[bogiesux]

Quote

POSTED by Demolition Man

Sorry Bogiesux for hijacking your thread. I just want to clear up for all those who come to post, this is a thread to discuss sevam's swing ideas, questions, and relevant discussions. It is not a place to debate Hogan's secret nor a place to come in and try to discredit sevam.

Thank you.

To all:
I hope this thread may pick up where the last thread ended.

I would welcome back all who posted to the original thread; Squish, Slicefixer, DFW1500, Sevam, magnum and everyone else who either had an opinion, a revelation or just a note of thanks to anyone that provided some, any level of help in their personal "secret".

Thank you,
Bogiesux

[tezkhan]

I would like to second that I was enjoying that thread and the constructive information was well received by the majority of us. I think tiltswing made his point and intentions quite clear at the end of that thread. Lets move on and exchange our ideas in a positive frame of mind.

Regards

Terry Rensch

[JASONR5]

I only posted in the original thread a couple of times, but I would love to see a continuation of that started again. I followed that thread from day one, and pretty much agree with the OP sentiment concerning the original thread and starting a new one.

[Freeze]

Link to original thread, so newer folks can catch up, might help:
http://www.golfwrx.c...howtopic=175341

[Wsc04forever]

Freeze, on Dec 30 2008, 01:28 PM, said:

Link to original thread, so newer folks can catch up, might help:
http://www.golfwrx.c...howtopic=175341

124 pages, any suggestions on where to start, i'm serious

[finalist]

I'd still like to see the original thread come back. 115 good pages were the work of a lot of customers. I know the posts are saved. maybe they can be pasted somewhere?

[Freeze]

Wsc04forever, on Dec 30 2008, 11:43 AM, said:

Freeze, on Dec 30 2008, 01:28 PM, said:

Link to original thread, so newer folks can catch up, might help:
http://www.golfwrx.c...howtopic=175341

124 pages, any suggestions on where to start, i'm serious

I think it's best to simply start at the beginning- there is a lot of great info all the way through (up until the last few unfortunate pages, of course). You can search youtube for SEVAM1's videos, which were deleted by the OP from the original thread, and which were the inspiration for the thread's initiation.

[psd]

Freeze, on Dec 30 2008, 02:12 PM, said:

Wsc04forever, on Dec 30 2008, 11:43 AM, said:

Freeze, on Dec 30 2008, 01:28 PM, said:

Link to original thread, so newer folks can catch up, might help:
http://www.golfwrx.c...howtopic=175341

124 pages, any suggestions on where to start, i'm serious

I think it's best to simply start at the beginning- there is a lot of great info all the way through (up until the last few unfortunate pages, of course). You can search youtube for SEVAM1's videos, which were deleted by the OP from the original thread, and which were the inspiration for the thread's initiation.

Your best bet might simply to go to SEVAM1's blog and get a copy of his e-book. Virtually everything of importance is distilled into 70 pages plus essential videos. Otherwise, I would suggest you start at the beginning.

[highergr0und]

Why don't we just start the thread properly...

Here's a great golfer's take on building a swing from the ground up revolving around a subtle hint by a golfing legend that his secret is "in the dirt"

Videos
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f

Here's a whole thread dedicated to these videos...

http://www.golfwrx.c...howtopic=175341

Start from page 1 and set aside a whole lot of time to digest the information. It starts out with a lot of cryptic posts regarding what "the move" is forcing you to think about the swing and what you're doing rather than just telling you. It then divulges some theories and moves into a whole lot of great posts describing feelings and what's going on as well as success stories for folks who implemented the theories. While the secrets revealed may or may not have been those of our great golfing legends, you will learn a lot. Enjoy. Just take time to really think about it all and you may just get better.

As with any forum, there are a lot of conflicting views, so you decide for yourself...

[Freeze]

Well done.

[JASONR5]

highergr0und, on Dec 30 2008, 02:47 PM, said:

Why don't we just start the thread properly...

Here's a great golfer's take on building a swing from the ground up revolving around a subtle hint by a golfing legend that his secret is "in the dirt"

Videos
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f

Here's a whole thread dedicated to these videos...

http://www.golfwrx.c...howtopic=175341

Start from page 1 and set aside a whole lot of time to digest the information. It starts out with a lot of cryptic posts regarding what "the move" is forcing you to think about the swing and what you're doing rather than just telling you. It then divulges some theories and moves into a whole lot of great posts describing feelings and what's going on as well as success stories for folks who implemented the theories. While the secrets revealed may or may not have been those of our great golfing legends, you will learn a lot. Enjoy. Just take time to really think about it all and you may just get better.

As with any forum, there are a lot of conflicting views, so you decide for yourself...

You will definitely learn a lot. “The Move” immediately improved my ball striking. No other tips that I have heard here or anywhere else has ever done that. Sevam1 has a thorough understanding of the golf swing and was a nice enough guy to share that with the rest of us. I think that this caused a lot of jealousy with established, long time gurus on this board.

So if a new thread starts up I will happily contribute to it. Hopefully this is that thread.

[Richie3Jack]

I believe that Sevam and his supporters (myself included) are not telling anybody that you must use this move to hit a ball well. I think Sevam is saying that he studied Hogan with great intensity to see if what Hogan was telling the world was true and he believe that Hogan was indeed telling the truth. He then believes that he found Hogan's 'secret' and supports it with his journey and using some rationale.

