Good insights Bom,
Equipment had a bearing and teaching had a bearing. I used to rip the turf up with my right foot as Norman did on the way through. Tuition ridded that from both of our swings. It gave us both less resistance to hit against with the pivot and then becoming handsier/armsy with less pivot drive and speed came along as a result and contributed to loss of golf feel also.
Lighter longer equipment helped me to lose the feel of loading and smacking that ball. They all go hand in hand. Speaking from experience of module work and using the old equipment these old feelings are coming back to my swing and my ball striking is approaching the belief stage again where I can play without fear of the having to find the so called positions that evolved from leadbetter based teaching. My dynamics are improving and I can play just as well be it persimmon and blades or 460 CC’s and perimeter irons. This has taken me 6 -8 months so far to get to this point…each year as the new equipment evolved my swing deteriorated unknowingly because I had to alter my swing to fit the bill. Coming from a load and rip style swing I had to shift to a slower smoother swing to have any clue where the clubhead was. My way of playing the game was lost. The way I swung and Norman and others wasn’t taught because no coach could swing that way or have an inner feel or insight into what we were actually doing. the good parts of the swing that made me play well were disintegrated away with a chisel over time.
That’s all Lag has been saying all along. The harder we make it, the more feedback we get. the more feedback we get, the more we know what to work on. the more we know what to work on the easier golf becomes. Then go use your modern equipment when you play events by all means, but give yourself a chance at improving or at the very least maintaining what you have by making practice time more difficult. If you hit the ball and miss the sweet spot obviously something is up…if you don’t know if you miss the sweetspot or not then how do you know how your swing is holding up?
If courses are set up where accuracy is not really required and distance and a hot wedge and putter is all that is required then so be it. That has become the norm and one day that trend will change because people will eventually tire of it and course setups will change. But sooner or later someone will get this backward stepping solved by taking the approach we talk about here and wipe everyone off the course week in and week out, whatever the course conditions present and the golfing tuition/coaching/playing trend will then point in that direction because people love to jump on the hot thing of the moment.
Thanks for sharing the thoughts there, man- without sounding repetitive, I do appreciate them.
It’s really unbelievable the people who make money out of teaching based on purely theoretical or observational understanding. Cause and effect can be so far removed that it’s a potential disaster to not actually know what’s happening. Your point about teachers not teaching what you guys were doing is so bang on it’s not even funny. I’m sorry that you had to go through that the hard way. Sounds like you’re back on track though- good to hear it…
How could these guys know or even begin to understand what it takes. But then It’s very easy to fall into the thinking of the best player of the time and think that that’s the best way to do things. It seems to be how swing theory works. Looking at the dominant player in each era you can really see how their style defined the time. It’s like music in a way- you hear some songs from different eras and they have a distinctive sound, often in line with the big band of the time. Faldo for the most part owned the 90’s so it was hard not to look to him for the answer. It’s human nature, I suppose. But like anything, it was a reaction to something. Looking at the young Faldo you can see what he was trying to fight with the leg drive etc. But if you don’t have that problem as a backboard, and you just start resisting with your hips or whatever the hell it is, then that idea is no good. This is kind of why I think trying emulate Hogan directly can be a problem. He had that wall of a hook to hammer away at, so every thought he had IMO was a fight against that. It’s invaluable in a way to know so clearly your enemy- it sharpens your focus to say the least and simplifies things to a great deal. Like Norman having one bad shot and then all of a sudden having five- that’s scary stuff.
I don’t think I’ve heard a better description of a good golf swing than ‘load and rip’. As I’ve said a few times, I’ve been really digging in to the feet and legs for a good while now and I’ve been floored by some of the things I’m noticing. I’ve hit a few 1 irons over the last while that have come off the face in a way I haven’t seen in a long time. The way the top strikers have used their right foot, or at least how their right foot functions is a big focus for me at the moment so it’s cool to hear you talk about ripping up the turf with yours. I’ve had the feeling of loading into my right thigh on the way down with the club held inside my foot/knee line, and as my hands pass by my right leg I then rip into it laterally with the whole back of the right foot coming off the ground and kind of sliding forward. It’s not heel up and out, it’s parallel to the target line with the whole outside of the right foot coming up perpendicular to it- at least in intent. It seems that that move carries the hands and club laterally through space and really bangs the back of the ball. There’s a lot more to that idea, but that’s kind of the ‘swing thought feeling’ that carries well onto the course…
Fun stuff…
Cheers…
My purpose here is really simple. To teach passionate golfers… the real seekers, how to stripe it.
