Everything was the same – the Launch Monitor (the Foresight GC Quad), the balls (same facility, so the Sxrixon balls would have been the same, whatever brand they were), the same driver (the Callaway Rogue Sub-Zero), and then you get close to identical top club and ball speeds.
However, I can point out something if you look at the 2 things:
Session 1 – May 26th
Session 2 – July 26th
If you look at the numbers, you’ll see that my average and top drive distance and top ball speed were just slightly higher in the May session, with a swing motion to which I was very accustomed.
However, the top club head speed was a hair’s breadth higher in the 2nd session, although the average and top drive distances and ball speeds were slightly lower – and that’s the telling point.
I wasn’t as sharp in the 2nd session because I have not swung a lot in the past couple of weeks, and I actually went a week without swinging a club before hitting the TXG Golf facility last Thursday. So my contact wasn’t as good, leading to a slight decrease in drive distance and ball speed.
But as I mentioned, my top club speed did not go down with the shorter, more-on-plane swing motion, even after a week off swinging.
In fact, it was a shade higher than it was 2 months ago when I was getting 2-3 days swing work in, and had been for nearly a month.
One might not make much of a this, but if I had taken a week off, without much swing work in the couple of weeks even before that week off, with the same swing that I had in May, I can assure you that my top speed would have been lower, not higher.
The point is, without having swung for a week, I matched my May top club speed – with the shorter, more on-plane swing motion that I worked on in the preceding weeks.
And that goes to the larger truth about the MCS Golf Swing model – it is not only easier to maintain than another method of swinging, you will get improved performance the closer you get to the theoretical model itself.
I was primarily concerned with one thing when I went back to TXG Golf to make some swings – was the shorter, more on-plane swing going to produce an in-to-out club path through impact?
The answer was, YES.
And not only that, I went from a pretty out-in club path through impact (avg 4.46 degrees) to a consistent in-out path but one very close to neutral (avg 0.46 degrees), which is what you want – and just by changing my pivot to closer emulate the proper “One Major Move” action.
That’s a club path change of 5 degrees in 2 months’ time!
So, there’s a lot of good stuff in the data – the MCS Golf Swing from May was still allowing me to drive the ball a good deal further than the average PGA Tour drive distances, but the changes I made to my own MCS model got me roughly the same speeds and distances even after time off swinging.
I’ll say it again – the closer you can get to the theoretical model, the better your swing should get.
The thing I love most about the new action?
It’s not only in-to-out now, which is what your swing arc should be doing – but the in-out path is so slight – averaging just less than half a degree – that going from a baby draw to a baby power fade is only a matter of adjusting the club face slightly with the neutral grip.
That makes for far more consistent ball-striking than if one’s path is 4 or 5 degrees from neutral one way or the other.
And this is after less than 2 months’ time (my first post about making this swing change was on June 10th, about six weeks before my last day hitting balls before the 2nd session) from when I decided to make the changes.
Back Pain or Back Injury Swinging a Golf Club?
Lacking Power, Speed, Distance and or Consistency?
Need A Swing That Is More Easily Maintained?
If You Answered “Yes” To Any Of The Above Questions, The Answer Is In The Formula For The Golf Swing: