Spine Tilt

Lefthook said;

I think you have a good point Lefthook. This IS a tricky thing however, I think, because of the different parts of the body rotating and bending in different directions and speeds. So it is a real brain teaser. Coupled with the fact that the model has been accepted/taken for granted for decades ,ie, that the axle model is accurate.

But if models are not accurate, or over simplified, then their usefulness is limited.
“World is flat”…works for short distances…not for very long distances.
“Newtonian physics”…works almost all the time…but not all the time…we need quantum physics.

The TGM model barely has the spine represented…a very short bolt that the lever arm rotates on.

I expect more lightbulbs from the spine pondering folks.

I think a basic understanding is all that is really needed regarding spine tilt, torso tilt, waist bend, spine axis, shoulder rotation, lumbar flexing and so on. I don’t see getting lost in translation of small details as having much benefit. Counting the number or capillaries connecting to each vertebra and so forth. To some… all that is very interesting…but I don’t see it benefiting the actual striking of a golf ball all that much.

If there is one common element in good ball strikers, it is probably a big shoulder turn. Especially for longer hitters. I have never seen a long hitter who had a stunted shoulder rotation. Whether the torso, spine, some imaginary cylindrical pillar that runs through the body, or other description is more erect, bent forward, tilted to the right or left can be debated… there is little debate that it needs to be tilted toward the players right foot on the downswing. If you don’t do this, the arms simply don’t have a channel to move through on the downswing. If they don’t move through this channel along a visual 4:30 line, then they are going to work OTT. Simple really.

Are there power advantages to wobbling the spine from upright to tilted? I am sure some are convinced there are. Could there be an accuracy compensation in doing so? I believe so. Which is more repeatable? Likely depends upon the individual, and also how much they apply themselves to the mastery of the move they choose.

As far as transition, there are many ways to do it… some good… some bad. Trying to transition with a hand throw from the top is simply bad. Doing it with only the arms… almost as bad.

Transitioning with the torso only… better, but you can run out of rotational range of motion quickly leading to a pivot stall too early. You can slide the hips left quickly which some feel is the secret move. I actually like that move if done correctly by keeping pressure still firmly into the right foot or ankle. Most players working on that kind of Hogan hip slide lose pressure in the right foot leading to a train wreck later in the swing. If done correctly, I see it as the most advanced move you can make. Very few have applied it successfully. A straight forward flexing of the knees I think will do the job fine. The Snead squat type action is easy to do… familiar enough for most who have ever sat down in a chair, and still allows for enough rotation to be saved and delayed for post impact pivot work. A lot of teaching doesn’t embrace it because to do this, the head must drop at transition. Of course everyone knows we are supposed to have a stationary head, so this should be a real no no… but history shows us that nearly every great striker if not every single one, drops there head at transition. Certainly Trevino, Moe, Knudson, Hogan all did. I agree with Knudson that the head goes where it goes, and trying to keep it still is probably the #1 incorrect swing myth of all time. The legs provide the pressures into the ground, initiate transition, lower COG, flatten entry into impact. I see a lot of stiff legs these days, stick men I call them… and I see a lot of poor ball striking, even out on tour.

Let me start off by saying that I do not want to start an argument, but put forth some alternative information out there. Twomasters and Lag are far more knowledgeable than me.

I see the pictures from Baddeley and everyone cringes. No question, but that is not what S&T promotes. That still photo was taken to show what Baddeley “feels” meaning not what he actually does in his swing, but “feels” like he is doing in his swing. Was it misleading, yes. Are they fighting that Golf Digest article ever since, yes. The closest to the actual model S&T position is Wi. Their model promotes centered. Meaning the rt leg straightens and the upper center (between the shoulders) stays over the ball.

Screen shot 2010-10-13 at 10.59.35 AM.png
Screen shot 2010-10-13 at 10.55.21 AM.png

Spine tilt is created by pushing the hips forward, and keeping the upper center stationary. I think they call it a secondary tilt. Wi is demonstrating here.

Screen shot 2010-10-13 at 11.04.20 AM.png

They also promote an open face during the downswing. Their philosophy is built around hitting a draw with an open face. The idea that a draw starts right and then curves back toward the target. To accomplish this they need an open face. I also think they promote swinging left, but since I am not totally understanding swinging left yet, I cannot be sure. I know they want the hands exiting low and left.

My issues with S&T are they are a bit too focused on positions. I could not agree more with Lag’s theory that positions are vapor trails.

To be fair also, they are not totally responsible for the barrage of marketing that has taken place. They made some videos for Medicus, and the Medicus marketing machine has gone completely out of control.

ok… so you start over the ball, keep your body stacked over the ball, then slide the hips forward which in turn thrusts the spine or torso backwards therefore…

A. You can temporarily block the a path for the arms to come down?
B. Be forced into more upright gear?
C. Decrease the range of motion of the shoulders?
D.Steepen the entry into impact?
E. Minimize clubface rotation pre impact?
F. Unleash a hidden power genie within the body?