I stayed away from the original giant thread because I was too lazy to read the thing. Then I got the book and decided to read the thread because the book was so good I was hoping to possibly find some other information.

Anyway, here's my experience. I played D-I college golf, graduated, then turned pro mainly in hopes to be a golf instructor some day. I then played some mini-tour events, not to try to take my game to another level, but more to gain experience so I can learn more about the game to pass onto future students. Later on I decided to quit the profession (being an assistant pro is tough) and get a 'real job.'

I played to a +1.7 at my best point, but I mainly did it with my good short game. Had a good short game in high school, then college, then on mini-tours. My ballstriking was always inconsistent, mainly because I have a flip release and it relied a lot on timing and my pivot needed work. At best I was sneaky long.

For the past 8 years, I practically quit the game...never hitting balls and probalby played about 12 times in that timeframe. I recently had major surgery and decided to get back into the game because I felt that life was too damn short to not do the things you love and are passionate about.

Sunday was the first day I really tried 'the move.' On Monday I think I finally figured it out. Not only the feel, but more importantly what I do wrong when I don't do 'the move.' I wound up probably hitting the longest 3-wood of my life that day, a good 260 yards...which doesn't sound like much...but it was:

1) 50 degrees out
2) using a beat up limited flight range ball
3) wind was in my face.
4) only had 11 yards of roll

Today I went to a different range with my old man. The pin to the back green on the range is a legit 228 yards. I work my way up to longer clubs on the range. I hit a 6 iron that rolled to the pin on the back green. Okay, let's see what a 3 iron does. I then proceed to fly over the back green, with ease, with a 3 iron. Again with:

1) it being 55 degrees out
2) using a beat up, limited flight range ball
3) coming off of major surgery 2 months ago.

My old man nearly soiled himself. Whether or not it was Hogan's 'secret' doesn't really matter to me. Hitting the ball significantly better does.







3JACK

[Robmc826]

That is great to hear richie. I ordered the ebook and i plan on studying it intensely, and trying my hardest to get better. too bad the closest range thats open is over an hour away. I hate the northeast.

Robert

[sevam1]

texan_golf, on Dec 30 2008, 09:58 PM, said:

You know as a teacher with my own beliefs, I do not agree with some of the idea's of what Sevam1 says about Hogan. As a teacher I admire Sevam1 for his research and effort to present his fact through a book, and video. As a teacher my thoughts and beliefs are based on my own research of Hogan, and I know that no matter if I brought Hogan back from the dead that others are still going to have there different opinion's of what he did, and how.

My major differences are I believe Hogan used his whole right side to hit the ball and was very dominant with his right hand. I believe that Hogan went extreme flat in his irons to find his more rounded flat inside-to inside swing plane. I believe Hogan attacked the golf ball from the inside using his right hand to control the loft and lie of the club to control the shot. I believe that Hogan bowed his right wrist from the top making the face point to the sky and increased that angle on the way down through the ball, making his left wrist bow from this move. I believe Hogan being always in motion gave him extra power. Finally, I believe that Hogan's club setup made his swing, and how he arrived to being a one plane fader...IMOB

There is just about nothing that you have just said that I would disagree with. My "right side" message in the book in particular is one of the things that I think has angered some people.

Sevam1

[Richie3Jack]

Robmc826, on Dec 30 2008, 08:38 PM, said:

That is great to hear richie. I ordered the ebook and i plan on studying it intensely, and trying my hardest to get better. too bad the closest range thats open is over an hour away. I hate the northeast.

Robert

Ezgolfer, on Dec 30 2008, 09:49 PM, said:

Nice post and good testimonial Richie 3 jack , specially from someone who has played some serious golf ...

I've read a ton of instructional books, everything from Harvey Penick's 'Little Red Book' to Homer Kelley's 'The Golfing Machine.'

In my 'comeback' I was searching for not only how to hit the ball better, but more consistently. I'm not looking to hit the ball like Sergio Garcia, but better and more consistent than I have in the past. One of Sevam's videos (before the book was available) said he asked Moe Norman about what the most important part of the swing was and he said 'pivot.'

I'm a pretty laid back person, but I do get angry when people call Moe an 'idiot savant.' Idiot savants just don't know what they are doing. They are great at whatever they excel at because it just naturally makes sense to them. But they are not going to explain to somebody how it works. Moe could explain how his golf swing works...did it all the time. Yes, he had a lot of natural talent and ability, but hard work and using the old brain to figure out what works and what doesn't is how Moe got so good. And he was able to convey much of that to people. An idiot savant would have never come close to that. So when arguably the greatest ballstriker ever talk about the swing, you should at least pay attention.

So when Sevam said that Moe told him the pivot was the pivot, I paid attention and started to investigate that. For instance, the history of golf has see good players with different address positions, different ball positions, different grips, swing planes, downswing path, etc. Many of which have been called wrong or weak or flawed. But have we ever seen a successful golfer that had a wrong or weak or flawed pivot? The only person I could come up with is Corey Pavin, one of the weaker ballstrikers and shortest hitters the tour has seen and a guy that nobody is going to teach to swing like anytime soon.

And what happens to players when they get older? They don't change their grips, they usually have the same swing plane, same address positions, etc. Well, their pivots are usually not as strong as they once were and thus they hit the ball shorter and with less accuracy.

I'm not sure that Sevam's book will work for everybody, but his book...along with SliceFixer's...are the only ones I've seen that really attack and focus on the pivot and I can't stress enough how convinced I am that Moe was dead on about it being the most important of the golf swing.




