Single Plane Swing - Simplified Biomechanics?

[GolfLivesMatter]

I am kinda digging this guy

This is EXACTLY the type of instruction I like....talking about the basic principles of what the body does in a golf swing. It's funny because I now remember standing at the range when I was learning golf and the instructor would only let me hit with my left arm. It was a gruesome show to start but after maybe 400 balls my body started to sense that it needed to stay still to hit the ball. Plus, knowing the bottom of the swing is SO important for those pesky 30 yard pitches from tight lies, and trap shots. Well done. I've never seen this man but now I'm going to subscribe.

My favorite part is the Breaking Bad meth trailer in the distance!

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

I believe that depends on WHICH single-plane swing you're talking about.

I think I have this right: In the Hardy approach single-plane really means that the plane determined by your club and arms at address is parallel to the plane determined by your club and arms at the top (or something like that); the point is that they are NOT the same plane, they are parallel. In the downswing you need to "drop down" to the address plane before striking the ball. In the Moe Norman version, single-plane means exactly that: There is ONE plane, determined by the club and arms at address, and at least in theory the club and arms remain in that same plane, back and through. I think even Graves admits that Moe departed a bit from that on the way back and came under the plane slightly on the downswing.

If I'm incorrect I'm sure someone will correct me.

I think you're correct. The missing link with Bryson's swing is his ridiculously fast hip snap and whip action into the ball. Holy COW!

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

After more experimentation today, I can say that the wider stance DOES stop me from moving the bottom of my swing left as the guy in the above excellent video states. So my observation thus far is a wider stance does enhance stability, or prevents moving left on the downswing, thus more consistent ball striking. I don't know enough yet to say all of the SPS positions work for me, but the wider stance is definitely worth further evaluation for me, and others who tend to move the bottom of their swing to the left with a sliding lower body.

 

[razaar]

I think you're correct. The missing link with Bryson's swing is his ridiculously fast hip snap and whip action into the ball. Holy COW!

Bryson's body rotation elements are the same that are articulated in Hogan's publication "Five lessons........". The speed of his swing makes it almost impossible to see exactly what he is doing in real time, especially if one hasn't got these same elements in their own swing. There is no other way to achieve this level of rotation in a golf swing.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

Bryson's body rotation elements are the same that are articulated in Hogan's publication "Five lessons........". The speed of his swing makes it almost impossible to see exactly what he is doing in real time, especially if one hasn't got these same elements in their own swing. There is no other way to achieve this level of rotation in a golf swing.

So if it's from the Hogan book then couldn't everyone somewhat benefit at a lower level? I do agree that everything happens fast, but IMO it appears that he starts his down swing while his hips are still turning back to create a massive whip-action. If the rest of us could get 50% of that whip we'd be over the moon!

 

[nlk10010]

GLM: I think the SPS does want a slide left (toward the lead side) in the downswing, just not much of it. You need to do that to make solid contact, and you do it by flexing into the lead knee. The wide stance limits this type of movement, absolutely, but Graves does actually say that the first move in the downswing is a "step" into the lead foot and a flexing of that knee.

As to Jim Venetos, his approach seems to be anathema to a number of posters who consider themselves real students of the game (I'm not one of them). If it works for you then fine, I certainly agree that low-point control is possibly THE most important skill a golfer can develop. S&T also emphasizes it, they just try to accomplish it with some shift of the lower body. Venetos wants your body to remain absolutely still.

 

[razaar]

So if it's from the Hogan book then couldn't everyone somewhat benefit at a lower level? I do agree that everything happens fast, but IMO it appears that he starts his down swing while his hips are still turning back to create a massive whip-action. If the rest of us could get 50% of that whip we'd be over the moon!

Whoever wrote Hogan's book made it almost impossible for the average golfer to understand how the body rotation needs to work. There is just not enough information there - it is almost impossible to describe exact movement without using anatomical language. Something that is missing in most written golf instruction.
Having said that I once interviewed one of my Golf Club's most famous amateur champions who was unbeaten in Australian Amateur golf, when writing my Club's 75 year history. He told me that he learnt the game from Hogan's publication, one page at a time. He was a gifted cricketer before taking up golf.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

Whoever wrote Hogan's book made it almost impossible for the average golfer to understand how the body rotation needs to work. There is just not enough information there - it is almost impossible to describe exact movement without using anatomical language. Something that is missing in most written golf instruction.
Having said that I once interviewed one of my Golf Club's most famous amateur champions who was unbeaten in Australian Amateur golf, when writing my Club's 75 year history. He told me that he learnt the game from Hogan's publication, one page at a time. He was a gifted cricketer before taking up golf.

When I was starting out in golf the golf team guys at my school said to get Hogan's book to get the basics down. In that respect the book worked very well for me and I can still see the illustrations in my mind to this day. Some things resonate with people, some see an illustration and take it to the extreme, others do the opposite. And I do agree that the rotational aspect of the swing is not defined in Hogan's book.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

GLM: I think the SPS does want a slide left (toward the lead side) in the downswing, just not much of it. You need to do that to make solid contact, and you do it by flexing into the lead knee. The wide stance limits this type of movement, absolutely, but Graves does actually say that the first move in the downswing is a "step" into the lead foot and a flexing of that knee.

As to Jim Venetos, his approach seems to be anathema to a number of posters who consider themselves real students of the game (I'm not one of them). If it works for you then fine, I certainly agree that low-point control is possibly THE most important skill a golfer can develop. S&T also emphasizes it, they just try to accomplish it with some shift of the lower body. Venetos wants your body to remain absolutely still.

Oh, I agree with your comment. I probably have some bias because it's easy for me to move left on the downswing, meaning from left shoulder down to left hip. As soon as that happens I'm locked out of any hip rotation because I'm too far ahead of the ball, at least my body thinks so.

 

[razaar]

When I was starting out in golf the golf team guys at my school said to get Hogan's book to get the basics down. In that respect the book worked very well for me and I can still see the illustrations in my mind to this day. Some things resonate with people, some see an illustration and take it to the extreme, others do the opposite. And I do agree that the rotational aspect of the swing is not defined in Hogan's book.

The book only made sense to me once I understood how the various micro movements associated with the pelvis and spinal muscles needed to work in order to get a chain reaction of micro moves to rotate the pelvis/ spine 180* in 2/5 of a second.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

The book only made sense to me once I understood how the various micro movements associated with the pelvis and spinal muscles needed to work in order to get a chain reaction of micro moves to rotate the pelvis/ spine 180* in 2/5 of a second.

LOL...true....fraction of a second move. But we can easily perform the same or very similar move without thinking when we attempt to skip a rock across a pond. For some reason holding a golf club with a ball in front of us hinders otherwise fairly simple movements that should not require much thought.

 

[dillbert]

Thinking I should definitely give this a try, especially with the driver. Naturally, I hit a fade, which can easily turn into a slice on certain days. I think that playing college baseball could definitely be a big help with the slide into the left foot. Although, my biggest struggle could be the idea of keeping the back heel planted. Luckily, I’m still a strapping young lad so I have time to try these things out and tinker with my swing. SPS is all about consistency and I think that’s all that we, as golfers, strive for. But at the end of the day, you have to figure out what works for you.

Looking forward to see the results of this “experiment”.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

Thinking I should definitely give this a try, especially with the driver. Naturally, I hit a fade, which can easily turn into a slice on certain days. I think that playing college baseball could definitely be a big help with the slide into the left foot. Although, my biggest struggle could be the idea of keeping the back heel planted. Luckily, I’m still a strapping young lad so I have time to try these things out and tinker with my swing. SPS is all about consistency and I think that’s all that we, as golfers, strive for. But at the end of the day, you have to figure out what works for you.

Looking forward to see the results of this “experiment”.

Agree, and if anyone wants to experiment, do it all the way as instructed, not some hybrid half-way stuff because that could create counter-productive positions that could hamper the SPS. I say this because I altered the address position to not have quite as much arm reach and that was dumb because that's not the intended address position.

What's kinda interesting is I just recalled hitting my brothers 50 inch driver many years ago (when drivers were 43 inches). It was a ridiculously long shaft to manage. He liked to experiment with longer drivers as he's 6'4". I was able to hit the driver decently but I recall having to have a very wide stance to create a sufficient "base" to swing from, otherwise the swing was impossible to execute with that club. The shots went straight (hmmm) but not farther because the club was so unwieldy in terms of weight and the club head felt like 3 lbs.

 

[Duffer Seamus]

If I'm going to try it, I'm going to try it exactly the way Todd Graves demonstrates it in the video you posted.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

I am kinda digging this guy

So I tried this today both on the range and the course. The 45* shoulder turn feels so weird to start, but then suddenly it hit me, isn't that just pre-setting to "cover the ball?" Anyway, he's right about looking over my shoulder at the target. I found the setup was simple once I got past thinking this is weird. The harder part was the weight distribution, so I just put more on the left side. I can say that short shots like PW's, 52, 60* wedges went right on line and if I didn't move the left side on the down swing I really could sweep pitches off tight lies. I tried it with the driver and no harm, maybe some benefit, but I really think irons could most benefit.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

I am not sure about driver but irons it seems like a very good idea. He does mention in another video that the 45* shoulder turn is mostly to help guide the swing path while you get used to the swing path. He only closes his shoulders in the video and not when he plays because that is how he swings. He also moves a little to the left so not perfectly still but while learning the stillness helps keep it simple. I really need to try this setup though

Thanks Scooby! If we lived near each other I'd buy you all-you-can-drink tequila shooters! I am new to this so I didn't know what you just posted, so that could make some sense. However, I can see going to this if the shorter irons are going to crap on a given day, or stay with it no matter. And it's true what you say, I did find it was somewhat limiting to not have any movement but given my propensity to move left I probably just moved less, or an acceptable amount to create better impact.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

If I'm going to try it, I'm going to try it exactly the way Todd Graves demonstrates it in the video you posted.

