Stack and Tilt

[gmbtempe]

Dave,

Good stuff.

I hit some balls with this pattern last night (about 50 swings) and your comment

If I was looking for a straighter start line with less curve or hitting a fade I would lessen the linear portion accordingly.

is very interesting and not something that I have read. In my swing with any pattern I used to have a LOT of linear hip slide. In the last couple months I have greatly reduced this.

Last night with the SnT pattern I only hit pulls, fades and over fades with pattern. I was shocked as I always hit a push draw/hook with this pattern.

Your sentence about linear portion probably explains the why for me.

[davidwedzik]

Feb 10, 2010 14:01:40 GMT -5 gmbtempe said:

Dave,

Good stuff.

I hit some balls with this pattern last night (about 50 swings) and your comment

If I was looking for a straighter start line with less curve or hitting a fade I would lessen the linear portion accordingly.

is very interesting and not something that I have read. In my swing with any pattern I used to have a LOT of linear hip slide. In the last couple months I have greatly reduced this.

Last night with the SnT pattern I only hit pulls, fades and over fades with pattern. I was shocked as I always hit a push draw/hook with this pattern.

Your sentence about linear portion probably explains the why for me.

No doubt about it - all else equal: less linear=strikes more towards the front side of the circle=pulls, pull/fades ---- oh and a bit better statement by me would have been to say "lessen or slow the linear portion relatively".

[imperfectgolfer]

David,

You seem to be suggesting that you vary the assertiveness of the linear pelvic slide motion depending on shot shape intentions.

I don't really understand the significance of that point.

In the S&T book, Bennett/Plummer state that the primary function of the pelvic slide motion is to reverse the spinal tilt - from leftwards to rightwards by impact. They state-: "To reverse the backswing actions, your spine must start to tilt to the right immediately from the top. The lateral sliding of the hips in conjunction with the unwinding of the shoulders is what allows that to happen: When your hips shift forward and your shoulder center stays, the spine will tilt to the right. When you get halfway down, your spine should be vertical from the face-on view, as it was at address. By impact, your spine should be tilted away from the target, the exact amount depending on how much you shift your hips forward."

In other words, the distinctive feature of the S&T swing is the need for a pelvic slide action to reverse the spine tilt (even if it varies in degree of assertiveness depending on shot shape intentions). As I have repeatedly stated, most of the latriflexion forces (due to the pelvic slide motion) will operate at the level of the lower spine, because the upper swing center is kept stationary.

Another distinctive biomechanical feature of the S&T swing is the fact that the outer border of the pelvis gets a few inches outside the outer border of the left foot (due to the pelvic slide action) and the left knee also moves few inches outside the outer border of the left foot. That reflects a significant magnitude of pelvic slide action - even if the degree of assertiveness varies from shot-to-shot depending on shot shape intentions. I personally cannot imagine the S&T swing working from a biomechanical/mechanical perspective - without this significant amount of linear pelvic slide motion.

Jeff.

[vjsinger]

Hi Dave,

I watched some of your videos online and I like them very much. I wonder if anyone has ever told you that you sould like Mark Verstegen from Athletes Performance in Arizona, a.k.a. The Core Performance guy? Anyway, I've always wanted to ask a S&T guy if they only teach that method? For instance, If I came to you and didn't want to do all of the method would you take me on? I've read that Sean O'Hair didn't want to go with the whole S&T method, only incorporating certain parts and that's why he went with Foley and that they are "working around it". I've seen some things written about you guys that are pretty harsh and unfair, basically saying that you can only teach one method and one way. What would you say to those critics? Thanks for being here and taking the time.

Best,
VJ

[davidwedzik]

Feb 10, 2010 17:55:03 GMT -5 imperfectgolfer said:

David,

You seem to be suggesting that you vary the assertiveness of the linear pelvic slide motion depending on shot shape intentions.

I don't really understand the significance of that point.

