Joined: November 17th, 2001, 6:19 am

October 10th, 2011, 3:46 pm #11

Ham I see what you are saying and it makes lotsa of sense from a logical point of view. I saw your comment on one of her videos that expressed the same sentiment where you said:
Not sure how you wish to create speed without leverage. Lack of leverage seems to be one of the biggest problems golfers have.
That expresses quite well the sentiment and mindset of the traditional golf teaching mainstream, as I said. Since the best swings in the world all turn, cock and hinge their wrists, keep their arms straight, have maximum X factor stretch, hip and shoulder rotation, and a strong lower body lead as the first move, it's hard to see how there could be something that works as well ( or even better) that is such a radical departure from the conventional wisdom. That is why I used the analogy of the Fosbury flop.

It was hard for me to see, who built my swing using heavy pipes and slow motion drills, it was hard for me to see how I could add more speed by swinging a lighter club faster and training with a speed chain. But, I stepped out of my comfort zone and sure enough, there it was.

Pitching is actually a good example. Most pitchers can bring just as much heat throwing from the stretch as they can with no men on and they are taking their big huge windup and leg raise. So why do pitchers not use the stretch all time, it is a simpler move? Because they have been pitching like that their whole lives.

IMO the best study would be to take someone who swings MGS, make those same measurements of muscle activation, body part speed, club head velocity and ball speed etc - take the same measurements that they have been taking for years measuring golfers that swing the more conventional way. Then we would be able to quantify exactly what MGS does bring to the table and what is involved and why it works.

Until something like that comes about, we only have our empirical evidence and speculation. But judging from the "chatter" here the MGS has some real merit. We have folks that NEVER posted coming on saying they are getting dramatic help and improvement. We have a lifelong golfer 68 yrs young who has added distance AND accuracy. Kiran says lots of people are buying her book, and I am getting lots of phone calls and emails reporting the same.

In two weeks, one of our own - HAWK - is going to meet with me for a one on one with this. Hawk is one of the first purchasers of my book when it came out, and has personally benefited from The Blueprint approach, so he will be a good reference point for comparison. So he will get a look first hand at what I am doing, how easy it ( or not ) is to adapt to MGS, and what kind of results he experiences. Not being the shy type, I expect he will give a full report of our session.

Kevin



Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
In the video linked below she says that the golfer's right side of the upper body should stay below the left, but the golfer's after video does not show that, and I think that you also do not accomplish that. I know it has only been a couple weeks, but if the swing is not being done properly how do you know it will work? Are there any videos of someone doing the swing as described?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXKpPNMt ... ideo_title

Ham
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 17th, 2001, 6:19 am

October 10th, 2011, 3:47 pm #12

What would be measured to rank the progress? It can't be scores because those are mostly dependent on putting and short game.

Whatever you might use to measure, I'd like to rank it by hours of instruction and practice per unit of achievement. 99% of golfers will not invest the time and effort needed for the Bertholy method. OTOH I'm pretty sure if I devoted enough time and effort, I could improve a lot no matter which method I used.

Maybe the best thing to measure would be student satisfaction.
Some sort of test that would show distance and accuracy before and after would be much better then before and after videos. That coupled with handicap improvement would be an idea.

Ham
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 22nd, 2004, 9:58 pm

October 10th, 2011, 4:32 pm #13

Ham I see what you are saying and it makes lotsa of sense from a logical point of view. I saw your comment on one of her videos that expressed the same sentiment where you said:
Not sure how you wish to create speed without leverage. Lack of leverage seems to be one of the biggest problems golfers have.
That expresses quite well the sentiment and mindset of the traditional golf teaching mainstream, as I said. Since the best swings in the world all turn, cock and hinge their wrists, keep their arms straight, have maximum X factor stretch, hip and shoulder rotation, and a strong lower body lead as the first move, it's hard to see how there could be something that works as well ( or even better) that is such a radical departure from the conventional wisdom. That is why I used the analogy of the Fosbury flop.

