It’s amazing how many people debate the golf swing who can’t play do to physical issues.Or others who play less than 10 rounds of golf a year.
It’s an easy game on a laptop.
4 Likes
Agree. But even reading this forum and others. It’s amazing how many people don’t play anymore.Or who play less golf in a year than most play in a week or so.But they still post swings or continually debate the swing to death
1 Like
I wonder how many truly elite players there are who learned the game by “swing analysis?” I’m guessing zero. I think great players figure out the game themselves. They might get some guidance from teachers, but in the end you are all alone with trial and error figuring out how to get the club on the ball properly. Even a system like ABS, it’s on the student to put in the effort. No drill is foolproof; you can try a drill and flush 3 or 4 shots, but then it wears off…unless you put in the time to make it permanent. As they say in music, a “good” player practices until they can play it right. A great player practices until they can’t play it wrong.
I’ve done quite a bit of reading about the golf swing in my life, and enjoyable as I find it, I’m sure it’s been to my detriment as a golfer.
5 Likes
Still haven’t heard from you Mr Mann my (repeated) questions to you over a week ago, what are your swing intentions and feels that 1) work best and 2) work under some, any, form of competitive pressure.
Cheers.
3 Likes
I think instead of analyzing positions. One needs to change their prospective to hand and club shaft speed. And when one is applying the speed. Modern golf equipment promotes speed right from the top. Where old school heavy equipment is speed later. It’s hard to comprehend holding shaft flex when you don’t look at hand speed and shaft speed. You can’t apply more speed after the strike when you already shot your wad at the start. Have to hold back the urge to shoot it early
Oh Captain, my Captain, the floor is yours! 
1 Like
Word! Would love to tap this worker’s brain about what he knew about force and propulsion prior to starting on the production line. Necessity is the mother…
I mean “swing analysis” is a broad term. Empiricism is a big part of development in anything and everything. For example, Ben Hogan had his greats like Bobby Jones etc. to reflect on. George Knudson had Ben Hogan’s swing to model after. @lagpressure has done his homework on what made the greats great. “Swing analysis” has its place, but it doesn’t have to be as scientific as @Dubious, @JeffMann, and The Golfing Machine make it out to be because it’s still a human being that’s doing the work. The only time scientific formulas and equations work is when you are using an Iron Byron. Otherwise, observation and interview of a subject’s intentions and “feels” are all single-subject experimental studies. Is it subjective? 100%. Does it work for everybody? Nope. Will it help some/most? Of course. Swing analysis may be subjective in nature, but that doesn’t mean there’s not correlations and commonalities among effective ballstrikers. Now it’s one thing to be able to see what makes them effective and then it becomes another skill to actually mimic/model it.
1 Like
This may be a simplistic way of looking at holding shaft flex but it works for me. If you take a freshwater graphite fishing rod, tie a sinker to it and swing it like a golf club, most certainly the shaft would flex and continue to flex until well after where a golf ball would be struck if you maintain proper rotation. Opposite would be true if you swing a steel rod - likely no shaft flex before or after impact due to rigidity and strength required to flex the shaft. A golf club shaft is closer in flexibility to the fishing pole so it stands to reason a golf club swung in the proper manner would facilitate holding shaft flex beyond impact. Obviously, the flexibility of the shaft would matter as would the ability of the golfer to generate speed at the correct time and the golfer’s ability to pivot and rotate correctly.
Lol good point. Didnt Hogan test all his theories in the heat of competition? Everything in his book was tested under 
Its annoying frankly.
Hmm… What’s the cutoff for ‘can’t play’?? This pretty much sounds like what I’ve been doing here for years
1 Like
Is the mouse or the scroll better to let it rip?
Lmao
Amazing to think. One of the greatest players of all time felt he needed to tell everyone that what he recommended stood up under pressure, and more’s the point not only worked better under pressure but should work better under pressure, but some 20 handicap thinks that criterion disapplies!
When both books were written they were either explicitly or in part taken from magazine articles. Power Golf was aimed at the 90 shooters I think, the modern fundamentals to get people to break 80. IIRC he said 80 was the dividing line between a player and a dub?
Still, plenty of low handicappers who don’t know what they are doing and some that do. I wouldn’t dare write a book, not even a blog-essay, even if I felt I could if I didn’t have a playing record or extremely low handicap to demonstrate that what I say works in competition and you can rely on it to put it into play.
Pressure being subjective I’m not even asking Jeff to discuss high level tournament play or money games. Just, what works, on the line. Any line. Tell us what the pressure was, what worked, what doesn’t. People can make up our own minds.
And whatever ‘it’ is, it needs to be explained in one or two sentences. Much shorter than my posts.
The big hypocrisy and which I think indicates Mr Mann is navel gazing/trying to drive traffic to his website, is he puts out reams of information suggesting he has researched it thoroughly, and says ‘go look at this link’ which runs into pages.
Which is contradictory to how people learn, which is not reading pages of info but in a more succinct, short, sharp, feel based or imitative way.
If you can’t say what has worked for you, under pressure, in one or two very short paragraphs you’re not interested in helping people.
4 Likes
Bulletfade,
You wrote-: "Which is contradictory to how people learn, which is not reading pages of info but in a more succinct, short, sharp, feel based or imitative way.
If you can’t say what has worked for you, under pressure, in one or two very short paragraphs you’re not interested in helping people."
You are very opinionated and also very stupid.
I operate in a very different mental universe than you and I don’t think that all student golfers believe that they can improve their golf swing based on a few sentences of advice and a few practical pointers based on “feel”. I am only interested in helping the more analytical type of golfer who wants to improve his overall understanding of golf swing biomechanics/mechanics so that he can self-improve his personal golf swing action. You, and the other ABS groupies, can continue to insult me, but your criticism is worthless because it has zero effect on my thinking when it comes to the golf instructional issue of how to efficiently perform a full golf swing action.
Jeff.
Opinionated - fine
Stupid - uncalled for
Worthless - rude
Thanks for calling me stupid. Nice.
You have said this many time now on this thread and I am beginning to believe it. I think where you go wrong here is this is not ur website 
Maybe stick to ur website for the scientific enhanced? Constant debating the OP has become more annoying that helping anyone here especially when u link ur website and repeatedly post pics of JE no shaft flex.
Do u see any of us crashing ur website and puking all over ur posts?
Bye
Jeff likes trying to understand, ABSers like trying to do. Each to their own.
3 Likes
Mann is repeating and debating the same shit for 13 years posting photos of JE w no shaft flex.
At some point hes become a troll @JeffMann
See definitions in: “Trying”
- difficult or annoying; hard to endure.
“it had been a very trying day”
1 Like