In the S&T book, Bennett/Plummer state that the primary function of the pelvic slide motion is to reverse the spinal tilt - from leftwards to rightwards by impact. They state-: "To reverse the backswing actions, your spine must start to tilt to the right immediately from the top. The lateral sliding of the hips in conjunction with the unwinding of the shoulders is what allows that to happen: When your hips shift forward and your shoulder center stays, the spine will tilt to the right. When you get halfway down, your spine should be vertical from the face-on view, as it was at address. By impact, your spine should be tilted away from the target, the exact amount depending on how much you shift your hips forward."

In other words, the distinctive feature of the S&T swing is the need for a pelvic slide action to reverse the spine tilt (even if it varies in degree of assertiveness depending on shot shape intentions). As I have repeatedly stated, most of the latriflexion forces (due to the pelvic slide motion) will operate at the level of the lower spine, because the upper swing center is kept stationary.

Another distinctive biomechanical feature of the S&T swing is the fact that the outer border of the pelvis gets a few inches outside the outer border of the left foot (due to the pelvic slide action) and the left knee also moves few inches outside the outer border of the left foot. That reflects a significant magnitude of pelvic slide action - even if the degree of assertiveness varies from shot-to-shot depending on shot shape intentions. I personally cannot imagine the S&T swing working from a biomechanical/mechanical perspective - without this significant amount of linear pelvic slide motion.

Jeff.

Jeff - the primary function of the pelvic/hips slide motion IS to to reverse the spine tilt and put in the secondary axis tilt. This is NOT in any way unique to Stack and Tilt by the way. I find that point one of the oddest points about your findings re: SnT. I can show you a huge list of players (tour or not) who, correctly, push the pelvis/hips/lower cog forward to put in the secondary axis tilt. Also, since you mentioned it, I can show you plenty of players who, again correctly, move the outer border of the hips and the left knee just outside the border of the left foot. In classifying the best players vs. the worst this is actually a distinguishing characteristic. And again...not unique to SnT.

My point was simply to say that the model has some room for variances within it. The words from your comments I was keying on were "absolute necessity for a very assertive"...and I said that there was not a NECESSITY for a VERY assertive movement. Necessity for very assertive conveys that it is a must for an instant bold, agressive, forceful move forward with with hips. This is not what we teach. I would describe it much more as a consistent or continuous move forward so that the linear does not stop too soon (when the forward simply stops too early in the downswing...or sometimes when a player moves forward too fast relatively...the problems start). In looking back at my post I was actually careful to say "lessen" or "slow down" the linear (and probably should have added relatively)...not in any way stop it or not have enough linear to put in the secondary axis tilt. You must agree that there are degrees to everything measurable and the degree of the continuous forward movement can determine a lot (re: start line/curve, etc.) in this case.

In the end all of this is not really the main point though. We do prescribe the forward motion you mention and we do want players to move the outer hip border and the left knee outer border to the outside of the left foot. Based on this I know we disagree on the back problems Stack and Tilt may/may not cause. I have simply seen NO evidence to say that the pattern is any more harmful than any other efficient way of swinging the golf club. In fact, since the spine is taken out of a harmful compressed state I believe it is likely easier on the back in the long run (my lack of medical drawings and a degree lead me to go back to using the example of how putting (bent over, compressed) for a long time is very painful.

Question for you as I'm curious - if you didn't believe that SnT put the lumbar and thoracic spine regions at odds - would you find SnT a proper/efficient way to hit a golf ball?

Dave

[davidwedzik]

Feb 10, 2010 21:45:09 GMT -5 @vjsinger said:

Hi Dave,

I watched some of your videos online and I like them very much. I wonder if anyone has ever told you that you sould like Mark Verstegen from Athletes Performance in Arizona, a.k.a. The Core Performance guy? Anyway, I've always wanted to ask a S&T guy if they only teach that method? For instance, If I came to you and didn't want to do all of the method would you take me on? I've read that Sean O'Hair didn't want to go with the whole S&T method, only incorporating certain parts and that's why he went with Foley and that they are "working around it". I've seen some things written about you guys that are pretty harsh and unfair, basically saying that you can only teach one method and one way. What would you say to those critics? Thanks for being here and taking the time.

