We've launched the new forums! Read more here

David Leadbetter's A Swing book

ShotScope
I tried the single plane swing. In spite of very good contact I lost a good deal of distance. From what I found on the net that seemed to be a common complaint.
 
Blazer said:
I tried the single plane swing. In spite of very good contact I lost a good deal of distance. From what I found on the net that seemed to be a common complaint.
Click to expand...

That is common and I lose a bit of distance as well, mainly because I haven't added length to my clubs to make up for my grip, but it doesn't really matter to me. I use the modern strong lofted clubs to make up for that. I can pick up some distance with a conventional grip and such, but I'd rather have the control.
 
Blazer said:
I tried the single plane swing. In spite of very good contact I lost a good deal of distance. From what I found on the net that seemed to be a common complaint.
Click to expand...
Really? Why do you think that is?
 
Fwiw, I carry my 7i about 175 using single axis, I can get it to 185, but it usually ends up left of the green when swinging that hard.
 
Disclaimer: I am a tinkerer by nature when it comes to my golf swing. I am around a 7-8 hdcp, but would say my putting is very good and that carries me. I have tried many concepts over the years and learned something from them all. Yes, I call them concepts, SnT, Natural, Single Plane, etc. My biggest problem has always been consistency. For example, I shot a 73 last Sunday, and and 81 five days later. I hit a bunch of solid iron shots with the 73 and could not hit a solid shot with the 81. In my mind, nothing had changed with my swing between those few days. Contact changed, and when I couldn’t make good contact, I started changing my swing mid round to fix it! Guess how that worked out?

Here are my first impressions after skimming the book, watching the seminar, and taking a few swings in the yard without hitting any balls. Trust me when I say this, I have never read anything from Leadbetter except the stuff he puts in the golf magazines a few years back. I don’t get any of those publication now, and haven’t a couple years. So I feel like I can be pretty fair when trying this concept out.

The first radical change for me was in the grip. Gripping the club more in the fingers is an unusual sensation for me. I always wear out my gloves first in the heel of the palm. The new grip inherently seemed to make the club handle set lower and seemed to me to loosen up my forearm pressure. It also made it much more natural to keep the club head outside the hands on the backswing. Having the right hand in such a weak position was also a big change. When I watch the seminar, I also noticed when Dennis Watson was swinging the club early on while Leadbetter was talking, his wrist seemed to be very loose, and limber. I kind of like the feeling honestly.

I also liked in the seminar how David explained the shoulder or upper body turn. Sometimes an image is all it takes. The way he let his arms hang down in front of him and used them like pistons to show the turn. I always struggle with this feeling myself. It’s a lot like one particular other concept that has you turn your left shoulder down instead of around to turn.

I am very intrigued by the follow through they show in the seminar. I have a BIG problem with rolling my hands, and even whole upper body sometimes on the follow through. So It is going to take some time to get used to just flipping my right hand up.

I am going to continue to read, and hope to hit some balls tomorrow……….so I will update.
 
Wow was just on another "ehem" golf forum just to see what the consensus on this was and wow I couldn't believe the crazy negative hate spewing. Glad to be part of this community where people can discuss freely without that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'd like to know the opinion of instructors whether they believe this is a "simpler" swing in which golfers will improve more rapidly, or just another way to swing the golf club with a "A Swing" label and related training aids.

Led's has a great point -- I think synching arms and body is tough, most golfers, from what I've seen on the range, are too armsy back and down, and have a "too long" backswing -- one of my issues, too, that I am desperately working and improving.

At the same time, I tend to think this A Swing is not as simple as Led's portrays it. You've still got a motion, you still have a pivot with a weight shift, and you've got to go from steep to shallow.

For the mass public, I don't think a book does it -- it takes hands-on instruction for 90% of the people, and probably only 10% get instruction. And finding quality instruction is tough. Golf is a difficult game and it takes patient, highly skilled instruction to teach and guide a player. In general, I just don't think a book, video or A Swing is "the" answer. Feel is not real, and a quality instructor brings reality to your game.

If the "A Swing" is simpler and can get more people into and continue with the game, more power to it.
 
blugold said:
Really? Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...

I was hitting straight shots that were stuck very well, but they were at least a club shorter. I'm not sure the reason, but from my brief research, if you can call googling that, I found I wasn't the only one who lost distance. Perhaps the one-plane-swing is better suited to swingers than hitters like me.
 
Desmond said:
I'd like to know the opinion of instructors whether they believe this is a "simpler" swing in which golfers will improve more rapidly, or just another way to swing the golf club with a "A Swing" label and related training aids.

Led's has a great point -- I think synching arms and body is tough, most golfers, from what I've seen on the range, are too armsy back and down, and have a "too long" backswing -- one of my issues, too, that I am desperately working and improving.

At the same time, I tend to think this A Swing is not as simple as Led's portrays it. You've still got a motion, you still have a pivot with a weight shift, and you've got to go from steep to shallow.

For the mass public, I don't think a book does it -- it takes hands-on instruction for 90% of the people, and probably only 10% get instruction. And finding quality instruction is tough. Golf is a difficult game and it takes patient, highly skilled instruction to teach and guide a player. In general, I just don't think a book, video or A Swing is "the" answer. Feel is not real, and a quality instructor brings reality to your game.

If the "A Swing" is simpler and can get more people into and continue with the game, more power to it.
Click to expand...
It's a lot better than that one golf book called " the lowest score wins" . That one went right to good will when I was done. That book missed the mark by a 1000 miles
 
Mystery Meat said:
It's a lot better than that one golf book called " the lowest score wins" . That one went right to good will when I was done. That book missed the mark by a 1000 miles
Click to expand...

You're hitting home there... LSW is a different book, not swing instruction. From my leaky memory, LSW has stats to back them up. And I do believe that more distance lowers HC over the long term. In the short term, short game will help until you develop a consistent distance game where you hit or come close to hitting the fairway more often, and are more deadly on long approaches.

If Leds has found a simpler way to swing where more people stay in the game, that is welcome. I've had trouble with a backswing for 20 years, and am just getting instruction that helps after other instructors had issues teaching the feel of a backswing. Led's has something about the backswing. It's tough. Still, the golf swing is complex. Just don't think it is as "easy" as portrayed. Call me a cynic because good golf is tough to do. As Lewis Black says, what kind of fool spends 20 years just to be a little better than crap?
 
Mystery Meat said:
It's a lot better than that one golf book called " the lowest score wins" . That one went right to good will when I was done. That book missed the mark by a 1000 miles
Click to expand...

That was a ridiculously bad book. Every Shot Counts is the one to read if you're interested in statistical analysis of golf scores.
 
Last edited:
Blazer said:
I was hitting straight shots that were stuck very well, but they were at least a club shorter. I'm not sure the reason, but from my brief research, if you can call googling that, I found I wasn't the only one who lost distance. Perhaps the one-plane-swing is better suited to swingers than hitters like me.
Click to expand...

How long did you try it?
 
I watched these videos online and I thought it could help a lot of golfers. I spend a lot of time at the range and I see A LOT of golfers taking taking the club back way too far inside. It's also something I struggle with. Learning to fix your swing from a book or videos is tough tho.
 
Blazer said:
I went to the Edwin Watts academy for about 8 weeks.
Click to expand...

Didn't know Edwin watts was doing anything like that. Are you talking single axis/plane (Moe Norman) or the One plane (hardy)?
8 weeks is good amount of time to see if something is going to work for a person or not, it's not for everybody, but I still maintain it's the easiest way to hit a decent, repeatable shot. I have several years into it now, and have gained back all the distance I initially lost and even gained some. Some of that is due to equipment, but the rest is just down to practice. There is nothing in the swing that limits swing speed. Single axis has advantages over conventional golf, but it still has to be practiced and developed, no magic swing or method in golf.
 
Ok I was able to go to the course today. Initially it was awful as expected. I was having big trouble with hooks, hooks, hooks. I finally got the grip weak enough and started to hit some nice draws. I was just in the practice area hitting shots. Once I got a little comfortable with it I played nine holes. I really had to focus on the grip and when I did I hit it very well. Probably a little longer than my normal swing. I was also making great contact. Having the grip in my fingers was the key. I felt like I could really relax my arms and wrist just let the swing happen. I felt like it created more lag. I shot a 37. Needless to say, I will stay with it and see how things progress.

Don’t get me wrong. I have no illusions that I am doing the swing exactly like the book says. I am sure I am not as upright on the backswing and am still probably not finishing like they suggest. I do love the feeling of having the grip more in my fingers and not in my palms. Love the contact I was making. Still getting used to the weak right hand also. When I revert back to my more strong grip, hook, hook, hook!
 
BamBooBender said:
Didn't know Edwin watts was doing anything like that. Are you talking single axis/plane (Moe Norman) or the One plane (hardy)?
8 weeks is good amount of time to see if something is going to work for a person or not, it's not for everybody, but I still maintain it's the easiest way to hit a decent, repeatable shot. I have several years into it now, and have gained back all the distance I initially lost and even gained some. Some of that is due to equipment, but the rest is just down to practice. There is nothing in the swing that limits swing speed. Single axis has advantages over conventional golf, but it still has to be practiced and developed, no magic swing or method in golf.
Click to expand...

