Monte Scheinblum- No Turn Cast - Does it make sense?

[cnosil]

16 minutes ago, Wildthing said:

 

Check out 02:51 - 6:00 and whether you understand what effect an early cast would have on your clubhead speed by impact?

https://vimeo.com/158419250

An early cast reduces the 'Moment Arm' distance which means less torque and less angular acceleration of the club.

 

 

Maybe you are misinterpreting and it isn’t an early cast but feeling that the player needs to do in slow motion but when incorporated in a full swing it is a properly timed cast of the club..  we see PGA players exaggerating movements during practice and pre swing but isn’t close to what they do in their normal swing.  
 

do I as a player need to understand the physics to get the right movement pattern?  Does an instructor need to get a student to only practice the ideal movement pattern or Is it possible to practice a movement pattern that I would not do in the the actual swing to improve my swing?   
 

While understanding the actual physics behind a swing may be important, it doesn’t make the person a good instructor for everyone.  In my mind I’ll take an instructor that has me doing things that don’t align with the physics but is improving my swing and swing results.   When looking at this drill has it helped golfers play better golf?   If yes, does it matter to the student that the drill matches the physics?  
 

these answers don’t require a graph or a physics lesson in how things are accurately measured.   It is a simple assessment of results.   

[RickyBobby_PR]

27 minutes ago, cnosil said:

we see PGA players exaggerating movements during practice and pre swing but isn’t close to what they do in their normal swing.

Two prime examples Justin Rose and Tyrell Hatton. They use over exaggerations of a movement to create a feel. Which is what most drills are. They over exaggerate to create a movement pattern or feel that puts the golfer in a better position.

Monte’s cast A is another good example. The trail elbow extends/unfolds til it’s almost fully open along with increasing flexion in the lead wrist. But when the swing is actually done the elbow only extends/unfolds a little in transition. It’s what AMG has shown in their varius shallowing videos along with pros vs ams videos 

[vandyland]

I was a 7-9 hdcp when I started the videos last year, went to see Monte in July of this year. I am now a 2.2 hdcp. I am undoubtedly better now than I was before. Whether it is feel or real, the Monte swing cues work for me. 

[Wildthing]

As I said before, if it works for you , then that's fine but it doesn't make sense from a physics perspective . If it's an exaggerated feel that somehow helps you synchronise your body movements in some favourable way , then that's okay too.  

It seems that NTC is a way to fix golfer swings who try and hold the lag angle for too long or early cast in an OTT fashion.  I agree holding the lag angle by actively using your wrists  or by bending the trail elbow in the downswing (which can cause a force on the grip as shown in image below)  may cause problems for golfers . Such as not having enough time to allow the physics to angularly accelerate the clubhead enough by impact or be able to physically square the clubface with lead forearm rotation.  I doubt one can square the clubface with just body rotation alone like MS did in his slow motion example.

Some golfers bend their trail elbow in front of their hip during the downswing while allowing their lead elbow to straighten .This causes a force pattern on the club as per 1st image below which creates a torque that will tend to hold the lag angle and may cause a delayed release which can cause problems as I mentioned above.

 

NTC is promoting a different pattern like below to prevent the above from happening, but for some, that can tend to release the club too soon. 

 

If you look at the kinematics of golf tour-pros , they tend to straighten our their trail elbow as the upper arm adducts and I can imagine that they are using different forces to retain clubhead lag that doesn't involve any of the force patterns above .

I've just added my own imaginary forces to one of those images above.  Instead of the red force vectors  (assume they aren't there in the image), I've drawn  trail arm/hand black force vector and a lead arm/hand yellow force vector being applied to the grip during the downswing. 

You can see that the yellow force vector is along the shaft and will just cause linear acceleration of the club.  The black force vector will also cause linear acceleration but in addition, will cause an MOF (moment of force) as depicted in Dr Sasho MacKenzie's video that will tend to assist clubhead lag (rotate the club clockwise as shown by the blue arrow). There is no need to use NTC to cure a 'holding the lag for too long'  issue in the downswing, the wrists will remain passive until the grip forces change direction enough such that the MOF starts angularly accelerating the club in the anticlockwise direction.

NTC might cure an OTT type move but it could cause early release and not optimise clubhead speed by impact (ie. clubhead speed could peak to soon).

