As ever, this could be an interesting discussion if it could be had with an open mind, but that’s tough here. Does anyone have Furyk’s club specs? The best I could find is that he has a 3 degree upright 3 iron and gets progressively flatter through the bag to the wedge where he’s standard lie- tough to verify authenticity on the web. That concept makes a lot of sense when trying to standardize the swing through the bag. I reference him because he’s big in the ABS world.
All reasonable discussion welcomed.
I think it makes sense that Furyk would play a set upright of standard given his backswing/transition loop. Not that backswing necessarily dictates lie angles, but it seems way more comfortable to make that type of a move with an upright club. I think there’s a good chance he learned on some fairly upright equipment. Likewise, a Ray Floyd move is less likely to come about naturally with really upright clubs, which you’d be less likely to want to move around your body on a flat plane with an inside takeaway.
Nicklaus’ shoulders are flat, only his L arm is upright. This causes his arms to get disconnected on top, necessitating him to reconnect in transition. Totally unnecessary IMO. He’s just an extremely talented player.
I think the confusion here is more a hitting vs swinging rather than flat vs Upright.
You can swing and be flat or upright. Hitters, however will benefit more from a flatter swing.
Nicklaus was a swinger… and a great one obviously.
Nicklaus had incredible focus and concentration which helped time his swing. Because swinging is so timing and feel
based, it is not only very difficult to execute, it is even more difficult to teach successfully.
I think most anyone can learn how to hit, and once mastered is much more reliable and repeatable. Much less timing
and much more tangible sensations going on within the body. Much easier also to analyze and trouble shoot also.
Most golfers will never develop the timing skill set to swing the club properly using a swinger’s protocol. However, some do and will and play golf just fine.
If I thought for a second swinging was an equally proficient method across the boards I would teach and promote it.
I grew up as a swinger, and can do it even now with fair results. But knowing both methods, I could not rationalize promoting it in the traditional sense.
I would say that for those hell bent on swinging, the model is Moe Norman. Lavern would be the guy to go spend time with in my opinion.
I hear what you are saying but, in general, upright through impact seems to be associated with steep AoA and rapid rate of closure. How would you advocate getting a player with a relatively steep downswing to shallow out the entry and keep from missing long/left under pressure?
If these questions sound pointed they aren’t intended to be…I’m just wondering. I know it can be done…a guy like Stricker seems to being it in shallow but still fairly steep. David Toms too. I have my own thoughts but I’m wondering what you think.
Good question. And didn’t take it as pointed at all. I am here to learn as well, as we all are. I have my pre-conceived notions, of course, but I have a truly open mind.
A more upright/vertical shoulder turn results to more clubhead speed because you will be turning the shoulders perpendicular to your spine angle and with the help of gravity, which IMO is a big deal. A non-disconnecting arms for consistency because this will enable you to return at intended impact alignments fixed at address better without the need for timing the re-connection later in transition. Plus the pivot will better transfer energy to the arms and hence the clubhead due to the non-disconnecting connections. The steep AoA inherent in an upright swing (in this case upright shoulder turn) will be negated by the same non-disconnecting arms and the use of the Elbow Plane as the Release plane.
Because of the inherent steep AoA in the upright shoulder turn resulting to more momentum or inertia downwards of the clubhead combined with the very low or shallow elbow plane that you are gonna use, the main issue now would be how to prevent the clubhead from digging vertically down into the ground without reducing the straightness of the baseline, without making the more DTL clubhead path less DTL and without making the AoA return to steep…
IMO, the swinging vs hitting is too restrictive that it almost always does not entertain the idea of a better method, which IMO is both—switter some call.
I think you can be a swinger in the sense that you use the pivot as the main engine, the CP, pulling hard on the L arm and clubhead. At the same time, I think you can be a hitter, not in the sense that you will unbend your R elbow using the triceps pushing, but in the sense that you will also be using the R hand/wrist/forearm/arm to control and/or let the pivot/CP and L arm do its thing.
So, strictly TGM speaking, I am for Swinging, but the R arm has to do an active participation both in BS and DS. The pivot/CP pull is for max clubhead speed, the R hand/wrist/arm active participation is for consistency/accuracy.
So I’d say the all the benefits of a swinger and hitter rolled into one…and the benefits of an upright and flat type of swing rolled into one…
I guess we have to be specific when talking about flat or upright - are we referring to the shoulders or the shaft. You mention the case of a steep shoulder turn but a club delivery on the elbow plane. I think that’s a combination that can work nicely and Lee Trevino is a good case study. I think you will find resistance to recommending steep shoulders with steep shaft IF your goal is accuracy via a post impact angled hinge. It’s great for distance, just see Mickelson or Bubba. Many folks here, including myself, appreciate the importance of connection pre and post impact (to a point).
Regarding the generation of power, do you feel that actively extending the right arm is really necessary? There are many here utilizing pivot + forearm rotation as the primary power generators and puting these engines on steroids through focused drilling. Do you see advantages here or is your opinion that adding “right arm thrust” is more optimal for distance AND accuracy? Distance only?
Anectodal evidence here but certainly a worthy case study. Doesn’t appear (MY OPINION) to be much right arm thrust if any.
No, not suggesting at all that you disconnect at any time of the swing. I am for an upright shoulder turn, and an upright L arm that is upright as well but in line with the shoulder line/turn AT THE SAME TIME keeping the R arm connection.
I am also not suggesting a R arm thrust as per my reply-post to Lagpressure. I am for using the R arm to, for lack of better term, “guide” or allow the L arm/hand to do its thing, but definitely no to R arm triceps push unbending the R elbow…
Are these the type of swings you are talking about? Trying to find models that have steep shoulders, upright left arm and still connection at R armpit in backswing… whose swings to you admire?
You have to put it in youtube brackets and get rid of the &tfeature=youtube_gdata_player ending. Such as [youtube] youtube link [/youtube] as below. Just hit the quote button and you can see the embedded links.
More pics…hands and arms tighter…much shallower plane…clubface more open with forearm rotation…torso shoulders turn more level…
Kaymer does a much better job of it than DJ in comparison
people trying to swing like Hogan or whoever are not going to approach it unless their equipment is set up properly…It pretty much boils down to that
Hogan’s clubs are flaaatttttt…and it allows him to keep the club behind him more and use the powers of forearm rotation from P3 into impact and then let his pivot turn supported with ground pressures take over…
