|
Post by vjsinger on Feb 28, 2010 18:19:47 GMT -5
What are the Fundamentals of the Golf Swing and have Golf Instructors and theorists been misleading and just plain wrong in the past and present?
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Feb 28, 2010 19:11:47 GMT -5
What are the Fundamentals of the Golf Swing and have Golf Instructors and theorists been misleading and just plain wrong in the past and present? Based on what I have learned the past month, yea lots of teaching out there that is not focusing on getting people into the correct impact alignments.
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Feb 28, 2010 21:13:44 GMT -5
I think the problem stems from stating certain things are fundamentals when they are not.
There is one worthless poster at another forum who claims...in his exact words...that anybody who teaches TGM is a fraud and that the swing is just dependent upon having the correct grip and the correct address position. And it's not like he's offering different types of 'correct' grips and different types of 'correct' address positions, but more or less one grip and more or less one type of address.
When it's pointed out that great golfers have had all sorts of different type of grips and different setup positions, he excuses it as them being exceptions to the rule and being extraordinarily talented.
You ask a golfer what the fundamentals of the golf swing are and it's almost inevitable 'grip, address and keeping your head down.'
And like this joke of a poster on that different forum, they tend to think that there's only one type of grip and address position a golfer should have.
So...my thoughts is that there's too much 'mandatory' thoughts or 'one way to do it' thoughts and there's too many teachers who think that the fundamentals are just grip and address.
One of the things that I really like about S&T's teaching philosophy is that one of the major fundamentals is hitting the ball first and then taking a divot. Sounds nothing earth shattering to me and you, but most amateurs have no clue that's how the sequence of ball strike to divot is supposed to go. And it also gets them thinking a bit about the real fundamentals of the golf swing outside of the standard 'grip and address' theory.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by vjsinger on Mar 1, 2010 15:50:43 GMT -5
Jeff?? I thought you'd have something to say on this. I'm curious about what the Biomechanist guy would say.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Mar 1, 2010 19:11:19 GMT -5
VJ The question is too broad, and it would require pages of prose for me to describe my opinions in depth. I will therefore make only a few points. I think that it is a good idea to generate an in-to-square-to-in clubhead arc (relative to the HSP) rather than an in-to-out or out-to-in clubhead path - if one wants to hit the ball straight. I also think that it is best to place the ball behind low point and strike the ball with a clubhead that is moving down-and-out while it is moving forwards to low point. That means that the clubhead is lagging behind the hands at impact. I also find the idea of creating a symmetrical clubhead arc (relative to the HSP line) appealing - by tracing a SPL. I actually do not agree that a FLW at impact is an absolute imperative - because it only applies to golfers who have a weak/neutral/slightly strong grip. Golfers who have a very strong left hand grip (4 knuckles) will have the back of their LW parallel to the ball-target line at impact. That's it. All other fundamentals are dependent on the chosen swing style eg. TGM hitters versus TGM swingers; left arm swingers versus right arm swingers, arm swingers versus pivot-driven swingers, Hardy OPS swing versus S&T swing versus traditional swing, straight left arm swing action versus bent left elbow swing (see below). Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by jonnygrouville on Mar 1, 2010 21:56:24 GMT -5
Is 'fundamental' the right word? Makes it sound too much like a rule, something that should be followed, but there are exceptions for every rule.
There are a lot of flippers out there playing good golf. You probably wouldn't teach it, but a well-timed flip is pretty fundamental to them getting the ball around the course.
Jeff's comments on what an amateur golfer should strive for are probably the best kind of things to consider in improving your game.
I don't think instructors are hiding anything. I don't think anyone intends to be misleading.
|
|