3JACK

[DemolitionMan]

Just so we are all clear.

1. Original Poster's do not own the topic to the point that they can have it shutdown/deleted whenever they feel like it. They certainly can make the request, and we'll consider it on a case by case basis. The original thread was shutdown because there was just too much bickering and members did not do a good job of policing themselves and getting back on topic.

2. This thread will be locked too if there is too much bickering and insults traded that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Yes, threads do sometimes evolve to other topics than the original, and if that's what the masses want, fine, but name calling is not a topic.

3. Surprisingly, when the last thread got out of hand, no one hit the violation button and reported it...until it got really out of hand a week later, then reports trickled in. If you want the thread to stay alive, then use the violation button if a few select members get out of control.

4. I notice we have this thread, and the Sevam buy his e-book thread going on at the same time. Choose one thread to ask sevam questions and discuss his ideas. Keep one thread going, not two...or three...or four. We really don't want to merge threads, it gets messy, but we'll do it if we must. So again, choose one thread, let the others die out.

5. A few members who posted many insults in the last thread got off easy, but it works both ways. While hardly any formal warnings were sent out, it was noted who seemed to have a problem maintaining the peace. These few members will not be allowed to bring down another thread. I think you know who you are, so without naming names or getting into a big debate, be warned now, you are on a very short leash.

6. One of these days, a condensed version of the 124 page thread without the name calling may show up at top along with our other permanent topics. It's going to take awhile to sort through. A lot of valuable information was shared/discussed, it shouldn't go without some credit. In the meantime, enjoy this thread, keep the peace, and it will stay unlocked for a long, long time.

Thank you for the cooperation.

[sevam1]

Dariusz J., on Dec 31 2008, 05:24 AM, said:

Just a thought from myself, for what it is worth - I have been "fighting" all the time against theories that try to desribe a rotary swing type (especially Mr.Hogan's swing) as a entirely left side dominated motion.
However, I personally strongly disagree to theories that try to present Mr.Hogan's action as a entirely right side dominated motion. Not only it is against biomechanics but also against what he wrote in his books.

Cheers

Golf is a two sided game. Something is always pulling while something else is pushing. The club moves is two directions on varying planes. You have two arms and two legs. There is a duality in golf. The right side is just as important as the left. That is why Hogan say "The left hand is a power hand also." and hit hard with both hands. Any methodology that fails to acknowledge the role of boths side is incomplete. Point of emphasis is yet another thing. Sometimes you have to emphasize a certain thing to overcome another which has been ingrained. Balance and stability are the great governors in the golf swing. I have an easier time balancing on two feet than one. I also swing better with two hands on the handle.

Sevam1

[Dariusz J.]

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 08:39 AM, said:

Golf is a two sided game. Something is always pulling while something else is pushing. The club moves is two directions on varying planes. You have two arms and two legs. There is a duality in golf. The right side is just as important as the left. That is why Hogan say "The left hand is a power hand also." and hit hard with both hands. Any methodology that fails to acknowledge the role of boths side is incomplete. Point of emphasis is yet another thing. Sometimes you have to emphasize a certain thing to overcome another which has been ingrained. Balance and stability are the great governors in the golf swing. I have an easier time balancing on two feet than one. I also swing better with two hands on the handle.

Sevam1

Well said, Mike. I think you like the Sagittal Plane Compression concept despite the fact that I am not a fan of so much deliberate weight transfer to the right foot as you are

Cheers

[Cloran]

I'm a novice on swing theory... so here's my beginners question. Slicefixer reccommends having more "weight" on the left side at set-up and a small weight shift as the hands move to the right on the backswing, but the majority of the weight is on the left (as I understand it in the 9/3 thread). Making the left foot, knee, hip a pivot point of emphasis. Sevam suggests moving "weight" into the right leg, and making that a pivot point for the backswing. This is how I understand it, and I may be incorrect.

The reason I put "weight" in quotes is because perhaps Sevam is focusing more on "pressure," and the feeling of weight shift. Stability in the right foot, knee, hip... and the subsiquent "drive" as he gets over to the left side give the feeling of a weight shift, but in fact the overall "weight" of the golfer hasn't moved that much at all.

Is this a possible explaination for both theories? Could Slice and Sevam be saying the same thing?

[JohnnyNight]

Slice varies the weight at set-up depending on the club. For a driver most of the weight on the right side.

[dminn23]

cloranstreetkid, on Dec 31 2008, 08:54 AM, said:

I'm a novice on swing theory... so here's my beginners question. Slicefixer reccommends having more "weight" on the left side at set-up and a small weight shift as the hands move to the right on the backswing, but the majority of the weight is on the left (as I understand it in the 9/3 thread). Making the left foot, knee, hip a pivot point of emphasis. Sevam suggests moving "weight" into the right leg, and making that a pivot point for the backswing. This is how I understand it, and I may be incorrect.

The reason I put "weight" in quotes is because perhaps Sevam is focusing more on "pressure," and the feeling of weight shift. Stability in the right foot, knee, hip... and the subsiquent "drive" as he gets over to the left side give the feeling of a weight shift, but in fact the overall "weight" of the golfer hasn't moved that much at all.

Is this a possible explaination for both theories? Could Slice and Sevam be saying the same thing?

No I don't think they are saying the same thing. I only know Slice's stuff, what I feel, and what the scales said. You may feel like you have 90 percent of your weight on your left side (for a wedge), but most likely its 66/34. And during the backswing, it may feel like you don't have a bunch of weight in your right foot, but its really about 50/50. For me it feels like during the backswing that the weight moves into my right pelvis and inner thigh while winding up....NOT the right foot. Thats turning into, not turning over. Slice wants you to turn into your right side. It sounds like Sevam wants you to turn over your right side. I can't answer that though.

[sevam1]

TEConnor, on Dec 31 2008, 08:49 AM, said:

I was an early contributor and admirer of the original thread. I think it lost the plot about 70 pages in, then regained some footing a little later only to become a 10 car pile up at the end there. But man what fun we had...

I would like to see this thread remain open. In light of DemoMan's Choice above (keep this or the e-book thread) I have something to say. It's going to sound a little harsh, so I must preface it. I greatly respect all of the teaching pros who are giving their time here on the boards. The brilliance of this place over any other I've seen is that the Agendas are all about helping and learning. Sevam1 lives up to this ethic as well or better than anyone here. However, the longer that a thread like the one devoted to the e-book stays open with a lot of active participation by Sevam1 in that thread...well, my humble opinion is that the appearance of this board's superb ethic starts to cross a line. I think the same is true, to a degree, with the pure ball striking gizmo. I understand that the teaching pros are in business for business. However, I really feel that the great ethic of this board is starting to reach a point that we should be open and chat about where it's going. My two cents.

On another note. I love lake's post above. Those observations are very interesting. I only quibble with the one about "dipping down." If you look at the first still, drawing 1, you will notice that Hogan is larger than in any of the other drawings...it's a perspective thing. His stance is also wider in that drawing than any of the others.

Cheers,
Tim

Tim,
You are right and I agree with you. The book happened and I am proud of it, but everyone who cares to know that I have written it will find out one way or another. I will have a forum for discussing the book at the site that I have built related to the book and that is the proper place for that type of discussion going forward.

Golfwrx is a place to discuss the golf swing and swing theories. I think it is fair and right to let the world know what I am doing and that I have written a book, but my reason for being here has not changed. I am not here to plug a book. I am here because I like to talk about the golfswing.

I am going to email Kumaborn and see what he would like to do about the other thread. I think that this one should be the continuation of the original thread just as it is titled.

Sevam1

[sevam1]

JohnnyNight, on Dec 31 2008, 08:59 AM, said:

Slice varies the weight at set-up depending on the club. For a driver most of the weight on the right side.

Slice is right or should I say correct so no one gets confused. As you narrow the stance and open the stance or conversely widen and close the stance you will find that the preset weight will favour one side or another. This is really just a matter of balance. So as you move through the bag the ratios of weight right and left will change. We may disagree about how much is right or left in terms of degree, but the fundamental principles of it are clear. How you apply this is just another matter and whether you preset weight or move it dynamically is a matter of technique.

Although I see the merits of the Stack and Tilt method. I also see some limitations. A complete golfer probably will have elements of S&T in the short irons using the right leg primarily as a brace on certain shots but will have a more right side orientation as he/she moves through the bag finally reaching the driver. To me a complete golfer will understand elements of both ends of the spectrum.

Sevam1

[sevam1]

dminn23, on Dec 31 2008, 09:24 AM, said:

cloranstreetkid, on Dec 31 2008, 08:54 AM, said:

I'm a novice on swing theory... so here's my beginners question. Slicefixer reccommends having more "weight" on the left side at set-up and a small weight shift as the hands move to the right on the backswing, but the majority of the weight is on the left (as I understand it in the 9/3 thread). Making the left foot, knee, hip a pivot point of emphasis. Sevam suggests moving "weight" into the right leg, and making that a pivot point for the backswing. This is how I understand it, and I may be incorrect.

The reason I put "weight" in quotes is because perhaps Sevam is focusing more on "pressure," and the feeling of weight shift. Stability in the right foot, knee, hip... and the subsiquent "drive" as he gets over to the left side give the feeling of a weight shift, but in fact the overall "weight" of the golfer hasn't moved that much at all.

Is this a possible explaination for both theories? Could Slice and Sevam be saying the same thing?

No I don't think they are saying the same thing. I only know Slice's stuff, what I feel, and what the scales said. You may feel like you have 90 percent of your weight on your left side (for a wedge), but most likely its 66/34. And during the backswing, it may feel like you don't have a bunch of weight in your right foot, but its really about 50/50. For me it feels like during the backswing that the weight moves into my right pelvis and inner thigh while winding up....NOT the right foot. Thats turning into, not turning over. Slice wants you to turn into your right side. It sounds like Sevam wants you to turn over your right side. I can't answer that though.

My thoughts and words about the move into the right leg is that you must move "down, into and around" the right leg on the backswing. That was the point of the PreTorque move. Presetting the feeling of turning into that leg and giving it the stability at address so that you cannot get over it. Never over. ALWAYS INTO. If you get over the right leg you are out of position and must make a compensating move to get it back into a position to use the ground and it also is no longer in position to fulfill its' role as a governor/limiter during the backswing.

Sevam1

[sevam1]

fcavallo, on Dec 31 2008, 09:52 AM, said:

dminn23, on Dec 31 2008, 08:24 AM, said:

No I don't think they are saying the same thing. I only know Slice's stuff, what I feel, and what the scales said. You may feel like you have 90 percent of your weight on your left side (for a wedge), but most likely its 66/34. And during the backswing, it may feel like you don't have a bunch of weight in your right foot, but its really about 50/50. For me it feels like during the backswing that the weight moves into my right pelvis and inner thigh while winding up....NOT the right foot. Thats turning into, not turning over. Slice wants you to turn into your right side. It sounds like Sevam wants you to turn over your right side. I can't answer that though.

Hogan discovered:
1. The faster he turned left, the further he hit it
2. The faster he got his weight left the better he hit the ball

Slice's swing is based on this and eliminating unnecessary movement. The Hogan CoG shift serves no puropse (other than to overcome Hogan's high RT hip). Hogan's BS did not end til after the CoG shift, in essence he was on his left pivot point at the completion of the BS,
all he did was turn.

The problem with a poor pivot and turning over your right side (as compared to turning into it) is that it requires a bump left (unnecessary movement) which if you don't get to your left pivot point will lead to hooks, fats thins etc.

Snead released left, but had a more centered CoG (stayed on his RT side more) he played pull fades.

This has all been discussed ad nauseum do a search. Besides if you look at Hogan Pre/Post secret the basic lower body movement is the same. Hogan also said the secret is easy to see if you know where to look for it.

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/index.php?sh...mp;hl=vj+trolio

The things in bold are related. Hogan used his body like a bow. Turn the hips and the mass will follow if you have moved correctly on the backswing. The faster that you move the hips the faster the mass chases it into the left leg and the further the ball goes. That is what happens. The question is whether to emphasize shift to turn or turn to shift or a blend. In either case these things are strongly related to one another. The mass however, must always feel like it is chasing the hips into the left leg. The reason for this is that the hands and arms and head and the bulk of the torso remains behind the ball. That is why the feeling of pressure in the ball of the right foot should not leave until the hands pass that foot. It has to retain its' ability to support the swing. Whether you chose to actively push with the right foot through the ball or not it must noentheless retain its ability to do so.

Sevam1

[trapsmv15]

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

Whether you chose to actively push with the right foot through the ball or not it must noentheless retain its ability to do so.

Do you think that would tend to hurt more than help, or the opposite?

[sevam1]

trapsmv15, on Dec 31 2008, 10:33 AM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

Whether you chose to actively push with the right foot through the ball or not it must noentheless retain its ability to do so.

Do you think that would tend to hurt more than help, or the opposite?

Hogan said he did it. I think this might have been what he meant when he said he Harley'd it. I wouldn't have that as a priority in my swing if I was just working things out, but a little push at the right time in proper sequence. What would be wrong with that? Isn't the golf swing a whole series of pushes pulls and rotations?

Like anything else use your discretion and see what feels and works best just make sure that you get a solid basic motion down befor you start trying to Harley it.

Sevam1

[kevcarter]

magnum184, on Dec 31 2008, 10:26 AM, said:

As a person who has pretty much self-taught himself forever, I sometimes find myself going through similar............AHA moments................or................epiphanies.................or..........
.........SECRETS............if you will. Everytime you add a successful piece to the puzzle, you kind of want to bounce it off someone. You kind of want to spill the beans a bit. Sometimes I think that might have been what Hogan was doing, whether it was to Venturi, or Vasquez, or whoever. I think everytime he found something he liked and it worked and it allowed him to control his ball like he wanted, he sort of told someone. It's like a cathartic release almost. It's a great moment of pure joy if you are on your own building a golf swing. Anyway, I sometimes feel that is why there are so many moves we choose to call secrets. The left wrist was a move. The right leg/knee was a move. The elbow positioning was a move. The hip action was a move. ETC....... They were all potential secrets, or moves, or whatever you choose to call them.

You add, you add, you add, and you add. Then you take it away and are left with the final action. I can understand that. Maybe my point is, it's all part of the big picture.

So, I suppose the word SECRET doesn't necessarily mean anything to me personally. But, if Hogan did call it a secret, I get the feeling had a new one fairly regular. The difference between his and a lot of other's is that his were pretty darned genius or the biggest coincidences I've ever seen. They all just make a lot of sense.

What a wonderful post, makes so much sense to anyone interested in following the swing. As Frank said, Slice and Sevam1 are different, great, I agree. Does not make anyone right wrong or better than anyone else, simply different philosophies. Both GREAT guys, Slice may be the best teacher on the planet, Sevam1 makes no pretense at being a teacher, more of a swing philosopher and story teller, and I don't see why folks are feeling a need to take sides, I enjoy learning from everybody.

Heck, I have always felt Jimmy Ballard to be one of the great teachers, and now I am following Bennett/Plummer and Trolio and Dana. Can you have any golf swing theories that are so diametrically opposed?

I'm sure glad we are back to talking golf!



Kevin

[sevam1]

jrose, on Dec 31 2008, 11:33 AM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 08:42 AM, said:

JohnnyNight, on Dec 31 2008, 08:59 AM, said:

Slice varies the weight at set-up depending on the club. For a driver most of the weight on the right side.

Slice is right or should I say correct so no one gets confused. As you narrow the stance and open the stance or conversely widen and close the stance you will find that the preset weight will favour one side or another. This is really just a matter of balance. So as you move through the bag the ratios of weight right and left will change. We may disagree about how much is right or left in terms of degree, but the fundamental principles of it are clear. How you apply this is just another matter and whether you preset weight or move it dynamically is a matter of technique.

Although I see the merits of the Stack and Tilt method. I also see some limitations. A complete golfer probably will have elements of S&T in the short irons using the right leg primarily as a brace on certain shots but will have a more right side orientation as he/she moves through the bag finally reaching the driver. To me a complete golfer will understand elements of both ends of the spectrum.

Sevam1

Not sure if you were implying it or not, but slice doesn't teach stack and tilt.

Sorry. I thought everyone knew that Slicefixer did not teach S&T. He and I both share the same cocerns about its' limitations is what I was trying to say.

Sevam1

[sevam1]

eightiron, on Dec 31 2008, 12:43 PM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 12:15 PM, said:

jrose, on Dec 31 2008, 11:33 AM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 08:42 AM, said:

JohnnyNight, on Dec 31 2008, 08:59 AM, said:

Slice varies the weight at set-up depending on the club. For a driver most of the weight on the right side.

Slice is right or should I say correct so no one gets confused. As you narrow the stance and open the stance or conversely widen and close the stance you will find that the preset weight will favour one side or another. This is really just a matter of balance. So as you move through the bag the ratios of weight right and left will change. We may disagree about how much is right or left in terms of degree, but the fundamental principles of it are clear. How you apply this is just another matter and whether you preset weight or move it dynamically is a matter of technique.

Although I see the merits of the Stack and Tilt method. I also see some limitations. A complete golfer probably will have elements of S&T in the short irons using the right leg primarily as a brace on certain shots but will have a more right side orientation as he/she moves through the bag finally reaching the driver. To me a complete golfer will understand elements of both ends of the spectrum.

Sevam1

Not sure if you were implying it or not, but slice doesn't teach stack and tilt.

Sorry. I thought everyone knew that Slicefixer did not teach S&T. He and I both share the same cocerns about its' limitations is what I was trying to say.

Sevam1

And can you enlighten us all on these limitations since all the different windows the can be hit within the pattern

The primary limitations that concern me pertain to adjusting the method to suit various lie conditions. How adaptable is a lead leg single pivot point focus to say uphill lie conditions or certain side hill lies as well. There are also some limitations that people encounter with respect to distance. I am not saying that S&T does not yield results distance wise that are sufficient to compete. Clearly there are pros winning using the method, but you have to be one hell of a specimen to bomb it with that method. I cannot deny that the method is extremely accurate either for those who can master it. Every method has its strengths and weaknesses. Knowing them is of course part of course management and the art of playing golf.

Sevam1

[eightiron]

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 12:55 PM, said:

eightiron, on Dec 31 2008, 12:43 PM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 12:15 PM, said:

jrose, on Dec 31 2008, 11:33 AM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 08:42 AM, said:

JohnnyNight, on Dec 31 2008, 08:59 AM, said:

Slice varies the weight at set-up depending on the club. For a driver most of the weight on the right side.

Slice is right or should I say correct so no one gets confused. As you narrow the stance and open the stance or conversely widen and close the stance you will find that the preset weight will favour one side or another. This is really just a matter of balance. So as you move through the bag the ratios of weight right and left will change. We may disagree about how much is right or left in terms of degree, but the fundamental principles of it are clear. How you apply this is just another matter and whether you preset weight or move it dynamically is a matter of technique.

Although I see the merits of the Stack and Tilt method. I also see some limitations. A complete golfer probably will have elements of S&T in the short irons using the right leg primarily as a brace on certain shots but will have a more right side orientation as he/she moves through the bag finally reaching the driver. To me a complete golfer will understand elements of both ends of the spectrum.

Sevam1

Not sure if you were implying it or not, but slice doesn't teach stack and tilt.

Sorry. I thought everyone knew that Slicefixer did not teach S&T. He and I both share the same cocerns about its' limitations is what I was trying to say.

Sevam1

And can you enlighten us all on these limitations since all the different windows the can be hit within the pattern

The primary limitations that concern me pertain to adjusting the method to suit various lie conditions. How adaptable is a lead leg single pivot point focus to say uphill lie conditions or certain side hill lies as well. There are also some limitations that people encounter with respect to distance. I am not saying that S&T does not yield results distance wise that are sufficient to compete. Clearly there are pros winning using the method, but you have to be one hell of a specimen to bomb it with that method. I cannot deny that the method is extremely accurate either for those who can master it. Every method has its strengths and weaknesses. Knowing them is of course part of course management and the art of playing golf.

Sevam1

Why would uphill lie or sidehill lie make a difference? Why do you think the main focus is the lead leg singlepivot?

[DemolitionMan]

TEConnor, on Dec 31 2008, 05:49 AM, said:

I was an early contributor and admirer of the original thread. I think it lost the plot about 70 pages in, then regained some footing a little later only to become a 10 car pile up at the end there. But man what fun we had...

I would like to see this thread remain open. In light of DemoMan's Choice above (keep this or the e-book thread) I have something to say. It's going to sound a little harsh, so I must preface it. I greatly respect all of the teaching pros who are giving their time here on the boards. The brilliance of this place over any other I've seen is that the Agendas are all about helping and learning. Sevam1 lives up to this ethic as well or better than anyone here. However, the longer that a thread like the one devoted to the e-book stays open with a lot of active participation by Sevam1 in that thread...well, my humble opinion is that the appearance of this board's superb ethic starts to cross a line. I think the same is true, to a degree, with the pure ball striking gizmo. I understand that the teaching pros are in business for business. However, I really feel that the great ethic of this board is starting to reach a point that we should be open and chat about where it's going. My two cents.

