|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 6, 2021 22:42:11 GMT -5
Dr Mann Didn't TR/MA mention some data from Dr Phil Cheetham to support their opinion about the trail hand strength changing the clubhead angle of attack and path, spin ,etc ? Is there any cause and effect correlation published data? DG I don't know what you are thinking about re: Cheetham data. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Aug 7, 2021 8:47:51 GMT -5
Dr Mann Didn't TR/MA mention some data from Dr Phil Cheetham to support their opinion about the trail hand strength changing the clubhead angle of attack and path, spin ,etc ? Is there any cause and effect correlation published data? DG I don't know what you are thinking about re: Cheetham data. Jeff. Apologies - it wasn't data from Phil Cheetham but related to TR's video below (but no distinction made between lead and trail grip strength). But I do recall Phil Cheetham stating that "A change in the grip of the hands will change the way the body moves in the downswing when a straight shot is the goal". But again , he didn't mention any specific relationship existing between body kinematics and individual hand grip strengths (just 'net' grip strength). I think I've made an error above because Phil Cheetham did conduct research on 93 PGA and European Tour Pros to determine any correlations between trail hand grip strength at address and body kinematics and kinetics during swing. If there are changes in the kinematics and kinetics during the golf swing will this not likely affect club delivery at impact and ball flight? I think his research data was presented to : World Scientific Congress of Golf, 2018 Vancouver 'The Effect of Strong and Weak grips on Swing Kinematics and Kinetics' I cannot find any research articles relating to this presentation. DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 7, 2021 10:08:51 GMT -5
I don't know what you are thinking about re: Cheetham data. Jeff. Apologies - it wasn't data from Phil Cheetham but related to TR's video below (but no distinction made between lead and trail grip strength). But I do recall Phil Cheetham stating that "A change in the grip of the hands will change the way the body moves in the downswing when a straight shot is the goal". But again , he didn't mention any specific relationship existing between body kinematics and individual hand grip strengths (just 'net' grip strength). I think I've made an error above because Phil Cheetham did conduct research on 93 PGA and European Tour Pros to determine any correlations between trail hand grip strength at address and body kinematics and kinetics during swing. If there are changes in the kinematics and kinetics during the golf swing will this not likely affect club delivery at impact and ball flight? DG Based on what Phil Cheetham stated in the webinar session, he has collected data on the trail arm/wrist motion of the 93 pro golfers that he used for his PhD dissertation research study, but he has not yet formally analysed the data. Terry Rowles has taken the position that if a golfer instantaneously changes his trail hand grip, then he will instantaneously change the way he swings the club - going from using i) a high-track path between P4 => P6, an ii) out-to-in clubhead path between P6 => P7, a iii) negative clubhead attack angle at impact with iv) very little forward shaft lean at impact when adopting a weak trail hand grip to going to i) a low-track path between P4 => P6, an ii) in-to-out clubhead path between P6 => P7 and a iii) positive clubhead attack angle at impact with iv) lots of forward shaft lean at impact when changing to a strong trail hand grip. That may apply to a subset of pro golfers who are asked to instantaneously change their trail hand grip strength in a "test". However, that does not necessarily apply to a pro golfer who uses a lead arm swinging action for his personal golf swing action and who simply decides to adopt a particular strength of trail hand grip for his personal golf swing action. I have given many examples where pro golfers do not have the combinations that TR/MA arbitrarily insist should apply to a golfer who adopts a particular strength of trail hand grip.
So, for example, Freddie Couples uses a strong trail hand grip but he does not come down a low-track path, and he does not have his trail elbow in a front linkage position at P6, and he does not have his hands well forward at impact with lots of forward shaft lean, and he does not swing in-to-out (relative to his body) like Lee Trevino and Dustin Johnson.
Also, here is a pro golfer - Patrick Rodgers - who uses a weak trail hand grip.
Note that he shallows the clubshaft between P4 => P6 and he does not come down a steep hi-track path between P4 => P6. Note that he uses a pitch elbow motion (and not a punch elbow motion) of his trail arm between P4 => P6 and he gets his trail elbow into a center-linkage position at P6. Note that he opens his pelvis/upper torso a lot in his later downswing and he gets his hands well forward at impact.
Here is a capture image showing a copy of Terry Rowles image of a face-opener and face-closer.
Image 1 shows a pro golfer who has adopted a strong trail hand grip - note that i) he has a lot of pelvic/upper torso rotation at impact, ii) a lot of right lateral bend, and ii) a forward hand position at impact.
I think that Patrick Rodgers looks more like the golfer in image 1 - even though he uses a weak trail hand grip.
The same applies to the following golfer - student-golfer of Kelvin Miyahira - who also has a very open pelvis/upper torso alignment at impact with lots of right lateral bend and who also has his hands well forward at impact despite using a weak trail hand grip.
I personally do not believe TR/MA's claim that there is strong causal link between the strength of the trail hand grip and the golfer's body/arm kinematics in many pro golfers who use a lead arm swinging action technique.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 13, 2021 22:23:37 GMT -5
This is my 8th post in my ongoing series of posts where I analyse the opinions of people who participated in TR/MA's 12 webinar video sessions. In this post, I will be analysing the two research studies that Phil Cheetham performed in order to study the relationship between the strength of the trail hand grip and i) swing kinematics and ii) the handle twist velocity (HTV) at impact. I think that both of the Cheetham studies are highly flawed and I believe that they cannot possibly produce scientifically conclusive results. I will start of by analysing the first study that Phil Cheetham performed where he took 16 skilled golfers, and made them hit 15 straight shots with a 6-iron using a neutral clubface at address (5 swings), an open clubface of 30 degrees at address (5 swings) and a closed clubface of 30 degrees at address (5 swings). Only 10 of the golfers could achieve the goal of hitting the ball straight in all 15 swing actions, so the study had a very small study sample size of only 10 study participants. I think that is crazy to think that one can obtain scientifically conclusive results from such a small study of 10 golfers, and the problem of scientific legitimacy is made much worse when you consider the way that the study was performed. Here is capture image showing a study participant.
In this image, the clubface is in a neutral position, and it is not 30 degrees open/closed at address. The study's participant golfers were told to adopt their "normal" grip, and you can see that this particular golfer has a very strong lead hand grip and a neutral (or side-under) trail hand grip at address. If a golfer routinely uses a very strong lead hand grip in his full golf swing action and if he uses a lead arm swinging action where he habitually keeps the back of his lead hand parallel to the swingplane between P6=> P7, then he is going to have great difficulty in this "artificial" testing scenario of having to deal with an open (or closed) clubface of 30 degrees. He will be forced to allow his lead hand to rotate either clockwise (or counterclockwise) during the P6 => P7 time period, which is a very unnatural swing action for a lead arm swinger who uses a very strong lead hand grip and who habitually uses a DH-hand release action through impact. I think that he will more likely be forced into using his trail arm/hand to control the clubface between P6 => P7 and he will likely end up performing a clubshaft-flipping action through impact as can be seen in the following capture images of Terry Rowles.
Terry Rowles performed the same type of "artificial" test where he opened/closed the clubface by 15 degrees at address and then attempted to hit the ball straight. Note how he is using his trail arm/wrist to flip the clubshaft through impact. He is obviously not using a lead arm swinging action and a DH-hand release action through impact.
I think that this type of "artificial" test makes no sense if a golfer routinely uses a lead arm swinging technique and if he habitually uses a DH-hand release action through impact to P7.2+ (where the clubshaft does not flip passed the lead arm from an angular rotational perspective).
Consider Matthew Fitzpatrick's DH-hand release action through impact.