Best,
VJ

Hi VJ - I do honestly teach only this "method" - that said, method is defined as: a systematic procedure followed in presenting material for instruction...or...an orderly arrangement or classification. Based on that everyone should really teach some sort of method. I believe in this arrangement and way of measuring the swing because it is grounded in principles that are not unique to Stack and Tilt. Many of the things we teach have been seen in great players for a very long time (and the poorest players do many things opposite of what we teach).

Now that said...I would most certainly "take you on" if you came to me for a lesson with that background. I would simply work to put in the most important pieces to help you the quickest. If you told me there was something you couldn't do or didn't want to do I would explore that and discuss with you and then go from there. Either way some good pieces would be better than no good pieces

Dave

[imperfectgolfer]

Dave - you wrote-: "I find that point one of the oddest points about your findings re: SnT. I can show you a huge list of players (tour or not) who, correctly, push the pelvis/hips/lower cog forward to put in the secondary axis tilt."

I agree that traditional/conventional golfers routinely acquire secondary axis tilt in the downswing. However, the acquisition of secondary axis tilt is merely a greater degree of rightwards spinal tilt. A traditional golfer already has rightwards spinal tilt at address and at the end-backswing position, and he only increases the degree of rightwards spinal tilt (secondary axis tilt) in the downswing. There is no reversal from leftwards tilt to rightwards tilt in the downswing. A S&T golfer has to create secondary axis tilt as a result of an assertive left-lateral pelvic linear motion.

You wrote-: "The words from your comments I was keying on were "absolute necessity for a very assertive"...and I said that there was not a NECESSITY for a VERY assertive movement."

You may not believe that the pelvic motion must be assertive. I derived the word "assertive" from the S&T book. To quote Bennett/Plummer-:

"FAQ: Isn't Stack and Tilt a reverse pivot?

That depends on how you define a reverse pivot. To us it means shifting to the front foot on the backswing and then to the backfoot on the downswing. This is certainly not what we teach. It is true in our model any weight shift on the backswing is to the front foot, but on the way down no weight ever moves to the back foot. So while the first part of the swing might look like the start of a reverse pivot, the move from the top is an aggressive forward shift. There is nothing reverse about that."

Note that I have highlighted the word "aggressive" in bold.

Bennett/Plummer also stated-: "The popular advice to make a slight "bump" toward the target with the hips does not transfer enough weight to the left side soon enough or for long enough ---- to level out your hips, you need to push up with your legs, as if you were launching yourself off the ground. Imagine a shot putter on the release or a tennis player serving: They literally jump off the ground". ----- The upward thrust of the lower body is another trademark move of Stack and Tilt. This jumping up should start when the club approaches impact (technically, when it reaches parallel to the ground on the downswing)."

The "butt-tucking" move and upward thrust of the lower body is part of the "aggressive forward shift" that Bennett/Plummer recommend in their book for their S&T swing.

You wrote-: " I have simply seen NO evidence to say that the pattern is any more harmful than any other efficient way of swinging the golf club." Neither have I - because no researcher has studied this issue. We are all unsoundly basing our opinions on anecdotal experience. I have never stated that the S&T swing will definitely damage the lumbar spine. I have been very precise in using the word "suspect" in my review paper, and my suspicion is based on the anatomy of the lumbar intervertebral facet joints and the fact that a S&T golfer subjects his lumbar spine to a lot of latriflexion forces when performing his pelvic slide action while the upper thoracic spine is kept stationary.

You wrote-: "if you didn't believe that SnT put the lumbar and thoracic spine regions at odds - would you find SnT a proper/efficient way to hit a golf ball?"

