Houston we have connection

I'm back in the swing of connection, so to speak. It's slightly astonishing to me that I ever left it. The freedom to turn hard that it provides is tremendous. There is the feeling that the ball just gets in the way of the swing, a sensation that many instructors advocate, but don't know how to fully explain or teach.

The left upper-arm and chest connection (for right handers) takes a little getting used to, not because it's hard to do, but because it imposes a kind of restriction, especially for more senior golfers, a feeling that one's swing is very short (which it probably is) and lacking power (which it isn't).

The shorter and more compact swing actually packs plenty of punch because the connection involved ensures that the larger muscles of the body (involving the core and hips in particular) work with the arms to generate clubbed speed. The fact that the compact, shorter swing also helps with accuracy and consistency is a bonus.

I should say that the most noticeable area of improvement with the connected swing is with the irons, mid and long in particular. It's not so evident with the longer clubs, particularly driver, maybe because there are other issues involved there, probably tempo and transition issues, which I personally need to work on quite a bit more.

The short game, chipping for example, is another story, but I do have a technique that works pretty well (a shallow club path and stiff wrists). And of course there is putting, but work on that will have to wait a while. I can't really expect much there for the time being. Patience is a virtue, trust me!

Luckily, I have connection to make me feel good. There is hope.

Swings times two addendum

I should add something to my post about the one plane swing. In fact, it's a comment about the advice I've heard given to golfers not to turn hard with their bodies in the downswing. This turning motion is supposed to cause an over the top (and plane) and slice inducing shot.

The reality is the as long as the turn is a full (upper and lower) body turn the dreaded casting over the top move does not occur. If the arms are 'connected' to the upper body, across the chest effectively, and the turn on the downswing is initiated with a simultaneous turn of the hips and knees, the club does not got out and down, it goes down and through.

I found this hard to believe at first, but what I wasn't aware of was that the very action of turning also produces the slight bump or shift to the front side that many teachers advocate. The trouble with thinking about the bump and initiating this shift is that it can actually break the connection between the upper and lower body, putting the lower body too much in front of the upper body and cause push shots and sometimes hooks.

This all sounds fairly technical, but if you think about starting the downswing with everything together - legs, hips, torso, shoulders and arms - not much will go wrong. I think back to Swing Machine Golf and my skepticism about the method advocated there by Paul Wilson because I was worried about this turning process and couldn't understand the way in which the fulcrum of the swing shifted from the back to the front side for human beings, which wasn't necessary for the Iron Byron machine itself.

This can get complicated, so I'm leaving it there. I just know that a good turn deserves another.

Swings and swings

Towards the end of last year, I expressed a level of happiness with my 'one-plane swing' (OPS). It was, of course, essentially the simple flat rotational swing that I had always used, but I was now incorporating a more 'connected' left arm and some slightly more vigorous body rotation.

At that time, even though I was relatively happy with my game, I tried to find something extra. Consequently, and inevitably, I started to play worse. However, I have now begun the process of returning to the swing I had in the latter part of last year. This is a process of simplification; a re-focusing on what is essential, a rejection of the multiplicity of swing thoughts that have done me plenty of damage.

My one-plane swing is probably not, in reality, a one-plane swing, since one's downswing is not a replica of the backswing - mainly because of the different weight shifts and body angles involved. Perhaps it can be done, but not by me. However, the OPS contains a feeling of compactness and simplicity that I like. It's about the elimination of some moving parts and a focus on the unity of arms and body. This seems to work quite well.

Having said that, I think there is definitely a swing thought and feeling that is even more fundamental - a sense of rhythm. I've mentioned this before more than once and not for no reason. I think rhythm is the main feature of all good golf swings. Styles vary, but rhythm and timing are essential for anyone wanting to play good golf.

In another return, I have re-discovered the split-hand putting grip. I've tried every known putting grip with varied results. Looking back, I actually putted quite well with the SHG, but abandoned it after one or two bad days on the greens. To me, there is a certain logic in using one's dominant lower (right for me) hand to control the putting stroke. The long-handle putters did it with some success and some other research has confirmed that putting with a SHG produces great consistency for many golfers.

Anyway, I'm swingin' in the rain at present and I've got rhythm, so who could ask for anything more?

Gestalt golf

So much for my simple weight shift concept. Like many of my other ideas, it sounds good and works fine in practice swings, but doesn't translate well to actually hitting shots on the course.

My idea was to use increased pressure in the front foot at transition as the trigger for the downswing to therefore improve the sequencing of my swing. However, I found it difficult to isolate this trigger from the other movements that were in progress at the time. I needed to think again.

I'm now coming to the view, which I must admit I have heard before quite a few times, that the swing must be thought of as a single motion, not a number of isolated body positions, no matter how well sequenced.

This is in line with the idea that the full golf swing is a natural movement akin to skipping a stone or throwing a ball sidearm or underarm. It is natural because there is absolutely no thought going on about body positions, weight transfer, arm or wrist movement; in fact the only thought is about how hard to throw in order to skim the object or hit the target.

