There are so many good reasons to have the biased address setup – first and foremost, it’s the only one that is mechanically-optimal, because if the head is not supposed to move around during the swing, then it should be at address where it will be at impact.
That’s already been established, but here’s another benefit – with the biased address setup, those with steep or over-the-top swing plane issues will find that the setup helps keep the club in the “slot” coming down from Continue reading →
I guess anyone watching the weekend’s WGC Bridgestone Invitational noticed that the announcers seems to be focused on Tiger Woods and his apparent stiffness, lack of energy and other things on the weekend.
I will admit that I only saw much of him on Thursday, because the weekend had me busy with family things and working on the “MCS – The Kinetic Chain” video.
One could say “six of one” and “half a dozen of the other,” when comparing my two Driver shot data series, if you overlook one important factor.
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.
I showed some data from May where I had gone to the TXG Golffacility in Toronto to show how the MCS Golf Swing model allowed me to drive the ball well upwards of 300 yard and to also create a positive Attack Angle to maximize drive distance.
I don’t get why GolfDigest is so breathless about Dustin Johnson’s driver numbers when they are largely the same as they were over a year and a half ago.
If you were around at the beginnning of 2015, you’ll remember that TaylorMade had a commercial out showing that Dustin was getting really good numbers with his Aero Burner driver, and let’s compare the numbers on two drives from then, and now.