I agree with 3Jack and others on this issue . Maves is a good communicator and has a solid concept and he can sell whatever he likes, its a free world, isn’t it. However I find the use of Ben Hogan’s name and secret thingy a bit distasteful, to attract “customers” and Maves isnt the only one hanging on to Hogan’s coat-tails as 2masters stated, every other day a new secret book emerges.
The interesting thing on the Maves deal is the feet screwing during the swing etc etc but on his website add he states Hogan wouldn’t change a thing in 5 lessons in bolded letters. The contradiction is humerous in that Hogan states in 5 lessons that the Body Motion moves the Feet
I dont see any Hogan motion in Maves swing at all , looks more like Moe to me, and thats no slight on Maves as he probably hits the ball good, but their are levels and levels of ballstriking , lots of layers
To the OP , anyone should be able to teach , the students will soon find out anyway , to me the only question is why these people need to use Ben Hogan’s name to sell their secret swing concepts, $$$$$ and marketing would seem the answer or the deluded state that they indeed “discovered the secret” and some form of adulation to follow
I think people use Hogan because Hogan is considered the greatest ball striker of all time. There have been other great ones too… Trevino, Moe, Knudson, Jones, Snead, Demaret, Nelson, Mehlhorn, O Grady… take your pic… I could list 20 more that many feel could rival most when they were on…
But Hogan always comes up not only because of his fantastic record, but I don’t discount “The Shell Match” as having a huge impact upon his legacy… because it really is the most complete thing that has been recorded historically.
Hogan was not perfect, and there are photos if him hitting out of trees, bunkers, and even a leg or two dropped into a lake. Had he had an off day, and Snead a great one, (that day) I think the legacy might be different.
But things are what they are… and we have what we have… in that one round of golf, Hogan hit every fairway and every green, and that does speak load and clear that he was spectacular, even as a senior.
I don’t think it is strange that people obsess over Hogan… write endless books about his secret, or try to profit from his legacy.
What I do find strange is that golfers (including Hoganites) seem hell bent on trying to improve their games by using very
different gear such as oversized lightweight clubs, and cavity back irons that will never allow one to develop a Hogan type swing even if that is their lifelong objective.
Mike doesn’t claim to have Hogan’s swing. He says it’s more of a combination of Moe and Hogan and that’s why he’s been given the nickname of ‘Moegan.’ Mike was a history major in college and became fascinated with learning about golf swings and swing instruction from the pre-WW II era. He then studied Hogan to more or less see if what he said was the truth (I don’t believe Hogan was telling the actual truth, just the truth as he saw it and how it worked for him). Mike’s book very much describes that journey and comes off like it’s written by a very sharp, former history major and that’s why if anything, it’s a fun read.
I’m not the biggest fan of people making money off the Hogan name either. Although I think in Mike’s case since he’s not using Hogan diagrams and is basically promoting ‘5 Lessons’ and states from the beginning you should have 2 copies of ‘5 Lessons’…I think that’s more than okay since it’s promoting Hogan’s work as much as it’s promoting his work.
VJ Trolio has a Hogan Secret book as well that I plan on getting soon. I’m assuming he went thru the proper channels to get all of the Hogan stuff and if he did, I have a hard time arguing with that.
I don’t think Hogan still had a secret anyway. I think he divulged everything he knew or it was eventually discovered anyway. There may have been some things he did subconsciously and never discovered it, but by now it’s been figured out anyway and his ballstriking ability had to do with having superior talent because I’ve seen guys who can swing very, very much like Hogan and hit the ball really well, but nowhere near Mr. Hogan’s actual ballstriking skill.
3JACK
3 jack (or any other forum member)
What “new” golf instructional insight did you learn from Sevam-1’s e-book or swing videos?
What am I missing?
Jeff.
I have read many books and magazine articles over the years. For me, NO one has ever placed such emphasis on the pivot, or explained it in such a great way so as to grab me and shake me. It was like “darn…why I am I just hearing this now, why didn’t somebody tell me”…
If you haven’t ignored the proper pivot for years or decades, or if you play great golf but don’t know why…you might not feel that way.
By the way , what reference do you have that emphasizes or explains the pivot as well??
Jeffman,
We aren’t all as good as you are, some of us actually learned something.
NRG
Eagle - my references for articles on the “pivot” include my many review papers.
Examples include-:
perfectgolfswingreview.net/pivot.htm
perfectgolfswingreview.net/xfactor.htm
perfectgolfswingreview.net/weight.htm
If Sevam-1 can teach me something “new” about the pivot action, then I would like to gain that “new” knowledge so that I can improve my knowledge about the full golf swing’s pivot action.
Jeff.
Jeff,
Thanks. Those appear to provide extensive treatment of the pivot. Tons of work there.
You would have to read (and try)Sevam’s work for yourself to see if any new bells go off for you , or if he rings a familiar note with what you already know and feel…or if there are areas of disagreement.
What he said, and how he said it, hit a nerve with me./eagle
Good question, Jeff.
Most of the stuff I learned new was in relation to the pivot and in particularly how the feet effect that. When I think of ‘ground forces’, the 3 biggest names I think of that talk quite a bit about it are Mike, Sean Foley and Shawn Clement.
The best way I’ve heard the importance of ground forces being explained is try to think of how well you would be able to hit the ball when standing on a sheet of ice vs. standing on grass. Obviously, the sheet of ice would not only be hard to balance yourself, but to also harder to ‘grip’ the ground and really get that pivot moving.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Maves, Foley and Clement are all Canadians and probably got this idea from their experiences with hockey. Anyway, Mike’s understanding of the feet and how it powers the golf swing was extremely helpful.
But probably the greatest help was understandng lag pressure and when to maximize it and it’s importance in the golf swing. Homer Kelley talks about it being important, but I guess Mike’s explanation help me understand it better. And he had plenty of other stuff, from the grip, the address position, etc. that I pretty much knew and understood, but many golfers would not know and I think he explains it in a way that really helps.
The only thing I don’t like is that I see some golfers that really get obsessed over the backswing he makes, especially how he uses his left arm and when they try and do it, it tends to look really bad and they don’t hit the ball well. They really need to find out what works for them and try to use Mike’s teachings on the feet and the pivot instead of trying to emulate his golf swing. But that stuff happens all of the time. The S&T book is a fine example. I don’t think anything in that book is wrong per say, but too many people have a poor interpretation of what the swing looks like, then they’ll hit a few balls pretty well and think they are n the path to being a great ballstriker when they really need to go and see an certified instructor.
3JACK
Good post R3J
I think we should include John Erickson/Lag in the list of people advocating ground forces. He has written ad nauseum about it being the most significant omission from TGM.
3jack
I respect your golf instructional insights.
How about providing us with a brief summary of his views regarding i) how to use ground forces and ii) how to maximise lag at the “correct” time?
Regarding the S&T swing, you state that there is nothing wrong with Bennett/Plummer’s swing recommendations in their S&T book. Do you therefore disagree with my criticism of the S&T swing as expressed in the following review paper?
perfectgolfswingreview.net/stackandtiltdraft.htm
Jeff.
Jeff, I’ll have to get back to you on review of the S&T book since it’s such a lengthy review. My point about S&T is that there are 6 components of S&T according to the book and my feeling that if you do any of those components correctly, you can hit the ball very well because they are more or less ‘correct.’ However, it becomes a question of whether you can do that part(s) of the S&T consistently. I’ve added the downward left shoulder turn to my swing because I was having issues with my backswing plane. But I really want to get into much of the lower body movement components because not only do I think it’s very vital (particularly the flexed left knee at impact with about 90% of the weight on the left side at impact), it’s something that I think curtailed some of my ballstriking when I was swinging really well and hitting the ball very well back in May & June of this year. I also tilt the head/neck downward and away from the target about midway thru the swing. I don’t think it’s completely due to the position of my right knee on the downswing, but I think that’s part of it and I think much of the S&T lower body movement can be beneficial.
As far as ‘The Secret Is In The Dirt’ goes, Mike talks a bit about ‘pre-torqueing’ the feet at address and how that plays into the pivot and what he prescribes as the sequence of the release which he calls ‘resist, rise, release and roll’…a combination of the movement of the lower body and the release of the club thru the impact interval. As far as lag pressure goes, Mike talks about it on page 62 of the latest update version of the e-book (one of the cool things about the book is not only does it include YouTube vids, but it also has free updates which is very helpful and innovative. More golf instruction books should follow this format). Anyway he talks about not worrying about the angles and instead worrying about lag pressure and maxing it out at impact and beyond and then ‘you’ll have all the lag you need.’ I never really thought of it that way before and I’m certain there are tons of golfers the same way. I believe a flat left wrist MUST be created thru proper lag pressure instead of actively thinking about keeping the left wrist flat. Believe me, I went years trying to figure this out and was working with a GSED at the time (not Ted Fort, a completely different teacher) and I always worked on actively keeping the left wrist flat. Ted kept telling me that you can’t think about it that way and Mike’s instruction finally got the light to go on.
3JACK
3jack,
I have a different opinion than Sevam-1 about ground forces and lag.
I wrote a review paper on Jamie Sadlowski’s swing.
Here is a series of early downswing images from that review paper.
perfectgolfswingreview.net/SadEarlyDownswing.jpg
Note how he squares his pelvis during the early downswing and how he creates the characteristic “Sam Snead sit-down look” by the end of his early downswing (image 5). At that time point, he is solidly grounded with approximately 50% of his weight over each foot. That’s what I understand by applying ground forces to stabilize the downswing. However, note that he keeps his pelvis level and his knees level during his lower body’s pivot action. He doesn’t over-flex his knees in the early downswing and then bounce-up like Tiger Woods. I personally believe that it is mistake to think that one has to “jump up” into impact - as recommended by a number of golf instructors - to demonstrate that one is “correctly” using ground forces in the downswing.
Regarding lag, you state that Sevam-1 recommends maximum lag pressure at impact. That doesn’t make sense to me. I believe in the “endless belt concept” for swingers. If you read my review paper on the “endless belt concept”, then you should hopefully understand why I believe that lag pressure has to be maximum as the hands transition from the straight line section of the hand arc path to the circular/radial section of the hand arc path, and that lag pressure must progressively decrease as the club releases due to centrifugal forces.
Here is Jamie Sadlowski’s swing.
perfectgolfswingreview.net/Endle … tation.jpg
I have traced the hand arc path in red. I believe that lag pressure has to be maximal at point 2 in a swinger, and that it should progressively decrease as the hands move from point 2 to point 4 (impact) - because the club progressively releases due to centrifugal forces, thereby progressively lessening lag pressure. Of course, one must still have some lag pressure at impact to ensure a flat left wrist, and forward shaft lean.
You wrote-: “I believe a flat left wrist MUST be created thru proper lag pressure instead of actively thinking about keeping the left wrist flat.”
I believe that lag pressure plays no role in keeping the left wrist flat throughout the swing. I believe that the left wrist is kept flat by the 3-D movement of the right upper limb in space. The left wrist is kept flat in the backswing (when there is no lag pressure in play) by the 3-D movement of the right arm/hand in space. I described the precise biomechanical phenomenon in great detail in the following review paper.
perfectgolfswingreview.net/arm.htm
Lynn Blake also described the same biomechanical phenomenon in his “Alignment Golf” DVD. It is based on the 3-D movement of the right forearm during a right forearm takeaway coupled with a dorsiflexing right wrist that bends back while keeping level.
If you like the S&T swing’s lower body’s movements and want to introduce those movements into your swing pattern, then we have totally opposite opinions. 
Jeff.
Jeff, you are correct in the the dead hand swinger world… there is no holding shaft flex into impact, and the swinger is at best using a momentum strike, void of any force… because a decelerating shaft will be void of acceleration therefore f=ma is not applicable to a swinger…
I know a better way though…
You wrote-: “Jeff, you are correct in the the dead hand swinger world… there is no holding shaft flex into impact, and the swinger is at best using a momentum strike, void of any force… because a decelerating shaft will be void of acceleration therefore f=ma is not applicable to a swinger…”
I would need you to explain your theory (re: f=ma) with respect to impact.
According to David Tutelman, the only factors responsible for ball speed include i) clubhead speed at impact (V clubhead); ii) clubhead mass (M); iii) ball mass (m): iv) COR of the ball; v) degree of glancing blow due to club loft, and vi) degree of centeredness of the hit.
He uses the following formula
Vball = (Vclubhead) X (1 + e divided by 1+ m/M) X cos(loft) X (1-0.14 *miss)
*miss is the amount (in inches) by which the sweetspot is missed.
See - tutelman.com/golf/design/swing2.php
Jeff.
Jeff,
Tutelman also states that the shaft is effectively like a peice of string at impact. Now that is fine for a swinger. But how could you possibly be accelerating the club after impact if this were the case as the likes of Miller, Hogan and Austin either did or at least claimed to do??
Its great to have ideas and theories, but what about golf in the real world?
NRG
A TGM swinger, who uses a centrifugal release action, is not applying additional power to the clubshaft at impact. Lets presume that the TGM swinger’s clubhead speed at impact is X mph.
A TGM hitter, who is drive loading the club, is applying a push pressure to the aft side of the club through impact. However, according to Tutelman, that will not result in greater ball speed if the clubhead speed is also X mph at hour at the exact moment of ball-clubface collision. A hitter may “feel” that his drive loading action is resisting clubhead deceleration (that is due to ball collision) because he “feels” that he is maintaining shaft flex through impact. However, a “feeling” of maintaining shaft flex through impact does not increase ball speed according to Tutelman - because the clubhead is essentially decoupled from the shaft during the 1/4,000th/second time period of ball collision. If you believe otherwise, please provide “evidence” to support your belief. Also, remember that the clubface only remains in contact with the ball for 1/4,000th of a second and you have to provide evidence of how “shaft acceleration” can increase clubhead speed during that short time period.
Jeff.
Jeff,
Ball speed may not be increased, but surely its best not to have a shaft release at the moment of impact.
NRG
What do you mean by stating "shaft release at impact?
In what sense does a shaft release at impact?
Also, who made the following statement- : “Remember, when acceleration reaches zero, the shaft itself releases.”
In what sense can a shaft be deemed to be released when shaft acceleration reaches zero?
Do these statements apply to hitting or swinging?
Jeff.
Jeff,
Who cares who said what?
Don’t you find what was said interesting??
And who cares about hitting or swinging anyway?, its about the physics of a golf shot right??
NRG.