Forward Shaft Lean

[Golfbeat]

Forward shaft lean, it is said, is the result of good swing mechanics. In terms of intents from P5 to impact is it an active moving of the hands and arms forward (which will open the body) or an active opening of the hips (45*) and shoulders (30*) to impact which "transports" the arms passively forward?

 

I cannot find a good explanation to this other then "it depends".

[Millbrook]

I think the 'it depends' is the perennial golf issue of what's the flaw that's preventing it. I appreciate you are looking for the answer to the question 'what do you do to achieve it' but as always in golf advice may be slanted towards 'whats preventing it'

 

I was watching some youtube videos on the same issue and I think the answer to the 2 scenarios you pose is - it's both.

 

If the weight is not forward then the golfer may be stuck and there is not a guarantee that an active moving of the hands forward will open up the body - the golfer may just flip.

 

If the hips and shoulders are open as you describe then what if the arms and hands have been 'passively transported forward' but the angles have been dumped.

 

However the commonality in the two scenarios seems to be;

 

1. weight has moved forward

2. hands are ahead of the ball at impact

3. hinge in the trail hand has not been lost at impact

 

It was 3 which helped me because in order to achieve it I had to sequence 1 & 2.

 

Can't remember which videos I watched and a bit short of time but if you wish I can find them for you later.

[juststeve]

I don't think forward shaft lean should be a matter of concern. What is important is that you strike the ball before the club touches ground. If you do that there will be a downward strike and some forward shaft lean but what is important is hitting the ball first.

 

Steve

[MPStrat]

Forward shaft lean, it is said, is the result of good swing mechanics. In terms of intents from P5 to impact is it an active moving of the hands and arms forward (which will open the body) or an active opening of the hips (45*) and shoulders (30*) to impact which "transports" the arms passively forward?

 

I cannot find a good explanation to this other then "it depends".

 

Attacking forward shaft lean on it's own is a dead end for a lot of people. When I used to ask this question, I was actually wanting to know how to get better impact alignments, but I thought forward shaft lean was the pursuit. When I learned I needed to keep my upper body back, and what needed to change in my swing to help keep my upper body back, my impact position looked much better without giving any thought to forward shaft lean itself.

[bph7]

It depends is the correct answer. Well maybe not, since p5 is too late for any active intents to have effect the swing.

[Golfbeat]

I don't think forward shaft lean should be a matter of concern. What is important is that you strike the ball before the club touches ground. If you do that there will be a downward strike and some forward shaft lean but what is important is hitting the ball first.

 

Steve

 

It is very well possible to hit the ball first with a shaft that is leaning back or vertical. The results will usually be less than optimal.

[MonteScheinblum]

It depends on the golfer.

 

I have had people 50 and 30 with the handle leaning back.

 

I'm only 30-15 and lean it plenty.

 

I had a guy who was probably 15 and closed and leaned it more than do.

 

You can have an intent after P4 unless it's pre planned...and 45 and 30 open is such a small% of golfers, so those numbers are worthless as a guideline. It's like discussing rec league basketball and saying the best Dunkers have over a 40" vertical jump.

 

It's about how you setup, make a backswing and transition.

[Golfbeat]

It depends on the golfer.

 

I have had people 50 and 30 with the handle leaning back.

 

I'm only 30-15 and lean it plenty.

 

I had a guy who was probably 15 and closed and leaned it more than do.

 

You can have an intent after P4 unless it's pre planned...and 45 and 30 open is such a small% of golfers, so those numbers are worthless as a guideline. It's like discussing rec league basketball and saying the best Dunkers have over a 40" vertical jump.

 

It's about how you setup, make a backswing and transition.

 

I was using the 45 and 30 example because that is what George Gankas is teaching as his stock model and all of his good players seem to be in this position at impact. He says that the opening of the shoulders/chest is creating the forward shaft lean. Most of his drills are meant to roughly create those 45 and 30 positions. Perhaps the intent is earlier but this is what he tries to do with his students.

[oikos1]

It depends on the golfer.

 

I have had people 50 and 30 with the handle leaning back.

 

I'm only 30-15 and lean it plenty.

 

I had a guy who was probably 15 and closed and leaned it more than do.