I think that the S&T can be deemed to be a proper/efficient way to hit a golf ball. However, there are other features of the S&T swing that I think that are disadvantageous eg. i) Inherently steep angle of attack in the downswing that is dependent on the pelvic slide action to shallow-out the clubhead path. By comparison, the traditional golf swing creates a much shallower clubhead approach angle for a longer time period through the impact zone - which is useful when using a driver; 2) the left arm is pulled inside quickly in the backswing and the hands go "deep" as the left arm remains closely connected to the upper torso => that creates a marked "inside-out" left arm motion in the downswing, which can predispose to shanks; 3) the entire clubhead arc is more rounded through the impact zone because the left arm remains more connected to the torso throughout the downswing, and that requires a greater level of timing to ensure a square clubface at impact.

However, I definitely agree that the S&T swing can result in great ball striking. One only has to look at Charlie Wi and Mike Bennett hit the ball!

Jeff.

[mudball]

OK I know what I am about to say is really dumb - but it's valentines ok and I think I've fallen in love!
The book arrived on Friday evening... and I started to read... I'm a slow reader as I have to say the words out loud - but the book does have pictures which helps me! I've read five chapters...

Anyway - couldn't wait until I've read the whole thing and found myself a local S&T instructor. Instead I went to the range with the following in mind...
From "Learn The Bacis Form In Thirty Minutes..." 10 balls for each of the following

1. Keeping Weight on Front Foot
2. Above + Left Shoulder turning down on Backswing
3. 1 and 2 above + hands swinging in
4. 1 and 2 and 3 + butt tucking under torso through impact (now I'm english and we don't have 'butts' so this took nme a few minutes to work out what it meant...
5. all of the above plus arms staying straight to finish.

I just striped the first 50 balls?!

So I thought, this is good... and went through the bag. I didn't miss a shot until I got to my three iron - but the next was good. So after I'd piped my utility and 3 wood - I thought shall I? So out came the Driver. The first one was OK, quite good. The second a little cutty. The third.... well the third was the best drive I've hit since September!

I'm sold and definetly going to carry on reading.

Now I know - that I won't have been doing the moves - if Andy Plummer or Mike Bennett were watching they'd say I was moving my weight back - probably lifting my arms etc. But it felt different and I'm really quite surprised at how straight I was and how consistent the strike was. My big concern is my back and neck - disks are shot basically so this is something I am worried about - I'll let you know how I get on and if I get any problems.

Dave

[gmbtempe]

I have a general stack and tilt question.

One of the fundamentals of the stack and tilt swing is that the left shoulder moves downward very steep in the backswing, have you ever heard anyone state is "steep" 90 degrees to the spine or is it supposed to be steeper.

One of the questions I have is as they market this swing to the majority of average golfers, the type that generally lack flexibility, can they even accomplish this? I know I have seen before and after where they take some hack and basically improve their low point but I am talking about actually building the normal person into the model. I know for me that was the one piece of the swing that always felt hard to do, forced, and uncomfortable.

[imperfectgolfer]

Greg,

Based on my reading of their book, Bennett/Plummer recommend that the shoulders turn at right angles to the spine in the backswing. This results in a steeper shoulder turn angle if the spine is tilted leftwards/extended during the backswing - and I think that it is easier for an average-flexibility golfer to achieve this steeper shoulder turn angle under those conditions. Jim Hardy achieves an equivalently steep shoulder turn angle in the backswing (relative to the ground) in a different way - by getting his OPS golfers to have more spinal bend at address together with a centralised spine.

I personally don't think that there is an advantage to a steeper shoulder turn angle - because I favor the traditional/conventional swing where the shoulders turn on a relatively horizontal plane in the backswing while the arms move more upwards due to independent upper arm motion at shoulder socket level.

Jeff.