 

 

 

Edited October 21, 2023 by Wildthing

[Wildthing]

Monte also seemed to infer that the body and arms are moving together in a pitch shot (ie. pelvis/torso/arms rotating together , unless I'm mistaken).

Here are the graphs of several tour pros pitching 30 yards and they are quite similar . They all transition as per the full-swing , pelvis/torso/arms/club,  but in the downswing , the arms/torso seem to be rotating together most of the time (until just before impact where the lead arm - the blue graph- slows down) but faster than the pelvis . Further the torso and pelvis do not peak and slow down but retain their rotational speed through impact.

 

Edited October 20, 2023 by Wildthing

[JOgolfer]

Graphs and vectors never hit a golf ball much less helped someone face down a 170-yard 5-iron dogleg around a swampy pond.

[JOgolfer]

Graphs and vectors do have their place in that they show "how pros swing" vs. ams (the whole basis of Athletic Motion Golf). But most ams lack the athletic skills and hand-eye coordination, not to mention hundreds of hours of practice time, to be able to effectively emulate the pros. Some moves can be done, others not. Monte's NTC is a practical game plan to allowing amateurs to produce a workable, repeatable swing IMO and personal experience.  I don't use it exclusively as I meld in some elements of stack and tilt, but it definitely helps.

[JOgolfer]

No disrespect for Wildthing, his posts provide a useful technical perspective.

[JOgolfer]

As Monte has said elsewhere, you don't go to the gym to get ripped like Arnold Schwartenegger (in his prime). You go to become a better version of yourself. Same with golf instruction, you're trying to shave a few strokes, make more frequent excellent shots and fewer clunkers, enjoy the game a little more. It's a fallacy to think that golf instrruction, or kenematic biometric mumbo jumbo, is going to turn a 15 handicap into a +2.  We all have our limitations.

[Wildthing]

5 hours ago, JOgolfer said:

Graphs and vectors do have their place in that they show "how pros swing" vs. ams (the whole basis of Athletic Motion Golf). But most ams lack the athletic skills and hand-eye coordination, not to mention hundreds of hours of practice time, to be able to effectively emulate the pros. Some moves can be done, others not. Monte's NTC is a practical game plan to allowing amateurs to produce a workable, repeatable swing IMO and personal experience.  I don't use it exclusively as I meld in some elements of stack and tilt, but it definitely helps.

According to Monte , its a framework for building a pro-caliber golf swing.  He says that there are a lot of elements that happen in elite golf swings.   

He states that good players get the club in the correct position at the top of the backswing and in transition ,  that their body will then be forced to react perfectly and they make a great strike.

Unsure if he has any evidence to prove his theory, but if it 'ticks your boxes' , go for it.

[Wildthing]

JOgolfer said " It's a fallacy to think that golf instrruction, or kenematic biometric mumbo jumbo, is going to turn a 15 handicap into a +2.  We all have our limitations."

Here's the video that shows Monte did indeed study the biomechanics of wrist movement data/graphs from golf scientists like Dr Sasho Mackenzie, Chris Como , Dr Phil Cheetham , Jon Sinclair, Joe Mayo. His more detailed theorised NTC was formed after he studied the data , so I assume he regarded the information as useful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4khfO0bTAqo&t=1958s

The idea that the body pivot squares the clubface is not something that AMG seem to agree upon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmBnXahF7wk

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Wildthing

[RickyBobby_PR]

On 10/28/2023 at 11:30 PM, Wildthing said:

According to Monte , its a framework for building a pro-caliber golf swing.  He says that there are a lot of elements that happen in elite golf swings.   

He states that good players get the club in the correct position at the top of the backswing and in transition ,  that their body will then be forced to react perfectly and they make a great strike.

Unsure if he has any evidence to prove his theory, but if it 'ticks your boxes' , go for it.

He has gears to prove it, also years of teaching all levels of golfers including tour pros, plus tons of professional collaboration with other high level instructors including amg who also have the data and it was shown in the video you posted about does the body square the club face. But you looked past the tidbit in that video of how much the angles in the wrist and trail elbow change because you focused purely on defending your position of the body not squaring the face.

amg also showed on in their shallowing video that led to a beef with Milo lines & then GG and some other instructors posting videos on their philosophy 

 

[Wildthing]

I haven't seen any proof that the body is mainly involved in squaring the clubface.  If that was the case , then I would suspect that  the handle twist velocity and ROC (rate of clubface closure) would be quite low.

