Physics don’t equal good golf or longer drives.

1. Golf machine
2. X-factor
3. Hold the lag/add lag/delayed release
4. Square to square putting

All of these things may make sense in the lab with robots and physics…and for the very few persons physically able to perform them, but for the vast majority, it is just not practical.

As far as The Golf Machine is concerned; I got an “A” in physics in high school and college, was a borderline PGA Tour player and have been studying the golf swing for 25 years and I don’t understand it. How is a person who never took physics, doesn’t know much about the swing and is an 18 handicap supposed to use any of that? Golf Machine articles might as well be written in Aramaic, using Chinese lettering, in infrared ink, using a nano pen and a microscope. It couldn’t make less sense to me.

The X-factor of restricting hip turn to generate a greater angle between the hips and shoulders creating more power, might add up on paper. For someone who is not very flexible, which is the vast majority of recreational golfers, this turns into a total arm swing and a lower back injury waiting to happen.

Holding/adding lag/delayed release is a Golf Machine fundamental, but since it is taught and attempted by non Golf Machine people, it deserves it’s own rant. If you are strong enough, turn hard enough, are flexible enough in the wrists and hit enough balls to time it properly…yes, this will make you hit the ball farther. However, the previous criteria for implementing this concept applies to about 1 in every 1000 golfers…if that many.

Square to square putting has some merit if you have lots of practice time and every putt you get is straight…but again, it will not work for the vast majority of golfers because if you don’t do it right, it results in disaster…and most people not playing golf for a living don’t do it right.

Studying the physical motions of a dunk, hitting a 100MPH fastball, and an Indy car taking a corner at 150 mph will not help people who can’t dunk, play in a slow pitch softball league and drive their 2.4 kids in a minivan.

People who are able to do the above things in other sports, do them because they are physically gifted enough to do them, train and practice them for several hours a day. No amount of study is going to help the average person do any of those things.

In theory and on paper the 4 golf fads I listed at the top are sound. In reality for over 90% of the golfing population…they are too mechanical, too complicated, create too many thoughts, are not natural, require too much practice time and most people are just not physically able to do them.

When you throw a crumpled up piece of paper into the waste paper basket, do you know what your wrist angle at PP#1 is?…and do you consciously restrict the bend of you elbow to get more wrist hinge…well, you get the picture.

Previous

Next

8 Comments

  1. CaryK

    Amen brother!!! I’ve played a lot of different sports and none of them had the volume of technicality that’s associated with golf. If I had to “think” about how I made a jump shot in basketball or threw to 1st base in baseball, I’d be a basketcase. Yet golfers do that in their swing the majority of the time because they’re inundated by magazine articles, videos, books, gadgets, and gizmos from the industry that promise more distance or lower scores if you just do this or that. But golf is unique in that people THINK all that stuff will help them when all it does is clutter then mind. It sure is a strange sport that should be easy to master by isn’t because most want perfection in the swing so they keep looking for answers to that. Enjoyed your rant … 🙂

    Reply
  2. MS Golfer

    Monte, I’m a huge fan of this blog and really hope you post more often but I disagree with part of this fella. I think you need to break up the golfing machine by saying that having the average golfer trying to figure out all the physics in their own swing will lead to a total breakdown mentally and phsyically. However, having a teacher who can understand some of the physics behind the club can sure help a golf swing. If you get the math working for you you’ll be much better off. I should probably also state that I do not personally subscribe to the golf machine (way too complicated) but I do think there is a valid argument when saying various swings can be aided (from people who understand it) by the laws of physics.

    The X-factor is garbage. All that makes you do is hit some shots 30 yards longer than normal.
    Lag holding is the equivalent of saying “swing like Tiger”, 1000 things have to happen right before lag.

    Reply
    • Monte Scheinblum

      I totally agree about the laws of physics. In my post last week I talked about centrifugal force being you friend.

      I totally advocate taking advantage, I am ranting against it being so complicated as it is in Golf Machine instruction.

      Who cares what your third lever is doing at PP#2?????

      All I meant in this post is that things that work on paper, don’t always work in real life if they are too complicated.

      Reply
      • MS Golfer

        Very true, like they say if you can’t simplify it you don’t know it.

        Reply
  3. meateater

    I agree with you monte, but I have to admit I find TGM interesting, in the same way I find an anatomy diagram interesting or a 3-D drawing of a racing car interesting.

    The flaw with X-factor is that McLean didn’t seem to understand how it was created. No telling how many guys wrecked their lower backs trying to do it.

    Reply
  4. smitty

    Do you give lessons? If yes, what course & how much are they? If no, who do you recommend in the Los Angeles area?

    Reply
  5. Brian

    Monte,
    Could you send the same info to me, re: lessons or a recommendation for the Pasadena area. Thanks!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Share This
X