If we can learn to flush a blade style long iron, one without perimeter weighting, but one that has an appropriate
mass centered correctly in the head of the club, then if we can hit that club, we can hit ANYTHING!
However…
Just because you can occasionally hit a hybrid, or a frying pan, does not mean you will be able to properly strike and control a blade style long iron.
Therefore, I highly advise spending a lot of time with such a club in your hands… with your drills, on the range, even on the golf course.
Now if you are playing an important match or competition, then by all means, use what you feel will give you the best chance to perform well. For me, that would still remain persimmon and blades on the type of courses I play.
But I can assure anyone, pro or amateur… if you only use modern lightweight gear to practice and play with, you will NEVER get access to the kinds of sensations, muscular conditioning, precision feedback, and ultimately “feel” …that crafted the games greatest golf swings and ball strikers.
Why are we not seeing the next Hogan or Snead?
Why are we not seeing the next phenomenal driver of the golf ball that we saw with Greg Norman years ago?
With a ball that obviously flies longer and straighter than balls of past… and gear designed
by NASA rocket engineers… throw in “Trackman” or any other high tech analytical devices… we should be seeing ball striking that is out of this world superior to that of the past…
However…
This is not happening…
Why?
Because the gear is not being designed for optimizing accuracy.
It has to be understood, that the golf swing itself, is going to evolve from the clubs that are used, how they are set up, weighted, lie angles, shaft flex, bounce and so forth. The swing will also evolve from the type of courses that are played… (long, short, wide open, tight etc…) and from the type of drills, practice, conditioning and so forth… as well as other things.
History has left behind it’s footprints in the sand. The greats of the past have left us a wonderful legacy. We can ignore this, or we can embrace this as we are doing here at ABS. Best embraced before it’s washed away for good.
But if modern players are looking at Hogan, or Moe for answers or clues, their search will be disjointed, confusing, and most likely a fragmented trail of road blocks and dead ends. Until they understand how these swings developed, the search will continue to be one of frustration and bewilderment.
[quoteBut I can assure anyone, pro or amateur… if you only use modern lightweight gear to practice and play with, you will NEVER get access to the kinds of sensations, muscular conditioning, precision feedback, and ultimately “feel” …that crafted the games greatest golf swings and ball strikers. ]
[/quote]
This is total nonsense, I’m sorry this is a ridiculous comment.
Modern Equipment has no impact what so ever on people’s muscular condition or movement patterns.
How golfers create speed or power has nothing to do with modern equipment, it’s a biomechanical breakdown in how their body creates speed, biomechanically.
It’s not the equipment, I can assure you, wouldn’t matter if they had modern or old gear, the golfer has biomechanical breaks downs and their biomechanics won’t change unless trained accordingly.
There isn’t one coach out there who is teaching anyone muscular condition without using 3d analysis technology to assist them.
3D analysis is the one way you can determine, how the body is firing in sequence and whether or not you are using the muscle groups with the right timing and sequencing.
Teaching muscle groups is a field of it’s own and is biomechanics, how the body creates speed and power has nothing to do with equipment or swing mechanics.
I can assure you, if someone has good biomechanics with modern gear he will only play better and someone who is using the old gear has no hope of beating this person.
Equipment is not the issue, most people biomechanics issues are the real issue, you have good biomechanics you can hit anything. Although there are very few men who do have good biomechanics anyway.
Bio, it’s interesting you would view it this way…
How can you believe the difference between swinging a 16 ounce driver and a 10 ounce driver would not effect the muscular development or conditioning of the golfer?
Of course it does.
I was talking to a former Canadian Tour winner this evening who was very close to Moe, and who’s own father was one of both Moe’s and Knudson’s direct competitors during their prime years playing back in the 1950’s and 1960’s. He was telling me how his dad, and Moe and George were all using very heavy gear, even adding lead tape under the grips so they could reduce swing weight feel of their clubs that were all set up at 16 ounces. You can’t pull anything off a modern golf shelf today that would resemble such a club.
