What can we learn from the old boys today.

[virge666]

Here is a Q for you all - what can we learn from the old players today. Bobby Jones, Sam Snead, those kind of guys.

Lets keep their mental game out of it. Don't really care about how mentally strong they might have been. I am talking about their swing technique.

I reckon bugger all. Mainly due to the change in golf equipment and green keeping equipment and the advent of golf being a power game. But I am open to abuse...

Thoughts....

[Jarro]

Probably heaps.

Don't a lot of teachers (Edwin included) still draw on Hogans swing when teaching students ? Surely some of the fundamentals that Moe Norman used would be handy to know in todays game ??

Where are we going with this Virge ?????

[Webster]

My observation would be that with the exception of Hogan and Moe Norman, they were focussed solely on getting the ball into the hole with the least strokes possible. It wasn't about the swing, it was about the score.

[virge666]

Where are we going with this Virge ?????

Dunno, just seeing what people think.. I completely ignore the old guys, i reckon not one of them would make the PGA tour with the swing they had in the 30 and 40's.

As i said - I am completely open on this to everyone's ideas... I just think comparing players in golf is like comparing players in Tennis. It is a TOTALLY different game nowadays.

Sure there are basic fundementals... being on plane at impact for example - but that is more commonsense than anything else.

Anyway - bring on your thoughts...

[Scottt]

If you have read Hogan's Five Lessons, Virge, I'd like to hear your thoughts on it. What struck me was that in many of the things he writes, it's as if he predicted the game would mutate slightly as players got bigger and stronger.

He re-released it in the 1980s and said he wouldn't change a word of it because the principles were exactly the same then as in the 1950s. Of course ionomer covers, titanium heads and graphite shafts still weren't around in the 80s.

Having said that, even now, I know many Touring pros refer to it regularly when checking/tightening their swing.

[zigwah]

Yeah i wonder how hogan would have went with an R9tp scotty cameron vokey wedges and the plethora of options they would now have with their swing, they still had to hit it straight they still had to putt on dodgier greens than now a days.

They also couldn't see their swings down to the very last frame,frame by frame, they didn't hav the physcologists and monitor every minute movement.

Everyone except tiger would be behind the greats if they were in this era with the equipment we have now imo

[virge666]

If you have read Hogan's Five Lessons

Read it - have read other books about that book and have seen DVD's from other people all about that book.

The 5 lessons is a book for a very flat one plane golf swing, that takes the left hand side of the golf course out of play. it is a very agressive swing full of danger on both sides.

It is an Anti-Hookers saving grace.

Can anyone show me a swing that looks even remotely like Hogan, Jacobson, McCarron and maybe with one eye shut... Zach Johnson, but no one pronates like he did because they are not that flat on the backswing.

Back then - the hands ruled the roost. Nowadays it is all about rotation, I think Hogan and Moe was the first to really get Rotation as a major power source happening.

[virge666]

Everyone except tiger would be behind the greats if they were in this era with the equipment we have now imo

I couldn't disagree more. There will never be another Seve B as the game no longer allows a Seve to be successful.

I reckon a bloke in the top 100 would smash almost all of the guys back then.

My observation would be that with the exception of Hogan and Moe Norman, they were focussed solely on getting the ball into the hole with the least strokes possible. It wasn't about the swing, it was about the score.

Nice one Jack. i am with you all the way.

[zigwah]

So what puts tiger so far in front of anyone? surely Hogan,Sneed,Nicklus and Tiger would be an awsome foursome to watch all using todays technology.

[virge666]

So what puts tiger so far in front of anyone? surely Hogan,Sneed,Nicklus and Tiger would be an awsome foursome to watch all using todays technology.

He works harder than everyone else, and he is talented.

Sneeds swing is too steep for todays balls and technology - and he would be about 200th is driving distance. Same goes for Bobby Jones.

Nicklaus is a modern player, he still hits is bloody well. Hogan is also the first of the rotators... so he and Nicklaus are in the same boat.

[Scottt]

Virge - how far have Love III, O'Meara and Faldo's swings come since the 80s?

They are about as close as I can think of dominant players who straddled the two eras of equipment while still in their prime. Did they change much to benefit from the modern gear?

[zigwah]

i haven't seen footage of sneed and little of jones so i'll have to believe you on that.

so what about woods v's nicklaus v's hogan all with equipment of our day and all in their prime playing today?

