The Perfect Swing

[Rich Goodale]

You probably will beat me, Jason, but by that time (i.e. next time you come to Fife) I will be so old that I will forget your beating me before we walk off of the 18th green.  All I hope for is that you will buy the first pint.

Rich

[Tom Kelly]

If you want to see the difference between 'active' hands and 'passive' hands watch Tiger et al on the PGA Tour and then go watch a Senior Tour event.

'Passive' doesn't mean they don't release or hold off releasing the hands, but rather the release is just a natural reaction to the body movement and clubhead momentum through the ball. By 'active' really what is meant is that the player consciously flicks his/her wrists to help time the swing or add power through the ball/impact zone.

Or at least that is my take on the topic!

[David Ober]

We will just have to agree to disagree on the hand action in the current top 50 players..most have very little.
There are  still some "handsy" players in there but not many..no harm no foul though..after all this site is all about opinions....

I agree with you 100%.

"Handsy" play results from a stall of some part of the body and then a compensatory "flip," which we view as "handsy." Most of todays best players do not play that way -- they have much more of a "body" swing with the shoulders, arms, and forearms squaring the clubface and the hands doing "just enough" and just at the right time to produce repeatable, beautiful golf shots.

Most of today's players, if they were to consciously add a bit more "hands" to their swing would hit their irons  1 to 2 clubs longer than they already do, which is a scary thought.

At least that's my view of most modern swings....

[Jim_Kennedy]

Gents this is Physics

Physics!  LOL, just last fall I had a couple of distinguished GCA fellows laugh at me when I told then that a car's turning radius decreases as the vehicle accelerates!   

They must not have heard about the handbrake. 

[Garland Bayley]

...

"Handsy" play results from a stall of some part of the body and then a compensatory "flip," which we view as "handsy." ...

That's seems to be physics taking over, not hands.

This tour pro "handsy" stuff is beginning to look more and more like urban legend. No one seems to want to state how it can actually be measured.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Here you go Garland.

http://www.ehow.com/video_2357710_golf-grip-tips-handsy-swings.html

[David Ober]

...

"Handsy" play results from a stall of some part of the body and then a compensatory "flip," which we view as "handsy." ...

That's seems to be physics taking over, not hands.

This tour pro "handsy" stuff is beginning to look more and more like urban legend. No one seems to want to state how it can actually be measured.

I could figure out a way to measure it if you gave me some time.

Basically, it would be the steepness of the "V" created by the shaft and the left arm (for a right-handed golfer) as the hands pass the left thigh after impact. The more acute the angle, the more "handsy" the player appears to be.

But I'm no scientist. LOL!

[Garland Bayley]

Here you go Garland.

http://www.ehow.com/video_2357710_golf-grip-tips-handsy-swings.html

If you hook the ball, you have a handsy swing? I don't think so. Maybe your ball position is wrong. Put the ball to far forward and your natural release is going to cause this effect the guy is taking about isn't it? For that matter, he solves a handsy swing with a weak grip. So what is this handsy characteristic that grip affects it? Urban legend.


Nothing is this video says how you can measure a swing to determine if it is handsy.

[Garland Bayley]

...

"Handsy" play results from a stall of some part of the body and then a compensatory "flip," which we view as "handsy." ...

That's seems to be physics taking over, not hands.

This tour pro "handsy" stuff is beginning to look more and more like urban legend. No one seems to want to state how it can actually be measured.

I could figure out a way to measure it if you gave me some time.

Basically, it would be the steepness of the "V" created by the shaft and the left arm (for a right-handed golfer) as the hands pass the left thigh after impact. The more acute the angle, the more "handsy" the player appears to be.

But I'm no scientist. LOL!

It seems to me that this is just a reflection of the physics of the hand release. When something goes into a stall as you say, then it is obvious that the hands will release. You will see it different places on different players depending on where they get stuck.

[Alex Miller]

Anybody else think Garland should post a video lesson starring himself in order to better illustrate what we don't know? 

[Garland Bayley]

Since no biomechanics practitioner or physicist is saying how you measure handsy, let me give it a try even though I am neither.

In the Perfect Swing book they use a model of two boards connected by a hinge. When the angular velocity of the top board decelerates, the angular velocity of the bottom board will accelerate. I suppose that with a frictionless hinge a physicist could give you the relation between these rates. Perhaps he could do so too with friction accounted for. If the measured angular velocity of the bottom board were to be faster than this physical formulation predicts, then I suppose we could have a handsy swing as I suppose the muscles controlling the hands would be the factor accounting for the extra velocity.