I'd be interested in seeing the proof if anyone has that information.

I can try and show some rough proof why it can't be the body squaring the clubface by looking at the images below, and I don't need GEARS to prove it.

The 1st image is just to show that the clubface might be about 45 degrees  open to the ball-target line at about P6.5

The 2nd image shows a graph (with the red dot I drew) where I've just roughly guessed P6.5 position and then just chose 350 degrees/sec as being the rotational speed of the upper body (chest/thorax). 

The 3rd image is from Dr Sasho Mackenzies's vimeo video showing the P6.5 position where there is 0.017 secs before impact. 

Now just use some simple maths :

How many degrees would the body turn in 0.017 secs if its angular rotation was 350 deg/secs?

350 x 0.017 = 6 degrees  approx.

Yet we needed the clubface to rotate 45 degrees by impact so that it was square to ball-target line. 

Conclusion: The body is not mainly involved in squaring the clubface from P6.5

Obviously , if the golfer had a very strong grip and only needed to close the clubface by 20 degrees , the body would still only square the clubface 6 degrees , so again, it's not mainly involved in squaring the clubface from P6.5.

 

 

Further , here is an AMM3D graph showing the typical pro handle twist velocity.

 

One can see that the handle twist velocity has to be over 1000 deg/sec at about P6.5  , which is 3 times as fast as upper body rotation (350 deg/sec). In fact , it has to reach about 2000 deg/sec by impact. 

The main contributor to squaring the clubface from about P6.5 is the supination of the lead forearm.

 

Edited November 2, 2023 by Wildthing

[chisag]

On 10/28/2023 at 5:45 PM, JOgolfer said:

No disrespect for Wildthing, his posts provide a useful technical perspective.

 

... No doubt! But for me he reminds me of college classes I had to drop. 

[Wildthing]

On 11/1/2023 at 5:32 PM, chisag said:

 

... No doubt! But for me he reminds me of college classes I had to drop. 

I don't think it needs college level classes to understand a few graphs that proves the body doesn't square the clubface .  It's also measured on 3D systems where the data shows the lead forearm is rotating far quicker than the body.  The body  (ie. lower and upper body) might help to close the clubface  (for a full driver/long club swing) but it isn't the main contributor. 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

On 11/1/2023 at 1:27 PM, Wildthing said:

haven't seen any proof that the body is mainly involved in squaring the clubface.  If that was the case , then I would suspect that  the handle twist velocity and ROC (rate of clubface closure) would be quite low.

Nobody in this thread said it does. I referenced that video because you posted about whoever somewhere claimed it to be true and to point out much of what you keep posting about trying to debunk Monte’s ntc was actually demonstrated in that video, but you missed that data focusing on a different subject. Not to mention all the other videos amg has showing the samething on gears about how the wrist and trail elbow move.

you like your sources and keep posting a about what they think yet pick and choose what other sources you use to debunk something else. 
 

Gears doesn’t lie

[Wildthing]

This is what Monte claims is happening in elite/expert level' swing sequencing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p74VYzpEZ4A

Check out what Brendon DeVore says from 7:37 - 8:00 and Monte's confirmation reply " exactly right".

It was mentioned in a previous post:

"He has gears to prove it, also years of teaching all levels of golfers including tour pros, plus tons of professional collaboration with other high level instructors including amg who also have the data and it was shown in the video you posted about does the body square the club face."

Not sure whether the poster is claiming AMG/GEARS  have the data confirming Monte's opinion that the body squares the club face.  As I said before , I'd like to see the evidence if it was made available, but the AMG video below claims otherwise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmBnXahF7wk

Further:

Let's look at 2 golfers (Rickie Fowler and Jonas Blixt)  on GEARS who square their clubface differently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOY0xgZP6R0

Here are the screen images at impact showing their Grip Roll  (ie. the rate they are twisting the grip at impact).  If the body was squaring the clubface why are the Grip Roll values so high? 