Note that Matthew Fitzpatrick uses a very weak ("on-top") trail hand grip. However, he uses a very strong lead hand grip. Note that he uses a DH-hand release action through impact to P7.4 and he does not allow the clubshaft to bypass his lead arm between P7 (image 1) => P7.4 (image 4).
In his regular full golf swing driver action, he is naturally/automatically keeping the back of his lead hand continuously parallel to his functional swingplane between P6 => P7. So, how can he use his regular release action if he participated in Phil Cheetham's "artificial" test if the clubface was first opened by 30 degrees at address, and if he was then instructed to use his "normal" grip and then try to hit the ball straight. He would have to radically alter his regular full golf swing's release action by using some type of hand manipulation technique (eg. as seen in Terry Rowles "on top" release image above), but that hand manipulation technique would be unnatural for him and it makes no sense to me how this type of "artificial" test can help us to better understand golf swing biomechanics.
A second major flaw in this small study of 10 golfers is that we have no idea what strength of lead hand grip was used by the 10 golfers and I will later demonstrate that lead hand grip strength has a major effect on the degree of lead forearm supination, and therefore handle twist velocity, happening in the late downswing just before impact. If the study participants were heterogenous with respect to lead hand grip strength (which is a major confounding factor that can significantly affect the handle twist velocity (HTV) at impact measurement and also body-arm motions during the downswing), then this study's signal-noise ratio will become even much lower.
A third major flaw in the study is that the golfers could cheat by altering their grip during the testing procedure. According to Phil Cheetham, the average degree of measured clubface closing/opening was only 14 degrees under testing (and not 30 degrees) and Phil Cheetham admitted that the golfers could have cheated by altering their grip strength during the testing process. If the study participants could cheat by that large amount, and if we have no idea which golfers were cheating and/or by how much, then the study's noise factor becomes even greater creating an even much lower signal/noise ratio.
I personally believe that this small study of 10 golfers has zero scientific merit because the study's sample size is far too small and because its signal/noise ratio is much too low, and it also unnaturally forces golfers to radically alter their regular release action during the later downswing. I therefore think that its results should be ignored.
Now, let's consider Phil Cheetham's 2nd study where he attempted to study the relationship between the strength of the trail hand grip and i) body kinematics and ii) the handle twist velocity at impact.
Phil Cheetham has a data base of ~93 pro golfers (which he used for his PhD disseration research study) and where he has already captured 3D measurements and HTV (hand twist velocity) measurements near/at impact.
Here is a graph showing the lead hand and trail hand grip strength of those ~93 pro golfers.
Note that there is only a low correlation coefficient R value of 0.41 between the strength of the lead hand grip and the strength of the trail hand grip and that very few of those pro golfers have good concordance (strong-strong or weak-weak) between their lead/trail hand grip strengths.
To perform his 2nd study Phil Cheetham chose 19 golfers with a very weak trail hand grip strength and 19 golfers with a very strong trail hand grip, which presumably means that he chose those pro golfers in the following capture image.
Note that I have used a yellow color overlay to show the 19 pro golfers who have the weakest trail hand grip and a red color color overlay to show the 19 pro golfers who have the strongest trail hand grip strength, and I presume that Phil Cheetham selected those two groups of golfers for his retrospective study analysis. Note that the two study groups are not homogenous where they have the same lead hand grip strength amounts/patterns in each comparable subgroup. Why is this important? I think that it is critically important because I think that lead hand grip strength is a major factor that can potentially affect the study's signal outcomes (signal outcomes = body/arm kinematics and HTV at impact) and I think that it can potentially affect the study's signal outcome even more than the trail hand grip strength. If I am correct, then having so much heterogeneity for such a major confounding variable will create a a lot of "noise" and thereby drive the study's signal/noise ratio to such a very low level that it cannot possibly produce a scientifically conclusive result.
Why do I believe that lead hand grip strength is a major factor that can potentially affect the HTV measurement at impact?
Consider this Cheetham graph, which he featured in his PhD dissertation paper.
In his PhD dissertation research study, Phil Cheetham only studied the wrist/forearm motions of the lead arm, and he did not discuss the trail arm's wrist/forearm motions.
The blue graph shows that the lead forearm undergoes a large amount of supination in the later downswing just before impact and this lead forearm supinatory motion happens very rapidly (= proportional to the slope of the blue graph). Why does this lead forearm supinatory phenomenon happen in most pro golfers? I think that the answer is obvious! It happens because the pro golfer has to rotate the back of his lead hand counterclockwise in the later downswing in order to square the clubface relative to his clubhead arc by impact.
Consider an example - featuring Justin Thomas.
Image 1 is at P6.2, image 3 is at P6.5 and image 3 is at impact.
Justin Thomas uses a weak lead hand grip, and he also uses an intact LFFW/GFLW swing technique throughout his downswing and early followthrough, which means that his clubface is always straight-line-aligned (from an angular rotational perspective) with his lead forearm's lower radial bone in his lower lead forearm, and also to a very great degree with respect to the back of his lead hand, throughout his entire downswing.
Note that Justin Thomas' clubface is open to his clubhead arc at P6.2 and P6.5 even though his club is releasing more (representing the release of PA#2 in TGM terminology), where the release happens in the plane of his intact LFFW (= in the plane of lead wrist radial => ulnar deviation).
Note that Justin Thomas squares his clubface relative to his clubhead arc between P6.5 => impact via a lead forearm supinatory motion that rotates the back of his lead hand counterclockwise so that it faces the target at impact.
I believe that a large amount of lead forearm supination is the major factor that can cause a large handle twist velocity (HTV) measurement near/at impact.
Here are two graphs that I copied from Phil Cheetham's PhD dissertation paper.
The top graph represents the HTV and one can see that the HTV increases rapidly in the late downswing just before impact, reaching its peak value at impact.
The bottom blue graph shows the angular velocity of lead forearm supination, and you can see that it increases rapidly in the later downswing (after the vertical violet-red arrow), and it is likely the most important causal factor responsible for the high HTV happening just before impact. Another potential causal factor for the high HTV measurement near impact is the angular velocity of counterclockwise lead humeral rotation, but that factor has never been studied by golf researchers, so we do not know to what degree it is a significant causal factor (compared to the causal factor of lead forearm supination).
In his PhD dissertation study, Phil Cheetham never discussed the role of different lead hand grip strengths in producing a high HTV value near impact. In the absence of scientifically valid research data, I think that it is reasonable to conclude that there likely is a high negative correlation between the strength of the lead hand grip and a large HTV measurement near impact - because a golfer who uses a very strong lead hand grip strength has to rotate his lead forearm counterclockwise via a lead forearm supinatory motion by a far lesser amount compared to a golfer who uses a weak lead hand grip strength.
Here is the 3D graph of Jamie Sadlowski's driver swing.
Jamie Sadlowski uses a very strong lead hand grip and he therefore does not not have to use a lot of lead forearm supination in his later downswing in order to square his clubface relative to his clubhead arc. Note that the blue graph shows that he does not rapidly supinate his lead forearm in his later downswing just before impact, and the total amount of lead forearm supination happening during that time period is very small.
By contrast, here is Jon Rahm's 3D graph.
The blue graph represents his lead forearm supination graph and the red dot on the vertical "imp" line represents impact.
Note that Jon Rahm uses a large amount of lead forearm supination in his later downswing and the steep slope of the blue graph shows that it is happening very rapidly just before impact - which does not surprise me considering the fact that Jon Rahm uses a very weak lead hand grip.
Both Jamie Sadlowski and Jon Rahm use a strong trail hand grip, and I strongly suspect that it plays no role in causing the difference in HTV differences that likely exists between Jamie Sadlowski (who probably has a low HTV measurement near impact) and Jon Rahm (who probably has a high HTV measurement near impact).
