Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

[bdbl]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

But isn't cynicism merely realism taken a little bit further ?

Actually you're right, I do have a pretty jaundiced view of the way the golf industry makes it money.

From the pseudo science of its technology marketing, through the churn them through approach of many of its coaches, taking in the course that can't resist closing the gap between groups to fit an extra four-ball every hour and making the afternoon a misery for everyone crawling round the course, and ending up with the club that "welcomes" 2-4-1 visitors as long as they use the outside toilet and don't want a drink at the members bar.

And you know its not really just down to the pupil; when the coach pushes "position comparisons" and the pupil wants to improve it is sometimes difficult to realise that the emperor has no clothes on.

[Neil18]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

And you know its not really just down to the pupil; when the coach pushes "position comparisons" and the pupil wants to improve it is sometimes difficult to realise that the emperor has no clothes on.

So the pupil has the difficulty...................so we agree!

All any man can do with information is interpret it.

As I said earlier, I've never known a golf coach look to clone me or anyone I know. The emperor may be starkers, but to know for sure you need the right pair of glasses.

[bdbl]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

So the pupil has the difficulty...................so we agree!

Oh yes, we agree the pupil has a problem. Just like if a hit and run driver smashes into my car and drives off I have a problem; doesn't mean I caused it.

As I said earlier, I've never known a golf coach look to clone me or anyone I know.

You know Neil, from the fact that you feel it necessary to repeat this I guess ................we must agree.

Cloning are attempts are not a good idea; it does happen thouigh doesn't it? Come to think about didn't we just have a heated debate about that guy in Hawaii who wants everyone to swing just like Tiger.

[qassim]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

On the subject of cloning I think all I need to mention is Tiger Woods and Adam Scott !

If it's good enough for the pros why isn't it good enough for the amateurs.

[rotator]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

A further observation regarding Sam Snead.

He was a blessed physical speciman. He was a natural athlete. I took the time to quickly check and this is but only one result.

http://www.brownbears.com/sports/m-f...ead_sam00.html

He was planning on a pro football career, but a back injury stopped that. He could have done well in any sporting endeavour he chose. He had a flexible body. You know of his trick of entertaining his friends by kicking one leg extended straight to the ceiling, while his planted leg stayed on the floor, and this in his dress shoes. He was able to do this when he was quite old.

Here's more insight to his fluid swing and a reference to the kicking display.

"The secret behind his amazing longevity was his fluid, classical swing. Unlike his great rivals Ben Hogan and Byron Nelson, who were born in the same year, Snead was blessed with a natural swing and never had to work at his game.

He was also exceptionally limber -- he always denied he was double-jointed -- and in his 60s won numerous wagers by betting that he could kick a seven-foot high ceiling.

"He has more natural rhythm than any man I've ever seen," Bill Campbell, a U.S. amateur champion and president of the U.S. Golf Association, once said of Snead.

"When he swings a club, his feet, knees and trunk all move, but it's so smooth it isn't apparent to the eye," said Campbell.

"People think of him as overpowering the ball, but that's never been true. He just gets everything together at the same time and place."


There are people who say he was too gregarious and did not have the killer instinct, otherwise he would have won more events and majors. But that seems to be what old Sam was, a fun loving farm boy at heart. Whenever you see him congratulating the winner, or being interviewed, he always has a chuckle and a wink in his eyes.

Ted

[vp27519]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

Neil,

Great vision of Mr SNEAD. I have never seen any of it before.

What I love is the maintaining of spine angle throughout and the clearance of the left hip on the downswing.

Nickers x

[vp27519]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

Hey there Robin,

I must admit my coach uses Staurt Appleby's as a swing comparison for me.

It's quite handy to see what coach is trying to explain.

Not only that, I can go away and pay close attention to Stuart when playing or what I see of him in the mags.

Nickers x

[LowPost42]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

A little late to the party, but I'll toss in my two cents.

The first thing I noticed is that it looks pretty 'rotary' or 'one plane' to me... to the point of what appears to be a slight reverse pivot caused by his incredible ability to keep his head firmly still in that 3 dimensional space. But unlike amateurs who do it, Sam stays firmly behind the ball and simply unwinds around his head.

As for checking positions and trying to make a cookie-cutter swing; I think it was another thread here where I agreed that there are checkpoints you can use to see how your swing is progressing as all great ball strikers have similar physical positions through impact (which is really all that matters - just ask super-accurate Jim Furyk) and it's here that it's worthwhile seeing yourself on video to find out the truth about your swing.

On the other hand, the Champions Tour is full of 'unique' swings that wouldn't hold up to a 'model' on a video; but those gents could still golf my socks off and leave me broke.

So is it worthwhile to have your swing videoed? I think so. Should you be manipulating yourself and your swing to 'hit positions'? I don't think so - work on the fundamentals and make your swing YOUR swing, and it'll take care of itself.

Case in point was a swing clinic I attended in January. The emphasis was on swinging in the most efficient, biomechanically correct way (as it applies to efficiency). They took a 70 year old golfer who had 'never been able to get his back to the target' and within 2 minutes had him there, easy peasy. In fact, with 11 other attendees ranging in age from 25 to 65 from 120 lbs to 300 lbs, from those that like 'real ale' to those that play middle linebacker, we were ALL getting our backs to the target, clubs pretty much perfectly on plane. We weren't copying anyone's particular swing, but we all looked similar as we were all using the same muscles to move - providing very similar movements in all participants. FWIW, the swing model is pull-pull with rotation around your spine. The interesting part is that a pull-pull swing can look exactly like a push-push, pull-push, or push-pull swing, but how you get there is totally different. Sam looks like a pull-push kind of guy.