Rickie : 2050 deg/sec

Jonas : 944 deg/sec

 

They are obviously using different swing biomechanics and their upper torso 'rate of rotation' is double the value  used in my previous calculation which was 350 deg/sec. Therefore, on reflection, body rotation could account for clubface closure for about 12 degrees from P6.5-P7  (if the clubface was 45 degrees open to the ball-target line).  If you used a very strong grip and only needed to close the clubface 20 degrees, then I can imagine the body could primarily be used to close the clubface.

It's up to you whether you wish to believe Monte's claims , but maybe he needs to say  "it feels as if the clubface is being squared by the body".  

 

 

 

Edited November 7, 2023 by Wildthing

[RickyBobby_PR]

15 hours ago, Wildthing said:

Not sure whether the poster is claiming AMG/GEARS  have the data confirming Monte's opinion that the body squares the club face.  As I said before , I'd like to see the evidence if it was made av

Not even what I said. You are confusing the use of my reference to your posting of the amg video explaining the body doesn’t square the face to what I’m saying.

I’ll try this again for you. In that video amg shows and talks about the angles changing in the wrist set and the trail elbow in transiton and the downswing. This movement is the samething that Monte teaches on NTC. The difference in NTC is that the drill of cast A is an over exaggeration of the movement the pros do. That video and many others from amg confirm what is being taught in ntc and shows that it’s what pros do in the swing.

to further the point of the wrists hackmotion golf had Monte do two separate presentations for them to their audience about the movements of the wrist related to early wrist set in the backswing and early release in the downswing. The same concept as ntc.

so please stop talking about body sitting or not squaring the face as no Cody including myself is actually saying it does.

 

[Wildthing]

The previous poster's remarks are very confusing and not very intelligible to me. The AMG video "Does The BODY Square The CLUBFACE?  #shorts"   doesn't mention the following:

"In that video amg shows and talks about the angles changing in the wrist set and the trail elbow in transiton and the downswing"

They do say the following:

 

Further, the poster says this:

"so please stop talking about body sitting or not squaring the face as no Cody including myself is actually saying it does"

So I'm assuming he disagrees with Monte's reply to  Brendon DeVore in the 'Be Better Golf'  video?

That's fine with me , so we all agree that the body is not the main contributor to squaring the clubface (contrary to Monte's opinion)

Edited November 8, 2023 by Wildthing

[RickyBobby_PR]

23 hours ago, Wildthing said:

The previous poster's remarks are very confusing and not very intelligible to me. The AMG video "Does The BODY Square The CLUBFACE?  #shorts"   doesn't mention the following:

"In that video amg shows and talks about the angles changing in the wrist set and the trail elbow in transiton and the downswing"

They do say the following:

 

Further, the poster says this:

"so please stop talking about body sitting or not squaring the face as no Cody including myself is actually saying it does"

So I'm assuming he disagrees with Monte's reply to  Brendon DeVore in the 'Be Better Golf'  video?

That's fine with me , so we all agree that the body is not the main contributor to squaring the clubface (contrary to Monte's opinion)

I’ll make this simple for you.

i never said the bday squares the faces. I referenced the video and hit thread on that subject. That’s it, just a reference point.

Here’s the video for anyone interested.

In the video starting at about th3 7:34 mark they getting into the changes in what the body has done in the swings of their example pros. At about the 9:10 they start giving the exact numbers including how much the wrist angle and elbow angle changed.

this change in wrist angle and elbow angle is exactly what NTC is teaching the golfer to do. So to the title of the thread yes it makes sense. There’s proof measured by gears and hackmotion that indicate the pros are doing what NTC teaches.

 

[Wildthing]

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

I’ll make this simple for you.

i never said the bday squares the faces. I referenced the video and hit thread on that subject. That’s it, just a reference point.

Here’s the video for anyone interested.

In the video starting at about th3 7:34 mark they getting into the changes in what the body has done in the swings of their example pros. At about the 9:10 they start giving the exact numbers including how much the wrist angle and elbow angle changed.

this change in wrist angle and elbow angle is exactly what NTC is teaching the golfer to do. So to the title of the thread yes it makes sense. There’s proof measured by gears and hackmotion that indicate the pros are doing what NTC teaches.

 

So NTC is teaching something that doesn't gel with what Monte is saying on those videos I posted?

[JOgolfer]

On 11/9/2023 at 11:52 AM, Wildthing said:

So NTC is teaching something that doesn't gel with what Monte is saying on those videos I posted?

