The Search For The Swing… Why MCS Is So Effective

Note: I’ll begin this post with some general musing about models and technique, but the main point of this writing will be halfway down, after “The Point About MCS.”

As you all know, I’ve been obsessed with finding what I would call the “optimal” golf swing model for nearly 15 years now.

I used to think there was a “perfect” golf swing, but since we are not machines, perfection is a very tricky word to use.

Nothing is ever perfect when dealing with people, but there can be an “optimal” model or motion, whether the results are perfect or not.

Example: Using the Fosbury Flop in high jump won’t make any one person a world record high jumper or allow one to jump over a bar twice their height, because there are human limitations to everything. 


However, the Fosbury is recognized as the optimal high jumping technique and you won’t find anyone competing at a high level in that event who doesn’t use the Fosbury

Athletic ability, practice, training, nutrition and a host of human elements will determine who among the Fosbury users becomes the best, but rest assured that the best and highest jumpers will be using that technique.

So, I would say that, when all is said and done, I’ve built the MCS Golf Swing model to be that model which should give the average person their best results when swinging a golf club, simply because there are no compensations in the model.

If you have no significant physical limitations, then you should have your best results swinging a golf club using the MCS Golf Swing model over any other way of swinging.

The problem that arises is in adopting the model as it is designed.

Even I, more than two years after I made the last adjustment to the model (you can stand square to the target line with every club from wedge to Driver and not have to angle your stance line the Hogan way), am still moving towards full implementation of that model.

What has stymied the completion of that journey is something I’d been doing in my setup for a few years now, which had me slapping my forehead in frustration and even anger, when I realized that nothing I did was ever going to get me there without fixing that one setup flaw.

The Point About MCS

That brings me to the point about the MCS Golf Swing model – even if you’re not using the model 100% of the way it is designed and structured, you will likely get much more out of it than a different model, especially the Modern Golf Swing in its various forms.

Even with the numbers I’ve posted, such as when I shared some swing numbers following a trip to the TXG Golf facility in Toronto, I was doing so with that major flaw in my setup:


I’d say those are pretty good numbers, and even better considering I was 48 years old at the time, and don’t swing every day, more like once a week during the April-October season.

In fact, the day I compiled the above data was the last day I hit a ball (July 26th) until I got back out this past May!

I will admit that I have driven the ball a good deal longer in previous days when not using the MCS model (because I hadn’t yet designed it), but that would be due to the fact that I was younger, hit a lot more balls than I do currently (I used to hit balls/play golf up to 5 days a week in the past) and am now 49 years old.

I noticed a dramatic drop-off in my physical performance around the time I began to design the final model of MCS (around 2015’16), due to that factor – getting older.

At 49 – Not Bad


That said, if I had had the MCS model back in my younger years, I can assure you that the younger MCS version of myself would have blown away my younger, other-method using self, because MCS is simply that much better than any other way I’ve tried to swing.

Add to the fact that I barely swing now, I would today blow away my younger self if my younger self were only hit balls once a week.  My younger self would have had trouble making solid contact hitting balls only once per week.

In fact, I might still get back to out-driving my younger self at 50, using the MCS Golf Swing, when I’ve finally reached that point where I can’t find any areas to bring closer to the model.

Better, But Not Quite There Yet…


I still haven’t realized my maximum potential using the MCS Golf Swing model but I have identified that setup flaw, worked on fix this past week (it was better but still flawed), and I am pretty sure I might be able to nail it the next time.

After that, I will probably need another couple of swing sessions to get used to the new feels in the proper setup position, and then I’ll be able to compare what I can do now with the optimal technique to what I used to do when younger, stronger and faster but with flawed swings.

I’ve gone from furious at the overlooking of that flaw for so long to excited about what I’ll be able to do once I’ve fixed it for good.

Not to mention, it is the “Proof in the pudding” about what I’ve been saying for years now – the swing begins and very nearly ends with the Address Setup, and if that is flawed, your swing action will be flawed and will require compensations.

Nail the setup, and you virtually can’t go wrong with the mechanics once you’ve learned them (the Hogan “floating pivot,” the “Drop & Pop” from the top, etc.).

Even if you aren’t quite perfect in the setup however, you’re much better off with the MCS swing model than any other.

So, a little more work for me on the setup, and then perhaps we can get into some serious discussion of the MCS swing model using a much better swing action than any I’ve been sharing to date.

It’s one thing to point out great swing actions that come close the optimal MCS model, but it will be exciting for me if and when I can use my own swing to say, “Now, this is how you want to swing using the MCS Golf Swing model!”

More to come!


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:

“E = MCS” The Swing Video