Jump to content


 

Photo

Theory Of Two


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#1 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 04 August 2019 - 04:59 PM

What on earth is Devon on about this time, I hear you ask!

Well, I recently decided that I would use right arm as plane arm for driver, if the hole and conditions meant that I would rather miss left than right. And I would use left arm as plane arm if I absolutely did not want to miss left, but could live with a miss right.

And then I realised that I had a complete set of twos.

Still not clear?

Putting. I use left hand low for nearly all putts, but for long putts, I switch to right hand low.

Bunkers: some times the lie suggests using leading edge in first, some times the lie suggests using the bounce.

Short game: I recently adopted a Stricker style for lies which called for a shallow angle of attack, and a wristy action when I wanted a steep angle of attack.

Irons: I get much better results using left arm as plane arm because I get a steeper angle of attack, and have given up right arm as plane arm for irons because it brings fats and thins into the mix.

And, back to driver, because I like to sweep up off the tee, always have level ground and fats and thins are not a concern, my swing choice includes options I would not consider for irons.

So, although there are many many ways of doing things, my theory of two is that it might be an idea to approach this learning business as a search for two good methods, rather than one.

Because whatever single method you might find and like, there will be lies, holes, wind, stance, links versus parkland variations, etc that your chosen method is a very bad fit for.

If your chosen method is a poor fit for the shot you face, your chances of a blob go way up, and stroke play, if you are masochistic enough to play stroke play, makes this far worse.

So, there you have it, my theory of two. You need two methods for each shot type so you can deal with the variations you face.
  • Weetbix likes this

#2 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 04 August 2019 - 05:13 PM

I have just realised this is an open goal for number one and number two jokes, so if that is your thing, enjoy!
  • hack2489 likes this

#3 Toph

Toph

    No golf allowed

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5748 posts
  • LocationProbably at work

Posted 04 August 2019 - 05:24 PM

Calling ink.....

“Short game: I recently adopted a Stricker style for lies which called for a shallow angle of attack, and a wristy action when I wanted a steep angle of attack.”

I do t understand. For me a wristy swing brings bounce into play for a lobby shot. Less wrist action gives a shallow angle and a chippy shot.
http://www.golf.org....icap/4070201550
What can possibly go wrong?

#4 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 04 August 2019 - 05:29 PM

Toph,

for the purposes of this thread, all I am saying is two methods, not one. How you describe and choose methods, up to you.

#5 Toph

Toph

    No golf allowed

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5748 posts
  • LocationProbably at work

Posted 04 August 2019 - 06:49 PM

Ok then. I’ll always go the easy pink over the difficult brown.
Does that snooker reference help?
  • hack2489 likes this
http://www.golf.org....icap/4070201550
What can possibly go wrong?

#6 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 04 August 2019 - 07:11 PM

Maybe, I think I see the point you are making.

Let me try another way. Last game out, my partner in our death match for the coffee against another pair uses a very flat swing. Flattest of any of my group.

Off the tee, he hits a lovely high draw with driver. On the first hole, his second shot was on a slight downhill, he had an iron in his hands. As soon as I saw the shot he faced, I thought he would duff it, and he did.

If he had a lesson, I imagine two scenarios

In scenario 1, the pro would try to steepen his swing. That would improve his iron play, but might mess up his good driving

In my theory of two scenario, the pro might say to keep what he is doing for driver, but teach him a totally different swing for irons. Something inherently steep, perhaps left arm plane arm, or maybe a out to in Trevino or something.
  • hack2489 likes this

#7 hack2489

hack2489

    WTF, I can change this now?

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1973 posts
  • LocationNorthern NSW

Posted 04 August 2019 - 07:39 PM

I'd like to hear from all the A grade players. As I suspect the better, low handicap to scratch players don't make it that complex.

#8 Bogey Golfer

Bogey Golfer

    metronome

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9741 posts

Posted 04 August 2019 - 07:56 PM

I'd like to hear from all the A grade players. As I suspect the better, low handicap to scratch players don't make it that complex.

when playing on the course you are playing golf and thinking about shot at hand.

last thing need to think about is swing, otherwise you walk around thinking swing instead of scoring.

 

yes agree vital to have those shots you mention in bag but do them with out any thought.

 

Bunkers- either open face or square, depending on lie, not many other changes needed, adjust from W or 52 to 56 to 60 for sand type.

 

yes pitch wrist / no wrist for controlling height, but thats it focus on shot landing area not on where your wrists are just swing. again better to choose 52 , 56 or 60 for height.

 

never change for irons.

 

putting: both grips work, if its good go with it.

 

stroke round is the best way to play, 


  • hack2489 likes this

2017 OOM winner at Growling Frog.

2016 A grade winner Moonah legends OOM4.

2015 member of team Vision winners of SGC pennant.

2014 National ISG champion

2014 winner Kooindah waters

2014 winner Magenta shores


2014 first ever hole in 1 in an ISG event, 4th Hole Kooindah waters 19th October

2012 winner of BHIC and gaining a 5 year exemption


#9 xrman1954

xrman1954

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 365 posts

Posted 06 August 2019 - 08:30 AM

I hear you Devongolfer. For me it was tee shots . If I want to draw shot I use Jim Venetos setup. If I want to fade I use Shawn Clement method. This is subject to change without notice.


I can spell reasonably well, even if in American at times. I cannot type well , so please look for the key I intended to use within one key of the strange one I used.


#10 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 06 August 2019 - 03:34 PM

Theory of 2 and Mindy Blake.

A few months ago I had given the Mindy Blake leg power approach a good go and abandoned it.

Inspired by watching the Women's British Open on tv, and armed with a couple of fresh pivot idea involving legs and feet, I went to the course yesterday wondering about giving it another go.

My first attempt was off the second tee with driver. I absolutely pured it. A big thrill.

I also had Theory of 2 in my mind as I walked up the fairway and waited for my buddies to play their second shots. So, my thought process was

1: wow, that was great, I want to use Mindy again
2: but I have been very happy with left arm plane arm for fairway shots in recent weeks
3: and I gave up on Mindy a few months ago because of inconsistency off the fairway
4: hang on, I have been banging on about theory of 2 on isg, this is a perfect theory of 2 situation. Just because I have used Mindy to nail a thrilling drive, it does not mean I now need to use Mindy for this second shot which is inherently a different type of shot.

So, I kept everything else as before and just used Mindy for most of my driver tee shots for the rest of the round.

I hit enough really nice drives in the rest of the round to convince me that Mindy is a good option for me with driver off the tee, but theory of 2 stopped my from messing up the rest of my game trying to use Mindy for everything else.

#11 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 08 August 2019 - 05:03 PM

I have been pondering this for a couple of days and, by coincidence, a new take on TGM has been published.

I won't get into that in this thread, but it took me back to my TGM days when we were dealing with different power source options, and different combinations of power sources.

I think there is a point of connection between Theory of Two and all of these options, particularly when it comes to driver.

To quickly list the differences between driver and irons

Driver, hit as far as you can, irons hit a specific distance
Driver, hit on the up, off a tee, on a level teeing ground. Irons, descending blow, off the ground, variable ground slopes
Driver, large sweet spot, not really concerned with fats and thins because we use a high tee. Irons, small sweet spot, very concerned about fats and thins
Driver, target area is the fairway ie pretty big relative to the iron target area which is ideally around the pin

That is a lot of differences.

So, back to TGM, or, if you prefer, Jim Hardy. Anyone, in fact, who explains a golf swing as consisting of choices or options rather than selling "one best method".

We each have to make the best choices to suit our own abilities and limitations.

Whilst it is certainly possible that our best driver swing will be the same as our best iron swing, given the differences between driver and iron shot requirements, I say that is not very likely.

I reckon it would be better to allow driver and iron swings to be different and to improve them separately. Two swings, in other words.

#12 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 09 August 2019 - 12:49 AM

Watching coverage of the US golf. Matt Kuchar, one of the best examples of right arm as plane arm, struggling with the lefts.

In my experience, right arm as plane arm has several ways to hit left

1: throwaway from the right wrist
2: get it too far behind you and get right hip interference
3: what TGM calls a round house, throwing the right hand at the ball instead of the whole of the right forearm
4: early movement forward with right hip, another way to get right hip interference

This is a tricky pattern, imo. If Kuchar gets the lefts, I reckon a chopper like me ought to expect a few as well.

Which goes to my main point, which is if you absolutely do not want a left on any given shot, and your normal pattern is right arm plane arm, time for a plan B.