I can't presume to speak for Monte, and don't know whether he follows this thread, but perhaps here's a way to reconcile what you seem to imply is an inconsistency between NTC and "the body squares the clubface" in the videos you posted. In NTC Monte teaches Cast B, which is the horizontal unhinging of the wrists through the hitting area. Although he doesn't specifically say this is what squares the clubface, he makes clear that it's what keeps the face in a good (square) position through impact. Now, he also says that when one does Cast B, it makes the body react appropriately in getting through the ball. This is common to all of Monte's teaching, which is that the body reacts to the position of the club, and that putting the club in the right position at the right time will enable the body to respond appropriately. He also says that if you do Cast A the right way and otherwise seqence the transition properly, Cast B should (hopefully) follow automatically (if it doesn't, then you have to have a Cast B "intent"). So when he says that body rotation through impact is what squares the club, in context that means it's squaring because all the preceding NTC moves (Cast A, re-centering, Cast B, etc.) have put the body in a position where it simply has to rotate through impact to square the club and keep it square.  I don't think he can be faulted for not going through the entire NTC drill/swing sequence and instruction every time he says "the body squares the club." You can't explain everything every time in every short video; that's why most instructors give you pieces of the whole puzzle a little at a time. Anyway that's my read, if it makes any sense, and as I say only Monte can speak for himself. 

[vandyland]

I may be blaming my own swing faults on someone else (common problem) but has anyone felt like the NTC/efficient swing protocol flattened their backswing out? Potentially in a bad way? I feel like the "push the hands to 7 o'clock and then 8 o'clock" makes you come back a bit flat? Maybe that is just me misapplying but I would be interested to see where other Monte students end up with their hands at the top of the backswing.

I also bring this up because Monte talks a lot about things "all good players do" and while you can find a few exceptions with a flat backswing (Matt Kuchar being the prime example) the VAST majority of tour players at least have their hands above their shoulder plane in the down the line swing view. Again, I am not blaming Monte for my flat backswing but I am curious if other students of his end up in a flatter backswing in trying to learn the NTC swing. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, vandyland said:

I may be blaming my own swing faults on someone else (common problem) but has anyone felt like the NTC/efficient swing protocol flattened their backswing out? Potentially in a bad way? I feel like the "push the hands to 7 o'clock and then 8 o'clock" makes you come back a bit flat? Maybe that is just me misapplying but I would be interested to see where other Monte students end up with their hands at the top of the backswing.

I also bring this up because Monte talks a lot about things "all good players do" and while you can find a few exceptions with a flat backswing (Matt Kuchar being the prime example) the VAST majority of tour players at least have their hands above their shoulder plane in the down the line swing view. Again, I am not blaming Monte for my flat backswing but I am curious if other students of his end up in a flatter backswing in trying to learn the NTC swing. 

Haven’t noticed that and i have used both ntc and efficient swing.  Flat swings typically come from not setting the wrists properly and not having the proper tilts in the body. Another cause is over rotating the lead arm. 

Doing the wrist set move at the start of the ntc has the club almost standing up. Pushing the hands to 7 doesn’t change that position of the club. 

[vandyland]

43 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Doing the wrist set move at the start of the ntc has the club almost standing up. Pushing the hands to 7 doesn’t change that position of the club. 

I was thinking more in terms of where the hands are. Like flat in the sense that hands/lead arm are below the trail shoulder, rather than the angle of the club. You could set the club straight up and down and still achieve this (ask me how I know). 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

4 minutes ago, vandyland said:

I was thinking more in terms of where the hands are. Like flat in the sense that hands/lead arm are below the trail shoulder, rather than the angle of the club. You could set the club straight up and down and still achieve this (ask me how I know). 

 

Nope haven’t had that issue either. That comes from a setup issue, some wrist set and how the body isn’t rotating properly due to setup issues.

Anyone can lift or place the club in a position that looks good but it’s still an ineffective position to hit the ball from. Most masters have too much arm lift and move the hands/arms to achieve an aesthetically pleasing position. Arms matching shoulder line, club face matching lead arm angle at the top, club face matching spine angle at p2 all come naturally from proper movements without having to manipulate them into that position 

[Goober]

 

[Azbuckeye]

Pretty new to MGS. Found Monte's NTC content last night and ran across this thread this morning. Thinking of giving this a shot.