Please post your results if you can. I have the admitted luxury to play 18 to 27 holes every day on a wide-open course, so I can experiment in real-time. For me, I'm not a big fan of the range anymore because I have rarely found any ability to xfer my swing from the range to the course. I cant tell you how many times I've literally hit 400 balls a day, then on the course everything I learned evaporated. I'm now finding that the lack of "pass-fail" on the range is diametrically opposed to course play. Well maybe not that bad, but close.

 

[Duffer Seamus]

Please post your results if you can.

If I try it I'll definitely let y'all know how it works out.

 

[razaar]

I pulled up a video of Moe Norman's swing as a young man when he was in his prime on YouTube. His swing in those days was different to his swing in later years when his body thickened.
His hands appeared to be more under his body than out when he was younger. His backswing was an inside takeaway with a turn and lift upswing which has the hands above the right shoulder at the top of the backswing. His transition was similar to Jack Nicklaus with dual external rotation of both hips moving to dual internal rotation at impact.
It is reasonable to assume that he changed his swing when his body started to thicken and he wasn't able to pivot as he did in his youth. Canadian golf has in my opinion had some history with Abe Mitchell's theories and concepts which he published in "Essentials of Golf" and "Down to Scratch" (circa 1930s). Essentials was possibly the first instruction book to articulate the elements of the swing in detail including the squat move which is dual external rotation of the hips. Moe Norman's prime swing appears to have been influenced by Mitchell's swing concepts.
Mitchell's "Essentials of Golf" included a special word of advice to those thick-set or stout players who, for physical reasons, found it difficult to follow his advice with the pivot movements. He reasoned that a stoutly built man cannot pivot so well as a slim man, but generally he is more strongly developed as regards his body, arms and wrists. He needs only to adapt his method of play somewhat to enable him to hit as far as his more slightly built fellow, while generally his style is in the direction of greater control.
Suggested adaptions included:
Stance - square, ball central between the feet
Grip- hands further out from the body.
Club - flatter lie.
Backswing - around the body, without a second movement of the shoulders.
Downswing - to get a slight draw on the ball.
Makes one think, doesn't it?

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

I pulled up a video of Moe Norman's swing as a young man when he was in his prime on YouTube. His swing in those days was different to his swing in later years when his body thickened.
His hands appeared to be more under his body than out when he was younger. His backswing was an inside takeaway with a turn and lift upswing which has the hands above the right shoulder at the top of the backswing. His transition was similar to Jack Nicklaus with dual external rotation of both hips moving to dual internal rotation at impact.
It is reasonable to assume that he changed his swing when his body started to thicken and he wasn't able to pivot as he did in his youth. Canadian golf has in my opinion had some history with Abe Mitchell's theories and concepts which he published in "Essentials of Golf" and "Down to Scratch" (circa 1930s). Essentials was possibly the first instruction book to articulate the elements of the swing in detail including the squat move which is dual external rotation of the hips. Moe Norman's prime swing appears to have been influenced by Mitchell's swing concepts.
Mitchell's "Essentials of Golf" included a special word of advice to those thick-set or stout players who, for physical reasons, found it difficult to follow his advice with the pivot movements. He reasoned that a stoutly built man cannot pivot so well as a slim man, but generally he is more strongly developed as regards his body, arms and wrists. He needs only to adapt his method of play somewhat to enable him to hit as far as his more slightly built fellow, while generally his style is in the direction of greater control.
Suggested adaptions included:
Stance - square, ball central between the feet
Grip- hands further out from the body.
Club - flatter lie.
Backswing - around the body, without a second movement of the shoulders.
Downswing - to get a slight draw on the ball.
Makes one think, doesn't it?

I think it's so hard to know what Moe's brain was thinking vs. the swing we see. It wouldn't be surprising if his swing did evolve. The SPS is up against a LOT of opposing views / teachings of the golf swing, and rightfully so because there's tons of wildly accomplished golfers with traditional swings. Some say Nicklaus's swing is not to be copied yet he holds the record for major wins....figure that one out... Tiger, with all his prowess and shear domination could not catch Jack, yet I'm sure Tiger's swing, in extreme detail, is on every golf instructor's iPad. I get that too, but Tiger was swinging like he had played golf for years when he was only 2 years old on the Merv Griffin Show. Talk about a natural.

