Secret In The Dirt - Golf's Greatest Social Network

phily wrote:



Thank you, Phily & Martin, for the recent insights.

I like the description of "just stepping forward with my right foot" while keeping the shoulders on the target line.

Continuing the scholarly nature of this thread, I searched through the Stance and Posture Lesson in Hogan's book, but did not find mention of this principle. In strict academic terms, this discussion should perhaps take place during Lesson 5 - Summary and Review, because that is where I found the following passage.

Hogan mentions that there is "no conscious variation" in the way one swings the different clubs, but suggests that a change does indeed take place. Hogan notes that the shorter clubs have shorter swing arcs, occurring on more upright planes. With these shorter swing arcs the golfer has,

"…less time on your swing to get your left hip out of the way. That is why I make - and suggest you make - a mild modification when you are playing the clubs from six-iron down to wedge: GET THE LEFT HIP OUT OF THE WAY BEFORE YOU BEGIN TO PLAY YOUR STROKE. You do this by setting your right foot a bit nearer the ball at address, as the diagram below illustrates.

This has the effect of drawing the left foot back from the direct line and turning the left hip a bit to the left - opening the hip a shade, in other words. When you play the clubs from the six-iron down with your body in this position, you still feel like you're taking a full swing. Actually you're not. You have placed a further restriction on the length of your arc. You will sacrifice some distance as a result - the club cannot travel so fast on a shorter arc - but what you lose in distance you more than make up for in direction. When you're playing the short irons, accuracy, of course, is the primary consideration."

(page 125, 5LTMFoG)

I like a couple parts of second chapter.
One is "bear in mind that the end objective is to build a sound swing, not a swing with only superficial good looks"
Second is "as the arms become schooled you will get the feeling that the arms and club form one firm unit-sort of as if the two arms form equal sides of a triangle."

Steve P wrote:


I will say that I've agreed with that from the beginning...

Eyeball wrote:


(good point, good post)

---------------------

this is why I think 'nuke-ing' a wedge is often problematic regardless of stance used, unless you practice it a lot and know what pattern or compensation to expect the short arc and timing can not be quite what we expect in terms of face accuracy.

I would agree with Martin about 'shading the heels'.

Almost like our weight wants to fall that way anyway based on anatomy. A couple arches in the foot- a transverse arch between, or across, the toes and a longitudinal arch from the toe to the heel. Like this:



There's those stupid arches again. One in the pelvis area, and one in the foot area. Too many arches for Ol' Festus.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Phily Way cool logo pardner. I don't even want to ask if the arms on the Y are supinated or not

Duplicate Post....don't know what happened

alan wrote:


Alan, what "race" are you talking about? Sprint down the line?! You're not going any where . You're just trying to turn without moving even an inch! Try slow and easy like the way the Sun rises at dawn!

Cy wrote:


Cy, Alan

You're both absolutely SPOT ON here.....if you can see the others' point of view without giving up your own here...you have something.

Cy,you made my point for me,it is nice and slow and easy on the way back,the tension he has set up inhis legs is directed forward as if hes getting ready to take off in a sprint,for someone who spent half my life playing football,basketball,baseball at high levels ,i recognize what Hogan is doing,if it was just standing to the ball,you wouldnt see that right knee where it is,the left foot flared and way more importantly that specific amount of bend at the waist,this is how he started before the backswing finishes....

Cy wrote:
CY what im talking about is adynamic swing,forces going in two different directions until they all go in one direction,a chain reaction that builds SLOWLY, you are taliking about a static,swing

alan wrote:


Jackie Burke calls this the runners stance, Abe Mitchell called it "Muscle Set".....it's preparing for what you know is coming and THAT is the true nature of an "Athletic address". Well put Alan.

We don't all have to do it the same as hogan and Mitchell....but we have to do it in the same way if we want good results. We have to be ready for what's to come. For me, that sums up lesson 2 of Hogan's 5 lessons.

Martin Ayers wrote:


Yes Martin, golf stance is definitely an "Athletic stance" in order to TURN. But I believe RUNNING and SPRINTING are very different both physically and mechanically than TURNING. Am I wrong?

Cy wrote:


No ... You are not wrong Cy....turning is different than running and sprinting. But I DETEST the word TURN when used for Golf...It's a 4 letter word to me. So while you are correct, I would argue that in viewing it as THAT different you are doing yourself a disservice.

Does a swimmer turn while swimming along the black line at the bottom of the pool? No....but their body does rotate....their rotation is made up of equal amounts of back left, forward right and vice versa...that is how the swing should be both felt and intended. Their is ample 'turn' built into the golf swing by virtue of the design and where we have to stand to accomplish it, any ADD to that turn is unnecessary in my view.

Martin Ayers wrote:


How about WIND instead? Obviously the feet and the legs play a key role in WINDING and UNWINDING of the body. You swing the club using your hands (i.e. grip) and wind your body using your feet.

Wind is better than turn for sure.

As for the rest I think there is more CLUB involved in all of it than gets discussed. What does it do to US? It does something when swinging to our balance....never see it talked about. For me it is EVERYTHING....what it does.

If Only it was as simple as his own quote:
“Golf is 20% talent and 80% management.” –Ben Hogan

Martin Ayers wrote:


One imperative of a good swing is the "feel" of the clubhead which is at the core of Ernest Jones "Swing The Clubhead" method. The other imperative of a good swing is a good "turn", "pivot", or "wind". The first imperative is about the hands/grip and the second is about the feet. Moreover, hands and feet also control the balance and rhythm of your swing. Golf is all about controlling your shot trajectory and result (i.e. direction, hight, carry distance, and spin/roll). I believe the hands play the most critical role in executing a good shot.

Of course, the "body" hitters or swingers can execute a "vanilla" swing with a decent outcome. However, I love "flavored" swings using my hands.

Cy wrote:


I completely agree with this. It's all about hands and feet and what they can control. The calf's are seldom mentioned but when the feet utilize the calf's right, it's where the "effortless power" begins.

hey Cy...thanks for the heads up on what Golf is all about.

kevin wrote:


Kev,

That's something I haven't heard talked about much either. Do you have an example or description how you, yourself, utilize the calves?

Martin Ayers wrote:



Sometimes in the heat of swing fundamental and mechanics discussion, reminding golfers about shot's trajectory might be helpful. With a good set of trained hands you can ALMOST do anything you desire with the ball especially around green like a trick shot artists!

Check the similarity in the right foot, right knee at set up between Hogan and his protege Tommy Bolt:





Also, Dariusz did a great job with this one:

Cy wrote:


Feel like I'm in a Southern Baptist church bein' preachered at.

I 'use' the hands to move the club an inch or so leading the head via the handle....then the hands aim to direct the inertia of the swinging club for the shot required....you don't need to move a Golf club as much as you need to allow it to move....

The club swings 'against' the hands and the feet for the most part, so while I don't disagree with what you're saying, I don't think it's overly helpful to 'preach' mantra without any of the how to's and why for's to back it up....
just a friendly word, a reminder if you like.

Martin Ayers wrote:


You're absolutely right Martin, golf is a religion and I am a "born again" golfer!
Just imagine an atheist who discovers the Christ message after 50 years of atheism!

Martin Ayers wrote:


I am sorry but in our sect we only concern about what for's, not how to's or why for's! We trust our bodies, hands , and minds to do the right things!