You can’t swing stuff like that with just your arms and hands. These swings adapted to their gear over time by embracing a more pivot driven move… supported and powered by muscular strength. The golf ball loves the added mass also, and that’s why the great strikers embraced this conceptually.
There is one…
his name is Lag…don’t forget it.
You Missed the point,
The Equipment isn’t to blame, people already had biomechanical break down in the first place, you can’t blame modern gear.
How people create speed is biomechanical function and has nothing to do with a lighter club.
Sure lighter equipment allows people who have arms thrusting issues to get away with it, although again still the true issue if biomechanical break down.
Also may I add you can get you driver weighted accordingly if desired.
I have my driver setup similar to my irons, although is slightly lighter due to length, although in dynamics, weighs the same as my irons.
Still you have to hit your irons and blades haven’t changed that much, you can still get heavy swing weighted irons if you desire or what ever weight you like. You might get away with poor movement patterns with your driver, although your going to get punished by your irons either way.
X-man don’t make me laugh, I can assure you muscular loading isn’t being trained or biomechanical function. If you have a post impact pivot thrust, I can assure you, you are not using the right muscle groups to power your golf swing. Having knowledge about human motion and the theory, you soon know what is spoken about here isn’t training muscle groups or biomechanical function.
I’m sorry I work off measured science and not belief systems and opinions, how can you say, someone is training muscle groups when they have never tested their drills or use technology to measure muscle groups or power generation process.
Also every athlete is different and has different issues, they need inidvidualised programs to train their body and muscle groups accordingly.
We have personal trainers and physios tell me everyday they are are training the right muscles groups in certain sports, They create programs from their beliefs and opinions not true measured science, although when you test their training programs and exercises the data indicates other wise. They soon realise they need to test their athletes and training programs.
They are also questions that can only be answered by an individual and are all relative. There are no definitives here Lag, thats what I am trying to highlight to you. You say that the best golf was played between 1930 and 1995. I disagree with you there because I think great golf was played before then and great golf has and will continue to be played since then.
Well thats just silly. The irons are the same, all they have to do is figure out how to hit persimmon which isn’t nearly as hard as you make out. Give one to a guy who is used to ‘endlessly beating balls’ and he’ll have it going pretty good by the end of the day.
Just realised thanks to the ‘how to win a tournament’ thread how much this site now exasperates me.
To those on the journey towards improvement, good luck.
I’ll probably check back in from time to time, but for now I’m going to concentrate on getting fit for the operation to remove the ruler up my ass. 
cheers people, its been emotional.
Biomechanic: I’m a patient rat…hard to find one of those in a trash pile. Golf is best played with humility but I’m going to set that attribute aside for a moment.
I’ve read your words on another site, and here as well. For the life of me, I can’t begin to understand how an individual receives dividends by blasting others in an attempt to prevail in your argument. Why not focus your energies on sites that are congruent with your beliefs?
That said…what you are peddling is simply a boatload of postulates devoid of actual practical understanding of major concepts as it applies to human range of motion juxtaposed with intent and instinct. Or in rat terms, it’s a boatload of crap 
I forgot who said this…“golf is 5% fact and 95% discussion”. What Lag and Two are doing here is the 5% piece…RR
Your loss, and to be quite honest, you have completely not understood, or not wanted to understand, what this site aspires to.
I haven’t read the “How to Win a Tournament” thread, but I don’t think I’ve ever found any topic on this site “exasperating”. A bit wordy, overly technical, or at times regarding things that don’t interest me, but never “exasperating”.
Styles, it may strike you as odd that being as conceited as I obviously am that the ABS forum doesn’t revolve around me. However, I’m truly a modern day Copernicus and this forum is not “Chaos-centric”. As such - I’m with Teddy…your loss. As far as the operation…just get a 50 gal. drum of butter flavored Crisco and work on your abs. When you are able to do a proper “L-seat”, just shake a bit…it’ll all drop out I’m sure. Yes, I’m quite confident there is much more up there than just a yard stick! 
Captain Chaos
biomechanic,
Reading your posts reminds me of the attitude encountered in various humanitarian disciplines where one sometimes tries too much to be like the hard core science disciplines, that it really is overdone, like trying inventing a square circle.
The human body is not purely a mechanical ensemble. Especially when playing golf where the psyche plays occupies such a primordial place. Hence a truly scientific approach should also include this latter dimension and not rely on a purely mechanistic approach.