 

You can have an intent after P4 unless it's pre planned...and 45 and 30 open is such a small% of golfers, so those numbers are worthless as a guideline. It's like discussing rec league basketball and saying the best Dunkers have over a 40" vertical jump.

 

It's about how you setup, make a backswing and transition.

 

I was using the 45 and 30 example because that is what George Gankas is teaching as his stock model and all of his good players seem to be in this position at impact. He says that the opening of the shoulders/chest is creating the forward shaft lean. Most of his drills are meant to roughly create those 45 and 30 positions. Perhaps the intent is earlier but this is what he tries to do with his students.

 

"I cannot find a good explanation to this other then "it depends". "

 

Does George say it depends?

[Golfbeat]

It depends on the golfer.

 

I have had people 50 and 30 with the handle leaning back.

 

I'm only 30-15 and lean it plenty.

 

I had a guy who was probably 15 and closed and leaned it more than do.

 

You can have an intent after P4 unless it's pre planned...and 45 and 30 open is such a small% of golfers, so those numbers are worthless as a guideline. It's like discussing rec league basketball and saying the best Dunkers have over a 40" vertical jump.

 

It's about how you setup, make a backswing and transition.

 

I was using the 45 and 30 example because that is what George Gankas is teaching as his stock model and all of his good players seem to be in this position at impact. He says that the opening of the shoulders/chest is creating the forward shaft lean. Most of his drills are meant to roughly create those 45 and 30 positions. Perhaps the intent is earlier but this is what he tries to do with his students.

 

"I cannot find a good explanation to this other then "it depends". "

 

Does George say it depends?

 

I meant on this Forum.

[MonteScheinblum]

How about this for an answer?

 

Considering most peole can't get 45 and 30 open because most people are not flexible, young, elite players.....getting the hands and arms more forward is usually the answer to create more shaft lean.

[Golfbeat]

How about this for an answer?

 

Considering most peole can't get 45 and 30 open because most people are not flexible, young, elite players.....getting the hands and arms more forward is usually the answer to create more shaft lean.

 

That is a pretty good answer :)

[bph7]

It depends on the golfer.

 

I have had people 50 and 30 with the handle leaning back.

 

I'm only 30-15 and lean it plenty.

 

I had a guy who was probably 15 and closed and leaned it more than do.

 

You can have an intent after P4 unless it's pre planned...and 45 and 30 open is such a small% of golfers, so those numbers are worthless as a guideline. It's like discussing rec league basketball and saying the best Dunkers have over a 40" vertical jump.

 

It's about how you setup, make a backswing and transition.

 

I was using the 45 and 30 example because that is what George Gankas is teaching as his stock model and all of his good players seem to be in this position at impact. He says that the opening of the shoulders/chest is creating the forward shaft lean. Most of his drills are meant to roughly create those 45 and 30 positions. Perhaps the intent is earlier but this is what he tries to do with his students.

 

If you are going to use Gankas's "model", then I'd recommend just doing what he says because trying to get other advice will likely just muddle things further.

[Golfbeat]

It depends on the golfer.

 

I have had people 50 and 30 with the handle leaning back.

 

I'm only 30-15 and lean it plenty.

 

I had a guy who was probably 15 and closed and leaned it more than do.

 

You can have an intent after P4 unless it's pre planned...and 45 and 30 open is such a small% of golfers, so those numbers are worthless as a guideline. It's like discussing rec league basketball and saying the best Dunkers have over a 40" vertical jump.

 

It's about how you setup, make a backswing and transition.

 

I was using the 45 and 30 example because that is what George Gankas is teaching as his stock model and all of his good players seem to be in this position at impact. He says that the opening of the shoulders/chest is creating the forward shaft lean. Most of his drills are meant to roughly create those 45 and 30 positions. Perhaps the intent is earlier but this is what he tries to do with his students.

 

If you are going to use Gankas's "model", then I'd recommend just doing what he says because trying to get other advice will likely just muddle things further.

 

That's what I am planning to do. I seem to have enough flexibility and the first results are really good.

[TB07]

It depends is the correct answer. Well maybe not, since p5 is too late for any active intents to have effect the swing.