Cheers,
Tim

I say this jokingly, but it is true. The e-book thread wouldn't have normally gone on as long as it did, but sevam's rabid fans are fast and relentless. By the time we get around to it, it looks like we (golfwrx) are endorsing a product, but really we're just slow to moderate sometimes. Or a thread looks okay at first, you go to bed, then the next day it's a rah-rah fest.

Regardless, point is taken, and all members here should feel assured that GolfWRX is not endorsing one swing theory over another, we are not trying to let one member drum up business while stopping another. It is our goal to evenly apply policy, ask any member looking to make a buck to become a sponsor and operate within those guidelines, and generally keep the peace. We're human, the swing forum is not exactly any of our favorites, so sometimes we're a little slow to see what's going on in here. But when it is brought to light, we do fall back on our overall principles. Again, if anyone sees it differently or if we are lagging, then hit the violation button and we'll look into it.

With the many swing theories out there and their proponents, we are trying to keep the forum a little more tidy by heading towards a one theory proponent / one open thread for questions approach. This way all members can see choices, they can see debates, they leaders have their soap box, and it's all in one place. Hopefully in the end, all members see the popularity of one thread over another is driven by members, not GolfWRX policy.

Happy New Year.

Now I think there will be a Daly thread or two or three heating up somewhere......

[sevam1]

[/quote]

Why would uphill lie or sidehill lie make a difference? Why do you think the main focus is the lead leg singlepivot?
[/quote]

My impression may be wrong but I thought that on the backswing the spine maintains a targetward lean with the right leg basically forming a post to support that lean from behind. On the down swing the move is left with the left leg essentially pushing upward from the ground so that you are delivering the club solidly from on top of the forward foot. I may have this description a little wrong, but with the movements that I have seen described I am having trouble figuring out how to work with the left foot above the right to any major degree. It just seems like that vertical thrust from the lead leg is necessay and that it would be difficult to execute from an uphill lie.

If I've got the motion wrong an explanation would be great.

Sevam1

[Poke]

trapsmv15, on Dec 31 2008, 12:20 PM, said:

fcavallo, on Dec 31 2008, 11:23 AM, said:

trapsmv15, on Dec 31 2008, 09:30 AM, said:

They are, indeed, more alike than different, though!

Nope. Not even close.

<snip>

There's nothing wrong with a Ballard like swing and DTL release though. Absolutely nothing, but there is a better mousetrap.

I'm pretty sure the poster I quoted and myself see some differences, just not as many as you apparently do. Capture Sevam's swing at the top and he is nowhere near being stacked on top of the right leg.

I don't appreciate the twist of the tone and spirit of my post (as I thought was evidenced by the exclamation point and smilie), but it is what it is and differences are realized.

While the detractors may or may not be right about the location of the secret(s) or breaking down photos of individual swings, they completely miss the point of conversation we are having in these threads. Sevam1 never claims to swing like Hogan, he does a Hogan imitation that has more of a low-left release, he does a Moe imitation that is even more dtl than Frank’s post shows, he or someone else, I can’t remember, coined his swing a Moegan. What he claims and what I among others here have found extremely effective is that the move is a common denominator to their swings and can be used as a base for a variety of others: the rest depends on our idiosyncrasies and ability to dig dirt. The move pre-sets and automates a turn into the right hip (varying degrees of severity of this can be chosen) and if maintained through transition automates the cog shift back to the left. It is even a common denominator in Squish’s (who graciously gave us the term eversion and a bio-mechanical explanation for it) Mike Austin based swing theory. I believe, a subtle version of it can help power a S&T/Morad swing: it keeps your hips working dtl the line until the club reaches the impact zone, take a look at some of the pros you use it or Mike McNary’s swing and how they delay the hips from opening and leverage the inside of the right foot through impact.



Personally, I was working on Slice’s theory and not getting it until I learned about the move. Now my stock drill for warming up or as a touchstone when I’m struggling is my own version of Slice’s 9/3 (reverse K, left hip stays over the right foot) with a heavy dose of right foot pre-torque as a brace and when swing well at the range can effectively experiment with a variety of backswings, pivots and releases all based off the move.

[sevam1]

Tiltswing, on Dec 31 2008, 01:27 PM, said:

Hey Sevam,

With S&T the spine isn't supposed to be leaning left at the top, that would look like Couples/Nicklaus/Monty, this picture shows that pretty well:

This picture is NOT S&T it's a Couples/Monty pivot.


This is what the S&T spine angle should look like at the top:


Tiger's spine angle is exactly what S&T should be like.

Not sure what you mean by a vertical thrust of the left leg, from the top, weight is just supposed to go left like any other swing method. Hope this helps.

I wasn't meaning from the top. I was talking about on the downswing moving throught he ball. I'll look at what you are saying but it looks to me that eveyone using this action stands up through the ball.

Looking at Tiger it doesn't seem like the kind of lean I have seen demonstrated when people are talking about S&T. Are the other pictures and descriptions of this exagerrating the positons to illustrate something? I'm not sure where Stack and Tilt starts and where a more traditional motion begins.

Sevam1

[sevam1]

eightiron, on Dec 31 2008, 01:37 PM, said:

Tiltswing, on Dec 31 2008, 01:27 PM, said:

Hey Sevam,

With S&T the spine isn't supposed to be leaning left at the top, that would look like Couples/Nicklaus/Monty, this picture shows that pretty well:

This picture is NOT S&T it's a Couples/Monty pivot.


This is what the S&T spine angle should look like at the top:


Tiger's spine angle is exactly what S&T should be like.

