer who rotates his body relatively well might take it for granted. Perhaps MM thinks that body rotation is unimportant because he can do it without thinking or without effort. Plus, as an older golfer perhaps he is using his core or torso rotation less than he used to as a younger golfer, so he is justifying his arm-focused teaching because of this. In any event, it is clear that torso/core rotation acts on the lead shoulder joint to significantly increase lead arm speed (PA#4) and club head speed, along with PA#2 and 3, as demonstrated in all good golf swings.
UG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 19, 2020 11:59:11 GMT -5
It is also interesting how MM makes light of the core (torso) and its influence in generating swing speed. Basically, MM is saying that all meaningful swing speed comes from the release of PA#2 and 3, even though an elite golf swing is clearly highlighted with torso/core rotation. Do you think this is a case of "out of sight, out of mind?" It seems like a golfer who rotates his body relatively well might take it for granted. Perhaps MM thinks that body rotation is unimportant because he can do it without thinking or without effort. Plus, as an older golfer perhaps he is using his core or torso rotation less than he used to as a younger golfer, so he is justifying his arm-focused teaching because of this. In any event, it is clear that torso/core rotation acts on the lead shoulder joint to significantly increase lead arm speed (PA#4) and club head speed, along with PA#2 and 3, as demonstrated in all good golf swings. UG I think that MM learned how to actively rotate his torso when he was a pro golfer and it has become so ingrained that he no longer "feels" like he is actively rotating his torso and he now thinks that his torso rotation is entirely reactive. However, how can a beginner golfer (who has just started to play golf) learn how to reactively pivot the body using an optimized/efficient kinematic sequence that produces all the correct body angles needed to position the two shoulder sockets correctly throughout the entire downswing if he is only taught to swing his arms? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Apr 23, 2020 11:52:33 GMT -5
Mike Malaska and Eric Cogorno have made a video about shallowing below.
What does he mean at 10:44 that the momentum of the club tends to fall to the rear of the golfer (negative beta torque) when one changes direction at P4? It doesn't make any sense? If one is supporting the LFFW with the RFFW (On Plane) , then there shouldn't be a need to actively try and prevent a too steep or too shallow clubshaft plane.
If the golfer starts the downswing with the clubshaft plane steeper than the hand plane , then I understand that there could be the reverse effect of 'SMK's passive torque' (ie. negative beta torque) that may cause the clubshaft to overshoot and go under the hand plane (and make it seem heavier), then the golfer might have to try and add more positive beta torque to get it back on plane. In that scenario it might be more difficult to get back 'on plane' than starting the downswing with the clubshaft shallower than hand plane, but this instruction is irrelevant if you keep the clubshaft 'On Plane' during the downswing.
At 13:11 he claims that as the club reaches the top of the backswing it weighs about 12-14 oz and that it gains about 1lb of force for every 2-3 inches that it moves during transition and ultimately weighs 10lb. I haven't got a clue where he got those figures from and I don't think he's ever provided the physics to prove that claim.
I can only guess that the golfers own hand forces on the club (ie. where the clubshaft is steeper than the hand path-causing an SMK 'reverse' passive torque effect) is causing that '10lb' weight feeling.
So is the MM move nothing more than a way to 'exaggerate a feel' to try and correct a swing plane fault?
DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Apr 23, 2020 12:38:27 GMT -5
Mike Malaska and Eric Cogorno have made a video about shallowing below. What does he mean at 10:44 that the momentum of the club tends to fall to the rear of the golfer (negative beta torque) when one changes direction at P4? It doesn't make any sense? If one is supporting the LFFW with the RFFW (On Plane) , then there shouldn't be a need to actively try and prevent a too steep or too shallow clubshaft plane. If the golfer starts the downswing with the clubshaft plane steeper than the hand plane , then I understand that there could be the reverse effect of 'SMK's passive torque' (ie. negative beta torque) that may cause the clubshaft to overshoot and go under the hand plane (and make it seem heavier), then the golfer might have to try and add more positive beta torque to get it back on plane. In that scenario it might be more difficult to get back 'on plane' than starting the downswing with the clubshaft shallower than hand plane, but this instruction is irrelevant if you keep the clubshaft 'On Plane' during the downswing. At 13:11 he claims that as the club reaches the top of the backswing it weighs about 12-14 oz and that it gains about 1lb of force for every 2-3 inches that it moves during transition and ultimately weighs 10lb. I haven't got a clue where he got those figures from and I don't think he's ever provided the physics to prove that claim. I can only guess that the golfers own hand forces on the club (ie. where the clubshaft is steeper than the hand path-causing an SMK 'reverse' passive torque effect) is causing that '10lb' weight feeling. So is the MM move nothing more than a way to 'exaggerate a feel' to try and correct a swing plane fault? DG Same ole Malaska BS!
His idiosynacratic swing philosophy is derived from his "belief" that most golfers struggle with a club that wants to fall back at the transition, and he believes that a golfer must oppose that phenomenon by performing the "Malaska Move". That "Malaska Move" swing action may apply to a subset of golfers who have that particular swing fault, but I think that the opposite swing fault problem (OTT move combined with a "tumble-over" the swingplane action) is much more common.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Oct 29, 2021 21:32:55 GMT -5
Dr Mann
Is Mike Malaska actually advocating a crossover hand release action in this video below? Seems like he's trying to avoid too much right forearm rotation in the backswing and downswing and now also suggesting a flip release hand action through impact. He also says that DJ and Brooks Koepka are using a throw hand release action through impact which seems to be incorrect.
DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Oct 30, 2021 9:14:39 GMT -5
Dr Mann Is Mike Malaska actually advocating a crossover hand release action in this video below? Seems like he's trying to avoid too much right forearm rotation in the backswing and downswing and now also suggesting a flip release hand action through impact. He also says that DJ and Brooks Koepka are using a throw hand release action through impact which seems to be incorrect. DG Mike Malaska does not recommend a hand cross-over release action through impact and he recommends a slap-hinge hand release action. There is no change in his thinking regarding a hand release action. DJ and BK doe not use a slap-hinge hand release action. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Oct 30, 2021 9:42:19 GMT -5
Dr Mann Is Mike Malaska actually advocating a crossover hand release action in this video below? Seems like he's trying to avoid too much right forearm rotation in the backswing and downswing and now also suggesting a flip release hand action through impact. He also says that DJ and Brooks Koepka are using a throw hand release action through impact which seems to be incorrect. DG Mike Malaska does not recommend a hand cross-over release action through impact and he recommends a slap-hinge hand release action. There is no change in his thinking regarding a hand release action. DJ and BK doe not use a slap-hinge hand release action. Jeff. Many thanks Dr Mann I mentioned cross-over hand release action only because it was mentioned as being demonstrated in the 1st video in this thread where you said: "Then he demonstrates a fast hand crossover hand release action through impact using his two hands - and he claims that it is the main source of clubhead speed in a full golf swing action." DG
|
|