It seems to me that this is the same thought pattern that must be in place in the golf swing. I think it's important to set up correctly, squarely and in an athletic way, and with the correct grip and alignment, but then the process must, I now feel, be almost automatic, rhythmic, smooth, and target focused.

When you look at the swings of very good golfers, you see a variety of styles, positions, and methods, but you generally notice the smoothness and effortless power generated in their swings. It stands to reason that it is the rhythmic, fluidity of their swings that is the key element, rather than the positions they create.

This gestalt view (the whole is more than the sum of the parts) is one I've probably had in the back of my tiny mind for some time, but now that my golf seems to be in a downward spiral, I think I need to take a different approach - forget all of my previous theories, all of the tips and titbits of knowledge I've acquired and just go out and hit the darned ball.

By the way, I think this same gestalt concept applies to putting and chipping. It doesn't seem to matter what kind of grip or stance I adopt, I putt badly if I try too hard or putt with too many thoughts in my mind. A smooth, rhythmic stroke, much like Mr Day's, seems to work much better. It's harder to achieve this under pressure, but I think it's probably a gestalt related concept worth working on.

Learning 201

Tinkering too much with my swing resulted in a very hard lesson. I think I can move on now to a lesson about how to make the best of the swing I do have.

One of the fundamentals of the full golf swing is weight transfer (to the front side) at impact. Unfortunately, I tried to incorporate a big hip bump or shift to achieve this or at least to initiate this transfer. I know now that such a move can be very disruptive of the swing arc. It's just too hard to time correctly. The alternative is simpler, less dramatic, but I hope more effective.

My idea now is to simply aim for a feeling that more weight is shifting to my front foot at the point of transition from the backswing to downswing. This shift, which is actually achieved by a slight movement to the front side, should be quite subtle. The rotation of the hips, which occurs a fraction of a second later, is a far more obvious and dramatic move. The main point being that for the average player the weight shift has to be initiated fairly gently, or at least not too violently, to ensure that the swing plane is not disrupted.

This movement is consistent with the move we tend to make when throwing a ball or stone, as I mentioned previously. But it has to be a more subtle move because the margin for error in terms of centre club face contact is small. However, it's a move that is necessary as a trigger for the downswing sequence - and there must be a sequence from the ground up - one of a handful of things on which nearly every golf teacher agrees.

I should emphasise that this ground-up weight shift can be initiated in a variety of ways, for example, a push off the back foot, or a knee flick, or a straightening of the front leg, or some other lower body action. It should not, however, be initiated by the arms or shoulders, which must wait their turn (so to speak) in the sequencing of the golf swing.

I must confess I haven't got this down as yet. I just know I need to find a smooth and rhythmic way to swing a golf club if I am going to survive in this game. I'm never going to win a long drive competition, so I might as well hit as many fairways and greens as I can.

A final point re putting. Here again, smooth and rhythmic will win the race. Jason Day has one of the smoothest putting strokes I've ever seen. It's a great model for success. I've even finally realised that one's putting grip and all the other 'methods' of putting are far less important than the rhythm of the putting stroke - and this applies to all lengths of putt. I'm starting to putt a little better having realised this and plan to stick to my current modified Vardon double-overlap grip and my putter for quite a while.

Not sure if I have really progressed to the next class, but there are a few more ticks on my report card, and a few less of the 'must try harder' comments.

A Lesson Learned

For some bizarre reason I decided to experiment with several technical ideas in my last round. I think that because it was an important competitive round that I needed to find something extra. What I found, of course, was that this was an extremely BAD IDEA.

Basically, what I tried to do was introduce a more pronounced hip bump, with the objective of getting more weight onto the front foot and creating more lag and power in the process. The problem with this, until you have worked on it for some time, is that it changes your swing plane too much and brings in the dangerous sway and dip moves that play havoc with consistency. The odd good shot doesn't make up for the three topped, heeled, whatever mishits.

I tried this for much of the round and my ball striking got progressively worse until I remembered that a connected, balanced swing was by far the more effective way to hit the ball. It seems to me that the weight transfer and lag are really a side-effect of a connected swing, mainly because of the momentum created by the forward swing of the arms. I think it's only necessary to have an awareness that you need to finish on the front foot and to be able to visualise that finish for it to actually occur.

A useful analogy for the golf swing, which has been quoted many times by many instructors, is the skipping of a stone. The motion in this side or underhand throw is very much the one that should be used in the golf swing. It is, for anyone with any athletic ability, a quite natural movement, with the arm going back, the weight moving to the front side, and the arm coming through a split second later. There's really very little thought about the movement; the focus is on the target.

In a previous blog I spoke about the benefit of a simple, single swing thought. I did stick to the single thought, but it was too big a thought. It was too much of a mechanical change to try to make during a round of golf. The lesson I've learned is 'don't take mechanical thoughts that you have not tried and tested to a golf game'. This is so obvious, so much common sense, but then again this is golf.

By the way, I also tried a new putting stance, again for half of that disastrous round, with equally poor results. What was wrong with channeling the smooth JD putting stoke, I ask myself? I should trust that I am a fairly good putter and not get caught up in crazy notions of finding the 'ideal' putting stroke. This is another lesson to be learned.