It was Hardy's method, I'm sure. I totally agree the swing I was taught was a great way hit hit solid shots I was flushing every iron shot like I never had yet they were going 1 club less or more. Perhaps if I tried the right forearm rotation I could have regained that length, but that would be true of any method that calls for pronation and supination of the forearms.
 
Blazer said:
I was hitting straight shots that were stuck very well, but they were at least a club shorter. I'm not sure the reason, but from my brief research, if you can call googling that, I found I wasn't the only one who lost distance. Perhaps the one-plane-swing is better suited to swingers than hitters like me.
Click to expand...

I think it's probably easier to scoop the ball with a single plane swing if you get too flat, which would reduce distance because you are adding dynamic loft to the club at impact.

It's interesting that many people feel like you lose distance with a single plane swing because more of your power hitters on tour are close to a single plane swing.

Furyk has to be the epitome of an "A swing" type golfer and he's not known to be a long hitter. His drives tend to be 260 or so while many of the single plane power hitters are averaging 300+.

Then again, Bubba is very unorthodox and hits the ball a "country mile".
 
widespot said:
I watched these videos online and I thought it could help a lot of golfers. I spend a lot of time at the range and I see A LOT of golfers taking taking the club back way too far inside. It's also something I struggle with. Learning to fix your swing from a book or videos is tough tho.
Click to expand...

Very true, can't see yourself swing in real time, have to go based on feel/perceptions. having a good instructor could have saved me a ton of frustration and mistakes.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard P. Feynman
 
-CRW- said:
I think it's probably easier to scoop the ball with a single plane swing if you get too flat, which would reduce distance because you are adding dynamic loft to the club at impact.

It's interesting that many people feel like you lose distance with a single plane swing because more of your power hitters on tour are close to a single plane swing.

Furyk has to be the epitome of an "A swing" type golfer and he's not known to be a long hitter. His drives tend to be 260 or so while many of the single plane power hitters are averaging 300+.

Then again, Bubba is very unorthodox and hits the ball a "country mile".
Click to expand...

If I understand the one-plane swing correctly it involves a great deal of body rotation. I'm not capable of doing that which may be the reason for my distance loss.
 
Blazer said:
If I understand the one-plane swing correctly it involves a great deal of body rotation. I'm not capable of doing that which may be the reason for my distance loss.
Click to expand...

It definitely does. It involves keeping the arms connected to the torso and using the big muscles in the back and core for power.
 
-CRW- said:
It definitely does. It involves keeping the arms connected to the torso and using the big muscles in the back and core for power.
Click to expand...

Thanks. That's probably why Homer Kelley's "Hitter" is more suited to my physique.
 
Blazer said:
It was Hardy's method, I'm sure. I totally agree the swing I was taught was a great way hit hit solid shots I was flushing every iron shot like I never had yet they were going 1 club less or more. Perhaps if I tried the right forearm rotation I could have regained that length, but that would be true of any method that calls for pronation and supination of the forearms.
Click to expand...

I'm employing the Moe Norman style (doesn't look look great , but works great), and focus more on leverage, but that's just semantics really. Getting to a good impact position is all that really matters, in my understanding. All the great players have some key similarities at impact (nose over the right knee, forward leaning shaft, and catching the ball on the down stroke being the most important)
 
BamBooBender said:
I'm employing the Moe Norman style (doesn't look look great , but works great), and focus more on leverage, but that's just semantics really. Getting to a good impact position is all that really matters, in my understanding. All the great players have some key similarities at impact (nose over the right knee, forward leaning shaft, and catching the ball on the down stroke being the most important)
Click to expand...

With MN's swing don't you sacrifice one lever?
 
-CRW- said:
I think it's probably easier to scoop the ball with a single plane swing if you get too flat, which would reduce distance because you are adding dynamic loft to the club at impact.

It's interesting that many people feel like you lose distance with a single plane swing because more of your power hitters on tour are close to a single plane swing.

Furyk has to be the epitome of an "A swing" type golfer and he's not known to be a long hitter. His drives tend to be 260 or so while many of the single plane power hitters are averaging 300+.

Then again, Bubba is very unorthodox and hits the ball a "country mile".
Click to expand...

That has been my problem with single axis golf, scooping/flipping. Still have to be able to have a firm/somewhat bowed left wrist through impact, you can still hit the ball straight while flipping but lose distance exactly how you are describing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top