Not sure what you mean by a vertical thrust of the left leg, from the top, weight is just supposed to go left like any other swing method. Hope this helps.

Tiger got that lower cog more forward and hips more shut off coming down ( delayed a bit longer ) and thats Hogan..so how come the move don't make this happen for you Sevam?

eightiron,

I will try to see if we filmed anything from behind like this during the summer and I will have a look at it and see what the differences are and get back to you.

Sevam1

[sevam1]

Tiltswing, on Dec 31 2008, 03:07 PM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 02:00 PM, said:

Tiltswing, on Dec 31 2008, 01:27 PM, said:

Hey Sevam,

With S&T the spine isn't supposed to be leaning left at the top, that would look like Couples/Nicklaus/Monty, this picture shows that pretty well:

This picture is NOT S&T it's a Couples/Monty pivot.


This is what the S&T spine angle should look like at the top:


Tiger's spine angle is exactly what S&T should be like.

Not sure what you mean by a vertical thrust of the left leg, from the top, weight is just supposed to go left like any other swing method. Hope this helps.

I wasn't meaning from the top. I was talking about on the downswing moving throught he ball. I'll look at what you are saying but it looks to me that eveyone using this action stands up through the ball.

Looking at Tiger it doesn't seem like the kind of lean I have seen demonstrated when people are talking about S&T. Are the other pictures and descriptions of this exagerrating the positons to illustrate something? I'm not sure where Stack and Tilt starts and where a more traditional motion begins.

Sevam1

Sevam,

This is an exaggeration:



None of them are actually in that position when playing, it is meant to show a feel. Tiger's spine angle is exactly what they're looking for, VERTICAL, not tilted left. I have worked with both S&T and MORAD instructors, so trust me, I know what I'm talking about.

I don't see a "stand-up": http://www.youtube.c...h?v=Tf-4HExppFk . Like every other good ball striker he releases his flex from the waist through impact, so did Hogan. But you can see that Badds is still tilted towards the target line into the finish (side-bend). So this "stand-up" action is not unique.

I'd say Hogan has way more "stand-up" in his swing: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=J53J7D0QPmw

I would like to see some more S&T swings face on. Can you post some youtube links to some decent examples?

Sevam1

[sevam1]

eightiron, on Dec 31 2008, 03:33 PM, said:

sevam1, on Dec 31 2008, 02:02 PM, said:

eightiron, on Dec 31 2008, 01:37 PM, said:

Tiltswing, on Dec 31 2008, 01:27 PM, said:

Hey Sevam,

With S&T the spine isn't supposed to be leaning left at the top, that would look like Couples/Nicklaus/Monty, this picture shows that pretty well:

This picture is NOT S&T it's a Couples/Monty pivot.


This is what the S&T spine angle should look like at the top:


Tiger's spine angle is exactly what S&T should be like.

Not sure what you mean by a vertical thrust of the left leg, from the top, weight is just supposed to go left like any other swing method. Hope this helps.

Tiger got that lower cog more forward and hips more shut off coming down ( delayed a bit longer ) and thats Hogan..so how come the move don't make this happen for you Sevam?

eightiron,

I will try to see if we filmed anything from behind like this during the summer and I will have a look at it and see what the differences are and get back to you.

Sevam1

You really do still believe you have Hogan's pivot/secret? Its kind of obvious the pivot is way to much sway to it ...so how can the whole feet screwing be the Secret?

Well. It has as much sway as I want to put into it. If I want to hit the ball further I move the hips further and faster. That's how I control my wedge distances also so I kind of don't get the point. I control the clubhead speed with the feet and the hips. I did a video on the Navel which was about just that. If you want to bomb it you do it by moving the center further and faster. If you want to just hit it regular it's a little tighter. You make a little move but it's all the same move.

Sevam1

[RJC59]

fats, on Dec 31 2008, 04:22 PM, said:

Well, educate us then

shifting weight past the instep of the right foot, without rotation of the hip joints....


usually looking like so....






Sevam does not sway, he quite simply just gets momentum going hard into the right instep as his first move, that way it relays back as soon as possible to get his naval moving left. Even though he talks about the feeling of being on his right side through the downswing, its impossible to know where in actuality you are in .02 of a second.. our feet and brain are too far apart and our nervous system is simply too slow.... Note how his left hip is over his downswing pivot point by the time his backswing is finished. If anything all he feels compression/leverage with the ground in his right foot throughout the swing, and it is being misconstrued as weight. This is something that someone who sways absolutely cannot have.

[RJC59]

Tiltswing, on Dec 31 2008, 04:25 PM, said:

RJC59, on Dec 31 2008, 03:19 PM, said:

I think a lot of you guys who blew their wallets on lessons from ill-informed teachers (like 95% of todays golfers) are misunderstanding what a "sway" is.

RJC59, I'm not really sure what you mean by this. How's about this I won't use the term "sway." I'll say Sevam has significantly more backwards shifting of his COGs than Hogan which moves low-point around and can make consistent, solid contact difficult.

I won't disagree that it is moving his low point around a tiny bit, but the benefits from doing this outweigh the possibility of chunking/thinning any shots, for the most part the average player will have contact problems just out of lack of coordination, but for the better player with good coordination and feel, contact is not a problem, and the result is not so much changing the low point and risking a mishit, but actually changing the shot shape and speed of the club head.. so you can sort of feel the effort your putting into the shot better by the amount of momentum your putting into the right instep..

just my opinion though