Optimizing the golf swing can’t hence be based simply on trying to optimize the golfer’s biomechanical machinery but one rather needs to devise a motion pattern which stands a better chance to hold up under pressure, fatigue or lapses of attention. However this requires a holistic approach more complex than a narrow scientific mechanistic approach.
It is really strange that you keep harping on the great depth of science to be found in your company and yet you consider it completely ridiculous that heavier golf equipment might play any role whatsoever with regard to golfer’s muscular condition or motion patterns.
First of all, any kinetic chain is characterized by the specific interaction between various linked elements and the magnitude of the mass/dimensions of the elements involved plays a very important role. Hence definitely also the mass/dimensions of the club.
Moreover, a golfer, learns, maintains and executes his swing using proprioception/kinesthesia to perceive body position of his limbs, their relative movement and the muscular tensions. Here again, the mass of the club plays a very important role in this very crucial feedback mechanism.
Dr. Nesbit, a prominent golf researcher, using complex 3d modelling and extensive experimental measurements, in his paper, “A THREE DIMENSIONAL KINEMATIC AND KINETIC STUDY OF THE GOLF SWING”, comes to a very interesting conclusion…
[i]"This analysis revealed the true complexity and individuality of the golf swing motion. While some data were similar among subjects, most data illustrated vast differences both in terms of magnitude and profile. For example, the kinetic quantities consisting of the work, power, linear interaction force and the three components of torque illustrated how differently each subject drives and controls the golf club.
These differences have important implications for golf instruction, equipment design, and injury assessment. revealed were the quantities that were related to skill level such as hand trajectory, work ratio, work, club head and grip velocity, alpha torque and angular velocity, and power. The other quantities seemed to reflect swing style and not skill level. The study discovered little correlation between body type and swing characteristics or skill level.” [/i]
It is therefore very tempting to draw a parallel with fundamental particle research …too much of science in golf will very likely, in a similar fashion, also result simply in raising more questions and moreover producing an ever increasing complexity.
Mandrin,
Why cause it’s the truth, I have taught this game for a long time and from day 1 was TGM student, a qualified golf instructor. Also a qualified club fitter.
As my time as a coach I produced from scratch, state level representative players and college players. Now I work with PGA and LPGA tour players across the world.
All my clients hit brick walls and could go no further and would not improve. Why was this and the search began. I knew and they knew deep down it wasn’t there mechanics or equipment there was a missing link. Which was there biomechanics.
How the body creates speed or the power production process has nothing to do with, swing mechanics or equipment. It’s biomechanics.
I can assure you the power production issues people have in their golfswing, if your measure this person hitting a tennis shot or hitting a baseball, they would have the same power production issues and movement patterns as their golf swing. This have been proven from research.
You can’t blame fry pan drivers for poor golf swing or movement patterns, the person had poor movement patterns even before they picked a club up for the first time.
Again why blame one club, what is this the cause for people not being able to hit irons as well. Don’t think so. The modern blades are still blades, you still can have stiff and choose what ever swing weight you like. Which highly depends on the individual.
If you have good movement patterns light clubs have no impact on peoples power production process, the lighter the better. Although heavy clubs if they are too heavy add an external force to the system and causes arm declaration,and stuffs up your kinetic link again measured and proven.
We have done product studies and evaluations for companies on swing weights and how this effects biomechanics, so we know first hand.
The players of today have to be more accurate, the further you hit the ball the less room for error.
Here is a good article to prove players of today are more accurate and the driving accuracy is better today than the 80’s.
Ivars Peterson’s MathTrek
August 18, 2003
Golf Clubs and Driving Distance
The last 20 years have seen remarkable changes in golf equipment: metal-headed drivers, forgiving irons, new putter variants, juiced golf balls, and more. Have these technology changes led to improved performance?
Anecdotal evidence certainly points to such improvements. In 1980, for example, the leader in driving distance on the Professional Golfers of America (PGA) Tour was Dan Pohl, who averaged 274.1 yards. In 2002, this value would have put Pohl into 158th place.
To gain some insight into changes in driving distance and accuracy, statistician Scott M. Berry of Sycamore, Ill., analyzed driving statistics from the PGA Tour over the last 24 years. His report appears in the current issue of Chance.