It was hard for me to see, who built my swing using heavy pipes and slow motion drills, it was hard for me to see how I could add more speed by swinging a lighter club faster and training with a speed chain. But, I stepped out of my comfort zone and sure enough, there it was.

Pitching is actually a good example. Most pitchers can bring just as much heat throwing from the stretch as they can with no men on and they are taking their big huge windup and leg raise. So why do pitchers not use the stretch all time, it is a simpler move? Because they have been pitching like that their whole lives.

IMO the best study would be to take someone who swings MGS, make those same measurements of muscle activation, body part speed, club head velocity and ball speed etc - take the same measurements that they have been taking for years measuring golfers that swing the more conventional way. Then we would be able to quantify exactly what MGS does bring to the table and what is involved and why it works.

Until something like that comes about, we only have our empirical evidence and speculation. But judging from the "chatter" here the MGS has some real merit. We have folks that NEVER posted coming on saying they are getting dramatic help and improvement. We have a lifelong golfer 68 yrs young who has added distance AND accuracy. Kiran says lots of people are buying her book, and I am getting lots of phone calls and emails reporting the same.

In two weeks, one of our own - HAWK - is going to meet with me for a one on one with this. Hawk is one of the first purchasers of my book when it came out, and has personally benefited from The Blueprint approach, so he will be a good reference point for comparison. So he will get a look first hand at what I am doing, how easy it ( or not ) is to adapt to MGS, and what kind of results he experiences. Not being the shy type, I expect he will give a full report of our session.

Kevin



Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
The Yankee's Bob Turley (Cy Young winner) went to a no windup delivery
because he couldn't throw strikes. He just stepped straight out to
the plate and cut it loose at 95 mph. Lots of ways to skin a cat.
That's why you could tell Brewer from Hogan from January from Snead
from Bolt at 400 yards or better. MGS doesn't resonate with me but
it does with some.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 2nd, 2002, 7:44 pm

October 10th, 2011, 6:08 pm #14

In the video linked below she says that the golfer's right side of the upper body should stay below the left, but the golfer's after video does not show that, and I think that you also do not accomplish that. I know it has only been a couple weeks, but if the swing is not being done properly how do you know it will work? Are there any videos of someone doing the swing as described?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXKpPNMt ... ideo_title

Ham
No swing is picture perfect. Or at leastg very few that i know of. You can take any teacher or instructor and read their teaching then watch one of their students and find diffences from what is taught. They are not machines even the best Pro's make poor shots and incorrect swings.

To me the answer is it working better for those of us trying it than what we were using. It certainly sounds like for lost here who are trying the MGS. For me I struggled the first time or so on the range, but gettting good reults now. I am sure if I had video of my self you would find a lot of things i am not doing according the the book. But I am hitting the ball better than before .
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 17th, 2001, 6:19 am

October 10th, 2011, 7:08 pm #15

if you are not performing the important parts of the swing properly, then are you doing the swing? Maybe working in the direction of the MGS helps your old swing become better, but if you go all the way to doing the swing properly maybe it would become worse. Maybe not, just a theory.

Ham
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 2nd, 2002, 7:44 pm

October 10th, 2011, 7:39 pm #16

You could say that with any swing style. I believe she even says if you using even part of her instruction it will help your game. I think she is talking about the set up mainly.
But most people probably have diffenrt swing methods mixes on together to some degree, wouldn't you say ?
Unless they have the benefit of working daily with the same instructor to be sure they are doing every single thing right. Even then I'm sure under pressure of playing on the course they have trouble s.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 13th, 2005, 8:24 pm

October 10th, 2011, 8:30 pm #17

Some scientific studies that evaluate the golf swing and how best to deliver the club to the ball at maximum speed and consistency compare amateur to pro. Most pro's learned to swing from an early age and were taught the "conventional way". So measurements of pro's swings are basically measuring the same style of swing, and amateurs attempt to emulate these swings.

