Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Our Sponsors

9 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

It doesn’t rotate or require to rotate the arms. At parallel point 6 the face isn’t opened, it’s either neutral or closed.  

Every top level player does this move to some extent. The thought process is shared by many instructors and thought in different ways.

You are obviously set in your thought process about the move and I doubt anyone here will change your mind and I’m guessing the approach to defending your position is what got you banned on wrx and not the bias towards Ferrell 

If you look at Phil Cheethams 3D graphs on 94  pga pros you will find all of them rotate their arms. I can post a 3D graph of Jon Rahm proving he rotates his lead forearm more at impact than it was at address.  He is a prime example of a golfer that bows his wrist at the top of his backswing and retains some of that bow into impact.  If he was using the 'RMM'  move , then surely the 3D graph would show less forearm rotation than at address.

Why is it a sin to defend an opinion based on facts/evidence? Is that a good reason to ban someone from a golf forum? I'm willing to listen and alter my point of view if anyone can provide proof that this 'Reverse Motorcycle Move'  does limit rotation  of the forearms.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wildthing said:

If you look at Phil Cheethams 3D graphs on 94  pga pros you will find all of them rotate their arms. I can post a 3D graph of Jon Rahm proving he rotates his lead forearm more at impact than it was at address.  He is a prime example of a golfer that bows his wrist at the top of his backswing and retains some of that bow into impact.  If he was using the 'RMM'  move , then surely the 3D graph would show less forearm rotation than at address.

Why is it a sin to defend an opinion based on facts/evidence? Is that a good reason to ban someone from a golf forum? I'm willing to listen and alter my point of view if anyone can provide proof that this 'Reverse Motorcycle Move'  does limit rotation  of the forearms.

 

 

I don’t think anyone is saying that the move limits forearm rotation or that some extent of foearm rotation is bad. Both are needed and for some reason a rmm that elite players do is getting a bad rap.

defending a position is no reason to be banned however the constant harping on a position and the desire for some to want to prove they are right and continue down that path would be. I don’t know your situation over there or what was said in either side but my guess is your passion for your point of view and sticking to it despite what others may have said might be the cause.

wrx has somevery smart teaching pros on the site and some pretty good guys with understanding of the swing.

Driver: Titleist 917D3 9.5 with Graphite Design MAD Pro 65g S

Wood: Titleist 917F2 with UST Mamiya Helium 5F4

Hybrid: Titleist 816H1 21 with Atmos Blue 85 S

Irons: Titleist 718 AP3 4i, 718 CB 5-6, MB 7-9 with KBS $ Taper 125

Wedges: Vokey SM7 46/50/54/60 with DG s200

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

I don’t think anyone is saying that the move limits forearm rotation or that some extent of foearm rotation is bad. Both are needed and for some reason a rmm that elite players do is getting a bad rap.

defending a position is no reason to be banned however the constant harping on a position and the desire for some to want to prove they are right and continue down that path would be. I don’t know your situation over there or what was said in either side but my guess is your passion for your point of view and sticking to it despite what others may have said might be the cause.

wrx has somevery smart teaching pros on the site and some pretty good guys with understanding of the swing.

I agree that wrx may have some good 'teachers' but imho  they show weaknesses in explaining the biomechanics of the golf swing. There is an 'art' to teaching using external focus cues  but they should be careful about trying to explain cause and effect of the golf swing (especially if they are not qualified in human anatomy or physics).

For example , I do not use complex mechanics  to try and improve my golf swing (ie. to mimic what the pros might do) . From what I've learned already, It would take many years to try and replicate the mechanics used by PGA pros without any guarantees that it wouldn't break down as your body ages.  The accuracy, precision and timing required to meet  theoretical optimal mechanics is incredibly difficult to achieve and retain.

I would suggest that recreational golfers that do not have the time/money to ingrain any 'theoretical' optimal swing mechanics consider using external focus cues  to assist their game (hear this wonderful podcast from Dr Gabriele Wulf below). 

 

 

 

Edited by Wildthing
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wildthing said:

I agree that wrx may have some good 'teachers' but imho  they show weaknesses in explaining the biomechanics of the golf swing. There is an 'art' to teaching using external focus cues  but they should be careful about trying to explain cause and effect of the golf swing (especially if they are not qualified in human anatomy or physics).

For example , I do not use complex mechanics  to try and improve my golf swing (ie. to mimic what the pros might do) . From what I've learned already, It would take many years to try and replicate the mechanics used by PGA pros without any guarantees that it wouldn't break down as your body ages.  The accuracy, precision and timing required to meet  theoretical optimal mechanics is incredibly difficult to achieve and retain.

I would suggest that recreational golfers that do not have the time/money to ingrain any 'theoretical' optimal swing mechanics consider using external focus cues  to assist their game (hear this wonderful podcast from Dr Gabriele Wulf below). 

 

 

 

I don’t think most amateurs can mimic what a pro does but they can mimic/learn the same fundamentals. Good takeaway and pressure transfer, proper sequence and transition and good wrist angles. 

Each person learns different and they should find the teacher, method, etc that works for them

  • Like 1

Driver: Titleist 917D3 9.5 with Graphite Design MAD Pro 65g S

Wood: Titleist 917F2 with UST Mamiya Helium 5F4

Hybrid: Titleist 816H1 21 with Atmos Blue 85 S

Irons: Titleist 718 AP3 4i, 718 CB 5-6, MB 7-9 with KBS $ Taper 125

Wedges: Vokey SM7 46/50/54/60 with DG s200

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the post that got me banned from golfwrx. It was the email I received from Jon Sinclair Director Of TPI .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have asked a TPI 3D expert for his opinion and highlighted some important sentences.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The wrist are very complexed. You have to look at both to really determine how the club is being manipulated. 

First of all a position in and of itself neither opens or closes the club face. So these players having flexed lead wrist does not mean they have closed the club. The grip has a lot to do with what is happening as well.

As a very general rule a player with a lot of flexion in their wrist at the top will actually start closing the club face later than one with a lot of extension. I am talking about world class players here. After club transition flexed players will tend to move toward extension a bit before going hard back to flexion. 

I cannot think of a player off the top of my head that does not have less supination at impact than when they started. This is a tricky measurement though. AMM does not do the shoulder girdles so that can alter it some.

Moving toward flexion closes the club face at the top but then acts and opens it at impact. Pronation/Supination takes the in and out of plane until you get more ulnar deviation then lead supination/ trail pronation closes it.

I would need to do a complete study but I would doubt highly that there is less or more forearm movement in a flexed wrist over a extended one. If you are talking about higher or  lower ROC I would also say that is a myth. It is what people want to believe. It fits nicely with a narrative.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I understand an argument about more or less forearm rotation at impact vs address. I'm not in remotely the same position at impact as I was at address. You can strap whatever you want on me (nope, I take that back) to show me a 3d figure of whatever, but i know that when i concentrated on taking the cup out if my left wrist at the top, i was able to produce a consistent draw and enjoyed the best ball striking if my life. So that sounds like help closing a club face to me. Whether it was or not is of no consequence, it worked.

Sent from my SM-A600A using MyGolfSpy mobile app

  • Like 2

:ping-small: G400 LST 8.5 Ping Tour 65 Stiff

:adams-small: Adams XTD Ti 18 deg 3Hy

:benhogan-small: Ben Hogan PTx 22-46 

:benhogan-small: Ben Hogan TK15 50, 54, 58 deg wedges

:cameron-small: Futura 5.5

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, it's something I need to work on some. IMO, this is another of example of instruction that works for a select group of people. Not everyone needs to do this. If you look at the Tour, I can think of 2 people that do this, DJ, and Daniel Berger. It works great for them while all of the other Tour players do fine without it. There is no instruction that works for everyone, and this is no exception. 

It seems to me that all the pros do this to some extent, the more exaggerated that come to my mind are DJ, Books K, but I do know that Rory and Tiger do this, just not as much as DJ. I’ve actually tried it on the range lately and might actually adopt it into my course game. Also, just a point to make with this...most of those guys I mentioned hit a power fade with this move. If you read Tiger’s book How I Play Golf, he discusses the label of the glove pointing to the sky at the top of the backswing...same move as discussed in this thread.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy
  • Like 1

In my ATumSBM.jpg Silencer

:cobra-small: King F9 set to 9*, Tour length Hzrdus Smoke Black 6.0 S-flex, with GolfPride MCC +4 mid-size

SONARTEC 3W - 13*, UST Mamiya 65 Gold S-flex, with GolfPride G2 Tour Wrap

Gigagolf.com - TXR Hybrid: 3H, UST Proforce V2 S-flex, with GolfPride G2 Tour Wrap

:ping-small: G 2016, 4-PW, AWT 2.0 S-flex, +1/2", black dot, with Super Stroke - Soft Wrap TC

:titelist-small: :vokey-small: - SM8 Tour Chrome, 50.08F - 54.10S - 58.12D

:EVNROLL: Custom Fit 35" ER6 Red at 68 degree lie angle and 4 degrees of loft

:Snell: MTB-X

:918457628_PrecisionPro: NX7 Pro Slope

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/28/2019 at 7:43 AM, Wildthing said:

I agree that wrx may have some good 'teachers' but imho  they show weaknesses in explaining the biomechanics of the golf swing. There is an 'art' to teaching using external focus cues  but they should be careful about trying to explain cause and effect of the golf swing (especially if they are not qualified in human anatomy or physics).

