It is so simple when you distill the golf swing to its most basic elements – the proper setup combined with the “perfect pivot” action that Ben Hogan used for his own swing.
Those two basic elements are the Alpha & Omega of the optimal golf swing. In fact, I can’t think of anything that would cause a problem in the swing that wouldn’t be solved by the grasping of these two elements.
For the Mike Austin/Dunaway crowd – you’ve already been there, in a sense, through all of the years in which I worked on the Austin model and looked at both he and Dunaway, and how they used a “measurement” method to set their stance.
I used it as well in the first MCS video way back in ’10, but this concept is one I’ve tweaked, as I’ve been writing about for some time, to include the “dropping the hammer” concept of last winter.
So, I’ve been going over and over this ad nauseum, and I just end up shaking my head.
When I’m through with this, I will have an even better, more efficient and powerful swing than anything I’ve ever had, all due to the two concepts coming together for me.
That’s how I know it is the A & Ω – if it makes my swing look like the standard swing of the model, with my left-handedness and scoliosis:
And if it allows me to swing the very light modern driver and the heavier Momentus Power Driver in the same manner, without any fear of hurting myself or doing something untoward to my body:
Momentus Power Driver vs TM RBZ
Then I know exactly what’s going on – this is the way one should swing.
And not because I say so, or because it’s the way I swing – I merely swing this way because, after 12 years of unrelenting obsession on how to swing properly and studying mechanics and swings, I have come to this motion.
As I’ve said, you start with a block and commence chipping away at all of the unnecessary things in a motion (and since many of the classic swingers of yesteryear were awesome, but had personal idiosyncrasies in their own swing, no such model has exited before now).
This is where, if kinesiology and biomechanics were taught properly (and they aren’t, since everyone graduating with these degrees is still somehow working on perfecting the un-perfectable and irredeemably flawed modern golf swing), one would end up.
This is where one would end up if they knew the way to set up their position over the ball so that, when they swung, there would be no manipulations or extraneous movements.
My swing isn’t even where I want it to be, but it’s far better this year than any previous iteration of the MCS swing model that I’ve been able to approach.
I don’t have to think about down swing plane, or what my hands are doing, or the club face – all I do is make sure I make that proper “perfect pivot” to the top and then simply “step into it.”
Don’t ask me for swing thoughts, because I have virtually none now, other than what I would advise anyone to think of on the back swing – getting that pivot going with the hips and legs, and if you’re in the proper position…
It’s a beautiful thing.
I’m enjoying watching the U.S. Open on TV this year – has anyone else noticed the dramatic increase in quality in Fox’s broadcast?
I’m actually enjoying it! Been a long time since I’ve televised golf and actually thought that.
Thanks to HKGolf for finding a good face-on view of Jack Nicklaus’ swing from address to impact, to finish the discussion from a couple of days ago on the topic of optimal address & impact.
As you can see, there is a very good reason Nicklaus was so brilliant in his ball-striking – the impact compared to address:
“A & Ω, Dear Friends!”
Compare the above to the MCS Address-Impact:
And then look at what today’s modern golf swing players are apt to be doing:
Modern Version of Address-Impact
I don’t think there’s any arguing that the modern golf swing tendency to have big differences between the setup and impact are superior to what the greatest major champion (and 3rd-highest total Tour wins total) was doing with his address vs impact positions.
One shows a situation in which consistency is ensured to be pretty high, the other is almost assured to be erratic and dependent on hand-eye coordination and being “on.”
I would think you can easily tell which is which!