 

[PatsFan]

The below video has over 400k views which means people are assessing the single plane option. I've heard of this before so it's not new to me, but I also never tried it either. So yesterday I experimented out on the course for 27 holes to replicate actual playing conditions, mindset, etc. The results were interesting, but certainly one day of trial is hardly a true evaluation. One caveat is "was I really doing a single plane swing or did I feel like I was". I don't know, but certainly the setup and stance was more in-line with the single plane. The results between the two swings was somewhat unique in terms of directional stability and simplicity. I want to add that with either swing the lower body must start the downswing, so there's no cheating with the single plane swing, but I did find the lower body wanting to engage a little better with the single plane, without focusing on my lower body. That too needs more experimentation to know for sure.

I played "Tiger vs. Couples" with two balls on each hole. The more difficult aspect was reaching out on the single plane vs. my hands being closer to my body. The other change was moving to a wider stance on one swing, then back to a narrower stance on "my swing". On a par 3 170 I hit "my swing" and pulled the ball left which is a more common miss for me. Then I tried the single plane. The ball flew online to the pin, not some perfect shot in terms of being 2 feet from the pin, but directionally superior. This occurred with shorter irons as well, whereby I tend to push those shots to the right. The single plane with the wider stance did seem to feel like it reduced body movement variability. That said, the wider the stance naturally limits hips and/or shoulders slide/sway movement, or possibly getting ahead of the ball on the down swing. If I stand with my feet together I can slide / sway far more, which is the same for everyone. So in my short experiment I can see how the stance does reduce variable movements. As for driver, I hit several drives that were 15-25 yards farther than with "my swing". However, that too could be anecdotal, but it was nonetheless a positive deviation, and it didn't feel unnatural.

It did feel a bit odd to have my arms more extended at address, but that said, it also did feel more like I knew where to get back to on the downswing. I am fairly certain golf instructors have poo-pooed the single plane swing for many years, but some argue (as in this video) that doing so makes the swing more complicated than it needs to be. Hmmm. I'm curious if others have tried this swing?

I have been watching Todd Graves videos and I want to go to his school in the spring. He has one in CT.
The hardest part of the setup is the arms extended which feels odd. I have found that a shorter backswing helps also.

This swing isn't for everyone but I can see the benefits for someone like me. looking for more consistency.
I can't wait to see the spring schedule for the schools.

Has anyone been?

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

I have been watching Todd Graves videos and I want to go to his school in the spring. He has one in CT.
The hardest part of the setup is the arms extended which feels odd. I have found that a shorter backswing helps also.

This swing isn't for everyone but I can see the benefits for someone like me. looking for more consistency.
I can't wait to see the spring schedule for the schools.

Has anyone been?

HIs teachings have a lot of merit no doubt....it got me thinking too, and experimenting. There's no doubt that even if folks lost 10 yards on their irons, but hit consistent distances and direction, the trade-off would HAVE to be lower scores. Then there's putting.

 

[dillbert]

Thinking I should definitely give this a try, especially with the driver. Naturally, I hit a fade, which can easily turn into a slice on certain days. I think that playing college baseball could definitely be a big help with the slide into the left foot. Although, my biggest struggle could be the idea of keeping the back heel planted. Luckily, I’m still a strapping young lad so I have time to try these things out and tinker with my swing. SPS is all about consistency and I think that’s all that we, as golfers, strive for. But at the end of the day, you have to figure out what works for you.

Looking forward to see the results of this “experiment”.

Welp, I hit the range today to experiment and I hit some really, really great drives. I think the more I play with it the easier set-up will come. I really felt like I could swing the club harder and not worry too much about missing the center of the face too terribly. If I continue to build off of this and remember my cues then I could be shaving off strokes in no time.

 

[GolfLivesMatter]

It seems to me that if someone has been struggling with the "traditional swing" for years, and they don't have the luxury to play golf on a consistent basis to hone skills, then the SPS may well be worth pursuing. I tried a bunch of stuff today, from my own traditional swing to Veneto's closed shoulder-ish setup to the SPS. Again, I've found the SPS to be good for the driver in terms of directional consistency and no loss of distance, and at times more yardage. I found Veneto's closed shoulders works quite well on shorter irons...it's a weird feel too. My traditional swing seemed to become jealous and started performing like 30 years ago....162 yard 8 iron (Ping G410) where I was hitting 140-ish. So maybe my brain is so scrambled that it can't give me any more instructions? .

 

[PatsFan]

HIs teachings have a lot of merit no doubt....it got me thinking too, and experimenting. There's no doubt that even if folks lost 10 yards on their irons, but hit consistent distances and direction, the trade-off would HAVE to be lower scores. Then there's putting.

I don't find I'm not shorter I'm usually longer and playing from the short grass isn't overrated.

I'm guessing better contact better results?


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk