Why?

Hey all,

Interesting. The point raised by Bill about Ben Hogan in particular. The old politician "do as I say, not as I do". The ironic thing is, Hogan didn't do what he said he did and I would rather use what he did, than what he said!..............

As for video technology I think it has its' place, but should not be supplemented for practice. Having said that, I use my camera on almost every long game session in which I'm working on something. Then I get immediate feedback and it cuts down my practice time spent on what some may refer to as "positional work" and shows me what I'm doing against what I think I'm doing. The last bucket of balls I hit is always aimed at a target though, without concern for anything else. When I'm not working on anything, I don't use my camera.

As for the points about looking good not performing good, I may agree that looking good does not necessarily perform good. Looking good is also a matter of opinion. But I would add that performing good, always looks good. Jim Furyk? Doesn't look orthodox, but I think he looks good. I'm talking about the general aesthetic nature of it. Lovely rhythm. Very controlled. Smooth as. He just has an extremely upright plane.

Charles Berkley? Say no more.

__________________
Luke: I don't believe it!
Yoda: That is why you fail.

i see a hundred different swings at my golf club, some look pretty good, some are plain ugly.but they all work for the individual, and i would guess not many are trying to copy a pro's swing.the very good golfers do tend to start looking like a pro. ie on plane nice posture etc etc.
but physical shape , age and ability eventually determine how good a swing you will have.most of the people i play with found that out years ago and just get out there and enjoy themselves.happy golfing!!!

hi Bruin
i do think most golfer now look the same with there swing as most now come from the American college system and have the samr type of coching.
the Jim Fuyrk, Lee Trevino, Seve Barastros, player that made up a swing that work for them are long gone now and ever new player has the same look and same Leadbetter type coaching.
cheers
bill

Maybe the American adopted style is the most efficient/effective and in that respect is the one to teach. I have to return to my previous comment that most good, even great golfers swing their club through the impact zone the same way, and that includes Tiger. Golf is no different in this respect to most sports, study has shown what works most effectively and surely that's the place to start. Very few greats in the last 30 years have had real quirky swings (OK! Furyk, Trevino, Norman, etc, they are only a few)

Of course it does not matter a fishes tit if you have a non standard swing as long as you are happy with your game . My experience of golfers is that very few are though

__________________
Best Regards
Brian

________________________________
Funny o'l game!

hi Brian
what you say it right.
it dont matter what you do before or after as long as you can get that club face square before impact and still be square when the ball leaves the face.
easy as that.
cheers
bill

It doesn't matter a fishes tit????????!!!!!!!

Brian, you do make me laugh.

Going back to the original question Neil. Is the answer mine ?

Yes. Yes it is.

Still think its the hats.

I see your point. It would be like copying your Grandad. Nobody wants to copy their Grandad.

i had a lesson last week and the pro put my swing video up against tigers
i swear they were identical

I didn't know Tony the Tiger played golf

Ahem! I am a Grandad

Then fear not! Nobody will want to steal your hat!

True, true. Although Zak Dingle did.