How about this one

How about this one

Joined: July 12th, 2001, 12:35 am

January 12th, 2009, 2:57 am #1

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 23rd, 2005, 12:18 pm

January 12th, 2009, 3:18 am #2



Tom & Mindy Blake Figure #20 GTTB

Address:http://community-2.webtv.net/RoverII/To ... lakeFigure/
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2001, 7:22 pm

January 12th, 2009, 12:32 pm #3

flat to me!

So here's the thing. We have pics / video of Moe's trail foot flat and not. There fore we can only conclude that this flat trail foot, as precious a part of "Moe-ology" as it is, is NOT a fundamental of a fine golf swing. If it was a an absolute requirement, then Moe wouold have included in all his swings, would he not? Indeed there is swing vision video out there of Tiger hitting shots that show his trail fool flat through impact, and other CG golfers, most notable Kenny Perry, have a very quiet trail foot.

It is hard to face contrary positions ( no pun intended )to those we are so dogmatic about, especially when the dogmatism is held out as THE WAY. That's just the way things go like this...

So, what is it about Moe's swing that we find the same in Hogan's, Nicklaus', Tiger's and all great swings?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

January 12th, 2009, 1:47 pm #4

I have photos of Tiger with his trail foot flat at impact. Keeping your trail foot flat is no big deal if you are willing to give up distance.

I posted a photo of a younger Moe with a driver and his trail foot was not flat. There are many photos of Moe either older or not with driver with his trail foot flat, but when he was younger (but not young) his trail foot was not flat at impact with driver in at least one swing recorded on camera.

Peter
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 28th, 2003, 12:59 pm

January 13th, 2009, 6:08 pm #5

confuse style with fundamental. A flat foot at impact or a raised heel at impact is style not a fundamental of an optimally performing swing. Great players have won using both foot positions.

A fundamental can not be violated if wanting to play to one's potential.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 12th, 2001, 12:35 am

January 21st, 2009, 11:33 pm #6

Style: (noun) A manner of doing something

I would never consider whether the foot is on the ground or off of the ground STYLE. What clothes you wear is style. The way you paint is a style. The way your write is a style.

When you talk about the foot on the ground at impact or the back of the hand being square to the target or not, this is not style. This is bio-mechanics relative to cause and effect of muscular action, body motion, arm action, hand action, leg action, foot action etc and club movement.

If your body moves back and upward due to the forces being applied to swinging a golf club, if you try to hold the foot on the ground (to change your style), you can cause injury. I would strongly advise against this type of change.

I doubt any tour player lifts his foot because he wants to be more stylish but once again, I am not talking about winning tournaments or being a tour player. I am talking purely about the human body as a a mechanism and the causes and effects of moving a golf club.

Todd
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2001, 7:22 pm

January 22nd, 2009, 1:13 am #7

you may not know? Sigh....



Doug writes of style and fundamental as Paul Bertholy does in his original manual and the revision Doug graciously authored - GSC 101. Do you own a copy? Moe owned both - the original and the revised edition, making a personal request from Doug for the later.



According to Bertholy, style is something about the swing that there can be variance in - a slightly narrower or wider stance, an overlap or interlocking or 10 finger grip, a fast swing tempo or a lazy one, etc.



A fundamental is something about the swing in which there can be no variance, something that if it is violated will result in a bad swing - such as the bent trail arm and wrist at impact,reverse the head, and the lead and lag of the master move (and position).



These fundamentals are evident in any fine swing - CG, Single Axis, and even the "Moe Swing" you teach . As Ham has mentioned elsewhere, the difference between great swings is not that much. A simple review of swings from across the ages shows the same things at the critical points Bertholy declares to be fundamentals.



For example, if any of your students that have perfected the single plane Moe swing setup, grip and swing you teach, fail to get their hands to the hitting position ahead of the clubhead, they will hit a less than desirable shot - GUARANTEED...EVERYTIME. Doesn't matter if they follow your system to the tee. THAT is a fundamental. If they lose the bend of the trail arm and wrist prior to impact, they will hit a shot that is as Bertholy would say - A FAKE...GUARANTEED.



Any teaching that does not include as mandatory instruction how to the lead with the lower body and lag with the clubhead is flawed. Any teaching that does not include the proper impact position with the right arm hitting as a claw, with the head reversed is flawed. YOU CAN ACHIEVE THESE TWO FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE SWING WITH ANY GRIP ( except perhaps cross handed )and any number of swing styles espoused here and in most of golf instruction. In this sense then, grip and feet flat (or not) are not fundamental, they are style.
Last edited by mcirishman57 on January 22nd, 2009, 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 12th, 2001, 12:35 am

January 22nd, 2009, 1:31 am #8

Ok..Sigh...

Bertholy doesn't answer the biomechanical questions that I pose. I would ask, why the differences and maybe they will never be answered. I don't think you can always respond by saying "Bertholy" said this or "Bertholy" seaid that. Heck, half of the things Moe said that he did were different than what actually occured.

I spent a day with Paul Bertholy and took a lesson from him because Moe told me to go see him. I enjoyed Paul and had a great day. His methods were fun and had what you describe as the "fundamental" elements. I think, however, that there is much more to it than that. There are causes and effects even if you hit all of the fundamental positions.

You say that the differences between swings is "not that much". I am not talking about differences here, I am talking about the causes and effects swinging a golf club whether it be conventional or Single Plane or any variation in between.

Todd




Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2001, 7:22 pm

January 22nd, 2009, 1:05 pm #9

Todd : " Bertholy doesn't answer the biomechanical questions that I pose. I would ask, why the differences and maybe they will never be answered. I don't think you can always respond by saying "Bertholy" said this or "Bertholy" seaid that. Heck, half of the things Moe said that he did were different than what actually occured."

First, regarding somethings I can certainly always respond by saying Bertholy said this or that...I don't consider myself an expert by any means, but I have used his programs exclusively for the last 6 years now to train my swing, and I have found nothing better for helping with the mechanics of the golf swing. So here's another one -

Bertholy says golf instruction has several errors -

1.Expectation of execution from suggest - whether verbal or written.
2.Expectation of execution from demonstration.
3.Teaching motion prematurely.

The corollary - If a golfer feels he will always remember. The fine golf swing must be fed into the student by precise conditioning.

Most "pro's" violate 1-3 above on a daily basis, and charge $45-$75 per 1/2 hour doing it. The sad part is the students are glad to pay. Most of the time they leave with no clue or plan for getting their lesson into their swing.

I had a problem with my trail leg losing my brace, consequently, my weight would get outside my trail foot and it was hard to get back. Playing golf with FDB years ago he told me. I objected. It was soggy and wet that day. He said, "Look at you shoe then." The whole outside edge of my right shoe was mud covered, furthermore , when I was cleaning my shoes off, I noticed that the outside edge of the sole was really worn. Knowing that I had this problem didn't help me. It took the better part of two years to build a fixed rail leg brace - by practicing it. It felt very funny at first, and I hit many bad shots while making the correction.

A couple years ago, again with FDB, I was having a terrible round. He kept saying "You hit it well when you wait for it...Wait for it at the top." I didn't get it, and became frustrated "Damn it SHOW ME, what you mean!" When we got home he showed me his whippy club. I got it...cause it is impossible to hit that thing if you don't "wait for it".

I share these two stories because it makes both your point and mine. I had then been doing Bertholy drills for several years, and still had these issues. He addresses both of these in detail several times in his material. Still I missed it. Yet, in the span of 5 minutes thanks to FDB with the right words AND the corresponding feel showed me what I needed to know. THAT is good teaching!

Quote
Like
Share