What is amazing to me is that Phil Cheetham already has the data to study the relationship between the lead hand grip strength and i) body/arm kinematics and ii) HTV measurement at impact in those ~93 pro golfers, but he stated in his video session (session number 4) that he has not yet analysed that data even though he has had full possession of all the data for more than 7 years. Phew - that's unbelievable! I strongly suspect that if Phil Cheetham published his data, that it would show that weak lead hand grip strength plays a much greater role than weak trail hand grip strength in causing a high HTV measurement near impact.
There is another factor that can cause a high HTV value near impact, which Phil Cheetham is not taking into account in his small study of 39 pro golfers - and that factor is a large amount of roll motion of the lead hand near/through impact that can potentially happen due to the swing fault of "running-out-of-trail arm".
Here is an animated gif of Phil Mickelson performing a roller subtype of non-DH hand release action through impact.
Note how Phil Mickelson is "running-out-of-trail arm" in his later downswing due to the fact that his trail forearm/wrist has to fully straighten before impact because his trail shoulder socket is too far back. When his trail arm fully straightens it causes his trail forearm to rapidly pronate and that causes his trail hand to roll over his lead hand causing a high HTV near impact, or at impact. I regard that high HTV phenomenon due to a "running-out-of-trail arm" phenomenon as being a non-intentional swing fault, and it can potentially happen in any pro golfer irrespective of trail hand grip strength. If that "running-out-of-trail arm" phenomenon is actually happening in a number of pro golfers in Phil Cheetham's study of 39 pro golfers, then it is another factor that can be a confounding variable (noise factor) causing his study to have a low signal/noise ratio - if the distribution of that "running-out-of-trail arm" phenomenon is not homogenous between the two study subgroups. I personally think that this Cheetham study of 39 pro golfers cannot possibly produce a scientifically conclusive result because the study's sample size is far too small and the signal/noise ratio is far too small. Most golfers and golf instructors are probably "statistically-challenged" and they do not know how to evaluate any research study's statistical analysis to determine whether the study can produce a scientifically conclusive result. To help those golfers, I would highly recommend that they read this paper - www.cmaj.ca/content/cmaj/165/9/1226.full.pdf - by David Sackett, who is a reknown expert in evidence-based medicine. David Sackett uses this simple formulae to determine a research study's scientific conclusiveness (strength of scientific validity).
David Sackett devised that simple formulae to help physicians evaluate the scientific validity of a research study's results involving randomised clinical trials between a control subgroup and a test subgroup, but it can be rationally applied to any research study where there are two comparison subgroups. Basically, the word "confidence" is a simple term that refers to narrow 95% confidence interval values. A scientific comparison study between two subgroups can only produce narrow 95% confidence interval values if that formulae produces a high value. Note that it uses the square root of the sample size because sample size is the most highly significant factor in determining whether any comparison research study can produce scientifically conclusive results. Signal is a measure of the study's outcome in terms of the magnitude of the difference in outcome results between the two study subgroups. In Phil Cheetham's small study of 39 golfers, there was a negligible difference in the HTV measurement between the two subgroups that could not even reach a P value of 0.05, so the study's signal with respect to HTV measurements is very small. Noise refers to heterogeniety between the two subgroups in terms of other factors (confounding variables) that can also produce a difference in the study's outcome results. In Phil Cheetham's study of 39 golfers, heterogeneity in lead hand grip strength values between the two groups is a major potential noise factor, that potentially dooms his study to having a low signal/noise ratio, which when multiplied by the square root of a very small sample size of only 39 golfers, inevitably causes his study to end up with a very low "confidence" value (very low level of scientific conclusiveness). Terry Rowles and Mike Adams harbor an arbitrary rigid belief that the strength of the trail hand grip is the major determinative factor that explains why the body/arms move in a particular way during a full golf swing action. However, I believe that their opinion is incorrect and I believe that many pro golfers do not swing in the way predicted by TR/MA. Consider an example featuring Patrick Reed. TR/MA believe that if a pro golfer adopts a weak ("on-top") trail hand grip that he will very likely perform his full golf swing action in a similar manner to Patrick Reed. TR/MA state that the adoption of an "on-top" trail hand grip will likely produce i) a flying trail elbow at the P4 position; ii) a punch elbow motion of the trail arm between P4 => P6 down a high-track path that will get iii) the trail elbow to a rear-linkage position at P6; that will likely result in an early release of the club so that iv) the clubshaft has very little forward shaft lean at impact. They also state that the "on-top" golfer will likely use a launcher pattern of pelvic motion and that v) he will likely not have a very open pelvis/upper torso alignment at impact and there will also be vi) very little right lateral bend present at impact. All those predicted features can be seen in Patrick Reed's driver swing action. Capture images of Patrick Reed's early-mid downswing.
Patrick Reed has a flying trail elbow at P4 (image 1) and he then uses a punch elbow motion of his trail arm between P4 => P6 that gets his trail elbow to a rear-linkage position at P6 (image 3).
Capture images of Patrick Reed's late downswing.
Note that Patrick Reed hands only reach his mid-thigh location at impact and that he has very little forward shaft lean at impact.
Note that he has very little right lateral bend and he does not have an open pelvis/upper torso alignment at impact.
Capture images of Patrick Reed's non-DH hand release action.
Image 1 is at impact, image 2 is at P7.2 when his clubhead is about 18" post-impact and image 3 is at P7.4 when his clubhead is about 3 feet post-impact.
Note that his lead hand is not moving assertively targetwards during his early followthrough time period, and that allows the clubshaft to bypass his lead arm (from an angular rotational perspective).
Note that his trail shoulder is not moving more downplane under his chin during his early followthrough and that causes a "running-out-of-trail arm" scenario where his trail arm and trail wrist become fully straightened => that causes his trail forearm to pronate a lot while the clubshaft bypasses his lead arm => note how that causes his clubface to roll closed post-impact.
TR/MA seemingly believe that all these biomechanical phenomena are causally-linked to the fact that Patrick Reed has adopted a weak ("on-top") trail hand grip. I think that their opinion has zero merit because there are many pro golfers who adopt an "on-top" trail hand grip, but they have a very different pattern of body/arm motions during the downswing and early followthrough.
I will now consider a few pro golfers who all use an "on-top" trail hand grip, but who swing very differently to Patrick Reed.
Capture images of Matthew Fitzpatrick's downswing action.
Image 1 is at P4, image 2 is at P5, image 3 is at P6, image 4 is at P6.25, image 5 is at impact (P7) and image 6 is at P7.2.
Note that MF is actively adducting his trail upper arm while using a pitch elbow motion of his trail elbow during his early downswing that gets his trail elbow well below his lead elbow at his P5 position. Note that he is also shallowing his clubshaft down to the elbow plane between P4 => P6 (note how low his hands are positioned at his P6 position).
Note that he has his trail elbow in a center-linkage position at P6, and note that he has also has acquired a lot of right lateral bend by P6.
Note that his hands are well forward at impact and that he has a lot of forward shaft lean at impact.
Note that his pelvis has rotated to a much more open position by impact.
Capture images of Matthew Fitzpatrick's DH-hand release action.
Image 1 is at impact, image 2 is at P7.1, image 3 is at P7.2 and image 4 is at P7.4.
Note that MF is using a DH-hand release action and he does not allow his clubshaft to bypass his lead arm (from an angular rotational perspective) between P7 => P7.4, which therefore enables him to keep his clubface square to his clubhead path post-impact.
Note that MF is not stalling his targetwards motion of his lead arm/hand during his early followthrough and that is a necessary requirement for a DH-hand release action through the early followthrough time period.
Note that MF is ensuring that his trail shoulder continues to move downplane under his chin during his early followthrough and that enables him to avoid a "running-out-of-trail arm" scenario - note that he still has a partially bent trail arm and a partially extended trail wrist at P7.4 (image 4) and note that his trail forearm never pronates post-impact to such a degree that it causes his trail palm to roll-over the top of his club handle.