For example , I do not use complex mechanics  to try and improve my golf swing (ie. to mimic what the pros might do) . From what I've learned already, It would take many years to try and replicate the mechanics used by PGA pros without any guarantees that it wouldn't break down as your body ages.  The accuracy, precision and timing required to meet  theoretical optimal mechanics is incredibly difficult to achieve and retain.

I guess I'm confused.  You say you don't use complex mechanics, but rather some externally focused approach, yet you're arguing about complex mechanics.  Why?  

  • Like 1

:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

:callaway-small: Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2019 at 3:31 PM, DaveP043 said:

I guess I'm confused.  You say you don't use complex mechanics, but rather some externally focused approach, yet you're arguing about complex mechanics.  Why?  

Learning/debating golf biomechanics is a hobby of mine from an academic standpoint only. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

... can’t comment on why you got banned but the “motorcycle move is taught/supported by many golf instructors, among them Monte Scheinblum (who I consider one of the best/most insightful coaches).  
And the concept works brilliantly if done done correctly. 
So I completely disagree with your opinion. Cheers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
On 11/1/2020 at 9:15 PM, Max M. said:

... can’t comment on why you got banned but the “motorcycle move is taught/supported by many golf instructors, among them Monte Scheinblum (who I consider one of the best/most insightful coaches).  
And the concept works brilliantly if done done correctly. 
So I completely disagree with your opinion. Cheers. 

You do understand that Monte Scheinblum is one of Golfwrx sponsors so posting alternative opinions  is a banning risk . I don't think Monte himself would demand someone be banned but some of the 'shills'  might do so on his behalf.

What if I can provide some research data that casts doubt on any 'motorcycle move' in the downswing? It might help your swing using the qualitative opinions of Monte and Tyler but is it really happening the way they proclaim?

I can provide the graphs that show the flexing of the lead wrist for 97 golfers which may provide some rationale why Tyler Ferrell and Monte advocate the move.  But I can also show you more accurate research data that proves there is no active flexing of the wrist and torqueing of the grip to close the clubface (in the downswing).  That the closing of the clubface is more likely explained by Dr Sasho MacKenzies  'Moment Of Force' concept which will passively cause the clubface to square by impact.

Addendum:

Actually , on reflection and reading the  research article again , I could be wrong about the 'motorcycle' move . Now , if the other Golfwrx  forum members had argued their case with some logic, I would have accepted it but they just banned me without giving any reason at all .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Wildthing
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2019 at 11:59 PM, jlukes said:

This isnt new or unique. Crossfield speaks of revving the bike to start the downswing in videos that are 6+ years old. And I'm sure there were others before him. 

 

But I'm not really sure what this thread is about so... Yeah we are friendly here.... 

 

This video is really interesting and way before Tyler Ferrell and Monte Scheinblum started using the 'reverse motorcyle move'  , but is it correct ?

Have a look at this new article that goes into great depth

What effect does lead wrist bowi (perfectgolfswingreview.net)

Maybe some of the more technically minded forum members might be able to fit all the pieces of the puzzle together better than I can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Wildthing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some proof that might show there is no motorcycle move and also a bit surprising about the golf swing in general. This is research done by 'Choi' where they've put sensors on the golf grip to measure torques and forces applied via the hands .

Look at graphs O and S which show the left and right hand torques applies on the grip (ie. clubshaft twist ).  If your into physics you need to use the 'right hand rule ' to visualise the rotation of the club that will produce a  torque vector in the 'Z ' axis direction on the coordinate system (connected to the club in that left image). 

The magnitude is basically zero for the whole downswing and most of the follow-through.  Unless I'm mistaken , there doesn't seem to be a 'reverse motorcycle' move being applied via the hands on the grip for the 9 golf pros used . If you look at the shaded areas around the best fit solid line graphs it shows the variance between the golfers data, but its all pretty consistent for graphs O and S (ie . virtually zero torques with no shaded variance regions). 

This means the clubface squaring is being done by something else and not any torques/twisting on the grip via the hands.  Its more likely caused by Dr Sasho Mackenzie's passive torque concept (see image further below) which creates some angular momentum in the yellow arrow direction ,which will increase the angular velocity of the club (around its longitudinal shaft axis) as the left wrist ulnar deviates . For a given initial instantaneous angular momentum, the ulnar deviation causes the MOI of the 'upper arm/forearm/club' unit to rapidly reduce which will cause increasing shaft rotational angular velocity that closes the clubface automatically by impact without any active muscular forearm rotation .

 

image.png

 

image.png.165b6abff41b2da1aeab1437888e4ca0.png

 

PS.  The 'Crosswise' force is something else I found out about and too complicated to explain here but it's quite small ( nothing like that Green arrow suggests) and a requirement to facilitate the passive torque effect as seen in the diagram above.

Edited by Wildthing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...