[Webster]

Virge, you mistakenly sell the old guys short. They would, like any of the best at their chosen sport, have been able to adapt to meet the challenge of the time.

[Scottt]

Having read how relentless Hogan was with his pursuit of perfection, his ability to overcome a horrific hook tendency and then a near fatal car accident that many said he would never walk after, I have no doubt he had the phyical talent and mental strength to succeed in any era.

[Yossarian]

Norman stradled both eras? Good example?

[Scottt]

I did have Norman in there, but must've deleted him. Good shout.

[Yossarian]

It’s hard with those guys though because they were starting to age. I don't really know enough to comment helpfully so I'll just watch this thread with some interest.

[PeteyD]

My observation would be that with the exception of Hogan and Moe Norman, they were focussed solely on getting the ball into the hole with the least strokes possible. It wasn't about the swing, it was about the score.

Food for thought. There does seem to be too much focus on the swing. Penick emphasised that the score in his books, rather than technicalities of the swing etc.

[razaar]

This thread is in reference to a post I made answering a question by Jono about presetting the hips...so I am guessing that Virge is seeking a reason why I prefer the old guys to the present generation of teachers.
IMO there is too much empasis in todays instruction on what the tour pros do. There is no disputing that we can all learn heaps from great golfers but most of us lack in ability, experience, physical capabilities and expert training to play golf like tour players. We don't play the same game.
Modern day teaching puts way to much emphasis on the mechanics of the golf swing and very little on feel. If I have learnt nothing else during my four decades playing this crazy game, it is this - if one wants to improve his game on the course it is through feel, playing the game by feel; if one wants to improve his technique it is by mechanics on the practice ground. Bringing a mechanical approach on to the course is a recipe for disaster.
The reason I prefer the old teachers is their teachings cater for every swing type and abilities. I am not sure that is true with many of the modern teachers with their stable of tour players.

[virge666]

Virge, you mistakenly sell the old guys short. They would, like any of the best at their chosen sport, have been able to adapt to meet the challenge of the time.

i am sure they would have... I am sure their swings would have CHANGED to meet then new demands of the both the golf course and the new equipment.

Where I struggle is people looking back at Snead's swing and Bobby Jones and saying things like "I wish I could swing like Sneed" and "Bobby Jones is my swing model"

Jono and I were chatting about this last week... he likes the old swings for their simplicity and I love the more modern swing for it's simplicity. I reckon the only thing not moving in Snead's and Jones' swing was their bowels.

I wanted to know what other people had on their minds...

[Webster]

virge, the old guys had solid short games played with inferior tools. The score is all about the short game. Imagine how much better they would be with the modern short game tools tailored to their games.

[Scottt]

Jono and I were chatting about this last week... he likes the old swings for their simplicity and I love the more modern swing for it's simplicity. I reckon the only thing not moving in Snead's and Jones' swing was their bowels.

Champagne Virge.

Enjoy.

[virge666]

This thread is in reference to a post I made answering a question by Jono about presetting the hips...so I am guessing that Virge is seeking a reason why I prefer the old guys to the present generation of teachers.

Actually it is in reference to a conversation with Jono re Mike Austin.

Nice answer though - totally disagree.

IMHO - I find modern teaching based on a method or system. Hardy has his one and two plane, Steve Bann has his 9 swing, Leadbetter has upper vs lower, Edwin has the RSS, Butch has higher and passive hands etc etc.

I am VERY biased though - I mush prefer a rotation based swing other than a hands based swing. I like Moe and Hogan and others whose hands are passive.

Horses for courses... it is a top game that has all this.

[virge666]

virge, the old guys had solid short games played with inferior tools. The score is all about the short game. Imagine how much better they would be with the modern short game tools tailored to their games.

I am with you all the way mate... the point I make is that using them as a model is not the best optionIMHO.

We can all copy their drive, mental strength and dicipline.. (Jones for example was amazing) but the last thing i would want to copy is a swing that was built around the keeping soft whippy shafts of the day under control.

See where I am coming from...

[Webster]

Of course you shouldn't copy anyones swing, you should stick to your own.

I have an old book here somewhere which shows the impact positions of some of these old guys. The Gene Littler one is perfect for example. So they may have swung differently to best utilise the gear at the time, but at impact they are still all basically the same.