Matthew Fitzpatrick is obviously using a lead arm swinging action combined with a DH-hand release action through impact, and his body/arm motions are very different to that seen in Patrick Reed's driver swing action - despite the fact that they both use a weak ("on-top") trail hand grip.
Here is another example of a skilled golfer using an "on-top" trail hand grip, but he uses a pivot-induced lead arm swinging action combined with an intact LFFW/GFLW swing technique combined with a DH-hand release action through impact.
Capture images of Kelvin Miyahira's student-golfer.
Image 1 is at P6, image 2 is at P6.5, image 3 is at impact and image 4 is at P7.4.
I have drawn a red line over his lower radial bone in his lower lead forearm and a green line along his proximal clubshaft. Note that the red line is straight-line-aligned with the green line (from an angular rotational perspective) all the way between P6 => P7.4, which means that he is using an intact LFFW/GFLW swing technique.
Note that his clubshaft does not bypass his lead arm (from an angular rotational perspective) between P7 => P7.4, which means that he is using a DH-hand release action.
Note how much he is rotating both his pelvis and upper torso counterclockwise between P6 => P7.4 and note that both his pelvis/upper torso are very open at impact.
Note that he does not have a "running-out-of-trail arm" scenario between P7 => P7.4 and note that he still has a partially bent trail arm and partially extended trail wrist at P7.4. Note that his trail palm is still in an "on-top" position at P7.4, but his trail palm never rolls over the top of his club handle (as seen in Patrick Reed's followthrough action).
This golfer's body/arm motions during his downswing and early followthrough are very different to those seen in Patrick Reed's driver swing action - despite the fact that both use a weak ("on-top") trail hand grip.
Finally, consider Patrick Rodgers' driver swing action.
Capture images of Patrick Rodgers' downswing action.
Image 1 is at P4, image 2 is at P5, image 3 is at P6, image 4 is at P6.5 and image 5 is just passed impact.
Patrick Rodgers uses a weak ("on-top") trail hand grip and also a weak lead hand grip.
Note that Patrick Rodgers uses a very active trail upper arm adduction maneuver combined with a pitch elbow motion of his trail elbow between P4 => P6 and he gets his trail elbow in front of his trail hip (center-linkage position) at P6.
Note how much he rotates his pelvis and upper torso counterclockwise to a very open alignment by impact while he simultaneously acquires a significant amount of right lateral bend.
Note that he has his hands well forward at impact, and they are opposite his lead thigh.
Capture images of Patrick Rodger's DH-hand release action.
Image 1 is at P6.5, image 2 is at impact and image 3 is at P7.4.
Note that he is using a DH-hand release action between P7 => P7.4, and that the clubshaft does not bypass his lead arm (from an angular rotational perspective) during that time period, which allows him to keep the clubface square to the clubhead arc between P7 => P7.4. Note that he must be using a lead arm swinging action where he does not stall the targetwards motion of his lead arm during his early followthrough.
Note that his trail shoulder moves far downplane, which allows him to avoid a "running-out-of-trail arm" scenario, and that he still has a partially bent trail arm and a partially extended trail wrist at P7.4. Note that his trail palm does not roll over the top of his club handle during his early followthrough time period.
Patrick Rodgers is using a pivot-induced lead arm swinging action combined with an intact LFFW/GFLW swing technique combined with a DH-hand release action through impact - despite the fact that he is using an "on-top" trail hand grip like Patrick Reed - and his body/arm motions are very different to that seen in Patrick Reed's driver swing action.
Terry Rowles claims that Patrick Rodgers actually tests positive for an "under" trail hand grip when tested using TR/MA's trail arm folding screening test, and he also claims that Patrick Rodgers would perform his driver golf swing action better if he changed his "on-top" trail hand grip to an "under" trail hand grip. Why does he harbor that opinion? What is wrong with Patrick Rodgers' driver golf swing action and how would his golf swing action definitely be improved if he uses an "under" trail hand grip?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 25, 2021 13:38:48 GMT -5
This is my 9th post regarding my analysis of the opinions expressed by participants in the UGL's 12 webinar video sessions. In this post I am going to focus my analysis on Terry Rowles/Mike Adams and Phil Cheetham/Sasho MacKenzie's opinions regarding the relationship between the strength of the trail hand grip and the handle twist velocity (HTV) near impact. Watch this video featuring Mike Adams. In this grip verification test video, Mike Adams explains how you know that you have "dialed-in" the correct trail hand grip strength.
Note that he starts with a strong trail hand grip and he then swings the club from waist-high-to-waist-high using only his trail arm. He states that if you "feel" the clubface closing near impact, then the trail hand grip strength is too strong. In other words, he is associating a strong trail hand grip with a high HTV value through impact. He then states that one should weaken the trail hand grip strength until one does not "feel" the clubface closing near impact. In other words, he is associating a weak trail hand grip with a low HTV value through impact.
I can personally understand why a strong trail hand grip could cause a higher HTV value near impact in his demonstration and that is because the right forearm is more supinated at the start of the trail arm motion. Then, when the club swings across the front of his torso the right forearm will more easily rotate counterclockwise secondary to the RYKE-like phenomenon, which is a passive rotary phenomenon.
See this video where Kevin Ryan explains the RYKE phenomenon.
The RYKE phenomenon applies to a double pendulum system that has a passive rotary joint inbuilt into the peripheral end of the central arm. If the clubhead is an open position at the start of the double pendular motion, and if a small impulse causes the clubhead to move outwards away from the body, then the peripheral end of the central arm will start to passively rotate while the club is releasing at the level of the hinge joint. In Mike Adams' trail arm swinging action, the impedance to a passive rotary motion happening at the level of the lower trail forearm in a counterclockwise direction will be far less if the trail forearm is more supinated than if it is already pronated - so I can readily understand why a strong trail hand grip will result in a higher HTV value near impact in his demonstration.
However, according to Phil Cheetham and Sasho MacKenzie a weak trail hand grip strength is actually associated with a higher HTV value near impact in pro golfers - which would represent exactly the opposite causal relationship.
Phil Cheetham did a small study on 38 pro golfers - 19 had a strong trail hand grip and 19 had a weak trail hand grip - to determine the relationship between the trail hand grip strength and the HTV near impact.
Here is the result of his study.
Note that the strong trail hand grip subgroup had a mean HTV value of 1,222 degrees/second near impact while the weak trail hand grip subgroup had a mean HTV value of 1,401 degrees/second near impact. The difference is actually very small - <200 degrees/second, which is less than the standard deviation value of 249-306 degrees/second, and the study's P value barely reaches a significance value of P = 0.05.
From my perspective, Phil Cheetham's small study is highly flawed because his sample size is very small and the study's signal/noise ratio is far too low - I discussed this issue of how to establish "confidence" in the scientific validity of a research study involving two subgroups in my 8th post. Most importantly, Phil Cheetham makes no attempt to offer a causal explanation that would explain why a weak trail hand grip would cause a higher HTV value near impact.
Sasho MacKenzie has access to Phil Cheetham's data and he did an inverse dynamics type of study to try to determine the amount of rotary torque that was being produced during the downswing in order to cause the high HTV value near impact in a pro golfer who adopted a weak trail hand grip.
Here is a Sasho-presented example of an individual pro golfer (presumably from Phil Cheetham's data set), who has a weak trail hand grip, and who has very high HTV value of >2,000 degrees/second near impact. Note that this individual pro golfer has a HTV value of 2,120 degrees/second near impact. That is a very high HTV measurement - considering that the high HTV subgroup in Phil Cheetham's small study had a mean HTV value of 1,401 degrees/second and a SD of 306/degrees/second, which means that the upper HTV limit of 68% of the pro golfers, who had the weakest trail hand grip among the 93 pro golfers in Phil Cheetham's data base, was 1,707 degrees/second. That means that Sasho MacKenzie is featuring an extreme outlier to make an ill-defined point.
Here is Sasho MacKenzie's calculated rotary torque graph for a pro golfer who has a high HTV value of ~2,000 degrees/second near impact
Note that the golfer is actively producing a large rotary torque in his later downswing in order to induce a high HTV value of ~2,000 degrees/second near impact.
How is that pro golfer producing that large amount of rotary torque? Is he actively rotating his trail forearm in a pronatory direction using the active muscle contraction of his trail forearm's pronator muscles? How does he perform his hand release action through impact? Is he rolling his trail forearm in a pronatory direction so much between P6 => P7 so that his trail palm is rolling over the top of his club handle through impact - as seen in the following capture image of Terry Rowles? Note that Terry Rowles has pronated his trail forearm so much in his "on-top" image that his trail palm has rolled over the top of his club handle, and that it has also caused his clubshaft to bypass his lead arm from an angular rotational perspective.
I would like to see capture images of that individual pro golfer who is generating a high HTV value of 2,120 degrees/second near impact. Sasho MacKenzie can present capture images that only show the golfer's arm/hand action below elbow level in his capture images (thereby maintaining the necessary personal confidentiality of that individual pro golfer) and those capture images will allow us to see what is actually happening near impact, and through impact, with respect to his hand release action.
I strongly suspect that the hand release action of that individual pro golfer, who is generating a HTV value of 2,120 degrees near impact, is atypical and not representative of the "average" pro golfer who adopts a weak trail hand grip - so the basic question becomes-: "What can we learn from that outlier pro golfer that is useful from a golf instructional perspective"?
Look at these capture images of Matthew Fitzpatrick's hand release action. Image 3 is at P6, image 4 is at P6.2, image 5 is at impact and image 6 is at P7.2.
I have drawn a blue line over the middle of his trail elbow's antecubital fossa and a red line over his lower radial bone in his lower trail forearm. Note that the red line remains rotated clockwise relative to the blue line, which means that his trail forearm is continuously supinated between P6 => P7. He never over-pronates his trail forearm during his later downswing and he does not roll his trail palm over the top of his club handle through impact - note that his trail hand is still in an unchanged "on-top" position at P7.2 (image 6) and that he never rolls his trail palm over the top of his club handle through impact.
I cannot fathom what useful golf instructional information can be gleaned from the fact that a subset of pro golfers, who use a weak trail hand grip, have a large degree of counterclockwise rotation of their trail forearm during their late downswing and who then consequently perform a rolling subtype of non-DH hand release action through impact - as seen in the following capture images of Patrick Reed. Note how Patrick Reed's trail forearm is rotating a lot counterclockwise through impact and how that causes his rolling subtype of non-DH hand release action through impact, where his trail palm rotates over the top of his club handle while his clubshaft bypasses his stalled lead arm.
I can readily believe that a subset of pro golfers, who adopt a weak trail hand grip, have a large HTV measurement near impact and that they consequently perform a rolling subtype of non-DH hand release action through impact. However, it is readily possible to adopt a weak trail hand grip and not over-rotate the club handle during the late downswing and through impact - as seen in Matthew Fitzpatrick's DH-hand release action through impact.
Capture images of Matthew Fitzpatrick's DH-hand release action. Image 1 is at impact, image 2 is at P7.1, image 3 is at P7.2 and image 4 is at P7.4.
Note that Matthew Fitzpatrick does not allow the clubshaft to bypass his lead arm (from an angular rotational perspective) between P7 => P7.4 and that he consequently can keep his clubface square to his clubhead arc between P7 => P7.4 - despite the fact that he uses a weak trail hand grip.
I have no doubt that it is physically possible to generate a high HTV measurement near impact if a golfer uses a weak trail hand grip and if that golfer actively rolls his trail forearm a lot counterclockwise in his later downswing near impact. However, that type of hand release action is not necessarily desirable/advisable! So, the fundamental question arises - what useful golf instructional information can be gleaned from Sasho MacKenzie's outlier example of an individual pro golfer, who adopts a weak trail hand grip, and who generates a very high HTV measurement near impact? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Aug 26, 2021 19:44:51 GMT -5
Dr Mann
Just wondering why SMK didn't show the trail forearm rotational velocity graphs to see if there was any correlation with the 'torque about the shaft graph'.
There is also the added complication of the 'passive' SMK club squaring torque and I don't understand how one can differentiate between that type of 'torque effect' on the rotation of the shaft versus shaft rotation caused by muscular rotation of the forearms.
DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 27, 2021 17:41:36 GMT -5
Dr Mann Just wondering why SMK didn't show the trail forearm rotational velocity graphs to see if there was any correlation with the 'torque about the shaft graph'. There is also the added complication of the 'passive' SMK club squaring torque and I don't understand how one can differentiate between that type of 'torque effect' on the rotation of the shaft versus shaft rotation caused by muscular rotation of the forearms. DG I think that Sasho was recruited by Terry Rowles to perform research to foster his pre-formed "belief" that a weak trail hand grip is correlated with a higher HTV near impact. I don't think that Sasho was really thinking of how best to show a causal relationship between trail hand grip strength and the HTV value near impact by examining all the potential biomechanical factors that could be implicated. I agree that it would be useful to have measured the degree of counterclockwise rotation of the trail forearm in weak trail hand grip golfers who have a high HTV near impact versus those who have a lower HTV value near impact. I suspect that Patrick Reed has a higher HTV value near impact than Matthew Fitzpatrick. The situation is complex because the degree of straightening of the right wrist, and the degree of counterclockwise trail wrist circumductory roll motion, happening near impact is also probably a significant causal factor that can potentially cause a higher HTV measurement. Also, I don't know how one can differentiate between an active trail forearm rotary motion versus a passive rotation secondary to a "running-out-of-trail arm" scenario. Finally, how does one rationally estimate how much the HTV measurement near impact is affected by the strength of the lead hand grip and the magnitude of the PA#3 release action secondary to lead forearm supination? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Aug 27, 2021 19:11:37 GMT -5
"I think that Sasho was recruited by Terry Rowles to perform research to foster his pre-formed "belief" that a weak trail hand grip is correlated with a higher HTV near impact"
I got that feeling too and ditto with Phil Cheetham .
DG
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Nov 12, 2021 17:55:10 GMT -5
I've found the explanation for why a lateral movement of the shoulder socket could increase clubhead speed. I bought Jorgensen's book 'The Physics Of Golf' and its explained in his topic titled 'Five Experiments'. Coincidentally , it's similar to a previous post of mine quite awhile ago but I didn't take into account the increased speed caused by the braking action (but this is explained in Jorgensen's book). DG The thread where I offered an explanation is here. newtongolfinstitute.proboards.com/thread/805/reach-maximal-speed-sooner-downswing?page=3I've just provided a general approximated description of the kinetics below but obviously one needs to understand how eccentric forces can cause rotation. I cannot understand why you have the braking force operating at the level of the left shoulder socket. When MA/TR/SL talk about a braking force they refer to the pelvis braking so that it does not continue to glide left-laterally towards the target - and it is secondary to a negative horizontal GRF happening at the level of the left foot, which requires that a large vertical GRF is simultaneously being generated under the left foot. I do not understand how one can brake the left-lateral pelvis sway motion via a negative horizontal GRF being generated under the lead foot without generating a large vertical GRF at the same time. That pelvis braking action potentially allows a moment arm to operate around a braking point that is at the level of the left pelvic crest, which causes the left-sided mid-upper torso to rotate counterclockwise and thereby elevate the left shoulder socket (presuming that the left side of the mid-upper torso can significantly extend, which depends on a golfer's spinal flexibility). As the left shoulder socket elevates between P5.5 => P7 it can increase the MoF acting centripetally at the level of the club handle and it can potentially increase the speed of release of PA#2. I suspect that the efficacy of this phenomenon is dependent on a golfer's flexibility and that it will work best in a golfer who can arch his upper thoracic spine away from the target so that his head moves downwards-and-away from the target while he simultaneously acquires a large amount of right lateral bend.
I am not surprised that SL cannot explain why that Thai golfer can generate large pelvic rotary speeds without first generating a large "spin" torque - because he does not take into account the possibility that the pelvis can be induced to rotate counterclockwise via the activation of the right-sided lateral pelvic rotator muscles and not solely via the horizontal GRFs being generated under the feet (right forefoot pushing away from the ball-target line while the left forefoot pushes towards the ball-target line). Jeff.
I'm still confused by the horizontal braking force when I see this video by Dr Scott Lynn www.facebook.com/ImproveYourSwing/videos/348040843066534/How does the braking horizontal component create clubhead speed unless it either speeds up the 'lead arm/hand' or changes the hand path to optimise the 'In Plane Mof' on the COM of the clubhead? I cannot understand the example he gave which implies that the lead arm is somehow stopped and that increases the angular rotational speed of the club. How can a golfer stop/brake the dynamic motion of the left arm in the downswing the way he described? DG Note : Dr Mann did comment below on Dr Scott Lynn's reply back to me about horizontal braking force and how he theorised it could create clubhead speed. ----------------------------------------- SL stated-: "It is interesting to note that in a few of the fastest long drive competitors in the world that I have had the opportunity to measure, the horizontal braking GRF peaks at the same time as the vertical GRF. If the golfer is able to peak the vertical and horizontal braking GRFs at the same time and transfer these forces through the body to the club, this could result in the net force on the club having a large magnitude and being directed more away from the target in the late downswing, thus increasing the moment arm between the line of action of the net force and the center for mass of the club. This would increase the in plane moment of force during the late downswing, when Dr. Mackenzie’s work has shown us that this particular moment is dominant in speeding up the club (the CoM of the club trying to “line up” with the line of action of that force vector)." That makes no sense to me. Doesn't the peak vertical and horizontal braking forces happen at around P5.5. Why should it affect the net force (which is mainly due to the MoF) that is happening at around P6.7 (in his diagram), which is much later in the downswing? Also, at that late stage of the release of PA#2, why should any additional force be needed to speed up the release of the club? ----------------- Addendum : There is still the parametric acceleration concept that could increase clubhead speed theoretically by ~5% . The red dots seem to be where the hand path might deviate (around P6.5) and become more curved and influence the magnitude of the 'In Plane Net Force' and its direction to create a larger 'In Plane Mof' . The above diagram, from Miura's research article [14], shows how the hub radius shortens through impact as the hands move higher (red dots) and that action pulls the clubhead higher through impact. This hub radius shortening action is due to elevation of the left shoulder socket through impact. Miura calculated that this action produced parametric acceleration of the clubhead and he estimated that it could add ~5% to clubhead speed. There are two ways to achieve this parametric acceleration - i) one could elevate the upper swing center, and therefore the left shoulder socket, by "jumping up" through impact or ii) one could keep the upper swing center stationary while elevating the left shoulder socket as result of extending the left side of the body. The disadvantage of the "jumping up" method is that is that it can create an inconsistent elevation of the hands, and therefore clubhead, through impact, from swing-to-swing. I think that keeping the upper swing center stationary, while elevating the left shoulder as one extends the left side of the body, can create a smoother and more consistent degree of parametric acceleration through impact. Actually Dr Mann did a revision of parametric acceleration and there are 4 ways. i) he can increase the degree of straightening of his left leg thereby increasing the degree of elevation of his left hip joint; ii) he can increasingly stretch-lengthen the left side of his mid-upper torso, iii) he can elevate his left clavicle more skywards than usual in a manner that is independent of the stretch-lengthening of the left side of his mid-torso; and iv) he can get up on his toes, or even jump-off the ground, in order to elevate his left hip joint even more just before impact
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Nov 13, 2021 7:34:10 GMT -5
Even Dr Kwon seems to infer the same belief that its the timing of the slowing of the body parts that speed the club up www.drkwongolf.info/biom/kinem-kin.htmlHere is an extract from his website. "For example, in the study of golf swing, kinematics focuses on details of the swing 'motion' such as the shape of the clubhead path, positions of the body and club at various swing events, velocities of the body parts and club, and the timing of slow-down of the body for speed-up of the club" I however thought it was the natural release of the club that slows down the lead arm not some active biomechanical action to slow the lead arm first which will then accelerate the club. Although the physics of Rod White's explanation (using Centrifugal Force) on Tutelman's wesbite is not wholly accurate , the below does seem to make sense. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The figure shows a ‘stroboscopic’ view of the golf swing. Have a close look at the direction of the clubhead midway through the swing – this is indicated approximately by the red arrow. Now look where the hands move at the same time – the blue arrow: in a different direction! Obviously the hands and clubhead cannot continue to move in different directions, they are restrained by the fixed length of the shaft. The diverging directions of the club and hands results in a large tension in the shaft. The tension pulls against the club head causing it to accelerate, and pulls against the hands causing them to decelerate. It is the differing directions of the hands and club that are ultimately responsible for the energy transfer. ------------------------------------------------------------ According to the bolded underlined sentence above , its only when the club is made to accelerate first by forces via the hands will the club then pull on the 'hands/wrist joints/arms' to slow them down. However, I can understand that parts of the body might need to be actively slowed down in one direction to move in another to alter the hand path. DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 14, 2021 16:50:32 GMT -5
I cannot really understand why braking of the pivot action should increase clubhead speed - other than the "idea" that the release of the lead arm (release of PA#4) requires that the lead arm must travel faster than the speed of the pivot motion. Think of throwing a frisbee back-handed using a pivot-induced release of the lead arm. The throw speed is increased if the pivot brakes so that the lead arm can catapult away from the torso.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Nov 14, 2021 20:10:08 GMT -5
I cannot really understand why braking of the pivot action should increase clubhead speed - other than the "idea" that the release of the lead arm (release of PA#4) requires that the lead arm must travel faster than the speed of the pivot motion. Think of throwing a frisbee back-handed using a pivot-induced release of the lead arm. The throw speed is increased if the pivot brakes so that the lead arm can catapult away from the torso. Jeff. If the pivot is being used to accelerate the left arm , then energy must be transferred from the pivot to the arm . If that is the case the pivot will naturally slow down as it loses energy to the left arm. If the golfer resists against the deceleration of the pivot by using muscular contractions and ground reaction forces , surely it will have the capability to transfer more energy to the left arm. This was proved in Sasho MacKenzies model where he tried optimising the torques (set within the capabilities of human limitations) to maximise clubhead speed (extract from Dave Tutelmans website below). ---------------------------------------------------- Maximum Clubhead Speed
The most telling change that MacKenzie made was to run the optimization program again. But this time, instead of making the closest match to the original measured golfer, the program was trying to achieve the greatest clubhead speed. (Of course, constraints were added so that a real, human golfer of the same size and strength would be able to make the optimized swing.) Another point to note: the large-muscle torques, the shoulder and especially the torso, continue to provide accelerating torque right through impact. In fact, the torso torque is increasing until immediately before impact.[1] That is a lesson we could also learn from the double-pendulum model (see my article on accelerating through impact); but the fact that a speed-optimized model recommends it definitely reinforces the lesson. ----------------------------------- However , there is a way to create an increase in the upper torso rotational torque to pull the left arm around faster and that's by braking the pelvis rotation not the upper torso. Look at the golfer image below and lets regard it as a left handed golfer where the swing has progressed into the follow-through. Look at what a braking torque applied to the 'pelvis/lower back' in a counter-clockwise direction (when looking down from a birds-eye view) will do to the upper torso. It will cause a 'reaction' torque in the upper torso in the clockwise direction. So if we applied the same to a right-handed golfer , a braking torque applied to the 'pelvis/lower back' in a clockwise direction will create an increased 'reaction' torque on the torso in the counter-clockwise direction. But the above applies to braking rotational torques not horizontal lateral braking forces. Addendum 15th Nov : For the left arm to be torqued around by the upper torso as implied above, there must be some sort of connection between the left arm and the torso so that it acts like a single unit.I am assuming a horizontal braking ground reaction force would have to occur in the frontal or coronal plane but that would involve the pelvis rotating like the image further below. This is where a torque is applied to move the right hip up while the lift hip moves down . This would cause a reaction torque on the thoracic spine as shown and help rotate the shoulders counter-clockwise (from a face on view) in the frontal plane and also pull the left arm down (from purely a physics perspective ). But this is not what is happening in a real golf swing (and it is biomechanically unnatural + the increase in left arm speed would be very small) therefore I don't think horizontal braking force has any direct effect on generating clubhead speed but could theoretically be required to facilitate another biomechanical action that might effect clubhead speed (ie. like the vertical ground reaction force that seems to happen at the same time). DG