Next question.

Has anyone every measured this? If so, have they ever found a tour pro to have a handsy swing?

[Michael Moore]

Garland -

Have you ever read any poems? Maybe "handsy" is just a way of describing the aesthetics of a certain kind of swing.

[Bill_McBride]

Garland, I think you may be looking at that a bit too scientifically.  Think about it this way.   When a really good player, like say Michael W-P who I just saw in action, swings, his hands are just swinging as the legs, torso, shoulders and arms dictate.  There is no active, aggressive move to roll the hands over during the swing through impact.  

By contrast a "handsy" player is attacking through impact, using thoughts like "close the gate" or left palm down right after impact.  

The modern player is much more likely to just turn the torso without thoughts of the hands' involvement in the swing.  

[Garland Bayley]

Garland, I think you may be looking at that a bit too scientifically.  Think about it this way.   When a really good player, like say Michael W-P who I just saw in action, swings, his hands are just swinging as the legs, torso, shoulders and arms dictate.  There is no active, aggressive move to roll the hands over during the swing through impact.  

By contrast a "handsy" player is attacking through impact, using thoughts like "close the gate" or left palm down right after impact.  

The modern player is much more likely to just turn the torso without thoughts of the hands' involvement in the swing.  

But, it's been alleged that tour pros like Rickie Fowler are "handsy". Are you telling me that Rickie is thinking "close the gate" or similar during his swing? Maybe Rickie's hands are just swinging as the legs, torso, shoulders and arms dictate. That's what I suspect. I believe it would take a scientific measurement to prove otherwise. I suspect we just can't look at a player and draw an accurate conclusion. Just looking at players allows us an opinion, but nothing more.

[David_Tepper]

If you have 8 minutes, here is Wayne De Francesco's analysis of Ricky Fowler's swing. Decide for yourself!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RaQFWSk8gw

Here is a 1-minute look at & analysis of Fowler's swing by Peter Kostis. According to him, Fowler's swing is powered by "the big muscles of his body." Doesn't sound very "handsy" to me!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=9e-FQbMWfok 

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Fowler's use of the hands is significantly more than say Mahan or Rose and to naswer how you evaluate...easy high speed photography and the realtion of the shaft/clubhead at impact and the positions of the hands and in particular the left wrist.
Such camera speed was not available for the Cochran study, just like we have onlt recently been able to see slow moving divots on the goggle box.

Urban legend for the word handsy and use of the hands...whatever, more like a reluctance to accept that the modern day player does not adapt ball shape by using the hands and allows the body rotation to release the club, if some people fail to accept this, so be it, it is what it is.

The only time I ever see ythe likes of Woods, Mahan et all use thier hands is when they are trying to hit a low hook under treees or a massive cut from similar surroundings.
As for Kostis and his swing analysis, rememebr this is for TV in a 20 second slot making an analysis for the general public.
If we cannot convince some on thsi well eduacated site of the facts, do you really think Kostis is going to try and explain the diffrence on TV?

For more good swing analysis' see Dan Whittakers stuff on gothamgolf blog, especially comaprisons between Mateo Massenero and Luke Donald, with Donald being a little more "flippy" through impact you can really see the difference in this analysis Garland to explain all this.

[Jim Nugent]

Second, the above conclusion has consequences for gca and golf generally. If long/medium iron play separates the boys from the men, the choices are stark if you care about a competitive Tour on which the cream will continue to rise to the top: either build 8000 yard courses or roll-back the ball. Those are the only two ways to make the pros hit medium and long iron approaches.

Bob     
 

Bob, I think there's another way, that you touch on in a later post.  Build more par 3s (and par 5s) on the course.  e.g. build 6 par 3s, and 4 par 5s.  You can easily get five long/medium iron shots out of that.  Maybe seven or eight. 

You can also take driver out of the players' hands on some par 4s, and give them more long iron approach shots.

You could end up with a par 70 course, easily under 7000 yards, that plays hard as nails for the world's best golfers. 

I remember reading that Byron Nelson was fantastic with his long irons. 

[Mike_Young]

Shea.

Is there anything new in golf instruction that is not a regurgitiation of what has come before?

Bob

Yes....marketing...

[Garland Bayley]

...

For more good swing analysis' see Dan Whittakers stuff on gothamgolf blog, especially comaprisons between Mateo Massenero and Luke Donald, with Donald being a little more "flippy" through impact you can really see the difference in this analysis Garland to explain all this.

Found the blog. Using the search there, I don't find a Whittaker comparison between the two. Or, are you suggesting that I make the comparison after viewing the analysis of each player?

[Garland Bayley]

Fowler's use of the hands is significantly more than say Mahan or Rose and to naswer how you evaluate...easy high speed photography and the realtion of the shaft/clubhead at impact and the positions of the hands and in particular the left wrist.
...

It sounds like you are suggesting that one photograph showing the relation of  shaft/clubhead at impact, and the positions of the hands will allow you to evaluate "handsy". Please tell me that is not what you are saying.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

A series of photgrahs actually...that would be the benfit of high speed film.
Although when one sees a still of Vijay or Phil about two frames post impact and the left hand is totally off the grip, even a toatlly uneducated individual of the game should be able to figure out the clubhead has been flipped.
Listen, if you dont want to accept this stuff..go with what you think is right.
Clearly you are resistant to learn about this, so I am going to bow out and not waste anymore time on someone who is stubborn on this fact.
Just keep on thinking what you want, no harm no foul.

[Bill_McBride]

A series of photgrahs actually...that would be the benfit of high speed film.
Although when one sees a still of Vijay or Phil about two frames post impact and the left hand is totally off the grip, even a toatlly uneducated individual of the game should be able to figure out the clubhead has been flipped.
Listen, if you dont want to accept this stuff..go with what you think is right.
Clearly you are resistant to learn about this, so I am going to bow out and not waste anymore time on someone who is stubborn on this fact.
Just keep on thinking what you want, no harm no foul.

Garland is also an expert on camellia growing.

[Garland Bayley]

A series of photgrahs actually...that would be the benfit of high speed film.
Although when one sees a still of Vijay or Phil about two frames post impact and the left hand is totally off the grip, even a toatlly uneducated individual of the game should be able to figure out the clubhead has been flipped.
Listen, if you dont want to accept this stuff..go with what you think is right.
Clearly you are resistant to learn about this, so I am going to bow out and not waste anymore time on someone who is stubborn on this fact.
Just keep on thinking what you want, no harm no foul.

We clearly agree on release being a matter of physics. We agree the great players hands release through the unhinging of the wrists caused by the physics of the golf swing. You have conjectured that certain players try to get even more clubhead speed by actively applying hand action through the wrists.

You suggest I am unwilling to learn, yet you ignore my suggestion of a method to prove or disprove your conjecture. Instead, without reference to my suggestion you offer high speed photography.

My response to that is that you are trying to prove something about a very dynamic process with static photographs that use hand position. Now if you were able to use the known time between pictures to calculate velocities and acceleration, you could use the calculations to say something about the conjecture. However, IMO static hand positions in photographs show nothing.

Vijay's right hand coming off the grip has been used as further evidence of handsy or flipping. To me this is totally counter intuitive. To me the hand has come off the grip, because the physics of the situation has exceeded a velocity where the hand can keep up. If the hand can't keep up, how can it be actively adding clubhead acceleration. I would suggest you try and experiment. Make a golf swing where you actively throw the clubhead through the ball with enough right hand force to make the club leave your right hand. My conjecture is that you will find that your shots will travel shorter (and of course be wilder directionally), than they will when you let the natural physics happen in your normal swing.

I'm sure that if you happen to manage people, I would hate working for you, as it seems only yes men need apply.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Actually a staff of 8 who have been with me for 10 years plus.
So once again you are inaccurate in your rather rude assumptiions, you fail to have a grasp on what real Physics is , ...continue to bury your head in the sand and assume that the small muscles of the hands can actuualy increase clubhead speed at impact???

The hands flip when the body stalls...THIS CAN BE EVALUATED by digital photography, where on digitises numerous points on the body and follows them during the golf swing.
Noone is suggseting the use os stills for full analysis, although your point of Vijays swing is so wrong
You truly belive that an individual can increase clubhead speed by manipulating the hands...if that were the case a centrifuge would have a hing in it!!.we clearly have nothing to discuss

[David_Tepper]

Nothing like a debate about the golf swing between a 22 and a +3!