Think Big

I had some fun this week with my golf game - if you call having fun playing some of the worst golf of my life.

The day before my mid-week game I spent some hours reading up on and viewing videos on a particular swing theory or method which, although a departure from much of my previous thinking, sounded pretty good to me. It sounded good because it targeted slightly older guys with reduced flexibility, who had experienced a bad back or some similar injury in the past, that is, people not too different from yours truly.

So, armed with this theory, I ventured onto the course for a practice round (actually a competition, but not a serious one). The experiment lasted twelve holes, at which point I realised that this theory was such a departure from my natural game that it would take months not hours to integrate it successfully into my game.

I am not saying that particular swing theory is wrong, it might be great for some people, but the experience of that 'practice-round' reinforced for me the folly of attempting any major departure from ones natural swing style - unless it is done in small stages, incremental steps, with hours spent on the driving range. I'm sure this is obvious to most golfers; I must be a slow learner.

Having said that I would not recommend this kind of swing experimentation, I naturally went straight out and looked for another swing theory. This is what swing junkies do. And, sure enough, I found one that I like.

To be more accurate, I re-discovered and have re-evaluated an approach I had come across before - the Ross Duplessis method (I'll call it the RD method).

What I like about RD's approach is (a) it is relatively simple and straightforward, but (b) it closely resembles what I already do in my golf swing (my usual golf swing, that is).

Firstly, the set up, a stable, athletic posture, with the club leaning slightly forward and in line with the lead arm, is pretty much how I set up. Slightly more weight is placed on the front foot, something I do with all clubs except the driver (a little more 50/50 for driver).

Secondly, the RD backswing is controlled by the big muscles, the shoulders in particular, rather than the hands and arms, which remain quite passive. There is no rotation or other manipulation of the hands and arms. This is something I've thought about a bit, especially since trying Paul Wilson's 'Swing Machine Golf' approach.

Finally, and again there are some similarities in the 'big muscle' approach of Wilson and RD, the downswing is controlled by the hips, which turn towards the target with arms, hands and club following (to put it simply). RD even mentions the touching of the knees - a Wilson principle.

In summary, in my view, the RD method is very much in the 'effortless' camp. And this approach is, I think, ideal for the golfer who doesn't want to spend weeks, months and years learning a lot of complicated moves when swinging a golf club.

My three fundamentals of an easy swing, no sway and weight on the front foot, fit quite well with the RD method. The RD (and Wilson) approach seems to me to be a simple, repeatable, reliable way to play golf at a reasonable level, subject to acquiring a decent short game.

We average, time poor, golfers need a method that offers maximum return for minimum effort - both in terms of the time spent practising (on or off the course) and in relation to the completing the actual golf swing itself.

Next weekend, I'm going to think BIG, and try to keep my expectations low.