[rotator]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

Good observations, LowPost, about the almost reverse pivot. Actually, as you know he had an over the top move, which is the dread of casual golfers, but he was able to stay behind the ball.

The OTT move gave him a high fade which he favoured.

Ted

[Neil18]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

Interesting stuff.

A few people have commented about his seemingly OTT swing. I don't believe it is, but it looks it. Especially with the longer clubs.

He'd quite often seem to set up closed to the target then suck the club back too far inside.

I think he actually just went back under plane and came down on it. Either way he almost always seemed to get the shaft angle back exactly where it was at address.

I have it on good authority that many in the circle of older golfers regard Sam as a better ball shaper than Hogan. He could do it all. Just slightly less conventionally. And his short game was awsome.

Sam's maintenance of his spine angle, and indeed his posture as a whole, I think is a massive key to his style of action.

In this clip, for example;

His spine angle doesn't change a bit. Right up until he's watching the ball fly away, he keeps his spine where it was at address. None of the modern disease of standing up out of the shot a la Tiger.

He's got so much room to ram his right arm through the shot it's rediculous.

In his younger, more supple days, Sam also has the classic action where his hips are pretty much past 45 degrees open to the target at impact. To do that, one must keep your spine angle. The minute one begins to straighten up, it destroys everything.

And all this while displaying almost unrivalled power for his day. Slamming Sammy was so named (apparently) because when he hit the ball it sounded like an old Rolls Royce car door being slammed shut.

I'd remortgage my house to go back in time and see him play.

[BrianW]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

He certainly had Popeye forearms, looked powerful and graceful.

[bill reed]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

hi
i think when you look at Hogan and Snead that both players always seemed to swing at about 95% of there power. both always looked to be in control of the ball and there swings.
both players always looked so relaxed over the ball.
how often you see a real bad shot form Hogan or Snead. a bad shot from them always seemed playable with no lost of shots.
if you watch Tiger his driving is often poor and its like he is giving it 110% and that cost him some matches as he hits it so long when he misses, he misses long and it sometimes costs him. he is still the best golfer of the last 20 years or so.
cheers
bill

[vp27519]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

I gotta start eating more spinach Brian .

Neil interesting point you make about the clearance of his hips at impact and this being so because of the maintenance of his spine angle.

Hips are something I am working on at the moment. So Neil, it is far easier to clear the hips when the spine angle remains the same throughout?

Nickers x

[Neil18]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

In my humble and possibly worthless opinion, yes Nickers. Losing the spine angle normally sees the right hip thrust out toward the ball so (from DTL) the spine will curve so the tailbone is nearer to the ball than at address. The alternative is to stand up, but this is more rare as far as I'm concerned. Most people lose the spine angle due to hips thrust in the wrong direction, at the wrong time.

Given the rotation involved, it means that when spine angle is lost the right hip now rotates on a flatter arc than it should, whilst the right shoulder is trying to rotate downwards toward the ball.

It has to do with having ones hips work with your body rather than against it.

If I am to take myself as a model, losing spine angle whilst still trying to turn with the hips can lead to a) shanks b) flipping and c) pain in the lower right portion of the back (right hander).

Now I'm starting to get more used to "having my hips and shoulders turn to the ball", as I call it, I'm actually coming off the golf course with aching thighs. And I play on a flat course. No back pain whatsoever.

Look how "down" the right hips is in the attached.

[dagosa]

Re: Why is this swing not discussed more? Discuss.

hi
i think when you look at Hogan and Snead that both players always seemed to swing at about 95% of there power. both always looked to be in control of the ball and there swings.
both players always looked so relaxed over the ball.
how often you see a real bad shot form Hogan or Snead. a bad shot from them always seemed playable with no lost of shots.
if you watch Tiger his driving is often poor and its like he is giving it 110% and that cost him some matches as he hits it so long when he misses, he misses long and it sometimes costs him. he is still the best golfer of the last 20 years or so.
cheers
bill

The greatest swings that we find ourselves imitating are found on the end of a driver/fairwaywood/long iron on a flat lie. That Hogan or Snead seem to posses a swing that "looks" more worthy of imitation while in the tee box belies the fact that....the best players are those that have the most varied successful swings, not the best looking. No one can keep up with the player who can execute a knock down in a heavy wind....a long fairway trap or long bunker shot etc.. None of these swings are held to scrutiny as the "ideal" swing, yet each may be just as valuable to complete a successful round. I would argue that this false choice of using Sam's or someone elses swing to emulate leads to frustration for the average golfer.
Successful golf lies in the proper utilization of the tools of golf under, usually, a different circumstance with each shot; the drive being just one of them. Criticizing Tiger's driving swing and at the same time acknowledging him as the best player in the last 20 years only emphasizes that point.
I repeat...the best players of any generation, may or may not have great swings.....they just grind out results with a variety of swings that are appropriate to the task at hand better than their competitors.
Working from the inside out...(the hitting area) may or may not result in a pretty swing. It will always result in the best outcome. That's where players should focus...not on swings.
That was the philosophy of Ted Williams as a hitting coach. He NEVER coached his swing. He coached situation and preparation. The swing he said, would take take of itself.
You cannot start with a swing and expect success. Ted's great swing come about over years of work from the hitting area outward until contact is eventually mated with power.
Sam Snead I would argue, did the same thing. There are no short cuts through imitation.