|
|
|
Post by studentofthegame on Feb 28, 2022 10:06:58 GMT -5
Dr Mann, I am a new member. I have been following your information for a long time, back with your original website. I learned a vast amount from your research which I thank you for. I appreciate the time and effort you have put into your work. Not many people have done the extensive research you have and can back it up. From your website and your references, my favorite (personal opinion of course) golf book is Swing Like a Pro by Fred Griffin and Ralph Mann. Combining the thoughts in that book with your work has led me down a path of great golf and quickly. I am 36 years old, entering my 6th full season of serious golf, and I play to a 2 handicap. I have been that handicap for a full season now. Now, here is why I have finally joined the forum. Last summer (July of 2021), I finally bit the bullet and went to see Mike Adams for a lesson since he is only about 1 hour from my house. I have seen his and TR's information and was extremely curious. Here are my measurements based on their system: Side Cover grip Wingspan longer than height Forearm longer than upper arm No external shoulder rotation Center post Once he measured me and I hit some shots, there was an instant improvement. I will present some details. My left hand grip had to be strengthened (based on their Edel Grip analyzer) which was a simple test. Grip the club with your normal left hand grip and turn through with your hips from address. This showed whether the face was open or closed at impact. My club was open about 5 degrees so we strengthened the left hand. Right hand was slightly on top of the grip being a side cover golfer. When I open my right hand, the palm of my right hand has to angle somewhere around my left foot. He said that is where my right hand has to be on the club for side cover. OK, good so far. Now, with wingspan longer than height and forearm longer than upper arm, my backswing will be more upright and my downswing will be steeper. This I questioned from the start. I can understand the more upright backswing, but why did my downswing automatically have to be steep? Next was the external shoulder rotation test. I am a right handed golfer, so the test was performed on my right arm/shoulder. You raise your right arm directly to the side of your body and raise your forearm so your palm is facing the target line. From there, he takes your hand and sees how far back your arm can go behind you. I apparently have zero external shoulder rotation. MA states that the more external shoulder rotation you have, the easier it is to naturally shallow the club. Next is the "posting". You put a club across the tops of your legs and turn back. I had no weight shift back so I am a center post. For reference, I really did not gain any club head speed. I generally am around 112-115 mph with my driver. Occasionally I would see 117-118 if he wanted me to go after one hard. Just wanted to point that out very quickly. With this information, he said I need to stand closer to the ball at address because long arms means stand closer and more upright. Helps with the upright backswing. I also need to drop my right foot back slightly and play from a closed stance due to zero external shoulder rotation. This helps shallow the club since I can not do it naturally. This would be for ALL normal, full shots with any club. Once I hit some, he also had me flare my left foot out about 30 degrees. He stated that left foot flare determines with the left leg locks up and it helps release the club. And this was the kicker. Based on my measurements, my swing path has to feel, and emphasize the feel, like it goes from outside to inside. I have never heard someone say I deliberately had to swing out to in. But he stated the weaker right hand (side cover) means I will naturally hinge the club to the outside and release is to the left. He believes the right hand in the golf swing is much like shooting a basketball. It has to release. And depending on the type of golfer you are, side, on top, or under, determines whether you release the club left (side cover), down the line (side on), or to the right (under). And the backswing hinge is also determined by the right hand grip. On top hinges up, side on hinges straight back, and under hinges more to the inside. Now, on to the shots that I hit and the improvement I mentioned above. One thing that struck me instantly was curvature of my ball flight increased significantly. Big push draws (for me, they were big). But the ball was falling at my target line. Not my normal ball flight at all. So for one hour, I was very intrigued. I left there hitting the ball better than I ever have. He really emphasized arm swing. If I can swing my arms fast, my body and specifically lower body would react properly. He said a sprinting coach has told him the faster you move your arms, the faster your legs move. So this was the main focus of my personal lesson. One thing he did mention which really stuck with me was the fact that due to me having the steeper downswing, I am very prone to "early extension" and I have to accept that fact. He couldn't really explain why, but said because my downswing is steeper, my body will naturally raise up to make space, hence early extension. I took that one with an extreme grain of salt. We also worked on lower body movements and really showed me how I have to move the hips. MA stated that due to my slightly closed stance, I have to focus hard on lower body action. I really have to push off the ground with my right side and clear my left side. And as I mentioned earlier, he places extreme emphasis on the left leg locking up at the right time. He stated that this helps release the club to the ball. I was very skeptical of that as well. Overall, he did say based on my measurements, I would launch the ball lower with a lot of spin because of my naturally steeper angle of attack. So I booked another lesson for 6 weeks from then so we could assess my practice/play after I had worked on this a bit. I would have really good days and some days where the whole property was in play. It was quite discouraging because I left his lesson tee with all of the confidence in the world. But two things really stuck out in the six weeks between lessons. One was I had an extreme tendency to get stuck on the downswing. Right hand was always coming off of the club. Two, was the nature of my misses. I rarely missed right. But the left side of the course was all of a sudden back in play for me. It was either really hard pull hooks (center face contact) or the really, really big miss was the strike off the toe that was a dead hook. The toe strikes were mostly with longer clubs, especially driver. This really bothered me because driving the ball is one of my strengths. So that really discouraged me because I rarely am in serious trouble off of the tee. So I stuck with this for 6 weeks and went back for my second lesson. I told him my concerns and we focused on getting stuck and the toe strikes. He said to solve getting stuck, I really need to emphasize my out to in path. For the toe strikes, I am standing too far from the ball. I really didn't believe either of these. So I did my hour with him and went on my way. I personally have not played his way since then. Funny thing is, doing some research and speaking with other people who I now know have seen MA, getting stuck seems to be the common denominator, regardless of measurements which I thought was interesting. I did not join to bash MA and TR. I just wanted to share my personal experience. If anyone has any questions I am happy to answer them. I also wanted to leave these two videos here in case anyone has not seen them since they are relatively new. It is the same player. He had the exact experience I had. Automatic improvement. I have no clue how he is playing but just wanted to share them. www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_1XPDy6GhAwww.youtube.com/watch?v=0RIROXoGcckThanks guys. Again, I am open to any questions you guys may have.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 28, 2022 11:05:44 GMT -5
Dr Mann, I am a new member. I have been following your information for a long time, back with your original website. I learned a vast amount from your research which I thank you for. I appreciate the time and effort you have put into your work. Not many people have done the extensive research you have and can back it up. From your website and your references, my favorite (personal opinion of course) golf book is Swing Like a Pro by Fred Griffin and Ralph Mann. Combining the thoughts in that book with your work has led me down a path of great golf and quickly. I am 36 years old, entering my 6th full season of serious golf, and I play to a 2 handicap. I have been that handicap for a full season now. Now, here is why I have finally joined the forum. Last summer (July of 2021), I finally bit the bullet and went to see Mike Adams for a lesson since he is only about 1 hour from my house. I have seen his and TR's information and was extremely curious. Here are my measurements based on their system: Side Cover grip Wingspan longer than height Forearm longer than upper arm No external shoulder rotation Center post Once he measured me and I hit some shots, there was an instant improvement. I will present some details. My left hand grip had to be strengthened (based on their Edel Grip analyzer) which was a simple test. Grip the club with your normal left hand grip and turn through with your hips from address. This showed whether the face was open or closed at impact. My club was open about 5 degrees so we strengthened the left hand. Right hand was slightly on top of the grip being a side cover golfer. When I open my right hand, the palm of my right hand has to angle somewhere around my left foot. He said that is where my right hand has to be on the club for side cover. OK, good so far. Now, with wingspan longer than height and forearm longer than upper arm, my backswing will be more upright and my downswing will be steeper. This I questioned from the start. I can understand the more upright backswing, but why did my downswing automatically have to be steep? Next was the external shoulder rotation test. I am a right handed golfer, so the test was performed on my right arm/shoulder. You raise your right arm directly to the side of your body and raise your forearm so your palm is facing the target line. From there, he takes your hand and sees how far back your arm can go behind you. I apparently have zero external shoulder rotation. MA states that the more external shoulder rotation you have, the easier it is to naturally shallow the club. Next is the "posting". You put a club across the tops of your legs and turn back. I had no weight shift back so I am a center post. For reference, I really did not gain any club head speed. I generally am around 112-115 mph with my driver. Occasionally I would see 117-118 if he wanted me to go after one hard. Just wanted to point that out very quickly. With this information, he said I need to stand closer to the ball at address because long arms means stand closer and more upright. Helps with the upright backswing. I also need to drop my right foot back slightly and play from a closed stance due to zero external shoulder rotation. This helps shallow the club since I can not do it naturally. This would be for ALL normal, full shots with any club. Once I hit some, he also had me flare my left foot out about 30 degrees. He stated that left foot flare determines with the left leg locks up and it helps release the club. And this was the kicker. Based on my measurements, my swing path has to feel, and emphasize the feel, like it goes from outside to inside. I have never heard someone say I deliberately had to swing out to in. But he stated the weaker right hand (side cover) means I will naturally hinge the club to the outside and release is to the left. He believes the right hand in the golf swing is much like shooting a basketball. It has to release. And depending on the type of golfer you are, side, on top, or under, determines whether you release the club left (side cover), down the line (side on), or to the right (under). And the backswing hinge is also determined by the right hand grip. On top hinges up, side on hinges straight back, and under hinges more to the inside. Now, on to the shots that I hit and the improvement I mentioned above. One thing that struck me instantly was curvature of my ball flight increased significantly. Big push draws (for me, they were big). But the ball was falling at my target line. Not my normal ball flight at all. So for one hour, I was very intrigued. I left there hitting the ball better than I ever have. He really emphasized arm swing. If I can swing my arms fast, my body and specifically lower body would react properly. He said a sprinting coach has told him the faster you move your arms, the faster your legs move. So this was the main focus of my personal lesson. One thing he did mention which really stuck with me was the fact that due to me having the steeper downswing, I am very prone to "early extension" and I have to accept that fact. He couldn't really explain why, but said because my downswing is steeper, my body will naturally raise up to make space, hence early extension. I took that one with an extreme grain of salt. We also worked on lower body movements and really showed me how I have to move the hips. MA stated that due to my slightly closed stance, I have to focus hard on lower body action. I really have to push off the ground with my right side and clear my left side. And as I mentioned earlier, he places extreme emphasis on the left leg locking up at the right time. He stated that this helps release the club to the ball. I was very skeptical of that as well. Overall, he did say based on my measurements, I would launch the ball lower with a lot of spin because of my naturally steeper angle of attack. So I booked another lesson for 6 weeks from then so we could assess my practice/play after I had worked on this a bit. I would have really good days and some days where the whole property was in play. It was quite discouraging because I left his lesson tee with all of the confidence in the world. But two things really stuck out in the six weeks between lessons. One was I had an extreme tendency to get stuck on the downswing. Right hand was always coming off of the club. Two, was the nature of my misses. I rarely missed right. But the left side of the course was all of a sudden back in play for me. It was either really hard pull hooks (center face contact) or the really, really big miss was the strike off the toe that was a dead hook. The toe strikes were mostly with longer clubs, especially driver. This really bothered me because driving the ball is one of my strengths. So that really discouraged me because I rarely am in serious trouble off of the tee. So I stuck with this for 6 weeks and went back for my second lesson. I told him my concerns and we focused on getting stuck and the toe strikes. He said to solve getting stuck, I really need to emphasize my out to in path. For the toe strikes, I am standing too far from the ball. I really didn't believe either of these. So I did my hour with him and went on my way. I personally have not played his way since then. Funny thing is, doing some research and speaking with other people who I now know have seen MA, getting stuck seems to be the common denominator, regardless of measurements which I thought was interesting. I did not join to bash MA and TR. I just wanted to share my personal experience. If anyone has any questions I am happy to answer them. I also wanted to leave these two videos here in case anyone has not seen them since they are relatively new. It is the same player. He had the exact experience I had. Automatic improvement. I have no clue how he is playing but just wanted to share them. www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_1XPDy6GhAwww.youtube.com/watch?v=0RIROXoGcckThanks guys. Again, I am open to any questions you guys may have. My first question - what is the real purpose of posting your experience with a MA-lesson? What should we learn from your experience? Is there a particular message that you are specifically trying to communicate? Do you have any video of your MA-lesson or your post-lesson full golf swing action when you were plagued by pull-hooks and "getting stuck"? Do you have any videos of your driver golf swing before you visited MA, and do you have any videos of your present-day driver swing? How are you swinging now, and which golf instructional concepts are you specifically following at the present time? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by studentofthegame on Feb 28, 2022 11:26:44 GMT -5
My first question - what is the real purpose of posting your experience with a MA-lesson? What should we learn from your experience? Is there a particular message that you are specifically trying to communicate?
I only discovered this forum a couple of weeks ago. I have been going through it extensively and like the information being shared. Since I have a first hand experience with a topic that seems to have been a pretty lively following, I thought I would share my information. I was not trying to bash anything, not trying to try to tell anyone to stay away from these teachings. I was just hoping to share my experiences and give some of my results. No hidden agenda at all. My message was nothing but an experience that I thought I would share since this topic generated a lot of discussion.
Do you have any video of your MA-lesson or your post-lesson full golf swing action when you were plagued by pull-hooks and "getting stuck"?
I do not have any videos. I really wish I did.
Do you have any videos of your driver golf swing before you visited MA, and do you have any videos of your present-day driver swing?
I do not. Since my short time working on what I learned, I am back to my "old" swing. Swing Like a Pro thoughts mixed with what I have learned.
How are you swinging now, and which golf instructional concepts are you specifically following at the present time?
See above.
I apologize if I came off in any way you do not appreciate. I just saw a lot of information in this thread and I respect your opinions and thoughts. I wanted to share my experience. I thought maybe my first hand experience would generate some more discussion if anyone was interested.
|
|