My Swing

[Neil18]

Re: My Swing

Great swing Neil.

Think I will invest in Ernie's book. Which copy did you have. It seems on Amazon there is a bit of confusion of which edition is which.

Thanks Rackster.

I haven't got the book. I merely used the ideas on:

Golf Swing

Have a look. It's pretty much all you need to know.

[Neil18]

Re: My Swing

Thank you Cmays.

[Rackster]

Re: My Swing

It is interesting how golf swing instruction has evolved. Ernest Jones focussed on swinging the cllub head and emphasised the hands. As did the great Henry Cotton. In the 1980s and 1990s there was a lot of emphasis on the "body" controlling the swing, such as Leadbetter and Ballard- the dog wags the tail.

I would say we have seen a move back to the "hands" controlling the swing teaching method. I have a Leadbetter swingsetter and on the DVD he starts his instruction (I think he starts but may be a little later) with his assistant swinging the swingsetter with the thumbs and two fingers of each hand, emphasising the role of gravity and the weight of the club. This to me is most definetly an Ernie Jones swinging the club head approach- and working the hands. A change from his previous philospohy maybe?

Hank Haney says that a body method was promoted, especially amongst the tour pros because their main fault was the hook, partly due to over active hands. Most golfers slice the ball, so should focus on the hand action, as a body method may on worsen a slice. i think Jim Flick also advocates this approach.

But it appears to be certain that to be a good golfer you need good hands.

[slater170]

Re: My Swing

after advice on "my swing" i relaxed the grip from a 7 to about a 3 and the swing just seemed effortless with better distance and no loss of accuracy!

[Neil18]

Re: My Swing

Nice one Slats.

Wonderful things happen when you let it!

[BrianW]

Re: My Swing

Neil,

I like it, a lot.

[Neil18]

Re: My Swing

Cheers Bri

So do I.

[Timothy Slaught]

Re: My Swing

Neil:

Thanks for your thoughts on the grip pressure question. For some reason, this has been the hardest principle for me to grasp (no pun intended).
I had experimented with lightening my pressure at times but would instinctively revert back to a death hold when shots started to go astray.
Now I focus on the pressure of 4 as part of my pre-shot routine and maintain this throughout the swing.

With this light pressure, I am able to fold my right arm correctly into the downswing whereas previously I would cast and straighten the right arm early due to too much pressure. The light pressure in my hands which relates directly to wrist, arm and shoulder relaxation allows me to create lag naturaly through the correct transitional move. I am also able to feel the flat left wrist at impact by correctly timing my swing from the ground up not through my hands alone.

I do see a little Ernie Els in your swing but that wrap around finish sure reminds me of Tiger.......speaking of which I will see him tomorrow at the new AT&T tourney in Washington DC. Can't wait.

Thanks again for your insight,
Tim S

[BrianW]

Re: My Swing

Sorry Neil, This is nothing to do with your swing but in the light of balanced discussion I feel needs a mention:Snip::::: Centrifugal force can be a confusing term because it is used (or misused) in more than one instance, and because sloppy labeling can obscure which forces are acting upon which objects in a system (which is true for physics in general). When diagramming forces in a system, one must describe each object separately, attaching only those forces acting upon it (not forces that it exerts upon other objects).One can avoid dealing with pseudo forces entirely by analyzing systems using inertial frames of reference for the physics; and when convenient, one simply maps to a rotating frame without forgetting about the frame rotation. Such is standard practice in mechanics textbooks.Because rotating frames are not vital for understanding mechanics, they are often not discussed in science education. Therefore teachers who need to impress on their students that centrifugal forces have no place in their calculations cannot give a matching emphasis to the fact that a centrifugal force does occur in a rotating frame. As a result, even students who master the physics curriculum well may leave school with the false impression that it is never scientifically valid to speak about centrifugal forces. :::::::Snip
Newton's Third law of motion: If two particles interact, the force exerted by the first particle on the second particle (called the action force) is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the force exerted by the second particle on the first particle (called the reaction force). Therefore the Centrifugal force is equal and opposite to the Centripetal force acting from the inside outward.Once again, apologies Neil.

[Neil18]

Re: My Swing

Sorry Neil, This is nothing to do with your swing but in the light of balanced discussion I feel needs a mention:Snip::::: Centrifugal force can be a confusing term because it is used (or misused) in more than one instance, and because sloppy labeling can obscure which forces are acting upon which objects in a system (which is true for physics in general). When diagramming forces in a system, one must describe each object separately, attaching only those forces acting upon it (not forces that it exerts upon other objects).One can avoid dealing with pseudo forces entirely by analyzing systems using inertial frames of reference for the physics; and when convenient, one simply maps to a rotating frame without forgetting about the frame rotation. Such is standard practice in mechanics textbooks.Because rotating frames are not vital for understanding mechanics, they are often not discussed in science education. Therefore teachers who need to impress on their students that centrifugal forces have no place in their calculations cannot give a matching emphasis to the fact that a centrifugal force does occur in a rotating frame. As a result, even students who master the physics curriculum well may leave school with the false impression that it is never scientifically valid to speak about centrifugal forces. :::::::Snip
Newton's Third law of motion: If two particles interact, the force exerted by the first particle on the second particle (called the action force) is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the force exerted by the second particle on the first particle (called the reaction force). Therefore the Centrifugal force is equal and opposite to the Centripetal force acting from the inside outward.Once again, apologies Neil.

No need to apologise Brian! I had to read it a couple of times to understand it, but I think I get it!

Why the apology?

[BrianW]

Re: My Swing

No need to apologise Brian! I had to read it a couple of times to understand it, but I think I get it!

Why the apology?

Neil,

Your post was to show the advance made in your golf swing. A thread was added a little out of context relating to centrifugal force, I felt compelled to respond and apologised for the detour from the original subject.

[Neil18]

Re: My Swing

It actually relates to it really! I read all this stuff:

Golf Science Explained in Scigolf's Jack Kuykendall's Myths of Golf

as posted above by Cmays and it scientifically explains how I now feel about my swing.

My body does not produce clubhead speed. It merely supports it. I have always been dubious of "the dog wags the tail" saying but never really knew why. Now I know, and it turns out, I knew anyway! Ha! Seems I was just using Centrifugal force as the description, rather than Centripetal force, which is what I meant! I stand corrected in my terminology.

Your apologoy is accepted because you are nice enough to think that way, but it is also not accepted because it is not needed.

[Neil18]

Re: My Swing

I presume you're referring to ball speed?

Right now I'm just trying to let the club talk to my body and let myself get used to it.

Once I'd played a good many rounds and trust it completely for accuracy, then I was going to learn about adding speed later. However, if you can expedite the process................????!!!!!!!!!!!