PGA officials have a protocol for determining a player’s average driving distance. At each tournament, they select two holes where most players hit drivers. Typically, the holes are fairly flat and oriented in opposite directions to minimize wind effects. Officials record the length of each player’s drive on each hole, and the average of the two distances is considered a player’s average driving distance.
A player’s driving accuracy is the percentage of times that he hits the fairway for all par-4 and par-5 holes.
Berry obtained data on average driving distance for 735 PGA Tour golfers going back to 1980. A plot of the data shows some interesting features. Average driving distances stayed fairly flat during the 1980s, with a slight increase toward the end of the decade. There was a slight decrease in the early 1990s, followed by a steady, strong increase in the median driving distance from 1993 to the present.
“In the current golf season, every single PGA Tour player has an average driving distance larger than the median player’s average driving distance in 1993,” Berry remarked. “The average driving distance of the median Tour player has increased 27.3 yards from 1993 to 2003.”
Is the improvement due to equipment or a stronger pool of players? Berry looked at the data for the seven golfers included in at least 23 of the 24 seasons of data. He saw a similar pattern in their statistics.
“This is an interesting trend, especially because these golfers, all having been Tour players for at least 20 years, are getting older,” Berry noted. “They are all at least 40 and hitting the ball farther than they ever have!”
Further analysis led Berry to conclude that changes in technology were largely responsible for the increase in driving distance in the last 10 years.
Has technology aided a golfer’s ability to hit drives not only farther but also straighter? In this case, the trend wasn’t as evident as it was in the case of driving distance. In 1980, the median driving accuracy was 62.4 percent. It increased to a high of 69.8 percent in 1998, then decreased in the following 5 years. The 2003 median of 65.7 percent is the lowest since 1990.
Nonetheless, overall accuracy is improving. Indeed, further analysis suggested a 5-percent increase over the last 20 years.
There’s a tradeoff between distance and accuracy, however. The error in the angle at which you hit the ball to keep it in the fairway is smaller the farther the ball goes. Indeed, the data show that, despite the overall improvement in accuracy, there remains a negative correlation between driving distance and accuracy.
Golf courses used in professional tournaments are already adapting to new equipment and performance levels, with longer holes, tighter fairways, and other changes.
“The best drivers of today are almost 1.5 shots per round better than the best drivers of 1980, resulting in a 6-shot difference in a four-round tournament,” Berry wrote in Chance.
In the sport of golf, that’s huge.
Copyright 2003 by Ivars Peterson
Goes to show players of today still deserve praise and recognition for being great ball strikers as well.
L
Biomechanic: I think you are missing the point completely. Let me give you a real-life example.
I began my drumming career in a drum and bugle corp. Was trained by some of the best drum-line instructors @ the time from The Sertominaires, The Royal Lancers, The Ambassadors, The Marauders, etc. Training the fingers, wrists, arms were done with size 3-S sticks- which are heavy and big as a horse’s leg. Why?..the weight, circumference, and the overall demands of the stick trains one to acquire the correct movements and positions within time.
If you can warp speed that size…lighter, smaller sticks are like taking candy from a baby.
Hey Mandrin…does C.O.A.M apply to stick movements… RR
Hmmmm, interesting… I wonder why that was?
My two and only cents on this ‘discussion’… until someone can draw a clear and defined line in the sand between where mechanics ends and biomechanics begins(assuming they even do or even exist as separate things), then the debate between which if either is more important, is fairly pointless…
As far as I’m concerned everything is interconnected and nothing happens in isolation…
Range rat,
Sticky question – I like to analyze how ground reaction forces come into play here and moreover if the use of oversized sticks can lead to a biomechanical breakdown.
One of the things that appealed to me about going back to hit blade irons is that it requires precision with your clubpath, lowpoint and the clubface.
I believe that these things do require some degree of motor skills and coordination.
I believe that if you stop testing those motor skills and coordination, it quickly erodes. While I have a lot of respect for Tom Wishon, one of the things that stuck in my mind about him seeing Hogan’s old irons was he stated ‘any other person would hit them fat 80% of the time’ because of the very sharp leading edge.
I disagree with Wishon on this because Joe Schmoe the 10 handicapper may hit it fat because he hasn’t tested his low point skills in forever. But somebody who wants to improve their game and has decent coaching will eventually learn how to better control their low point hitting these irons over some big thick sole Game Improvement irons.
3JACK