[mudball]

Re steepness of shoulder turn.
I think the idea is to make it simpler. One of the key things I took away from the book was the desire to create a simple movement that was not dependent upon timing of complex moves. Swinging the arms on one plane and the shoulder on another - requires timing to coordinate the return path (downswing).
Their book says "The shoulders begin turning at a right angle to the forward tilt of the spine at address. So not more than 90 degrees.
On a personal note I found that when I swung in a traditional way I lifted up slightly on the backswing and came OTT - whereas with the S&T swing thoughts I am maintaining my posture and not coming OTT.
Of course I agree with Greg - it does feel uncomfortable - because it is different. I read somewhere it literally takes thousands of golf shots for you to become comfortable with a new move when it is different to what you've been doing.
I would say you shouldn't just work on feel - you should also Look, LOOK, LOOK as Homer Kelley would say. Use video for example to see how your shoulder movement is working.

[imperfectgolfer]

Dave,

You wrote-: " One of the key things I took away from the book was the desire to create a simple movement that was not dependent upon timing of complex moves. Swinging the arms on one plane and the shoulder on another - requires timing to coordinate the return path (downswing)."

I agree that it would be nice if we could swing the arms on the same plane as the shoulders and simplify the golf swing. Both Bennett/Plummer and Jim Hardy make this claim for the S&T swing and Hardy OPS swing respectively. However, they have only lessened the difference between the shoulder turn plane and arm turn plane by a very small amount by steepening the shoulder turn angle. There still has to be independent humeral head movement within the shoulder sockets (external/internal rotation and abduction/adduction movements) during the backswing/downswing and that still requires a timing element.

One also still has to time-coordinate the torso rotation with the arm movements across the front of the rotating torso in the downswing in the S&T swing and the Hardy OPS swing.

Jeff.

[danadahlquist]

Feb 21, 2010 19:07:17 GMT -5 imperfectgolfer said:

Dave,

You wrote-: " One of the key things I took away from the book was the desire to create a simple movement that was not dependent upon timing of complex moves. Swinging the arms on one plane and the shoulder on another - requires timing to coordinate the return path (downswing)."

I agree that it would be nice if we could swing the arms on the same plane as the shoulders and simplify the golf swing. Both Bennett/Plummer and Jim Hardy make this claim for the S&T swing and Hardy OPS swing respectively. However, they have only lessened the difference between the shoulder turn plane and arm turn plane by a very small amount by steepening the shoulder turn angle. There still has to be independent humeral head movement within the shoulder sockets (external/internal rotation and abduction/adduction movements) during the backswing/downswing and that still requires a timing element.

One also still has to time-coordinate the torso rotation with the arm movements across the front of the rotating torso in the downswing in the S&T swing and the Hardy OPS swing.

Jeff.

They are not the same in respect of the left arm, however we do load #1 to 90degrees

[danadahlquist]

Feb 10, 2010 21:45:09 GMT -5 @vjsinger said:

Hi Dave,

I watched some of your videos online and I like them very much. I wonder if anyone has ever told you that you sould like Mark Verstegen from Athletes Performance in Arizona, a.k.a. The Core Performance guy? Anyway, I've always wanted to ask a S&T guy if they only teach that method? For instance, If I came to you and didn't want to do all of the method would you take me on? I've read that Sean O'Hair didn't want to go with the whole S&T method, only incorporating certain parts and that's why he went with Foley and that they are "working around it". I've seen some things written about you guys that are pretty harsh and unfair, basically saying that you can only teach one method and one way. What would you say to those critics? Thanks for being here and taking the time.

Best,
VJ

Ive said before there are so many options, however they are rule based. Sean did not go to stack because it called stack. Nothing really more than that. I will say this Sean will not be getting much help from Andy after the last GD write up. We teach the model because its the easy to do model and goes far model. Look at Hurst's hips on the LPGA. she does what we like.

[imperfectgolfer]

Dana,

You wrote-: " I will say this Sean will not be getting much help from Andy after the last GD write up."

What write-up? Can you please provide details?

Jeff.