 

This

[Golf nerd]

The hands need to be forward at impact. You can have two intentions:

1. Body rotation with synched arms.

2. Move the handle forward with the hands and arms, which will move the shoulders open on a steeper angle.

 

Both will work and you need to find our what suits you most. The right elbow position is crucial. The more it leads the more hands come forward, the later the release. Clubface needs to be more closed or grip more on the stronger side. However, a late release can lead to trouble. Another intent can be a flat downswing plane by rotating the arms clockwise. The more you rotate the more the right elbow gets forward and shaft flatter.

Have found this on Dan's channel that shows what I mean in general.

[birly-shirly]

It depends is the correct answer. Well maybe not, since p5 is too late for any active intents to have effect the swing.

 

I have heard this often enough, but based on my own experience I have to doubt that this is universally true.

 

I reach p5 with plenty lag but lose it rapidly, too rapidly, from then on and the lead wrist is extending before impact. I think my transition is decent enough, based on how p5 looks but it looks as though I need to retrain what I feel and expect in the last segment of the swing.

 

I have no doubt that p5 is too late to react or salvage a poor swing out on the course, but I still have to think that you can still work on making changes in your mechanics in that part of the swing.

[Golfbeat]

It depends is the correct answer. Well maybe not, since p5 is too late for any active intents to have effect the swing.

 

I have heard this often enough, but based on my own experience I have to doubt that this is universally true.

 

I reach p5 with plenty lag but lose it rapidly, too rapidly, from then on and the lead wrist is extending before impact. I think my transition is decent enough, based on how p5 looks but it looks as though I need to retrain what I feel and expect in the last segment of the swing.

 

I have no doubt that p5 is too late to react or salvage a poor swing out on the course, but I still have to think that you can still work on making changes in your mechanics in that part of the swing.

 

I agree. This part of the swing should be trained with drills with a much shortened back swing to get the proper feeling of correct positions at P5, P6 and P7. This drilling of the correct positions should then gradually flow into the full swing.

[bph7]

It depends is the correct answer. Well maybe not, since p5 is too late for any active intents to have effect the swing.

 

I have heard this often enough, but based on my own experience I have to doubt that this is universally true.

 

I reach p5 with plenty lag but lose it rapidly, too rapidly, from then on and the lead wrist is extending before impact. I think my transition is decent enough, based on how p5 looks but it looks as though I need to retrain what I feel and expect in the last segment of the swing.

 

I have no doubt that p5 is too late to react or salvage a poor swing out on the course, but I still have to think that you can still work on making changes in your mechanics in that part of the swing.

 

I agree. This part of the swing should be trained with drills with a much shortened back swing to get the proper feeling of correct positions at P5, P6 and P7. This drilling of the correct positions should then gradually flow into the full swing.

 

This is being misunderstood. No one is saying not to "train" from p5 on. But it's a fact that, in an actual golf swing, once you get there, there is no changing of intents and no intent will have any effect on impact, there's not enough time for your body to react to the signals your brain is giving it. So, to the extent that people think they are implementing feels from p5 on, the intent is in fact being applied earlier in the swing. Like if your feel were to be totally open by impact (not endorsing that as a feel I think that's terrible advice in isolation for just about anyone), you can do that, but the intent to do so is being applied earlier than p5, even though you are ostensibly changing impact position.

[birly-shirly]

I appreciate what you're saying, and I imagine it holds true in some cases.

 

But what I'm seeing in my own swing is an amount of lag at p5 which I don't expect to change. I'm expecting any change, or improvement, to occur from p5 onwards and I really feel that to accomplish that change will require a change in intent, and a change in technique from p5 onwards.

 

I don't think I will improve matters by improving how my body works through transition, but I think I can improve my arm and hand action in the lower half of the downswing.

 

I'm someone who has long practiced according to the advice that you can control the backswing but that the forward swing is largely a reaction over which you have little conscious control. For 30 years, I have accordingly largely ignored the part of Hogan's 5 Lessons where he talks about the elbow leading, right arm action in the downswing. Time to put that right.

[KMeloney]

Golf Nerd's link to that video is helpful reinforcement to me that I absolutely HAVE to feel like my arms start the swing down before my hips (and before my hips out-race them) or I'll never get my hands forward.

