A bridge too far

I am a firm believer in Paul Wilson's 'Swing Machine Golf' and his concepts of unwinding from the lower body and powerless arms, to name just two. However, when it comes to his concept of varying the speed of the body rotation, especially in relation to the short game, I have some reservations.

I'm sure that Wilson is capable of maintaining his rhythm and timing while varying his rotational speed (1, 2 and 3 mph are his speeds). And he does say that the average player can probably only manage two speeds (slower and faster). But is this a good approach for the average player who probably currently swings too fast and would benefit from finding a constant, unhurried rhythm?

I think the rotation speed variation approach is actually risky for the average player in that s/he will have enough trouble finding a swing rhythm that is not too fast, let alone try to ingrain the feeling of two or three swing speeds. Any attempt to create a faster swing speed could lead to over-swinging or hurried swings, and trying to find a slower swing could very easily lead to the very destructive deceleration of the swing.

In the full swing these dangers are probably not going to be insurmountable; careful practice and vigilance could produce the desired swing rotation speeds. But in the short game, where the swings will already vary from a full to a three-quarter down to a half swing, adding a swing speed element might be complicating things too much.

When chipping and pitching any tendency to speed up or slow down the swing (particularly slow it down) is likely to have disastrous consequences. Deceleration in any aspect of the short game (from pitching to putting) is the enemy of the average golfer. Hurried and quick chips and bunker shots are similarly counter-productive. My view is that there are safer ways to regulate distance in this area of the game.

Don't get me wrong, I think the lower body is important in chipping and putting. Golfers who try to chip or pitch with their arms alone are dicing with inconsistency. The turn of the legs is important in these shots (for reasons that others can explain), but trying to vary the speed of this turn is my quibble.

My preference would be to achieve distance variations by changing club (first of all), then length of backswing (though not in the bunker), and finally by the length of grip taken (up or down the grip). The other short shot considerations like where to land (or direct) the ball and how much spin is likely to be imparted give the golfer more than enough to think about without having to think about turn speed.

I know Paul Wilson doesn't agree with me, but here again we have the problem of the expert golfer (despite his best efforts) not quite understanding the barriers most golfers face in improving their game. Paul's commitment to simple approaches is exemplary, but I think some of his short game ideas might be taking us to a bridge too far.