I would have this question… if S and T promotes using a lateral slide to initiate transition, it would still seem better to be working the torso back toward the right foot… so it has somewhere to go? So it has somewhere to slide to?

I still don’t like the wobbly spine move. Too complicated at too critical of a moment in the swing. Just my thoughts.

Thanks for the kind words, Eagle!

I really enjoyed reading the latest posts here in this thread.

I don’t know if there’s any point in me repeating this lumbar lordosis and the lateral side bend much longer. So I’ll quit soon :smiling_imp:

In the pictures of Moe above it is easy to see that he has straightend his back (lumbar lordosis) at the top of his swing. His back looks reasonably flat from the lumbar region and up to the shoulders than at address. And his head seems to be leaning towards the target. He seems to be set up to turn straight through the ball.

I believe a good and natural turn through the ball will be a blend of hip rotation, hip slide, hip tilting, spine rotation, spine swaying and spine crumming and then spine swaying again. If you know where you want to move your sholders these ingredients should contribute with the right proportions. But if you for some reason have issues in your pivot you may have to open pandoras box and see what’s missing inside. I agree with what most of Lagpressure’s latest point of wievs. But I also think Kelvin M’s diagnosis of Padraig H’s swing problems are well founded. And the essense of this diagnosis is that Padraig lacks lumbar lordosis in his back swing and therefore has to compensate with independant hands / arms dropping. Which gives him a hook problem AND a disconnection through impact. Which he tries to fight by practicing an OTT move. Because neither he nor his swing coach sees what’s really missing.

It is fun to watch Harrington do the Happy Gilmore. It isn’t perhaps the best pattern for precision but ther is some great dynamics going on in that swing that lacks in his stationary stroke.

One thing a little of the sideline perhaps: A lot of good golfers keep their head (not entirely but quite) on the same altitude throughout the stroke. Those players tend to raise their hips before impact. Tiger basically keeps the same altitude of his hips and drops his head. Moe drops his hips and drops his head even more. It seems like every good ball striker compresses the spine and shorten the effective length of the torso towards impact.

All great players let the head drop we see this in film and photos . Every arm chair qb and tv analyst want Tiger Woods to stop it you see at ranges all across America with teachers holding sticks on top of players heads so they dont move them George Knudson figured out 30+ yrs ago the head was not the center of the swing that it moves where the body goes try and throw a baseball from left field to home plate without moving your head you’ll be lucky to throw it 20ft. The torso needs to make a big turn and be tilted to the right most amatuers make a 70% turn then in a ditch effort for power slide and throw there hands at the ball! Lag mentioned stickman i agree the range is full of arm swingers and they hit there 7 iron and 4 iron same distace! . Nicklaus said the only weight training he did in winter time was legs and thighs he used them to initate the transistion and the key is the rt foot, Amatuers are taught clear ,drive, and open never preserving the power rolling to the outside of the left foot. Knudson took months to figure out how to stay balanced like Hogan anyone can do it but must have opposing pressures to make it work.Tiger,Nicklaus,Hogan, and many more created a lot of vertical pressure by letting the head drop and using the knees and legs. For those who played baeball to hit a low pitch you better bend or lower your COG and the head will follow or strikeout.

The reason this works is that to compress the spine in this way, you can do this simply by really tightening the abdominal muscles. My Tai Chi
instructor years ago worked us into this cupped lower mid section for most all the forms. I found it interesting, and messed around with this concept
in the golf swing with excellent results. It has stayed in my swing, and is totally DNA’ed at this point.

What this does really is bridge the lower body to the upper body, so that the work you do down below can then manifest throughout the body in what I call a “cohesive body tension” that exists from hands to feet. As soon as you have relaxed muscles, you have tension leakage or disconnection.

This (lumbar lordosis) appears to be putting the focus of the Tai Chi compression I learned… into the back. Two sides of the same shape. The lower abdominal muscles when contracted I think will flatten the lower back? I suspect different views of the same objective. I think Kelvin would be spot on if I am understanding his theory correctly.

I like to lock it in at address, and then just maintain that all the way through the swing. I suspect some teachers promote a pumping of this lumbar
via relax- contract - relax… but if I can eliminate another timing element without drastic compromise I will always do so. Trying to time those movements or for that matter, time the spine wobble, I would much rather take those things out of the swing for the sake of simplicity, and repeatability. If it costs me 10 yards, I’ll pick it back up with more module #1, 2 and 3 work.

This conversation seems a lot like a ‘Bio’ style conversation, where every single problem comes down to one thing. For him it was the ‘kinetic link/chain’, and in this instance it’s all about the spine. Any time there’s one answer for every problem, then I tend to be wary. I’m not saying that PH’s spinal motions are not his problem, or that they don’t contribute, but to say that the reason he struggles with a hook is because of this and this only, seems off to me. I haven’t read the PH analysis btw, I’m just observing the info from the post above, but it’s all too neat and tidy to say this is this, and there’s no other reason. It’s kind of like chiropractic stuff- oh, you’ve got a sore shin, let me pop crack your back for you and all will be well. Again, I’m not saying that it isn’t the issue, or that it’s not playing a part, but when your lens is a single colour, then everything tends to appear as a shade of it.
I do believe that the athletic engine carries over through all motions, but the channeling of the energy that that engine creates, is the real skill of each sport.

The ball doesn’t lie. I don’t think PH’s ball striking stats are too impressive, I could be wrong, but I saw earlier this year he hit only 2 greens in reg at one of the Florida stops and still managed to shoot 71.

He can putt for me anytime.

Just a couple comments about S/T and then I will leave it alone as ABS is more efficient, accurate and powerful. I think the guys who “invented” the process overlooked something that leads to accuracy problems and visits to the chiropractor: the reverse C.

This movement will cause a reverse C every time…it can’t be helped and the reverse spine will cause many face issues through the ball. The proper sequence is to, once stacked 70-30 at the top favoring the L foot is to use the L foot to send the weight back to the R foot so that you become basically 50-50 at roughly P3. Just go through the ball “normally” from that point and the spine will finish nice and straight. When the weight goes back to the right foot it is this movement that should cause the secondary spine tilt away from the target and not pushing the hips forward. Pushing the hips forward defeats the purpose of stacking in the first place. Easy to do in this fashion and accurate too…but again subject to timing. :slight_smile: RR

The essence of the problem with S&T is that the heart or the thrust of the motion isn’t rotational. It’s going to work fine for short irons and even up to mid irons if you’re good, but the minute the shaft stretches out, there’s no compatibility between how you’re moving and where the ball is. And you can see it in the bad shots of some of the guys- Mike Weir went from a very reliable driver of the ball to hitting a lot of flat hooks. There are also a lot of strange fat iron shots that seem to come out of nowhere when a guy is striping it, but when you break it down, they’re inevitable.
You could say that Watson was basically the last great player to use a similar frame work of hang back leg drive, and he says himself, that he owned the game as soon as he understood and accepted shoulder rotation. He stopped trying to be Jack and learned to rotate. I don’t know the stats, though I don’t really like stats, but I’d say Watson hit it better or more consistently in the latter part of his career, but as we know, the putter wasn’t great.
In my view, the reverse C isn’t in and of itself, the problem, it’s more of a symptom- there have been great strikers who finished that way. But I think it’s definitely a sign of things to come. Johnny Miller had it on a string for a relatively short period of time, but enough to be recognized as a fairly key player in history. He ran into problems eventually too. I’m sure there are other reasons, but in my view, the basic issue is the focus on lateral action that’s at the heart of it. It’s easier to overdo the lateral too, because we’re very good at balancing laterally from foot to foot, so we can compensate, and the problem sneaks in. How many times have you fallen over to the side in your life? Probably not many. We’re more likely to fall over from a loss of heel toe, or front to back balance. I’m brainstorming now, but this could be one of the instinctive difficulties that people have with rotation in the golf swing- if you’re not strong in your structure, you wont be inclined to want to unwind behind you. That may not be on our minds, but it’s probably on our internal minds, or subconscious.

Range Rat,

I would like to better understand your definition of a reverse C. If you mean in the finish position then please see Charlie’s finish position below. I do not see a classic reverse C position there. I think the problem with the reverse C finish position was bending of the knees and then arching the back, the combination of these two moves is what causes the damage to the back. What S&T wants is the spine to be in flexion. It is possible that I am misunderstanding your view of the reverse C. One thing we are in complete agreement about ABS is a better way, great ballstrikers vapor trails are there for us to see.

Screen shot 2010-10-15 at 10.20.06 AM.png

Bom,

S&T definitely wants the golfer to not only push the hips forward, but rotate them as well. Their issue with instructors just telling golfers to rotate is it can cause the player to spin out if they just spin in place. They prefer the player push the hips forward and rotate at the same time. They definitely want the hips open at impact. Quite a bit actually, but they want them forward as well.

My last comment is that I think S&T is good for the recreational golfer. Someone who does not want to put in the time as we do here in ABS. I want to be the best player I can be, so I am going to do my drills multiple times per day, some people do not want to do that. I think Lag doesn’t want to teach them anyways. I think S&T may be a good option for them.

Impact,
They may recommend rotation, or promote it in different aspects, but the reality is that the overall structure of the concept doesn’t create or even encourage rotation. That photo of Charlie Wi up there has has no remnants of active rotation in it, it’s a linear push/shove/hold the face on the line/dear god please don’t go left, followthrough, and it’s going to work fine-ish in the short irons and maybe mid irons like I was saying. But when the ball gets further away from you and you want to go at it freely and with conviction, that move will not work ever or never- I rarely if ever speak in absolutes, but I make an exception for this. It’s one of those things that from the outset, I didn’t need empirical evidence for, but we’ve got in abundance at this point. Even thinking it through from a basic physical perspective, it was never going to work. I’ve been around good players who jumped on when it came out, and the lucky ones jumped off quickly. In my opinion, it sells itself on the strike it produces with irons when it works, and people feel that and it feels good, and they want more, and believe it will transfer over. But it doesn’t because it can’t. That’s my 2 cents on that.