 

Seeing the slow motion of the student get his arms down in front of him before any major hip action is very helpful to me. I suppose it's death to someone who doesn't rotate his hips much, but it shows the only way I have a chance of getting my hands forward and not hitting it fat.

 

Specifically with my irons, I need to feel like the downswing starts and feels like mostly arms until the swing can then get supported by the hip turn. Might not be what actually happens -- but I know that the feel of turning the hips fast leads to stuck arms and fat or short shots.

[iteachgolf]

I appreciate what you're saying, and I imagine it holds true in some cases.

 

But what I'm seeing in my own swing is an amount of lag at p5 which I don't expect to change. I'm expecting any change, or improvement, to occur from p5 onwards and I really feel that to accomplish that change will require a change in intent, and a change in technique from p5 onwards.

 

I don't think I will improve matters by improving how my body works through transition, but I think I can improve my arm and hand action in the lower half of the downswing.

 

I'm someone who has long practiced according to the advice that you can control the backswing but that the forward swing is largely a reaction over which you have little conscious control. For 30 years, I have accordingly largely ignored the part of Hogan's 5 Lessons where he talks about the elbow leading, right arm action in the downswing. Time to put that right.

 

You are again completely misunderstanding what he is saying. He isn't saying you can't have an intent after p5. You can't start an intent at p5. The intent and idea needs to be there WELL before you get to p5. You can change lots of things after p5, I do it daily, but the intent should be there before you even begin the swing and must be there long before p5. You cannot decide to do anything at p5 and have it happen prior to impact.

[birly-shirly]

You can start an intent at p5.

 

Wow. I don't want to risk completely misunderstanding anyone else YET AGAIN. So can I just check that when you said that, you meant what you said?

[iteachgolf]

You can start an intent at p5.

 

Wow. I don't want to risk completely misunderstanding anyone else YET AGAIN. So can I just check that when you said that, you meant what you said?

 

I meant can't . phone autocorrected and you understood exactly what I meant due to the context of what I said. I fixed it for you though. He clarified it for you as simply as he could and you still didn't understand what he was saying.

 

once you get there, there is no changing of intents and no intent will have any effect on impact, there's not enough time for your body to react to the signals your brain is giving it. So, to the extent that people think they are implementing feels from p5 on, the intent is in fact being applied earlier in the swing.

 

And yes you did again misunderstand him. You can change beyond p5 easily but you need to have the intent to change it before you actually get there. And there is no debate on the subject. Human reaction time is far to slow to change anything by the time you get to impact if the process starts at p5. Nobody has argued that you can't have an intent to change things after p5 from a position stand point. But that it needs to be in place before p5 from a time stand point. When you are attempting to change your mechanics after p5 you are making that decision and implementing the intent before you even begin swinging.

[birly-shirly]

You know what? You're right. I had a good idea what you really meant, because I took the trouble to read your post and try and make sense of it.

 

It would reflect well on you if you were to do the same.

 

I don't give a toss whether you read what I post or not. But you have a frikken nerve talking about a lack of understanding when you clearly haven't taken the time to read what I wrote. Instead, you don't even take the time to read your own post to check that you haven't written the polar opposite of what you meant.

 

Read my posts and it's perfectly clear that I understand. Which bit of

I have no doubt that p5 is too late to react or salvage a poor swing

did you not understand?

 

The point I was making, and which I don't think is that hard to grasp, is that golf is awash with the idea that ballstriking is X% (usually a heavy majority) preswing fundamentals, or backswing, or transition. If that's not you, then great. Move right along and take your condescension with you.

 

The OP got it fine though, and I don't see that it should be beyond your comprehension.

 

 

But if you really want to assert something so utterly banal as "Human reaction time is far to slow to change anything by the time you get to impact if the process starts at p5." then congratulations on what may turn out to be the most facile statement of 2016.

[iteachgolf]

You know what? You're right. I had a good idea what you really meant, because I took the trouble to read your post and try and make sense of it.

 

It would reflect well on you if you were to do the same.

 

I don't give a toss whether you read what I post or not. But you have a frikken nerve talking about a lack of understanding when you clearly haven't taken the time to read what I wrote. Instead, you don't even take the time to read your own post to check that you haven't written the polar opposite of what you meant.

 

Read my posts and it's perfectly clear that I understand. Which bit of

I have no doubt that p5 is too late to react or salvage a poor swing

did you not understand?

 

The point I was making, and which I don't think is that hard to grasp, is that golf is awash with the idea that ballstriking is X% (usually a heavy majority) preswing fundamentals, or backswing, or transition. If that's not you, then great. Move right along and take your condescension with you.

 

The OP got it fine though, and I don't see that it should be beyond your comprehension.

 

 

But if you really want to assert something so utterly banal as "Human reaction time is far to slow to change anything by the time you get to impact if the process starts at p5." then congratulations on what may turn out to be the most facile statement of 2016.

 

Dude you were the one who got butt hurt. All I did was tell you that you misunderstood what bph7 was saying and I tried to make it more clear so you could understand what he was actually stating. I responding to your direct statements to him. My whole point was that you both were saying much of the same thing but you were continuing to argue with him when you were in agreement.

 

All I literally said was that you were misunderstanding him and I then tried to clear up the confusion by restating exactly what he said slightly differently. That's it. That's all I said. You're making this out like I said something negative about you, which I didn't, and then completely over reacted and blew this way out of proportion.

 

I read exactly what you wrote. I read you arguing with a person that you were actually in agreement with and essentially saying the same thing. That person tried to clarify that you guys are saying the same thing and you went of to argue with him more, obviously misunderstanding what he was saying both times he said it. All I did was point out the misunderstanding and help you understand that you guys were actually in agreement the entire time. Why don't you reread what you wrote and what I actually said, which was simply pointing out a misunderstanding and trying to help you see where the mix up occurred. There was absolutely no condescension except on your part because you misunderstood my intent to help as some personal slight when it was nothing of the sort

[birly-shirly]

Well, before you give up your day job to go into mediation or international diplomacy - maybe consider this.

 

I don't think bph and I are in any danger of falling out over this.

 

I think I've bent over backwards to acknowledge the part of what he's saying that I agree with. And I've also tried to expand on where I think his statements maybe need to be expanded or qualified. If there's an issue, I don't think it's a lack of understanding on either side, maybe just a matter of clarification.

 

bph is welcome to agree, or disagree with anything I wrote. We'll get in touch if we need counselling.

[iteachgolf]

Well, before you give up your day job to go into mediation or international diplomacy - maybe consider this.

 

I don't think bph and I are in any danger of falling out over this.

 

I think I've bent over backwards to acknowledge the part of what he's saying that I agree with. And I've also tried to expand on where I think his statements maybe need to be expanded or qualified. If there's an issue, I don't think it's a lack of understanding on either side, maybe just a matter of clarification.

 

bph is welcome to agree, or disagree with anything I wrote. We'll get in touch if we need counselling.

 

Again you continue to be condescending and over reacting to what should have been nothing

 

BTW human reaction time for kinesthetic stimuli is 0.15 seconds and 0.25 seconds for visual stimuli. From p5 to impact takes about 0.12 seconds. So reaction time is only slightly too slow to react by p5 and have it affect impact. Top of the swing to impact is roughly 0.25 seconds and within the range where human reaction time is fast enough to alter impact based on something felt at the top of the swing. So to act like saying it can't be done by p5 is somehow common knowledge and obvious when it would by possible to react within 0.03 seconds of impact, so it only can't affect impact by the slimmest of margins, is quite a stretch.

[LaggingBehind]

I like how Adam Scott does it, his intent is to swing fastest after contact with the ball. You can't do that with a flip, so the handle must lead.

[birly-shirly]

Well, before you give up your day job to go into mediation or international diplomacy - maybe consider this.

 

I don't think bph and I are in any danger of falling out over this.

 

I think I've bent over backwards to acknowledge the part of what he's saying that I agree with. And I've also tried to expand on where I think his statements maybe need to be expanded or qualified. If there's an issue, I don't think it's a lack of understanding on either side, maybe just a matter of clarification.

 

bph is welcome to agree, or disagree with anything I wrote. We'll get in touch if we need counselling.

 

Again you continue to be condescending...

 

Well, with all due respect, it's a bit late for you to start worrying about that. And in saying that, I don't think I need to measure in 1/100 sec