For example, all pros exhibit much greater shoulder turn than amateurs, so the conclusion is drawn that a big shoulder turn is required for maximum club head speed. Nobody considers anything different, or that perhaps that is not totally correct, or that there might be a better way, because all pros do this, and they all do it way better than most amateur's. The longest hitters make the biggest shoulder turn of them all. So to improve your swing, increase your turn, right?

Well I read Herbert's question to Kiran about wrist cock, where it seemed he might be trying to slip her a "gotcha question" about the paper she referenced - as it stated that pros "...held wrist cock longer....and that it was the strongest determinant of club head velocity...".

Her reply was genuine, simple and to the point:
The paper's correlation with club speed is a correlation only not a cause. The better golfers are more able to do what is required of them, which, traditionally, is a wrist cock, and of course the better golfers have better speeds, on the whole. So, one does not necessarily cause the other.
This was like a gentle slap in the face to me as I sat there thinking about all the the concepts I have about the swing, and how I went about building my swing, and how my thinking has been soooooo limited in many ways - in part because I made such dramatic improvement going down the path I choose..how could anything else be an improvement? It took an injury to move me to consider other possibilities and move me off my position and change my paradigm.

So ladies and gentleman, we are ( or at least I and some others are )at the same fork in the road with the swing, that high jumpers were when Fosbury appeared on the scene many years ago. Could it really be possible to get better performance jumping that way? REALLY everybody said. he won the gold medal. Now, most everybody flops don't they?

Is it really possible to attain pro level contact, consistency, and distance using MGS fundamentals? NO big turn - NO active wrist set - NO unnecessary movement or rotation. NO - re routing. NO huge back swing? Could MGS, with its unconventional set-up, and break from some long held swing mechanics dogma be the swing of the future? She makes a bold claim, which should not be overlooked, and should be given very careful consideration, because it makes a ton of sense:
IF you do everything MGS, you can have a very specific cause for every fault, and it is universal to every human body - no discrimination - because all our joints work in exactly the same manner.
Now that's a pretty strong statement, about as strong as it gets. But imagine the possibilities if indeed this is the case.

Dem bones..Dem Bones..Dem Bones...oh hear the Word of the Lord.

Kevin







Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
Ok keep in mind I posted another comment, its not up yet? But I tried it as close as possible to the decription. no variation. At least as I can tell. An it simply works. Straight baby draw on everything. Distance was the same as my other swing when struck well. But no fat shots and no faids. Just clean scuffing the grass. with a little zip sound.

Tried it with the wedges pitch and chip shots works just as good and as advertized. Fairway woods super clean shots, and the driver the same. So I am not going to question anything Kiran says, I am just going to do it. Boy was my thought process off about this swing. Let me slap myself in the back of my head. Slllaaaaap so there.

Dont know anything about the putting on her site, will get the E-book I guess? well I am convinced.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 16th, 2005, 10:50 am

October 10th, 2011, 9:18 pm #18

Some scientific studies that evaluate the golf swing and how best to deliver the club to the ball at maximum speed and consistency compare amateur to pro. Most pro's learned to swing from an early age and were taught the "conventional way". So measurements of pro's swings are basically measuring the same style of swing, and amateurs attempt to emulate these swings.

For example, all pros exhibit much greater shoulder turn than amateurs, so the conclusion is drawn that a big shoulder turn is required for maximum club head speed. Nobody considers anything different, or that perhaps that is not totally correct, or that there might be a better way, because all pros do this, and they all do it way better than most amateur's. The longest hitters make the biggest shoulder turn of them all. So to improve your swing, increase your turn, right?

Well I read Herbert's question to Kiran about wrist cock, where it seemed he might be trying to slip her a "gotcha question" about the paper she referenced - as it stated that pros "...held wrist cock longer....and that it was the strongest determinant of club head velocity...".

Her reply was genuine, simple and to the point:
The paper's correlation with club speed is a correlation only not a cause. The better golfers are more able to do what is required of them, which, traditionally, is a wrist cock, and of course the better golfers have better speeds, on the whole. So, one does not necessarily cause the other.
This was like a gentle slap in the face to me as I sat there thinking about all the the concepts I have about the swing, and how I went about building my swing, and how my thinking has been soooooo limited in many ways - in part because I made such dramatic improvement going down the path I choose..how could anything else be an improvement? It took an injury to move me to consider other possibilities and move me off my position and change my paradigm.

