Kiran's Gem's- Could MGS be Golf's "Fosbury Flop"?

Kiran's Gem's- Could MGS be Golf's "Fosbury Flop"?

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

October 9th, 2011, 11:59 pm #1

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!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 13th, 2001, 8:30 am

October 10th, 2011, 12:36 am #2

I have been guilty of doing that in the past but it was not my intention this time. I was interested in her thoughts on the subject.

Damn you I am going to end up trying this swing more thoroughly if I keep reading your stuff.

Regards, Herbert
Last edited by gHerbert on October 10th, 2011, 7:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 7:03 am #3

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 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:

Do you think it is possible to throw a baseball as far as a pro with NO big turn - NO active wrist set - NO unnecessary movement or rotation???

If you want to go by science I think you need to do a study before deciding that it works. Teach 100 beginners MGS, 100 beginners IMA/Bertholy, and 100 beginners conventional golf. Do the same with amateurs between handicap 10 and 20. Then you could claim it to be better.

My first impression is that the answer to the question above will tell you the answer.

Best regards,

Ham
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 13th, 2001, 8:30 am

October 10th, 2011, 8:43 am #4

I definitely believe that you can throw a baseball farther with no unnecessary movement or rotation. If the movement is not necessary then don't do it! LOL I do understand what you mean just pointing out how words can be tricky...

It is true that you can throw a baseball further with a bigger windup and I like that analogy. Consider however a catcher throwing to second base on a steal attempt vs and outfielder throwing home. The catcher throws from the ear with a compact motion that is very accurate while outfielders use a lot more body motion and are less accurate from what I have observed. So I think that in golf you can give up some distance for repeatability and accuracy in your swing. It is a choice go for the bigger longer swing or take shorter swings and probably hit it straighter.

As for pro level distance that is unlikely or actually impossible for a very large percentage of golfers. It is more a matter of hitting your maximum potential with what might be a more difficult to repeat swing vs. hitting it shorter on good strikes of the ball but more often hitting it solid which in many cases will work out to a higher average distance overall.

Anyway I think that the mental side is more important than the swing method. Mental is why so many cannot get from the range to the first tee and also why some really good players just cannot play very well when the heat is on. Remington was right about getting away from fear and anger when golfing. LOL enjoy every chance that you get to hit the ball and don't beat yourself up for your bad luck or less fortunate shots. If you don't get mad at yourself then maybe you don't have anything to fear...

Remember the higher you score the more shots you get to hit! OB? Yippee I get to try to crush my driver again and those unfortunate folks who hit one right down the middle have to wait and watch...

Regards, Herbert
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 8:51 am #5

who decides what movement is necessary?

From what I have seen from the swing there is much less hip and torso rotation when compared to the best players in the world.

Can somebody send me a link to the best video of the swing? I have watched a few, but found the before and after comparison to be lacking in helpful info, and the website is not yet built.

Ham
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 9:20 am #6

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!
To this swing will also pass, as one to try. as so many stray away Moe's simple way. You will see that MGS is simply Moes swing presented diffently, straying away from the trail arm alignment.
So I guess re-roughting the club is simpler? So I guess setting up on a two axis set up is simpler?
So I guess not cocking the wrists are simpler? well I think it loads the shaft to early.

But I guess if you can play well with it you should use it. But before call it the holey grail, truly do a good assesment with the several versions of the single axis swings. If those were done as described and not mixing in ones own versions you be surpized they work well.

MGS being a conventional swing with the same inherent issues on the back has no claim as being good for the back, at least none that I saw. It has the same lift up and clearing as conventional golf. So Mac for the life of me I dont understand how it feels better on your back. I think the back issues stem from trying to be a long driver and over rotating like I thought you always did. Also the bertholy drills arent exactly back freindly

There should possibly be a section called the swing of the week. Mac congrats on your win but I dought that you were strictly MGS. No facts just my hunch. I have used Kiran's swing as a drill when I start to lose my spine angle. She has lots of merit and congrats if this is your Fosbury Flop.

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 6th, 2004, 8:10 am

October 10th, 2011, 9:55 am #7

who decides what movement is necessary?

From what I have seen from the swing there is much less hip and torso rotation when compared to the best players in the world.

Can somebody send me a link to the best video of the swing? I have watched a few, but found the before and after comparison to be lacking in helpful info, and the website is not yet built.

Ham
My respect for Kevin knows no bounds ( and I'm an extremely satisfied customer of his Blueprint by the way ), but I think we might be getting carried away here. So much marketing/selling of new swing theories is about supposed "Secrets" and "Simple" ways to improve, and I wonder is this isn't just more of the same. Mike Austin, Single Axis, One Plane, x-Factor, S+T ( of which I am a devout practitioner ), all of them espoused by semi-religious followings so as to assume cult status on the basis of some "scientific" (oh that magic, all justifying, word) theory which explains how the world really works....

Yesterday I experimented briefly on the range with MSG but couldn't really get it down, so for fun I tried something completely different - a tiny lateral hip bump to the right just before starting my backswing. Bingo ! Fabulous ball contact and an effortless extra 10 yards ! Kept hitting it over the back of our par 3's because of the extra distance. I'm going to call it The Magic Move and it's yours for only 3 Big Mac coupons....
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 12:33 pm #8

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:

Do you think it is possible to throw a baseball as far as a pro with NO big turn - NO active wrist set - NO unnecessary movement or rotation???

If you want to go by science I think you need to do a study before deciding that it works. Teach 100 beginners MGS, 100 beginners IMA/Bertholy, and 100 beginners conventional golf. Do the same with amateurs between handicap 10 and 20. Then you could claim it to be better.

My first impression is that the answer to the question above will tell you the answer.

Best regards,

Ham
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!
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 12:49 pm #9

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:

Do you think it is possible to throw a baseball as far as a pro with NO big turn - NO active wrist set - NO unnecessary movement or rotation???

If you want to go by science I think you need to do a study before deciding that it works. Teach 100 beginners MGS, 100 beginners IMA/Bertholy, and 100 beginners conventional golf. Do the same with amateurs between handicap 10 and 20. Then you could claim it to be better.

My first impression is that the answer to the question above will tell you the answer.

Best regards,

Ham
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.
Quote
Like
Share

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

October 10th, 2011, 1:22 pm #10

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 upper body movement looks strange. Not sure if that is what is taught. Shoulders staying level??

Do you have a link to a good video, and the book. I could not find the book.

Ham
Quote
Like
Share