Big Things Cooking – Setup On Conventional Classic & Right Dominant Models

Things have been developing apace since I decided to model the golf swing without input from any other swinger or modeler/instructor.

First, the thing about the setup that I have adjusted applies to both models, but the models themselves have markedly different setups.

Which is no surprise, but you’ll remember my extreme dissatisfaction with Mikes Dunaway and Austin presenting how to swing a golf club with one standard setup and action – when they both swung with markedly different setups and actions.

Again, the reason I’m working on two different models is because people bring a lifetime of habits with them to the golf swing and, since we hold and swing the club with both hands and arms, there will be differences in how people want to swing it.

For those who like to feel they’re “pulling the swing” with their leading arm, there’s the conventional Classic Golf Swing model (which will see changes where I personally think something in the conventional can be improved or optimized), which is also for people who feel that they swing equally with both arms, not favoring one or the other.

For those who are very dominant in their trailing side (swinging the club with their trailing arm), there is the X-Dominant model (X being the trailing arm, swinging lefty or righty).

Right now, I have returned from another swing session at Tracer Golf and based upon my observations swinging today, I’ve made changes to both models with regards to setup and believe they could be ready to go.

I’ll spend the weekend ironing out the mechanical swing action to make sure that the setups are what they should be to deliver said desired swing action.

I can’t tell you all how exciting and simultaneously maddening this research is – exciting because I felt I had optimized the conventional Classic model and it never occurred to me until a short time ago that, “it’s one thing to take an already existing model and work on optimizing it, but what if the existing model contained elements that weren’t athletically intuitive and so could never really be optimal-optimal?”

You could say the same for the X-Dominant model – we’ve only really seen one man, Mike Dunaway, swing purely in this manner, but what if that particular model could also be tweaked to make it more intuitive and thus a better model than the original?

So, unexplored territory here, where I can take the things that I was doing “wrong” or not according to the convention due to my athletic intuition and plug them into a completely from-the-ground-up swing model and see what happens.

The maddening part?  I think I should have already figured this out, so I go through a roller-coaster ride of “I think this is it… wow, this could be it… hmm, not quite working as planned… why can’t I figure this out… oh, I was set up/swinging like this when it should be that…”

That last part keeps me doing it, because there’s no thought of my giving up on modeling.

More to come.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.