So ladies and gentleman, we are ( or at least I and some others are )at the same fork in the road with the swing, that high jumpers were when Fosbury appeared on the scene many years ago. Could it really be possible to get better performance jumping that way? REALLY everybody said. he won the gold medal. Now, most everybody flops don't they?

Is it really possible to attain pro level contact, consistency, and distance using MGS fundamentals? NO big turn - NO active wrist set - NO unnecessary movement or rotation. NO - re routing. NO huge back swing? Could MGS, with its unconventional set-up, and break from some long held swing mechanics dogma be the swing of the future? She makes a bold claim, which should not be overlooked, and should be given very careful consideration, because it makes a ton of sense:
IF you do everything MGS, you can have a very specific cause for every fault, and it is universal to every human body - no discrimination - because all our joints work in exactly the same manner.
Now that's a pretty strong statement, about as strong as it gets. But imagine the possibilities if indeed this is the case.

Dem bones..Dem Bones..Dem Bones...oh hear the Word of the Lord.

Kevin







Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
Is there a short game adaptation of MGS?
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 9:42 pm #19

if you are not performing the important parts of the swing properly, then are you doing the swing? Maybe working in the direction of the MGS helps your old swing become better, but if you go all the way to doing the swing properly maybe it would become worse. Maybe not, just a theory.

Ham
and remember, I originally tried it in the hopes of being able to swing with an injured back, and to keep from re-injuring all the way to an unplayable point, and I just kept running with it.

So, for example, if you look at the earliest of my attempts at MGS swings, I am still very much SA aligned. Kiran says NO! Hands lower. NOT LIKE MOE. So I set them lower - the shot off the blacktop video - and she says NO hands too low! So I make the adjustment again. Then shes says, still to much turn! Just let the lead arm climb up your chest wall and hit your face, soft lead elbow, no raising up out of posture. So I do that...it's a work.

Also, as Ham pointed out, my trail shoulder still comes up somewhat. Kiran noticed this too, and said that my trail shoulder and lead arm needs to soften more.

Now SATTHMS' point is very valid too. So I am not executing a pure MGS action per her direction, SO WHAT? I hit many of the salient positions, and there are enough changes in my swing that people here and those in my league that haven't seen me play in awhile notice some very big differences.

I think most others are in the same boat. But the good news is that the changes she recommends are solid enough that a great many people who are open minded enough to give it a try as best they can understand it, are finding some real positive results. And when you get right down to it, that is what it's all about, real golf instruction, that really works and makes the golfer better.

kevin

Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 9:56 pm #20

What would be measured to rank the progress? It can't be scores because those are mostly dependent on putting and short game.

Whatever you might use to measure, I'd like to rank it by hours of instruction and practice per unit of achievement. 99% of golfers will not invest the time and effort needed for the Bertholy method. OTOH I'm pretty sure if I devoted enough time and effort, I could improve a lot no matter which method I used.

Maybe the best thing to measure would be student satisfaction.
the types of studies Peter references alot - from peer reviewed studies. Things that measure and compare muscle activation and use in the swing. Club head speed, launch angle, ball speed. Because most pros swing the same way, they only measure the things that have an impact on that type of swing pro vs amateur.

The pro closest to MGS in terms of neutral wrist action is JB Holmes, but he has a lot of body action.

What would be interesting would be to measure a golfer that swings MGS style, and has pro level club head / ball speeds, distance, and accuracy, and see if the metrics show any difference between the two styles.

I know that in my own swing last Saturday, I was getting the same distance on my irons as before, and just a tad less on my drives and fairway woods. Club head speed for my playing swing with driver is almost the same now as it was before MGS. Still at pro level speed...and now I am getting close to pro level dispersion !

Kevin



Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
Quote
Like
Share