#13 Jack_Golfer

Jack_Golfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2461 posts
  • LocationPerth

Posted 09 August 2019 - 09:49 AM

Watching coverage of the US golf. Matt Kuchar, one of the best examples of right arm as plane arm, struggling with the lefts.
In my experience, right arm as plane arm has several ways to hit left
1: throwaway from the right wrist
2: get it too far behind you and get right hip interference
3: what TGM calls a round house, throwing the right hand at the ball instead of the whole of the right forearm
4: early movement forward with right hip, another way to get right hip interference
This is a tricky pattern, imo. If Kuchar gets the lefts, I reckon a chopper like me ought to expect a few as well.
Which goes to my main point, which is if you absolutely do not want a left on any given shot, and your normal pattern is right arm plane arm, time for a plan B.


Devon,
I wonder if you could clarify what you mean by the term “plane arm”?

Is it the arm that sets the plane or is the arm on plane, or is it something else?

#14 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 09 August 2019 - 01:10 PM

https://www.google.c...ZW-rrWeNSbbh-M:

Jack,

it is based on Jim Hardy and one plane or two plane swings. In his analysis, he classifies swings based on which arm points at the plane line tracing the line.

In the top picture, black shirt, one plane, the left arm is vertical and the right arm points at the target line through impact. aka right arm plane arm aka Kuchar, aka RIT or Right arm Inward Throw.

In the bottom picture, white shirt, two plane, the left arm is not vertical, it points at the target line. This is Left arm Outward Pull or LOP.

Hardy also explains some hybrid examples that are a mix of the two.

There are approximate relationships between TGM swinging / LOP and Hitting / RIT, though the hybrids mean that this relationship is not exact.

Until I learned about the Zen twist, and before that, the Zach super strong left hand grip, I did not like left arm plane arm because the club face rotated through impact, which meant timing affected slice or hook. But with those adaptations, I can keep the face square to the path with left arm plane arm. But because it is steep, a typical plane error might be a fraction out to in, so a bad one might drift right a bit.

While I was Hitting, and when I switched to Hardy as my main source, it was all about the right arm plane. This made it natural to keep the face square to the path, which was the great appeal. Unfortunately, the typical plane error might be to get one or other end of the club under plane, and that leads to fats and thins with irons, though not with driver. And all the right arm errors go left, round housing, throwaway, right hip interference etc. Kuchar had the lefts yesterday.

Unfortunately, it is not that straightforward to switch back and forth between TGM and Hardy language.

Anyway, my personal experience is that two ways of doing it seem mad.

Classic Swinging / LOP with high ROC or rate of closure or face rotation through impact. It seems crazy to me to hook or slice based on timing.

The other is the steep left arm backswing, then the lay off move in transition. That seems crazy to me because you have to find the right arm plane in milliseconds, and if you get it wrong, particularly with irons, you get fats and thins.

For irons, I like left arm plane arm with either a Zen twist or a Zach super strong left hand grip. The steeper plane gives much better iron contact, and you don't get the lefts, fats or thins.

Driver, for me, is different. I can use left arm plane arm, with Zen twist or Zach grip, but I might also do RIT if I have trouble right and plenty of room left. I am also liking a Mindy style pivot power driving action recently, a bit more distance.

Sorry you asked?
  • Jack_Golfer likes this

#15 Devongolfer

Devongolfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1111 posts

Posted 09 August 2019 - 01:30 PM

Jack,

one thing I got from the Enchridirion first read, was about secondary lever.

All the secondary lever moves add speed but also club face rotation.

At the Open, they had next level computer analysis of the pros and they did McIlroy. The analysts noticed that Rory was later than others at squaring the face. I reckon Rory is using a lot of secondary lever. When he gets it right, it is amazing, but a bit off and it goes anywhere.

I reckon the bigger, stronger pros are sacrificing secondary lever action to get the face squarer earlier, but they are so powerful, they make up for it with pivot power moving the primary lever.

When I tried pivot power for driver, just moving the primary lever, I reckon I gained 15 yards. And that is without much practice. I get lag all the way from feet up. But I don't try any fancy secondary lever stuff. And I don't try it off the fairway, I need the larger sweetspot and the tee to give me the margin I need for pivot power.
  • Jack_Golfer likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users